A different cut on beginners' classical music

[Teresa]

So, what you don't like is not worth listening to. This pretty much sums up your musical philosophy and makes any further discussion futile. I'm off.

Wrong again, simple English.  It is wrong for anyone anywhere on the planet to recommend something they do not like, this is really a tough one for you to comprehend isn't it?

If you enjoy listening to something I do not like it is worth listening to for you, it is not worth listening to for me.  No one should listen to what they do not like and no one should tell anyone else what they must like.  Understand?

[Harry]

Well after all those pages, it is clear to me, what is actually going on here.
Teresa has a certain view of how to approach Classical music, and she clearly states that it is her opinion, and she will not force it on others. Her choices! And that is allright, isn't it. Everyone is entitled to have a opinion, or explanation how to listen to classical music. I do not agree with her, but I respect her opinion, and understand her passion.
I think there should be room for her also on GMG, for we harbour many posters that have also some extreme opinions, but are respected anyway.
Lets be friendly open and welcoming, instead of biting each others heads off.
And that is my opinion.

[Grazioso]

I hope you now understand, I have really worked with you all long enough that there should be at least some comprehension!  How hard is it to understand The Basic Power Orchestral Repertoire or Classical music for folks who don't like Classical music http://www.analoglovers.com/page13.html was written for people who do not like traditional Classical music??

This is just disingenuous. On that page, you write, "This is a list of some of the most beautiful, colorful and exciting orchestral music ever written.  Unlike other recommended lists there is no "stuffed-shirt" academic boring music here!  This is classical orchestral music written to be enjoyed from the very first note to the last.  Music that is always fresh and alive no matter how often it is played.  This is the good stuff."

You are clearly implying that excluded music is the "bad stuff" and not always fresh and alive and not meant to be enjoyed from first to last. Quite frankly, you have limited tastes and are confusing those opinions with facts.

Again, you falsely assume that "folks who don't like Classical music" fall into your same pattern. I once assumed (out of ignorance based on terribly limited exposure, coupled with youthful arrogance) that I didn't like classical music. Then I actually took the time to expose myself to it with an open mind, and now I love it. And after years of listening to it, my taste in and understanding of classical music have only broadened, not remained fixed on one narrow cross section of it. I understand that we're dealing with serious art, too, and not mere light entertainment. Because I don't understand or like a piece doesn't make me assume that others will or should react the same way.

You need to give others more credit. Despite their initial prejudices and assumptions about classical music, they may approach it with more sensitivity and openness than you. Their tastes may simply differ. They may dislike "Power Orchestral" but immediately fall in love with Classical-era chamber music or opera.

It's one thing to say, "This is the type of classical music I like" and another entirely to pretend you can speak for or guide other skeptics into the genre.

[longears]

Teresa has made some claims here about what she thinks is "morally wrong."  Personally, I think it "morally wrong" to set herself up as an expert and tastemaker when she is unqualified.  I think it morally wrong to be unwilling to accept guidance or to acknowledge error.  And it's morally wrong to blame others for her shortcomings (i.e. she describes her failure to understand or appreciate chamber music, opera, or the core of the orchestral repertory as if the music were to blame rather than Teresa herself--her limitations, inexperience, prejudices, and lack of training).

She likes to defend her right to her opinions.  Of course she has a right to her opinions.  But in setting herself up as a guide, she has a moral obligation to express only informed opinions (her opinion about opera, for instance, is ignorant in the extreme and therefore worthless).

Of course, the foregoing is only my opinion.

[Florestan]

Excellent post, Longears.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Well after all those pages, it is clear to me, what is actually going on here.
Teresa has a certain view of how to approach Classical music, and she clearly states that it is her opinion, and she will not force it on others. Her choices! And that is allright, isn't it. Everyone is entitled to have a opinion, or explanation how to listen to classical music. I do not agree with her, but I respect her opinion, and understand her passion.
I think there should be room for her also on GMG, for we harbour many posters that have also some extreme opinions, but are respected anyway.
Lets be friendly open and welcoming, instead of biting each others heads off.
And that is my opinion.

This is a forum, where people share ideas and engage in give-and-take. If someone expresses an extreme opinion, they can expect to be challenged, and if anyone can't take the heat, they should get out of the kitchen. Teresa, whatever one may think of her opinions, certainly gives as good as she gets.

But I cannot agree with your analysis either: "she clearly states that it is her opinion, and she will not force it on others." As I stated above, Teresa wants to hold two incompatible views. If one says to her that she is forcing her opinion on others (as Grazioso does above, with unmistakable documentation), her response is that no, anyone can like what they like. If one points out to her that if that's the case, her lists and ideas are too restrictive, then her response is that no, she's coming up with exactly the kind of music that those who hate the "academic, boring stuff" will want to hear. And round and round.

[Fëanor]

...  To recommend something I do not like would be immoral and wrong in every meaning of the word.  ...   

It is too bad if you cannot accept other views, I feel sorry for you.  I truly do.

Teresa, I can accept your views, but that doesn't preclude that I disagree with them.

I feel free to recommend what I don't like (or haven't yet learned to like).   My "Core Classical" list ... http://ca.geocities.com/w_d_bailey/CoreClassical.html ... wasn't development for other people in the first place, but for my own education.  It is a mainly compilation of recommendations from quite a few different sources which don't recommend the same thing, but from which a certain consensus emerged.  That is, the items there represent most commonly recommended pieces.  The only exceptions are some contemporary pieces that don't have quite the same consensus but which I felt ought to be included to present this as yet under-appreciated subgenre.

There are a certainly pieces on my list that I don't personally care for, (though none I "abhor").  Nevertheless I recommend them without reservation because of the recognition they have earned from critics and listeners far more experienced than I.

[Ephemerid]

It is not about dumbing down but being included rather than excluded.  It is about freedom! 

Again, I wholeheartedly agree.  But you are the one talking about how "absolute music," chamber music and opera are all boring.  Not a good selling point!  LOL  Who's really doing the excluding here?

As far as "lesser known composers" go, I am familiar with a good deal of it and then some (its nice to see Sessions' Black Maskers Suite on there-- its an old favourite of mine, sadly underrated IMO).  You'll find there's plenty of people here who do lament that concert performances tend to focus on more standard repertoire and want a bit of music past 1899 for example -- but not at the expense of denigrating the standard repertoire!  Its not because Mozart is boring, but because there *is* so much more out there.  

One of the reasons I came to this forum was precisely because people here do listen to more than just the standard repertoire.  I love Bach, but I love Steve Reich too-- and a whole lot in between.

Its not "wrong" to have certain preferences, or even to hate certain composers, but to present a small sliver of classical music to others, claiming everything else is boring is awfully misleading.  As I've said before, its like taking someone on a tour of a large country, but staying within certain confines and just stereotyping the rest of the country.  It doesn't give the tourist a good idea of what the country is like (various people, sub-cultures, landscapes, climates, food, etc.).  

[greg]

Teresa, I can accept your views, but that doesn't preclude that I disagree with them.

I feel free to recommend what I don't like (or haven't let earned to like).   My "Core Classical" list ... http://ca.geocities.com/w_d_bailey/CoreClassical.html ... wasn't development for other people in the first place, but for my own education.  It is a mainly compilation of recommendations from quite a few different sources which don't recommend the same thing, but from which a certain consensus emerged.  That is, the items there represent most commonly recommended pieces.  The only exceptions are some contemporary pieces that don't have quite the same consensus but which I felt ought to be included to present this as yet under-appreciated subgenre.

There are a certainly pieces on my list that I don't personally care for, (though none I "abhor").  Nevertheless I recommend them without reservation because of the recognition they have earned from critics and listeners far more experienced than I.

i'd say this is a pretty good list, Feanor.

I'm not sure the introduction through classical by means of comparison to a popular music genre works, since classical is so different. What I'd do, instead of using Teresa's list, is to just get someone to sample different works from different eras- for example, maybe (from Feanor's list) the Xenakis, Sibelius,  Brahms, Bach, and Adams <- (i think he should be on the list). Often, people on here have a preference for certain eras/periods/genres whatever, but it's best to just listen to them all to find out what you really like, and often you're surprised! 

Still, even if you don't like something, 4 times of listening isn't quite enough..... at least meaning, listening 4 times to something and then dismissing all music that is similar. If I did that, I'd be missing out on a lot of music I like!  That would be musical hell.


For example, I don't care much for opera- my least favorite genre. But I still try to listen to operas every now and then, and enjoy them sometimes. And for composers, I don't like Beethoven much.... but every now and then, I'll go back to, say, the Eroica symphony which I completely hated the first time I heard it. The second time I get the score and follow along. After that, I understood it a bit more, although I still don't like it. Same with much of Beethoven, but I still try to understand his music even if I don't like it.


Teresa's list could be useful for someone out there, but there's much better ways of introducing people to classical (and getting them to love a variety of different styles in classical).

[Don]

Wrong again, simple English.  It is wrong for anyone anywhere on the planet to recommend something they do not like, this is really a tough one for you to comprehend isn't it?

If you enjoy listening to something I do not like it is worth listening to for you, it is not worth listening to for me.  No one should listen to what they do not like and no one should tell anyone else what they must like.  Understand?

What I understand is that you are a poor guide for those new to classical music.  Your recommendations are much too restrictive.

[greg]

What I understand is that you are a poor guide for those new to classical music.  Your recommendations are much too restrictive.

exactly my point. How do people know they won't like something unless they try it?

[Fëanor]

...
I think there should be room for her also on GMG, for we harbour many posters that have also some extreme opinions, but are respected anyway.
Lets be friendly open and welcoming, instead of biting each others heads off.
And that is my opinion.

Absolutely, Harry   

There is no doubt that Teresa has a very extensive listening experience.  No doubt there are many topics where her insights will enlighten discussion.

[Fëanor]

...
I'm not sure the introduction through classical by means of comparison to a popular music genre works, since classical is so different. What I'd do, instead of using Teresa's list, is to just get someone to sample different works from different eras- for example, maybe (from Feanor's list) the Xenakis, Sibelius,  Brahms, Bach, and Adams <- (i think he should be on the list).
...

Greg, there is a good case for including John Adams as a prominent minimalist example.  For my part, everything of his that I've heard has sounded, (to use Teresa's adjective), "boring".

[greg]

Greg, there is a good case for including John Adams as a prominent minimalist example.  For my part, everything of his that I've heard has sounded, (to use Teresa's adjective), "boring".

have you listened to Harmonielehre?

[Ephemerid]

Greg, there is a good case for including John Adams as a prominent minimalist example.  For my part, everything of his that I've heard has sounded, (to use Teresa's adjective), "boring".

What was he once described as?  A "mininimalist bored with minimalism"?  LOL  But Adams isn't a strict minimalist-- even in his more earlier works, certainly not when you compare him to the extremely rigourous music of Reich or Glass of the 70s. 

Harmonielehre is certainly a great introductory piece, but I'd say he incorporates elements of minimalism from time to time, but more for colouristic effects and textures than for building entire structures of a piece.  There are times when Adams sounds more like Copland than anything "minimalist" per se (the orchestration & the way he spaces out chords I guess?  I can't quite put my finger on it).

I bet Teresa would like Harmonielehre too-- particularly the final movement-- sublime and powerful music.    I've got Simon Rattle's recording and I'm impressed by it (not to mention that it also has an excellent recording of Short Ride in a Fast Machine on it). 

[Fëanor]

What was he once described as?  A "mininimalist bored with minimalism"?  LOL  But Adams isn't a strict minimalist-- even in his more earlier works, certainly not when you compare him to the extremely rigourous music of Reich or Glass of the 70s. 

Harmonielehre is certainly a great introductory piece, but I'd say he incorporates elements of minimalism from time to time, but more for colouristic effects and textures than for building entire structures of a piece.
 ...

I'll give it a try at the first opportunity.  0:)

[Don]

Absolutely, Harry   

There is no doubt that Teresa has a very extensive listening experience.  No doubt there are many topics where her insights will enlighten discussion.

That's a magnanimous attitude.  Personally, I have the feeling that she has much less listening experience than it might appear.

Teresa's list is nothing more than a list of personal preferences; it's not a guide at all.

[Szykneij]

Could there be some covert racism involved in the traditional stardard repertoire lists?  I believe there is, I really do or Germany would not be so prominent and most of the rest of the world ignored except for a few token composers here and there. 

That's like saying there must be covert racism because so many Canadians are in the NHL Hall of Fame. Even a cursory knowledge of music history would provide some clues about Germany's prominence. Of course, if you dismiss entire eras of music development as boring ...

At least my opening up Classical music borders to cover the entire world will hopefully set things right! 

Phew! Thank you so much! I knew there had to be a reason why music from all over the world is championed and discussed on this board.

I look to the future with great hope, these elitists will not kill off "Classical music for everyone" if I can help it! 

I think the elitist angle you're trying for is unfounded (you've mentioned the word in several posts.) Overall, I find this board to be very non-elitist. While there are many here who only listen to classical, there are few who display an elitist attitude about it. A read-through of the Non-Classical Listening thread and other threads in the Diner reveals most of us here have a wide variety of musical interests beyond classical. You are not unique in having diverse musical interests.

[Teresa]

IMPORTANT NOTE: It is 36 years not 26 years I have been listening to Classical Music. 2008 (-) 1972 (=) 36.  Sorry about my poor math skills, my god I'm getting old!

This is just disingenuous. On that page, you write, "This is a list of some of the most beautiful, colorful and exciting orchestral music ever written.  Unlike other recommended lists there is no "stuffed-shirt" academic boring music here!  This is classical orchestral music written to be enjoyed from the very first note to the last.  Music that is always fresh and alive no matter how often it is played.  This is the good stuff."

You are clearly implying that excluded music is the "bad stuff" and not always fresh and alive and not meant to be enjoyed from first to last. Quite frankly, you have limited tastes and are confusing those opinions with facts.

Again, you falsely assume that "folks who don't like Classical music" fall into your same pattern. I once assumed (out of ignorance based on terribly limited exposure, coupled with youthful arrogance) that I didn't like classical music. Then I actually took the time to expose myself to it with an open mind, and now I love it. And after years of listening to it, my taste in and understanding of classical music have only broadened, not remained fixed on one narrow cross section of it. I understand that we're dealing with serious art, too, and not mere light entertainment. Because I don't understand or like a piece doesn't make me assume that others will or should react the same way.

You need to give others more credit. Despite their initial prejudices and assumptions about classical music, they may approach it with more sensitivity and openness than you. Their tastes may simply differ. They may dislike "Power Orchestral" but immediately fall in love with Classical-era chamber music or opera.

It's one thing to say, "This is the type of classical music I like" and another entirely to pretend you can speak for or guide other skeptics into the genre.

Still no understanding of the audience I am talking to I see, once again these are listeners who "think" they dislike Classical music because it is boring and hard to relate to.  This is what is clearly meant by no "stuffed-shirt" academic boring music here.  There is no music listed that demonstrates technique and shows off the players skills without also being entertaining to the average non-classical listener.  The 97% of the population who do not like Classical music know exactly what I mean.  And for the majority of the world listeners music is easily boring which has no spices and is not sprinkled with at least some percussion.  After listening to Classical music for 36 years for me percussion is the most important component in all music.  Just listen to the vast improvement in Mussorgsky's original piano only version of Pictures At An Exhibition versus Ravel's wonderful orchestration with all the wonderful percussive effects, the result is one of the greatest masterpieces of all time. 

This is the "good stuff" for anyone who finds "stuffed-shirt" academic music boring.  Not everyone finds "stuffed-shirt" academic music boring some find enlightenment in this type of music.  I even own some "stuffed-shirt" academic music and listen to it occasionally.   I am clearly stating there is NONE of this music in the list, after all they have already rejected this traditional core classical base.  That in no way means the opposite is "the bad stuff". 

And to be perfectly honest I am embarrassed that Chamber music and Opera even exist in Classical music, or that most music written between 1650-1800 lost most of it's excitement due to these overly strict new rules of composition.   I reserved listeners right to listen to these types music and if I live to be 1,000 years old I will never understand.  So I do not delve in these areas at all, as I have nothing constructive to say on these three items.  But on early medieval and early renaissance dance music, and from the Romantic period on I do have a lot of experience and a lot to say, especially in terms of Orchestral music.  But the main reason I didn't even mention Chamber music or Opera in "The Basic Power Orchestral Repertoire or Classical music for folks who don't like Classical music" because chamber music and opera are not orchestral compositions. 

No matter what you say Classical music will not be elitist, thank god for the Internet as listeners can find the "good stuff" for themselves.

Teresa has made some claims here about what she thinks is "morally wrong."  Personally, I think it "morally wrong" to set herself up as an expert and tastemaker when she is unqualified.  I think it morally wrong to be unwilling to accept guidance or to acknowledge error.  And it's morally wrong to blame others for her shortcomings (i.e. she describes her failure to understand or appreciate chamber music, opera, or the core of the orchestral repertory as if the music were to blame rather than Teresa herself--her limitations, inexperience, prejudices, and lack of training).

She likes to defend her right to her opinions.  Of course she has a right to her opinions.  But in setting herself up as a guide, she has a moral obligation to express only informed opinions (her opinion about opera, for instance, is ignorant in the extreme and therefore worthless).

Of course, the foregoing is only my opinion.

I do not set myself up as an expert but a guidepost who has traveled the difficult and often uneasy waters of the vast expense of thousands of classical compositions written over more than 400 years to find that which is beautiful, exciting and very rewarding to me.  I am clearly sharing them with others who have rejected what is know as the core classical repertoire.  I really believe Classical music can easily be 50 times more popular if only listeners knew these other works exist, I intend to see they do.

I also agree my opinion about Opera is worthless, why because I hate Opera.  But it is not "ignorant in the extreme" to dislike something that is so utterly distasteful to me that I cannot tolerate it even in small doses!   Have you ever seen me make any Opera suggestions at all ever, this is the most absurd thing I have ever read.   There are experts on Opera who can recommend Opera.  All I can tell is the truth about how bad opera sounds to my me and the physical pain the singers poor vocal cords produce in my ears, I really because Opera can cause hearing damage if listened to at realistic levels. I reserve the right of other people to listen to music I do not like but on the other hand I cannot recommend music I do not like, THAT IS MORALLY VERY, VERY, VERY WRONG!! One can only recommends what one likes and cannot recommend what one does not like.

What limitations?  I am only honest in what I like and do not like.

What inexperience or lack of training? I am a guitarist and both a pop and amateur classical composer. I have studied composition and can transpose for the all instruments of the orchestra.  In short I can write and read an orchestral score.  I studied composition and orchestration in school and it was at that time 1972 I decided to write better compositions than the masters I learned from (Mozart, Bach, etc.) I have mostly failed but I have found so many wonderful modern classical works that I would have had a privilege to put my name on.   Thank goodness I found Classic music I could love and I only to share it with the world. 

Everyone in the entire world had prejudices in what they like or they are lying!

I do accept guidance and acknowledge errors when they are found.  For example I am rewording the Copland entry in "Classical Music for Everyone" under suggestions to folk music listeners as Copland did write some atonal music.  But the right to approach Classical music from other than the core repertoire is what has you upset.  For this I am sorry, but you cannot keep Classical music for yourself.  Not everyone likes what you like and believe it or not there are millions (maybe billions) of people who hate Opera and Chamber music, but don't let that bother you if you like it enjoy.  Music is meant to be enjoy in any way you can!

As far as "lesser known composers" go, I am familiar with a good deal of it and then some (its nice to see Sessions' Black Maskers Suite on there-- its an old favourite of mine, sadly underrated IMO).  You'll find there's plenty of people here who do lament that concert performances tend to focus on more standard repertoire and want a bit of music past 1899 for example -- but not at the expense of denigrating the standard repertoire!  Its not because Mozart is boring, but because there *is* so much more out there.  

One of the reasons I came to this forum was precisely because people here do listen to more than just the standard repertoire...

Great news I should have a fun time and maybe discover some new modern composers if this sub-tread ever ends.

I am glad to hear you liked Sessions' Black Maskers Suite , it is one of my favorites as well.  There really is so much Classical music out there that I could live a 1,000 years and not hear it all even excluding the 1650's-1800's, chamber and opera. 

I am still waiting for release in any format (I can play them all) of William Russo's Symphony No. 2 "The Titans", I have been waiting for this since 1974, there have been a few performances but no recordings.  In 1966 Seiji Ozawa was in "Big John's" bar in Chicago listening to the Siegel-Schwall Blues Band and decided he wanted to commission a orchestral work that incorporated them.  Next summer in 1967 Ozawa conducted Russo's Symphony No. 2 at Ravinia and was so impressed and thought that he would be the perfect composer to commission his "Blues Band and Orchestra work" and Russo agreed.   The resulting work "Three Pieces for Blues Band and Symphony Orchestra, Op. 50" written in 1968.  Seiji Ozawa didn't get the go ahead to record it until 1973.  He never was able to record the 2nd Symphony though.  But in 1977 a second work Street Music A Blues Concerto for Harmonica, Piano and Orchestra, Op. 65 with Corky Siegel, Ozawa, San Francisco Symphony Orchestra was released by Deutsche Grammophon.  So for 35 years I have been waiting for Russo's Symphony No. 2 I hope it recorded or at least performed in Nevada before I die.

What I understand is that you are a poor guide for those new to classical music.  Your recommendations are much too restrictive.

Too restrictive?  It is just the opposite.  "The Basic Power Orchestral Repertoire or Classical music for folks who don't like Classical music" There is classical music from all corners of the earth: American, Russian, English, German, Mexican, Spanish, French, Oriental, Jewish, etc.  As well as folk influenced, jazz influenced, blues influenced.  You will not find such variety from any Classical list every published anywhere on the planet.  And then when you combine it with Classical Music for Everyone there are over 400 classical compositions listed.  I could add more but I didn't want to overwhelm!  It's the standard repertoire lists that are overly restrictive thus the critical need for my list and articles.

exactly my point. How do people know they won't like something unless they try it?

That is exactly my POINT the standard repertoire excludes entire genres and nationalities of Classical music.  If you don't like the standard repertoire my alternate list is the one to go to.  I hope in the future there will be more.  I recommend using streaming audio to try new music.

[greg]

But I wonder, does anyone besides us actually read these lists?