please recommend me some complex or seemingly chaotic music

[Catison]

For real chaos: you need to play them together and very loud.    ( Verdi's Requiem ...chaotic??? Orff's Carmina...complex?)

The guy is calling B's 9th chaotic and complex.

[c#minor]

The guy is calling B's 9th chaotic and complex.

Exactly

[Daedalus]

For chaotic and complex, how about the first two movements of Mahler's Fifth?
When I was first getting into classical, I was obsessed with this symphony and especially the first movement.

That chaotic sounding passage, which sounds so agitated, aggressive and desperate, with strings and brass wailing towards the end of the first movement always sends a shiver down my spine every time I listen to it. Plus you can't beat the cliffhanger beginning with the trumpet solo and I love the snare drums that come in before the funeral march begins.
The second movement is pretty much more of the same, perhaps even faster. Terrific stuff!

Plus, the rest of the symphony isn't bad either   

D.

[jochanaan]

Tamal, if it's complexity with singers you want, you aren't going to do better than Mahler's Second, Third and especially Eighth symphonies.  Try also Schoenberg's Gurrelieder.  And if you're feeling really adventurous, try Alban Berg's two operas Wozzeck and Lulu.

Also, anything by Edgard Varèse fits the bill for complexity.  Even the small-scale works such as Octandre and Density 21.5 are very very complex.

I suppose you've discovered Gustav Holst's The Planets?  Check out also his Hammersmith Scherzo, Hymn of Jesus and Egdon Heath.

Oh, and you've gotta hear Charles Ives!  Especially the magnificent Fourth Symphony.

[Superhorn]

    The  music  of   Elliott  Carter,  who  will  turn  100  this  December  and  is  still  in  remarkably  good  physical  and  mental  shape  is nothing  if  not  complex.  He  is  still  composing  and  his  music  is  being  widely  performed
despite  the  fact  that  many  find  it  baffling. 
   It  often  features  different  instruments  proceding  at  different  tempi
as  in  the  string  quartets.
   I  once  played  some  of his  orchestral  music  for  some  one  who   was  baffled  by   the fact  that  it  was  impossible  to  figure  out  whether  the  tempi  were  slow  or  fast. 

[karlhenning]

Varese  Ionisation

Nah; that's in a straightforward 4/4 for its entirety.

[jochanaan]

Nah; that's in a straightforward 4/4 for its entirety.

Ah, but what Edgard does with that 4/4!

[greg]

I've felt you could get away with writing large portions of the Rite of Spring in 4/4, too........

[Sorin Eushayson]

Chaotic and complex... Baroque-period music may be right for the complexity part...  Perhaps by 'chaotic' you mean 'intense?'  For that I would recommend this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLuqRl8SdU4.

[71 dB]

Guys, why don't we just cut to the chase.  The man is looking for Orff's Carmina Burana and/or Verdi's Requiem.

Classical music is about exploring. Canonic works are too easy/fast answers.

Elliot Carter & Ahmed Adnan Saygun sound chaotic to my ears... 

[Kullervo]

I don't think it matters. OP probably hasn't been back since.

[Catison]

Classical music is about exploring. Canonic works are too easy/fast answers.

Elliot Carter & Ahmed Adnan Saygun sound chaotic to my ears... 

From the tenor of his post, I think Orff is probably still in the "unexplored" area.  Hence, my post.

[71 dB]

From the tenor of his post, I think Orff is probably still in the "unexplored" area.  Hence, my post.

You are probably right. As long as he doesn't stop exploring after Orff.

[jochanaan]

I've felt you could get away with writing large portions of the Rite of Spring in 4/4, too........

Slightly off-topic reply: As a performing musician, I'd rather see the weird time signatures and be prepared, than see 4/4 and try to count those rhythms to fit a 4 pattern!  I once played a band piece by John Barnes Chance called "Blue Lake Overture" that was written in 4 but whose rhythms were asymmetrical like Stravinsky's; the band director wisely conducted the beats, not the time signature.  It was hard on those who had to count rests, but we managed, and the performance was nicely rhythmical. (This was the Nebraska All-State honor band in the 1970s.)

[Jay F]

For chaotic and complex, how about the first two movements of Mahler's Fifth?
When I was first getting into classical, I was obsessed with this symphony and especially the first movement.

What is your favorite version? Mahler is my favorite composer, and I have favorite versions of everything (mostly Bernstein) but the M5. I probably play Sinopoli's most often.

My vote for "seemingly chaotic" would go to the Mahler 7th, and I like either Bernstein version better than anything else I've heard. I have maybe a slight preference for the Deutsche Grammophon version. And you know, the first time I heard the Mahler 8th, I found the fact that it was sung, well, "chaotic" would be one way to describe it. I asked my friends the music critic and the piano professor, "What was that?" And they said, "oh, that's just Mahler." And eventually, the M8 became one of my favorite pieces of music. I like Bernstein's CBS version as well as Tennstedt's and Sinopoli's.

[greg]

Slightly off-topic reply: As a performing musician, I'd rather see the weird time signatures and be prepared, than see 4/4 and try to count those rhythms to fit a 4 pattern!  I once played a band piece by John Barnes Chance called "Blue Lake Overture" that was written in 4 but whose rhythms were asymmetrical like Stravinsky's; the band director wisely conducted the beats, not the time signature.  It was hard on those who had to count rests, but we managed, and the performance was nicely rhythmical. (This was the Nebraska All-State honor band in the 1970s.)

Hmm that's good to know 

[Martin Lind]

The guy is calling B's 9th chaotic and complex.

And why not? Do you think Beethovens 9th is easy? I don't think so. The guy is very (!) new to classical music. That doen't mean that he is unable to grasp complex music. Beethovens music is not that easy, it only appears easy to somebody who listened to classical music for thousand years and has listened to 20 thousand works. Orff Carmina Burana is a nice thing, but compared to Beethovens 9th it's a step back. It is no real challenge to somebody who enjoys Beethovens 9th.

Brahms would be a challenge, Bruckner would certainly be a challenge. For somebody coming new to Bruckner ( at least me!) the music appears completely chaotic and had a complexity difficult to grasp. I really studied these works. Now I can enjoy them like Mozart. But not at first sight.

I have the best understanding that somebody very new to classical music ( as this person) finds Beethovens 9th complex and chaotic. It would be strange, if he would think otherwise. I found a lot of music quite chaotic when I started to enjoy classical music, certainly also Beethovens 9th. So I don't see the point in recommending him Orffs Carmina Burana ( nothing against it!). He at least enjoys Beethovens 9th. He will then certainly enjoy other things.

For something very chaotic sounding choose Charles Ives, they also like the Holiday symphony or the 4th possess a choir. I discovered this music in early years and loved this "chaos" of musical voices. But is Bruckner really easier? And is Beethoven so much easier?

[Catison]

That's a very nice post.  But you've made the assumption that he knows what he is talking about when he says complex and chaotic.  You have to read between the lines.

I've used to work in music stores, and I can tell you that half the people I talked to about classical music had no idea how to describe what they liked.  Most of the time my recommendations did fit their descriptions at all, but overtime you develop and intuition for what they really want.  This might sound rash or elitist, but I can tell you I had many repeat customers.  And years after I left, my manager told me people would still come to look for me.  I don't mean to sound boisterous; I just want to show that sometimes giving someone what they think they want is not always the answer.

For this thread, the answer was clearly Orff's Carmina Burana.  That reminds me that after 10 years or so, I should probably listen to it again.

[karlhenning]

That's a very nice post.  But you've made the assumption that he knows what he is talking about when he says complex and chaotic.  You have to read between the lines.

I've used to work in music stores, and I can tell you that half the people I talked to about classical music had no idea how to describe what they liked.  Most of the time my recommendations did fit their descriptions at all, but overtime you develop and intuition for what they really want.  This might sound rash or elitist, but I can tell you I had many repeat customers.

You did what you ought to have: you served the customer well.  Not rash, nor elitist, save in places where wretched customer service is the norm 

[Martin Lind]

Hi Catison,

What can I say against your experience. If you are the expert in such things you will be right.

By the way I never needed advice. When I was young, my parents had some records. I liked Mozarts 39th symphony and some other things. But I had the concert guide of my parents and what was more important: I had the radio. So though I find a forum "Classical Music for Beginners" highly sympathetic, I really don't know why people need such advice. I never needed advice. I simply needed some kind of information and the radio. Well radio was better that time. But I really never asked somebody what to hear next.

It is nice to recommend something. But if you are seriously interested in classical music, use good books and read and read and read. Or take to a good radio station with classical music and listen and listen and listen. And maybe record something from the radio. There is no better advice. For me always curiousity came first. And if the guy likes Beethovens 9th, why not buy the other ones? There is so much on the market, things who are dead cheap and are not bad at all.

So even if I like to give advice I really don't know why people need advice. Especially when it comes to standard works. OK, if it comes to Glazunov maybe, you may ask: Do I really need Glazunovs symphonies. Or what do you think of Malcom Arnold ( I like him)? This advice is always welcome. But the great eternal works? You only need a simple book, a guide of any kind and you soon will come to Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms for example. Or you buy a CD guide ( for example the Penguins Guide) and the simple fact that there are works who are performed very often will guide you somehow. So there is really no need for advice, especially for a beginner, just the opposite, if you start to hear to classical music, you normally need no advice. Simply buy a book and it can be an old one cheap from a second hand book shop it will be completely enough. The point is that many of these "beginners" have no serious interest in classical music.  Would they they wouldn't maybe ask such questions.

Regards
Martin