Standard repertoire

[MN Dave]

I think Sarge purchases more as me Dave!

Well, all of Sarge's Cheerios aren't in the bowl either. 

[Harry]

I know, I know. You're the doctor of love.

Well that amongst others, yes! 0:)

[Kullervo]

I've done my survey. Now I sit in my comfort zone, for the most part.

Take two Ockeghem masses and call me in the morning. 

[MN Dave]

Take two Ockeghem masses and call me in the morning. 

[springrite]

I know, I know. You're the doctor of love.

Dr. Strange Love

[Harry]

Dr. Strange Love

O, I assure you there is nothing starnge about my love, apart from being ferocious...maybe...

[MN Dave]

O, I assure you there is nothing starnge about my love, apart from being ferocious...maybe...

Harry's love roars like a lion.

Oh, are we off topic again?

[Harry]

Yes we rather are Dave...

[paulb]

Too much music, too little time

Thats why i choose carefully as to what stays in my collection, and/or take a  chance on.
I have like 400+ cds, and a  few others to buy I'm not complaining.
I also have   a  *box of what-nots* that i slowly dump on my brotherinlaw. He loves the fact I am selective
+ another 100 *to sell* cds that Katrina took care of, which i could have saved, had i remembered

But to answer the OP, I also think that later in everyones life , changes will happen. Even if you think *oh I would never ever lose my great interest in my favorite composer ______, or fav _____, or _,or_____*
Yet there are laws at work deep down inside you.
Life is permanance and change. You could try to remain, but why?

[Steve]

Is it just me, or is it really so that most people go for standard fare in classical music?
I see a lot of postings of the three B's and Mahler/Sibelius/Pettersson thank God/ Stravinsky, etc, etc, etc as Yul Bryner said in the the King of Siam.
But there is so much more quality to be found, yet the bulk of posters are keeping on the surface of things in their choice of composers.
That is not to say that this is a negative thing, but still there is more beyond as some people think, me thinks.
What you you have to say, my classical friends.

I wonder though, Harry, if there is really a strong correlation between the works discussed here at GMG, and what we are actually listening to. The discussions seem to surround those canonical composers because their music is present in nearly all of our collections. Hence, nearly everyone will have some favourite recording, ensemble, or the like. Additionally, as many of our posts refer to specific recordings of works, one would expect those works with many renditions on record to be more discussed (as there are more of them), then those hardly recorded. It wouldn't be difficult to show that the works in the canon, are recorded more frequently. With many obscure works there may be only a single definitive recording.

[bhodges]

Re: standard rep.  It's "standard" for a reason, and I respect that.  Many classics are widely admired, and further, admired by many people over long periods of time.  Further, most of them "keep on giving," in the sense that listeners continue to like them after repeated hearings and get more out of them.  And although it's not a given, repeated hearings can mean that in time a work becomes "beloved," like getting to know someone who someday, after many conversations, dinners and other events, may be "an old friend." 

Now that said, my feeling is that if you never hear anything new (and that doesn't mean music written today, by any means), you're not giving something the chance to push its way into your "circle of esteem" and possibly become...your favorite piece.  I hear new works every week, either recorded or live, and some are fantastic, some are forgettable, with most somewhere in between.  But I always try to remember that this is a first hearing, and very often a first impression will mature into something else.  My experience is usually that subsequent hearings bring more pleasure, rather than less, although it's good to keep an open mind to whatever path occurs.

Without belaboring the point, I've been listening to classical music for decades, but here are some of my all time favorite works—yet they are works that I only discovered in the last five years or so.  But there is that all-important first step: hearing each one for the first time, i.e., "letting them in."  If I hadn't at least spent the time to hear them once, I'd never have been the wiser, but in these cases a first hearing led to a second, then a third, and now that I have heard all of these dozens of times, I can't imagine not hearing them. 

Martinů: Double Concerto (1938)
Janáček: Jenůfa and Kát'a Kabanová (1904 and 1921)
Shostakovich: Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk and Symphony No. 4 (1934 and 1935-36)
Pavel Haas: Study for String Orchestra (1943)
Louis Andriessen: Workers Union (1975)
Rihm: Jagden und Formen (1995-2001)
Ligeti: Violin Concerto (1992)
Sven-David Sandström: High Mass (1994)
Nino Rota: Score to Il Gattopardo (The Leopard) (1963)
Richard Strauss: Die Frau ohne Schatten (1918)
Verdi: Macbeth (1847 - see, I do listen to some music before 1900  )

And this is just the tip of the iceberg--things that come to mind with just a few minutes' pondering.  Those who like Renaissance and Baroque music have a veritable goldmine of new recordings of much of this repertoire, and the same idea applies: if you listen to Vivaldi's Four Seasons day in and day out, you'll never discover Handel's Theodora, which you might end up enjoying even more.

Whether you spend half your time exploring unfamiliar works, or 25%, or even 1%, you never know what works are lurking out there, waiting patiently for you to discover them, which will then join your (hopefully ever increasing) canon of favorites.

--Bruce

[Harry]

I wonder though, Harry, if there is really a strong correlation between the works discussed here at GMG, and what we are actually listening to. The discussions seem to surround those canonical composers because their music is present in nearly all of our collections. Hence, nearly everyone will have some favourite recording, ensemble, or the like. Additionally, as many of our posts refer to specific recordings of works, one would expect those works with many renditions on record to be more discussed (as there are more of them), then those hardly recorded. It wouldn't be difficult to show that the works in the canon, are recorded more frequently. With many obscure works there may be only a single definitive recording.

There is truth in that also of course. The fact is that I post really a lot of unknown composers, but that seems to no one important really, only for my self and a handful of others. Maybe my pace is just to high, that could well be.
Maybe its my hormons, also a possibility.

[Harry]

Re: standard rep.  It's "standard" for a reason, and I respect that.  Many classics are widely admired, and further, admired by many people over long periods of time.  Further, most of them "keep on giving," in the sense that listeners continue to like them after repeated hearings and get more out of them.  And although it's not a given, repeated hearings can mean that in time a work becomes "beloved," like getting to know someone who someday, after many conversations, dinners and other events, may be "an old friend." 

Now that said, my feeling is that if you never hear anything new (and that doesn't mean music written today, by any means), you're not giving something the chance to push its way into your "circle of esteem" and possibly become...your favorite piece.  I hear new works every week, either recorded or live, and some are fantastic, some are forgettable, with most somewhere in between.  But I always try to remember that this is a first hearing, and very often a first impression will mature into something else.  My experience is usually that subsequent hearings bring more pleasure, rather than less, although it's good to keep an open mind to whatever path occurs.

Without belaboring the point, I've been listening to classical music for decades, but here are some of my all time favorite works—yet they are works that I only discovered in the last five years or so.  But there is that all-important first step: hearing each one for the first time, i.e., "letting them in."  If I hadn't at least spent the time to hear them once, I'd never have been the wiser, but in these cases a first hearing led to a second, then a third, and now that I have heard all of these dozens of times, I can't imagine not hearing them. 

Martinů: Double Concerto (1938)
Janáček: Jenůfa and Kát'a Kabanová (1904 and 1921)
Shostakovich: Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk and Symphony No. 4 (1934 and 1935-36)
Pavel Haas: Study for String Orchestra (1943)
Louis Andriessen: Workers Union (1975)
Rihm: Jagden und Formen (1995-2001)
Ligeti: Violin Concerto (1992)
Sven-David Sandström: High Mass (1994)
Nino Rota: Score to Il Gattopardo (The Leopard) (1963)
Richard Strauss: Die Frau ohne Schatten (1918)
Verdi: Macbeth (1847 - see, I do listen to some music before 1900  )

And this is just the tip of the iceberg--things that come to mind with just a few minutes' pondering.  Those who like Renaissance and Baroque music have a veritable goldmine of new recordings of much of this repertoire, and the same idea applies: if you listen to Vivaldi's Four Seasons day in and day out, you'll never discover Handel's Theodora, which you might end up enjoying even more.

Whether you spend half your time exploring unfamiliar works, or 25%, or even 1%, you never know what works are lurking out there, waiting patiently for you to discover them, which will then join your (hopefully ever increasing) canon of favorites.

--Bruce

Your story lifted my spirits Bruce, thank you. Many good points.
Absolutely.

[MN Dave]

Your story lifted my spirits Bruce, thank you. Many good points.
Absolutely.

Bruce is always lifting spirits. Gin especially.

[Okay, I'll leave now.]

[Steve]

Whether you spend half your time exploring unfamiliar works, or 25%, or even 1%, you never know what works are lurking out there, waiting patiently for you to discover them, which will then join your (hopefully ever increasing) canon of favorites.

Well put, Bruce.

We must always seek!

[bhodges]

Bruce is always lifting spirits. Gin especially.

[Okay, I'll leave now.]

Harry, you definitely have a huge appetite for unfamiliar music--probably larger than anyone here.  I don't think anyone would be expected to match your pace, but on the other hand, you're constantly reinvigorating your listening pool.

And I forgot a glaring omission on my list above: virtually all the works I've come to like by Elliott Carter...all in the last five years.  Oh, and Wagner's Tristan und Isolde.

Steve, absolutely right: seeking is such an important part of listening.  Now, how much you seek, and how often--all up for grabs.  But not seeking at all, period, is to me closing off a huge source of potential pleasure.

--Bruce

[karlhenning]

I have an idea, Bruce, that perhaps instead of . . .

. . . if you never hear anything new (and that doesn't mean music written today, by any means) . . .

. . . you may have meant, doesn't mean exclusively music written today, by any means.

Maybe 

[ChamberNut]

For me, being only becoming an ardent classical music fan 3 years ago, and with limited time constraints, I've only scratched the surface of what most would consider the "standard repertoire".  I have to have short lists of composers/works of where I'd like to focus my exploration towards, plus money is also a consideration.  I find I don't have enough fully dedicated listening hours to enjoy all of the music I already have in my collection (100 or so discs), thus I don't see how I could do it with 10,000 + discs in my collection? 

Also, when I find I really like something, it tends to stay in my backpack that I bring to work (I usually keep 6 or 10 CD's in their for wherever I go, on a rotating basis).  I think I had my set of Beethoven String Quartets in my backpack for about 2 years, because I would always want to listen to them, and couldn't get enough of them! 

[bhodges]

I have an idea, Bruce, that perhaps instead of . . .

. . . you may have meant, doesn't mean exclusively music written today, by any means.

Maybe 

That's absolutely right, Karl: the point I was after is that there is much unfamiliar music out there from all periods. 

And ChamberNut, points well taken: time and money do enter into all of this, and...we all have our "Beethoven string quartets," either literally or figuratively, that we love to hear again and again.

--Bruce

[MN Dave]

There's so much in there I could upset about.

No time.