New to Wagner - Just purchased this big box set.

[71 dB]

If what you actually want is background music for doing math, there are far better options than Wagner.   

Take into account that I am not paying any attention to the libretto (I don't understand German), just the music. If the music is good enough, I might purchase a Blu-ray and get into the libretto also. I have been listening to all kind of classical music while watching those math videos, because the music that plays in them is horrible.

[Papy Oli]

I might purchase a Blu-ray and get into the libretto also.

You can find free opera libretti for download here, including Wagner.

https://libretti.deccaclassics.com/

[AnotherSpin]

Gotterdammerung is in my opinion an overwhelming experience. My favorite Wagner other than Meistersinger. All this talk about Wagner being boring and the lousy libretto makes me wonder how well the posters know the opera. I've seen three complete Ring cycles at the Met in New York under Levine, who unfortunately became more soporific as he grew older, but I had the good fortune to hear both Rita Hunter and Gwyneth Jones in the Brunnhilde role. (Sad to say, I never heard Birgit Nilsson live; it's said her voice was even more powerful in the house than on recordings.) But I did hear a concert performance under Haitink at the Royal Albert during the period when Covent Garden was under renovation, and my all-time great memory of a Gotterdammerung was at the Met in spring 1974, when Rafael Kubelik conducted the work with Rita Hunter and Jess Thomas in the leads. This was the only opera Kubelik conducted in New York other than Les Troyens, but he was a great Wagner conductor and his Meistersinger is widely considered among the best ever recorded.

I share your reverence for Götterdämmerung (or, for that matter, any of the three earlier installments in the cycle), it sweeps over one like a tidal wave, doesn't it? Tristan remains my other Wagnerian summit, yet nothing rivals the cataclysmic splendor of the Ring's finale. As for the naysayers who brand Wagner "boring" or dismiss his libretto as "lousy," they've simply never unlocked the spell. Pity them? Perhaps a little, though not overmuch; savoring Wagner is a cultivated taste, and the lazy need not apply.

My own opera-mad years are now a memory, alas. Two or three decades ago, however, I'd gorge on every recording under the sun, Solti, Böhm, Karajan, Knappertsbusch, Keilberth, etc., without a flicker of fatigue, only unalloyed bliss. In those same halcyon days I adored Verdi, Puccini, and Mozart for their melody and heart. Yet where they offered cozy fires and gentle tears, Wagner hurled a metaphysical thunderbolt that rewired the soul.

[Karl Henning]

Actually, longueur is a feminine noun (la longueur) so it's Les longueurs ennuyeuses (cf. Les liaisons dangereuses) 

Thanks! I did wonder, rather.

[Florestan]

Vivaldi?

Anything (non-vocal) Baroque and Classical.

[Spotted Horses]

Take into account that I am not paying any attention to the libretto (I don't understand German), just the music. If the music is good enough, I might purchase a Blu-ray and get into the libretto also. I have been listening to all kind of classical music while watching those math videos, because the music that plays in them is horrible.

The music is good, but I'll reiterate, they are not symphonies. I didn't get much out of it until I combined it with knowledge of the story. Even big orchestral interludes didn't register with me until I knew the action they were associated with. It's not that I revere Wagner's libretto, but the music is tied to it, for better or worse.

Your reaction may differ, of course.

[Karl Henning]

Well, in the first place, I disclosed practically at the outset my relative ignorance of the Ring. Also, I've reported the purchase of two sets, which the even-handed reader would take as an effort to address that ignorance. Wagner has a historical track record of being found dull by many, and I have nodded off while listening to Wagner. I'm not convinced that nobody who knows the work well would find boredom here or there. Clearly (again) I'm fixin' to remedy my ignorance, and am prepared to exercise all good faith, and not dismiss the lot as "boring" out of hand. And personally, I did not dismiss the libretto as "rubbish," but merely opined that Wagner was egotistical and mistaken in asserting that his libretto for the Ring is the greatest Poem in the World. If, on experiencing the Ring, I find Wagner's self-assessment justified, and my scepticism unwarranted, I shall have the integrity to disclose my error.

[Karl Henning]

If the only choices, though, are "Greatest Poem in the World"  or "Rubbish," I'll risk a five-spot on "Rubbish."

[ritter]

There was another factor that I should mention concerning my relationship with the Ring. At the time we were making our way into the Ring (mid-1970s), English National Opera started touring their production, with Rita Hunter as Brunnhilde. We had seats for Gotterdammerung in Manchester. I remember it was a very hot day. The air inside the theatre was stifling. Yet for the bulk of the performance, I stopped noticing the heat. The whole afternoon/evening was the most stupendous thing I'd ever heard or seen. It still is, in hindsight - in the sense that I've never been so utterly transfixed by a performance since. The sets were minimalist, abstract, otherwordly: a landscape for gods. At the end the audience exploded. The applause went on and on and on until sheer exhaustion made everyone stop.

That seared Gotterdammerung into my being forever. It remains the supreme musical experience of my life, and the memory of it has always meant that the Ring is for me, a thing apart.

That was another landmark, way back in those early days. The BBC transmitted the whole of one of those Boulez Bayreuth performances in one week on the radio, and we made sure every evening was free, as if we'd booked tickets. The whole Ring unfolded, day after day, with a day's work in between each one. It was exhausting but magnificent, and although I would not now rate the Boulez Ring as the finest (I suspect the published audio recording is what the BBC transmitted, but can't be sure), it has a really important personal appeal. Gwyneth Jones as Brunnhilde knocked me for six. For all its faults, the Chereau production remains for me the most watchable of all the DVD sets.

Very nice read, ER! Thanks...

Re. the Boulez / Chéreau Ring, I was there (in 1979). An unforgettable experience... 

[Karl Henning]

Very nice read, ER! Thanks...

Re. the Boulez / Chéreau Ring, I was there (in 1979). An unforgettable experience... 

And: just landed

[Spotted Horses]

Gwyneth Jones as Brunnhilde knocked me for six.

I assume you are familiar with her remarkable performance in Tannhauser.

[hopefullytrusting]

If the only choices, though, are "Greatest Poem in the World"  or "Rubbish," I'll risk a five-spot on "Rubbish."

Also, no one is required to like everything - that sort of defeats the purpose, and no canon is uncontested, and most canons are rubbish and shoddy due to truly miniscule amount of data that is put into them - even those critics, who are indefatigable with memories that are near photographic - like George Steiner, James Boswell, Samuel Coleridge, to name jus three - have consumed barely a drop of the ocean of the thing that they sought to tastemake.

Criticism, on that scale, is and has always been a joke.

[Madiel]

I find it amusing that the only explanation people have for not having been completely uncritical about an experience is that I must not have experienced it properly.

After watching The Flying Dutchman, I wondered "Is it just me?", and so I went online. No. No, it isn't just me. It is not at all difficult to find people who admire the music but find the libretti deficient.

The fact is, most great opera composers sought out other people to write the words. It's a different skill.

There are also clear examples of composers who knew when they had a really good libretto to work with and when they had a poorer one but it was the best available and they had to make do. History regularly agrees with the composer. Mozart knew Da Ponte was good.

[ritter]

Also, no one is required to like everything - that sort of defeats the purpose, and no canon is uncontested, and most canons are rubbish and shoddy due to truly miniscule amount of data that is put into them - even those critics, who are indefatigable with memories that are near photographic - like George Steiner, James Boswell, Samuel Coleridge, to name jus three - have consumed barely a drop of the ocean of the thing that they sought to tastemake.

Criticism, on that scale, is and has always been a joke.

Well, that is debatable. We might not like this or that, which is perfectly reasonable and healthy, but there are certain works, certain authors, who have made an indeleble mark on Western civilisation and constitute a "canon", whether we like that notion or not.

Wagner is unique in that, due to the hybrid nature of his output, he has an assured position in the canon, as one of the greatest dramatists of all time (his name can stand along those of Sophocles, Shakespeare, Calderón, Racine, etc.) and one of the greatest composers of all time (along with Monteverdi, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven...)¹. And this is so whether we like or not his work (as Gesamtkunstwerk of dramatised myth), his music as such, or the man and his ideas.

¹ I have purposefully omitted any names that can after Wagner from these lists, and they are not exhaustively by any means.

[Madiel]

Such a great dramatist, he built his own theatre lest his dramas be mucked about with by anyone else.

[Spotted Horses]

Also, no one is required to like everything - that sort of defeats the purpose, and no canon is uncontested, and most canons are rubbish and shoddy due to truly miniscule amount of data that is put into them - even those critics, who are indefatigable with memories that are near photographic - like George Steiner, James Boswell, Samuel Coleridge, to name jus three - have consumed barely a drop of the ocean of the thing that they sought to tastemake.

Criticism, on that scale, is and has always been a joke.

The criteria for a "canon" that makes most sense to me is whether a given artist was a significant influence on those who came after. Mozart is in the canon because Beethoven, Brahms, Wagner, etc, reacted to his contribution to the genre. You could unearth a composer from Mozart's era and argue that his or her works were of greater quality, but if they were unknown and had no influence I would say they are not in the same category.

[ritter]

Such a great dramatist, he built his own theatre lest his dramas be mucked about with by anyone else.

No need to be dismissive of an artistic institution that (with its ups and downs, of course) has been going strong for 150 years.

He built his own theatre because he had the will and vision to convince patrons and artists precisely that in such a theatre the ideal performing conditions could be achieved, and his work is rich enough to —on its own— constitute the repertory of the theatre, permitting ever renewing interpretations (dramatic and musical) of his output.

[Madiel]

PS I have no problem regarding Wagner as part of the musical canon.

But that is the first time I've ever seen someone try to put him in a list with Shakespeare.

[ritter]

There's always a first time for everything... 

[hopefullytrusting]

Well, that is debatable. We might not like this or that, which is perfectly reasonable and healthy, but there are certain works, certain authors, who have made an indeleble mark on Western civilisation and constitute a "canon", whether we like that notion or not.

Wagner is unique in that, due to the hybrid nature of his output, he has an assured position in the canon, as one of the greatest dramatists of all time (his name can stand along those of Sophocles, Shakespeare, Calderón, Racine, etc.) and one of the greatest composers of all time (along with Monteverdi, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven...)¹. And this is so whether we like or not his work (as Gesamtkunstwerk of dramatised myth), his music as such, or the man and his ideas.

¹ I have purposefully omitted any names that can after Wagner from these lists, and they are not exhaustively Snyder means.

I don't think you'd like the direction this discussion will take, but I will simply state that western is not the word I would use in reference to the names you listed.