Which of these composers do you struggle with the most and why?

[Florestan]

Maybe because I started with the symphonies. I didn't actually dislike them at first hearing; it was more like, there's something really impressive and monumental going on here, but I can't quite figure it out.

That is indeed a very apt description of the First Symphony.

[Jay F]

I can't even imagine that... When I first heard his chamber music (the big Brilliant box) my reaction was: "This is the most beautiful music I have ever heard!". I stand by it, with a minor correction: "This is some of the most beautiful music ever composed."

I really mean it: Brahms is one of those composers who instantly won my heart, mind and unconditional admiration and devotion.

Fascinating how different people hear different things in one and the same music. 

Maybe because I started with the symphonies. I didn't actually dislike them at first hearing; it was more like, there's something really impressive and monumental going on here, but I can't quite figure it out.

I do think that the chamber music of Brahms is even greater than his orchestral music, and as a totality constitutes one of the world's greatest musical achievements.

I found it peculliar, too, that when I first heard Brahms' chamber music, I liked it. I liked it immediately. Yet at the same time (literally), twenty years after first hearing his symphonies, I still felt neutral towards them. This is the only struggle I've really had in classical music. In music, period. I know there's something good about Brahms' orchestral music, but it did not reveal itself for a very long time. I listen to Honeck and Abbado's versions for the most part. They'll never be Mahler, but I like them somewhat, now. The chamber music, OTOH, I can listen to for hours.

When I say I have no other struggle, it's because I can decide quickly whether I want to listen to something or not. I don't listen to music I don't like, generally. There's too much music I do like, in numerous areas.

[jochanaan]

What I have found, and I suppose most of the active musicians on this forum have found also, is that as I have begun to play some of the music in question, any "struggle" in appreciating it as a listener disappears.  It becomes a case of "Oh, so that's how it goes!" And many of us have discovered that it is in fact the music we struggle to play, the things we go over and over and over just to get those notes and rhythms exactly so, that becomes our favorite music to perform.  The struggle becomes part of the mastery, which evokes great joy as we play and listen.

(As an oboist, I find I am in nearly the best seat in the orchestra, surrounded by sound and in close contact with the other musicians, to whom I am listening with all my attention as I play. )

[Henk]

I'm right there with you, Jeffrey. I seldom listen to Stravinsky these days and I can barely even bring myself to listen to the Rite or Petrouchka. Last time I listened to Petrouchka, I actually turned it off out of frustration!

+ 

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

When in my teens, I could say the same when first investigating just about any composer. I have to qualify a rather wide swath lacuna in my druthers, though, and this was not much less true when I was 'young' -- post Schumann, the later romantics [Brahms is a major exception] have never done much for me, though I eagerly hop back on board with Mahler and as just as heartily love and admire some Nielsen. As a pianist I do like and admire Chopin [far more aggressively wild and modern than many think or render him], while I think his music is far more satisfying to play than to listen to.

A colleague of mine 'blames' this preference [or maybe better, aversion] on the fact I first teethed on listening to Prokofiev, Janacek and Bach, and then at six started piano straight away learning to simultaneously read and play with both hands via Bartok, then was given some simple Bach  I'm not certain he is either wholly or partially correct about that. I'm as sentimental as the next guy, maybe even a bit more than most, but that is just not in a generally 19th century way, I guess.

Nice story there! As I came to music when I was young I basically just listened to the radio. Reading books about music, especially contemporary classical music, made me extremely curious to find out what it sounded like. A lot of romantic music is what I've been coming to enjoy only in recent years, probably because I never found it interesting to read about when I was 8 years old.

[Florestan]

I don't listen to music I don't like, generally. There's too much music I do like, in numerous areas.

My listening philosophy too.

[Maestro267]

Of the composers in this list, I chose Sibelius. I prefer the larger and more colourful orchestral canvasses of the likes of Mahler, Strauss and Shostakovich. I really have to be in the mood to listen to Sibelius, and those times don't come along all that often.

[North Star]

Shostakovich, I guess - but my struggles related to these composers are financial.

[Karl Henning]

Shostakovich, I guess - but my struggles related to these composers are financial.

Hah!

[Rons_talking]

Though I a fan of many Finn composers, Sibelius has never done it for me...

[North Star]

Though I a fan of many Finn composers, Sibelius has never done it for me...

...and why?

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Finally voted for Mahler.

[some guy]

Where's some guy when you need him?

Not looking into the poll forum, that's where.

And kind of sorry I did just now.

But I do have a plaintive little some guy kind of question. Are classical music fans the only kind who essentially define themselves by their struggles, by what they don't like, don't connect with?

There's been a voice or two on this poll who have deprecated the lack of a "none" option. Add mine.

I enjoy music. There are lots and lots of pieces and lots and lots of composers that I do not like. But I rarely if ever talk or even think about them. Why, if someone were to find out who my least favorites were and made a thread just to bash them, I wouldn't be interested in playing. My dislikes are simply not interesting, not even to me. But that's because I'm a fan, in the traditional sense of that word. My fellow classical fans seem many of them to have made a new category of fandom, the "I struggle and dislike quite a lot of classical music" category.

It does not seem like a category to me. It seems like a contradiction. If you don't like listening to classical music, then why do you post to classical music sites? (And the answer seems to be, "To participate in the 'I don't like this or that' threads." In fact, there's even more to that: "To turn even positive threads in praise of this or that into their opposite by going on at length about what I don't like and why.")

Other than that, if you're still reading this ( ), the other trend I have seen in the decade or so I have spent on classical forums is that classical fans don't listen to very many things. You'll occasionally get people who claim to listen to everything, but on this or that other thread--like this one, maybe, you'll find out that they have never heard anything by Nielsen yet or Bartok or Haydn, that they've never even heard of Lidholm or Oliveros or Berwald, and that they can identify huge swaths of music that they're sure is horrible and that they would never listen to, there's just not enough time.

To a fan, all of this sounds very strange, I must say. I love music. I have always had time to listen to it. I have always had time to read and play chess, too. I always have had time to play with my various cats and to hang out with my three sons. I always have time to spend with pretty girls. I always have time to paint and to write. Does this sound strange to you? That there's always time for the things you enjoy? I wonder.

[Jo498]

But I do have a plaintive little some guy kind of question. Are classical music fans the only kind who essentially define themselves by their struggles, by what they don't like, don't connect with?

I do not think that this is a good description. Most classical music listeners do not define themselves by what the do not like. There might be some tribalism but not at all to the extent want found in my youth in the 1980s between e.g fans of heavy metal and other popular music tribes.

Still, if one likes everything almost equally well, this can seem like lack of discernment and basically lack of developed taste. Sure there is also pseudo-elitism around but if someone finds a quartet by Dittersdorf as good as one from Haydn's op.76 I will doubt his ability to discern differences that are relevant for musical quality.

Other than that, if you're still reading this ( ), the other trend I have seen in the decade or so I have spent on classical forums is that classical fans don't listen to very many things. You'll occasionally get people who claim to listen to everything, but on this or that other thread--like this one, maybe, you'll find out that they have never heard anything by Nielsen yet or Bartok or Haydn, that they've never even heard of Lidholm or Oliveros or Berwald, and that they can identify huge swaths of music that they're sure is horrible and that they would never listen to, there's just not enough time.

Maybe we can agree on trivial truths like those: There is a limited amount of time for focussed listening. It is often easier (and gives more pleasure in a sense) to listen again to already familiar music (maybe in a different interpretation) than to listen to (stylistically very different) unfamiliar music. So one has to decide whether to listen to the Eroica for the 100th time or to a symphony by e.g. Niels Gade (or whatever). It is also a fairly recent thing that CDs are quite cheap and one can listen to almost everything on the web in decent quality. Independent of that not everyone is "musical" enough to absorb unfamiliar music in unfamiliar styles quickly and it might take time for several listenings sessions (that could be spend more pleasureable with already familiar music).

[71 dB]

I have always had time to listen to it. I have always had time to read and play chess, too. I always have had time to play with my various cats and to hang out with my three sons. I always have time to spend with pretty girls. I always have time to paint and to write.

Lucky you! I feel I hardly have 10 % of the time I need for everything!

[71 dB]

Sure there is also pseudo-elitism around but if someone finds a quartet by Dittersdorf as good as one from Haydn's op.76 I will doubt his ability to discern differences that are relevant for musical quality.

I have to say sometimes I enjoy Dittersdorf even more than Haydn. I simply can't see what makes Haydn "superior" of the two. Nobody is able to explain it.

[Florestan]

I enjoy music.

Welcome to the club!

There are lots and lots of pieces and lots and lots of composers that I do not like. But I rarely if ever talk or even think about them. [...] My fellow classical fans seem many of them to have made a new category of fandom, the "I struggle and dislike quite a lot of classical music" category.

It seems to me that you are unable or unwilling to understand that some people like not only listening to, but also talking about, music.

If you don't like listening to classical music, then why do you post to classical music sites?

This is an entirely fictitious category. Show me one single GMG member who doesn´t like listening to classical music.

Other than that, if you're still reading this ( ), the other trend I have seen in the decade or so I have spent on classical forums is that classical fans don't listen to very many things. You'll occasionally get people who claim to listen to everything, but on this or that other thread--like this one, maybe, you'll find out that they have never heard anything by Nielsen yet or Bartok or Haydn, that they've never even heard of Lidholm or Oliveros or Berwald, and that they can identify huge swaths of music that they're sure is horrible and that they would never listen to, there's just not enough time.

That there isn´t enough time is a truism. There is only a finite amount of time one can spend listening to music. Choices have to be made and priorities have to be set, inevitably. We cannot  listen to everything. You don´t listen to everything. Okay, maybe you listen to everything that comes your way, but for every recording you listen to there are probably a few hundreds more you´ll never get to listen to. So there.

Then there is another thing: we cannot like everything. You don´t like everything. Sure, we can try to like everything but inevitably (again) there will be things that we cannot like no matter how much and hard we try. Therefore, spending most of the time listening only to music one likes, or is likely to like based on what one likes (excuse the clumsy wording) makes a lot of sense and is far from being that prejudiced as you seem to think it is.

I love music. I have always had time to listen to it.

It might come as a surprise to you but we all love music and always have time to listen to it.

I have always had time to read and play chess, too. I always have had time to play with my various cats and to hang out with my three sons. I always have time to spend with pretty girls. I always have time to paint and to write.

As I said above, it´s a question of making choices and setting priorities. You seem to have got them both straight --- and to be lucky enough to have the job of your dreams, I suppose. You know, for all our desire to live as we wish, jobs (or lack thereof) oftenly stand in the way.

EDIT: As you can see, I have patiently and attentively read through your whole post. How many points do I get? 

[some guy]

It seems to me that you are unable or unwilling to understand that some people like not only listening to, but also talking about, music.

Um, no. I obviously enjoy talking about music.

Show me one single GMG member who doesn´t like listening to classical music.

I can show you dozens who can talk about what they don't like, at length, who spend the bulk of their time online talking about what they don't like.

That there isn´t enough time is a truism. There is only a finite amount of time one can spend listening to music. Choices have to be made and priorities have to be set, inevitably. We cannot  listen to everything. You don´t listen to everything. Okay, maybe you listen to everything that comes your way, but for every recording you listen to there are probably a few hundreds more you´ll never get to listen to. So there.

This is a matter of perspective. I was only saying that I don't think of time when I'm doing something enjoyable. I am not aware of time when I am doing something enjoyable. I do use clocks and calendars to make and to meet appointments. I know where I'll be at 20h on the 4th of May, for instance. And I will have to get to the airport by a certain hour in order to do so. But what of that?

Anyway, yeah, I suppose that to someone looking at what I do will see that I am making choices and setting priorities. It's just that me being me, living and doing (the doing is the living), it doesn't feel like making choices and setting priorities. It feels like doing things. Sure, I have to choose what to do at any given "time." But I'm not focussed on or obsessed with or even aware of the choosing. Too busy doing the doing.

Then there is another thing: we cannot like everything. You don´t like everything. Sure, we can try to like everything but inevitably (again) there will be things that we cannot like no matter how much and hard we try. Therefore, spending most of the time listening only to music one likes, or is likely to like based on what one likes (excuse the clumsy wording) makes a lot of sense and is far from being that prejudiced as you seem to think it is.

You have a very poor track record accurately understanding what I think.

In any event, I enjoy listening to music. I don't have to try. It's fun. Again, the perspective thing here. I spend very little time thinking about or even acting according to my likes and dislikes. I have said before that my dislikes are not interesting, not even to me. In a way, my likes are not interesting, either. That is, dividing up the world into things I like and things I dislike just doesn't seem very useful or interesting to me. Here's the one thing I like, for sure, which is interesting--I like to explore. I like to learn, to go places and study things and experience things that I don't know. The not knowing is what makes the liking and disliking impertinent. How can I like or dislike something I don't know? And the process of getting to know is all about the thing, not about me.

It might come as a surprise to you but we all love music and always have time to listen to it.

From what I've read over and over again about there being not enough time to do everything, from what I've read over and over again about this that or the other thing being unlistenable or difficult or distasteful, yes, after years of reading those kinds of things from numerous people over and over again, I would be surprised. Indeed.

As I said above, it´s a question of making choices and setting priorities. You seem to have got them both straight --- and to be lucky enough to have the job of your dreams, I suppose. You know, for all our desire to live as we wish, jobs (or lack thereof) oftenly stand in the way.

I suppose I'm lucky. As for the rest, you have no idea. Truly. I do more than suspect that it's because for me it is not a question of making choices and setting priorities, but of doing, that I seem to have gotten the choices and priorities straight. I'd say more, but I don't like talking about private things in public. Maybe next time I get to București, I can tell you about my life.

EDIT: As you can see, I have patiently and attentively read through your whole post. How many points do I get? 
[/quote]You don't get any points. Life is not about accruing points, grasshopper. As soon as you understand that, I'll give you a point, though.

[Florestan]

I can show you dozens who can talk about what they don't like, at length, who spend the bulk of their time online talking about what they don't like.

I don´t need dozens. Show me only three.

This is a matter of perspective. I was only saying that I don't think of time when I'm doing something enjoyable. I am not aware of time when I am doing something enjoyable.

I should have thought that most humans fall in this category.

I know where I'll be at 20h on the 4th of May, for instance.

Really? Wow! I have no idea whatsoever where I'll be at 20h on the 4th of May.

Anyway, yeah, I suppose that to someone looking at what I do will see that I am making choices and setting priorities. It's just that me being me, living and doing (the doing is the living), it doesn't feel like making choices and setting priorities. It feels like doing things. Sure, I have to choose what to do at any given "time." But I'm not focussed on or obsessed with or even aware of the choosing. Too busy doing the doing.

You are so Zen!

You have a very poor track record accurately understanding what I think.

Maybe you should try to write in plainer English... 

I enjoy listening to music. I don't have to try. It's fun.

For you it´s fun. For me listening to, say, Boulez or Xennakis or Stockhausen is far from being fun: it´s at best boring and at worst aurally unbearable --- and I cannot help it.

dividing up the world into things I like and things I dislike just doesn't seem very useful or interesting to me.

Don´t you dislike being misunderstood time and again? I should have thought you did, judging by what you wrote about my poor track record of... what, never being able to accurately understand your thinking?

Dividing the world into likes and dislikes is all too human. You are probably among the very few who don´t do that, or claim not to do that.

Here's the one thing I like, for sure, which is interesting--I like to explore. I like to learn, to go places and study things and experience things that I don't know. The not knowing is what makes the liking and disliking impertinent. How can I like or dislike something I don't know? And the process of getting to know is all about the thing, not about me.

You don´t speak Romanian, I am sure --- ie, it is unkown to you. Do you feel the urge to learn it? Do you ever contemplate learning it at some point in the future?

I know for an undeniable fact that I dislike some types of music (ie, the experience of hearing them is not pleasant and not fun --- it is boring or unbearable). What fault do you find in my avoiding them?

From what I've read over and over again about there being not enough time to do everything, from what I've read over and over again about this that or the other thing being unlistenable or difficult or distasteful, yes, after years of reading those kinds of things from numerous people over and over again, I would be surprised. Indeed.

You confuse having time to listen to everything with having time to listen to what one likes.

Heck, I haven´t even listened to all the major works by my top-10 favorite composers yet --- and you´d want me to spend more time with works I know for an undeniable fact that I did not and would not enjoy?

I don't like talking about private things in public. Maybe next time I get to București, I can tell you about my life.

First of all, I do appreciate that you took the pain to properly write the name of my home city.

Secondly, next time you get here make sure you let me know in advance. I am sure we could have a very interesting and genial dinner talk.

Life is not about accruing points, grasshopper.

No shit, buddy? 

[some guy]

I don´t need dozens. Show me only three.

Well, my point was that they're ubiquitous. I don't want to take the time (!!) to list even three.

I have no idea whatsoever where I'll be at 20h on the 4th of May.

I have an appointment then.

You are so Zen!

I suppose. Seems like just living to me.

For you it´s fun. For me listening to, say, Boulez or Xennakis or Stockhausen is far from being fun: it´s at best boring and at worst aurally unbearable --- and I cannot help it.

Well, without being you, I'm going to still go ahead and believe that you can help it. Other people have said the same and have helped it. As it were.

Put it this way. I am a human. I like music. I like a lot of the same music you like. I find listening to Boulez and Xenakis and Stockhausen to be quite fun a lot of the time. (No, I don't like everything. We've covered this one already, right?) So one difference between us is that I like Xenakis et al., and you do not. Another difference might explain why we differ about Xenakis: I do not need music to be any particular way. I am happy to let each type of music be itself. It's not aurally unbearable to me because I am able to accept it for what it is without repining about what it is not. (NOTE: this may be a very unfair and inaccurate characterization of how you think--I have read many of your posts, though. I think I'm pretty close. But let's say that I'm not. The point still remains, if Xenakis can be liked, then he's likable. If your idea of how music should sound does not include Xenakis' sounds, then you won't like Xenakis. If you can change your idea of how music should sound, then you might end up liking Xenakis.

Don´t you dislike being misunderstood time and again?

I dislike trick questions.

In any event, I have no control over your ability to understand.

Dividing the world into likes and dislikes is all too human. You are probably among the very few who don´t do that, or claim not to do that.

Oh, I do it, too. I have just found that it's more interesting and more useful to explore and to understand--and even to enjoy not understanding. I have said before that I would very much like to hear some music that baffles me. It's been many years since that has happened. It's fun. I hope someone comes up with something that will baffle me before I die.

You don´t speak Romanian, I am sure --- ie, it is unkown to you. Do you feel the urge to learn it? Do you ever contemplate learning it at some point in the future?

No, yes, and yes.

I know for an undeniable fact that I dislike some types of music (ie, the experience of hearing them is not pleasant and not fun --- it is boring or unbearable). What fault do you find in my avoiding them?

I know for a fact that unless I listen to something, I will not know--not for certain sure--whether I will like it or not. I also know that I don't listen to things in order to like them. I like listening to music. I listen to a lot of things I have never heard before. I don't know if I will like or dislike what I don't know yet, so liking or disliking can hardly be the point is all. I listen in order to experience.

You confuse having time to listen to everything with having time to listen to what one likes.

No, I don't. The confusion, I'm sure, comes from your trying to understand what I'm saying in terms that are not appropriate to what I've said. I have said many times over the years that I listen horizontally rather than vertically--that is, I listen to things for themselves, not for how they stack up in comparison with other things. Every time I've said something of that sort, someone else has concluded that I think everything is equally good.

No. What I think is that equality/inequality is not a useful concept for thinking about or for listening to music. "Nielsen's 4th symphony is better than Glière's 3rd" is a type of statement I find of no utility. Nielsen's 4th is different from Glière's 3rd. Two different composers trying to make two different things. I prefer one over the other. I listen to one more than I listen to the other. But if I'm ever listening to the other, I'm not constantly thinking, "Wow, I should be listening to 'one.'"

Heck, I haven´t even listened to all the major works by my top-10 favorite composers yet --- and you´d want me to spend more time with works I know for an undeniable fact that I did not and would not enjoy?

OK. I don't want you to do anything. I also do not think that you can know what you claim to know. And I have listened to all the major works by hundreds of composers. It's no thing. It's what I do. It seems to go without saying. So now color me incredulous. Why? Why have you not yet listened to all the major works by your top-ten favorite composers yet? Don't you like your favorites?

I do appreciate that you took the pain to properly write the name of my home city.

Secondly, next time you get here make sure you let me know in advance. I am sure we could have a very interesting and genial dinner talk.

I certainly hope so. I will let you know in advance, for sure. My life is not very certain at the moment--and probably for many moments to come. If you don't hear from me for several years, it's because I've not come to București in all that time. I hope it's not that long before I get back there. Oh, and de nada about București. It's one of my little quirks to call places what the inhabitants call them.