Please see this link: Classical Music: Recommended Works, but Prioritized (https://docs.google.com/document/d/18t_9MHZTENbmYdezAAj4LRM0-Eak_MYO1HssZW2FX1U/edit?usp=sharing)
A few years ago I attempted to begin a project like this here and the results were (to me) very interestingly different from those I got doing this on other fora. Unfortunately, there was also so much unhappiness with the idea of this project and criticism of each other's voting that I angrily decided not to do it here. I somewhat regret that. If we have some interest here, I will create a thread where people can vote on that project.
We would begin with the lowest tier and work our way up.
Also, even if there is no interest in voting on this project here, feel free to let me know if you know of any works that are missing from our list. I'll add them to the lowest tier and if people feel they should be recommended more strongly, they'll get promoted through the voting. Here (https://jonathan-guide.neocities.org) is an unranked, alphabetical list of the works we've recommended.
My problem with this kind of project is it determines nothing other than we like music. It seems more like a pissing contest than anything rewarding. This is just my two measly cents.
I agree. Also apparently the good members at TC think that romantic era music is far more important than any other era. And in fact they seem to think that Brahms is worth the same as most other composers combined. Sad.
Quote from: coffee on June 22, 2022, 08:50:25 PM
Please see this link: Classical Music: Recommended Works, but Prioritized (https://docs.google.com/document/d/18t_9MHZTENbmYdezAAj4LRM0-Eak_MYO1HssZW2FX1U/edit?usp=sharing)
A few years ago I attempted to begin a project like this here and the results were (to me) very interestingly different from those I got doing this on other fora. Unfortunately, there was also so much unhappiness with the idea of this project and criticism of each other's voting that I angrily decided not to do it here. I somewhat regret that. If we have some interest here, I will create a thread where people can vote on that project.
We would begin with the lowest tier and work our way up.
Also, even if there is no interest in voting on this project here, feel free to let me know if you know of any works that are missing from our list. I'll add them to the lowest tier and if people feel they should be recommended more strongly, they'll get promoted through the voting. Here (https://jonathan-guide.neocities.org) is an unranked, alphabetical list of the works we've recommended.
I scrolled down the Recommended Works, but Prioritized doc, at first out of curiosity to learn just how many tiers there were, and then to see what some of the off-the-beaten-path works were. I'm mildly curious, too, about the occasional Empty Tier.
Quote from: Mirror Image on June 23, 2022, 06:04:16 AM
My problem with this kind of project is it determines nothing other than we like music. It seems more like a pissing contest than anything rewarding. This is just my two measly cents.
It's not nearly as thrilling as a Top 700 pieces of music list. ::)
🤠😎
Quote from: DavidW on June 23, 2022, 06:21:45 AM
I agree. Also apparently the good members at TC think that romantic era music is far more important than any other era. And in fact they seem to think that Brahms is worth the same as most other composers combined. Sad.
In fairness, there are many other threads here in "The Polling Station" that could be viewed in the same light --- I created plenty of them. However, this particular idea from this member seems to go beyond the idea of a "Top 10" or whatever poll and tries to determine the best works of all-time based on individual member votes. Sorry, but they have enough of these polls on TC and I hope they never come to this forum. Colossal wastes of time.
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 23, 2022, 06:26:54 AM
It's not nearly as thrilling as a Top 700 pieces of music list. ::)
🤠😎
I already made this point, Gurn.
Quote from: DavidW on June 23, 2022, 06:21:45 AM
I agree. Also apparently the good members at TC think that romantic era music is far more important than any other era. And in fact they seem to think that Brahms is worth the same as most other composers combined. Sad.
Mozart popping up for the first time only in the sixth tier, Haydn only in the thirteenth and Chopin only in the sixteenth? Gimme a break.
My opinion is that the good folks at TC are mostly teenagers / youngsters who have only recently discovered "classical music", ie mostly Beethoven and Mahler. GMG is vastly more sophisticated, being to TC what calculus is to arithmetic. ;D
Quote from: Mirror Image on June 23, 2022, 06:34:34 AM
I already made this point, Gurn.
I don't think you added sufficient sarcasm to it though. ;)
🤠😎
(* chortle *)
Quote from: Florestan on June 23, 2022, 06:43:31 AM
Mozart popping up for the first time only in the sixth tier, Haydn only in the thirteenth and Chopin only in the sixteenth? Gimme a break.
Ouch! Relegating top tier composers to the bottom of the barrel. Yeah I think you might be right about TC, or at least the TC members that like to vote in polls! :D
Quote from: Florestan on June 23, 2022, 06:43:31 AM
Mozart popping up for the first time only in the sixth tier, Haydn only in the thirteenth and Chopin] only in the sixteenth? Gimme a break.
But that seems to be where the good stuff is on this list. 8)
Beethoven 9 as a first priority? Just...no. It took me decades to appreciate that work. I feel similarly about all the Bach and Wagner. I sense a heavy bias toward Germanic music here.
Quote from: Mirror Image on June 23, 2022, 06:30:42 AM
Sorry, but they have enough of these polls on TC and I hope they never come to this forum. Colossal wastes of time.
What MI said!
Quote from: Mirror Image on June 23, 2022, 06:30:42 AMtries to determine the best works of all-time
It explicitly says that it does not do that.
"Naturally our list represents the knowledge and tastes of the people who have helped build it. No one claims that it is the single official objective canon of art music!"
Quote from: Florestan on June 23, 2022, 06:43:31 AM
Mozart popping up for the first time only in the sixth tier, Haydn only in the thirteenth and Chopin only in the sixteenth? Gimme a break.
My opinion is that the good folks at TC are mostly teenagers / youngsters who have only recently discovered "classical music", ie mostly Beethoven and Mahler. GMG is vastly more sophisticated, being to TC what calculus is to arithmetic. ;D
The first work by Mozart is on the fourth tier, behind only 8 other works.
Even the sixteenth tier is a very high tier, higher than 98% of the recommended works.
If you guys really are so much better than the folks at TC and amazon, you should be eager to help us fix this list.
Or is it just all bluster? You just want to huff about how superior you are, or you want to share your expertise?
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 23, 2022, 06:24:15 AM
I scrolled down the Recommended Works, but Prioritized doc, at first out of curiosity to learn just how many tiers there were, and then to see what some of the off-the-beaten-path works were. I'm mildly curious, too, about the occasional Empty Tier.
The empty tiers are there to prepare to split a tier that is too large.
Quote from: DavidW on June 23, 2022, 08:36:23 AM
Ouch! Relegating top tier composers to the bottom of the barrel. Yeah I think you might be right about TC, or at least the TC members that like to vote in polls! :D
The bottom of the barrel right now currently features these works:
Abrahamsen: Left, Alone (Piano Concerto) [2016]
Adigozalov: Piano Concerto #4 [1994]
Aguila: Concierto en Tango for cello and orchestra [2014]
Aguilera de Heredia: Obra on the eighth tone for organ "Ensalada"
Alexandrov: State Anthem of the Soviet Union [1943]
Alwyn: String Quartet #3 [1984]
Argento: Postcard from Morocco [1971]
Auerbach: La Suite dels Ocells [Homage to Pablo Casals] [2015]
Ballou: Concerto for Solo Guitar and Chamber Orchestra [1964]
Ballou: Prelude and Allegro for String Orchestra and Piano [1951]
Barrett, R.: life-form [2012]
Bax: String Quartet #2 [1925]
Bazzini: String Quartet #2 in D minor, op. 75 [1875]
Bedrossian: Twist [2016]
Bendix: Piano Concerto in G minor, op. 17 [1884]
Berg, N.: Symphony #5 "Trilogia delle Passioni" [1924]
Berio: Sequenza XI for guitar [1988]
Bériot: Violin Concerto #9 in A minor, op. 104 [1859]
Berkeley, M.: Oboe Quintet "Into the Ravine" [2012]
Berkeley: Piano Concerto in B-flat, op. 29 [1947-48]
Boieldieu: Piano Concerto #1 in F [c. 1792]
Bologne: String Quartets (6), op. 1 [c. 1770]
Bray: At the Speed of Stillness [2012]
Bridge: The Hour Glass, H.148 [1919-20]
Bruhns: Prelude in E minor "The Great" [late 17th century]
Brüll: Andante and Allegro, op. 88 [1902]
Buck: Concert Variations on "The Star-Spangled Banner", op. 23 [1868]
Budashkin: Domra Concerto [1943]
Carter: Horn Concerto [2006]
Chávez: Paisajes Mexicanos (Variaciones sinfónicas) [1973]
Chavez: Soli III for four soloists and orchestra [1965]
Cmiral: Altered Mind of 20-20 [2020]
Coates, G.: Holographic Universe for violin and orchestra [1975]
Coates, G.: Nightscape for contrabass and percussion [2008]
Coates, G.: String Quartet #8 [2001/2002]
Coates, G.: Symphony #16 "Time Frozen" [1993]
Coates, G.: Symphony #8 "Indian Sounds" for voices and orchestra [1991]
Coates, G.: The Force for Peace in War [1973]
Costa: Aphoristic Madrigal [2015]
Coulthard: Twelve Essays on a Cantabile Theme [1972]
Crosse: Some Marches on a Ground [1970]
Crosse: The Demon of Adachigahara [1968]
Cutting: Lute music, including "Divisions on Greensleeves" [late 16th century]
Danielpour: Darkness in the Ancient Valley [2011]
Daugherty: Deus Ex Machina [2007]
Dean: Voices of Angels [1996]
Demessieux: Te Deum, op. 11 [1959]
Dench: ik(s)land[ s] [1997-8]
Donatoni: Etwas ruhiger im Ausdruck [1967]
Dusapin: Item, for cello [1985]
Dusapin: Musique captive, for chamber ensemble [1980]
Enescu: Chamber Symphony in E, op. 33 [1954]
eRikm, Ferrari, & Lehn: Les Protorythmiques [2007]
Escher: Le Tombeau de Ravel [1952; rev. 1959]
Fano: Sonata for Two Pianos [1952]
Ferneyhough: Sisyphus Redux [2010]
Foss: String Quartet #3 [1976]
Fragoso: 7 Preludes [c. 1923?]
Franssens: Harmony of the Spheres [1994-2001]
Freeman: Under the Arching Heavens - A Requiem [2018]
Gilbert: Tsukimi (Moon Viewing) [2013]
Ginastera: Piano Concerto #2, op. 39 [1972]
Gomes: Lo schiavo [1889]
Granados: Dante [1908]
Gretchaninov: Mass "Et in terra pax", op. 166 [1942]
Gretchaninov: Missa Sancti Spiritus for Chorus and Organ, op. 169 [1943]
Gretchaninov: Symphony #2, op. 27, "Pastoral" [1908]
Gretchaninov: The Seven Days of Passion (Strastnaya Sedmitsa) [1911]
Groven: Symphony #2, op. 34 "Midnattstimen" ("The Midnight Hour") [1934]
Haas, G. F.: AUS.WEG [2010]
Haas, G. F.: Concerto Grosso #1 [2014]
Haas, G. F.: Trombone Concerto [2016]
Harper: Fanny Robin [1971]
Harper: Symphony #2 "Miracles" [2007]
Heininen: String Quartet #1, op. 32c [1974]
Henze: String Quartet #5 [1976]
Hermanson: Lyrical Metamorphosis [1957]
Herz: Rondo de concert, op. 27 [c. 1850]
Hindemith: String Quartet #3 in C [1920]
Hoddinott: Euphonium Concerto, op. 180 "The Sunne Rising, The King will Ride" [2002]
Holliger: Dona Nobis Pacem [1968-69]
Holloway: Violin Concerto, op. 70 [1990]
Hölszky: Dämonen [2006]
Hosokawa: The Raven [2011]
Ichiyanagi: Sapporo [1962]
Jolivet: Piano Concerto [1951]
Kagel: An Tasten [1977]
Kalafati: Légende, op. 20 [1928]
Kalomiris: Symphony #3 "Palamiki" [1955]
Kancheli: Chiaroscuro [2010]
Kaprálová: Piano Concerto in D minor [1935]
Kerem: Symphony #3 "For the Victims of Communism" [2003]
Kernis: Color Wheel [2001]
Kessler: , said the shotgun to the head. for poetry speaker, rap choir, string quartet, and orchestra [2003]
Kessler: Utopia II for 5 voices, 41 instruments, and live electronics [2011]
Kirchner, L.: String Quartet #4 [2006]
Kirchner, T.: Nachtbilder, op. 25 [1877]
Klebe: Die Zwitschermaschine, op. 7 [1949-50]
Korte: Piano Sonata [1953]
Krenek: Organ Concerto #2, op. 235 [1982]
Krenek: Piano Sonata #7, op. 240 [1988]
Lizée: Hitchcock Études [2010]
Lourié: Concerto Spirituale [1929]
Lumbye: Champagne Galop, op. 14 [1845]
Macklay: Many Many Cadences [2014]
Malec: Sonoris Causa [1997]
Manén: Symphony #2 "Ibérica" [1958]
Manoury: Cryptophonos for piano solo [1974]
Manz: E'en So, Lord Jesus, Quickly Come [1953]
Marshall: Gradual Requiem [1980]
Martinů: Clarinet Sonatina, H. 356 [1956]
Martucci: Nocturnes, op. 70 [1891?]
Mashayekhi: "Nous ne verrons jamais les jardins de Nishapour", op. 56 [1977]
Matsumura: Piano Concerto #2 [1978]
McCabe: Cloudcatcher Fells [1985]
McCabe: Piano Sonata "Study #12: Homage to Tippett" [2009]
McEwen: Symphony #5 in C-sharp minor "Solway" [1911]
Mennin: Symphony #5 [1950]
Mercury/Zilber: Bohemian Rhapsody [1975]
Mertz: Bardenklänge, op. 13 [1847-50]
Messiaen: Cantéyodjayâ [1948]
Miller: Duet for cello and orchestra [2015]
Moross: Symphony #1 [1941-42]
Muczynski: Preludes (6), op. 6 [1954]
Neuwirth: Masaot/Clocks without Hands [2013]
Nielsen: Chaconne, op. 32 [1916]
Orff & Keetman: Musik für Kinder [1930-3, rev. 1950-4]
Pabst: Piano Concerto in E-flat [1882]
Palau: Concierto Levantino (Concert of Valencia) [1947-59]
Pärt: Sarah Was Ninety Years Old [1977, rev. 1990]
Paulus: Concerto for String Quartet and Orchestra "Three Places of Enlightenment" [1995]
Pembaur: Cello Concerto in B minor, op. 86 [1910]
Pepping: Symphony #2 in F minor [1942]
Pereira: Concertino for Cello and String Orchestra [2010]
Perry: The Silent Years: Three Rhapsodies for Piano and Orchestra [2010]
Pinkham: Christmas Cantata (Sinfonia Sacra) [1998]
Pisaro: Fields Have Ears [2010]
Popper: Cello Concerto #2 in E minor, op. 24 [1880]
Pousseur: Paysages Planétaires [2000]
Prangcharoen: Piano Concerto "Luminary" [2016]
Ries: Clarinet Sonata in G minor, op. 29 [1809]
Rouse: Symphony #4 [2013]
Roussel: Psalm 80, op. 37 [1928]
Różycki: Violin Concerto, op. 70 [1944]
Ruehr: Cloud Atlas [2011]
Ryu: Sinfonia da Requiem [2009]
Rzewski: Whangdoodles [1990]
Saariaho: Nuits, adieux [1991]
Sallinen: The Palace Rhapsody, op. 72 [1996]
Sawyers: Homage to Kandinsky [2014]
Sawyers: Symphony #4 [2017]
Saygun: Partita for Solo Violin, op. 36 [1961]
Schafer: Apocalypsis [1980]
Schoenberg: Herzgewächse (Foliage of the Heart), op. 20 [1911]
Schwanter: Piano Concerto #2 [2011]
Searle: 2 Practical Cats [1953]
Segerstam: Symphony #253 "Crazily alone at Christmas, but in the family of universes of sounds" [2011]
Sheng: Shanghai Overture [2007]
Shinohara: Alternance [1962]
Sköld: Horn Concerto, op. 74 [1977]
Slonimsky, S.: Requiem [2004]
Slonimsky, S.: Sonata for Piano [1962]
Slonimsky, S.: Symphony #10 "Infernal Circles" [1992]
Smit, L: Concerto for Viola and Strings [1940]
Smolka: My My Country [2012]
Šulek: Trombone Sonata "Vox Gabrieli" [1973]
Sviridov: String Quartet #1 [1945–6]
Sørensen: Rosenbad - Papillon, for piano quintet [2013]
Taïra: Aiolos [1989]
Tanguy: Sénèque, dernier jour: concerto pour récitant et orchestre [2004]
Tate: Tracing Mississippi [2001]
Tchaikovsky, B.: Piano Concerto [1971]
Tchaikovsky, B.: Violin Concerto [1969]
Tchaikovsky, B.: Violin Sonata [1959]
Terterian: Symphony #8 [1989]
Thompson: The Peaceable Kingdom [1936]
Toch: Burlesken (Burlesques), op. 31 [1923]
Torke: An American Abroad [2002]
Ullmann: String Quartet #2 [1935]
Van der Aa: Imprint [2005]
Van der Aa: The Book of Sand, digital interactive song cycle [2015]
Van der Aa: Up-close, for cello solo, string ensemble, soundtrack & film [2010]
Van der Aa: Violin Concerto [2014]
Veldhuis: Paradiso [2001]
Wallin: Stonewave [1990]
Weir: Storm [1997]
Wilder: Children's Plea for Peace for narrator, children's chorus and wind ensemble [1968]
Wishart: Globalalia [2004]
Yoshida: Utsu-Semi [1979]
Note that we're recommending specific works, not composers, and the question I would pose to the superior beings here is which of these works would you recommend most strongly?
Quote from: Mirror Image on June 23, 2022, 06:04:16 AM
It seems more like a pissing contest than anything rewarding.
What is a pissing contest?
Sorry, but I don't have enough time, and when one's taste has become somewhat solid through a lot of listening of all genres, such very long lists often appear of less interest (I own music by about 100 of these lastly listed composers, and there are certainly many goodies on that list). But TC seems to be the place for them to flourish - and this pretty overwhelmingly.
Also, when seeing the long alphabetical list, and taking a look at the first A-composers, I disagree with many of the work selections - which is rather typical and, in a way, personally frustrating.
Quote from: coffee on June 23, 2022, 11:03:24 PM
The first work by Mozart is on the fourth tier, behind only 8 other works.
If you guys really are so much better than the folks at TC and amazon, you should be eager to help us fix this list.
Or is it just all bluster? You just want to huff about how superior you are, or you want to share your expertise?
I don't think it is an issue of superiority but of difference. There is real value in different forums having their own flavour, and enjoying those differences without rancour or partisanship.
For me, this list carries less personal interest. I know lots of traditionally well-known works will top the poll in the same way that Classic FM will always celebrate certain pieces. Many of the works I enjoy most don't even appear on this list, and if they did, wouldn't rate in the 'top tiers'. Doesn't necessarily say anything about their quality. Holmboe symphonies and SQs, Simpson, Peter Maxwell Davies to name just three from a host of glaring omissions.
Edit:
It is always nice to see quieter or less active members posting in the music areas at GMG. It would be nice to see you sharing the music you love,
coffee, and contributing your own likes. It can be harder to gain traction in a community when inflammatory language starts to appear.
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 23, 2022, 11:20:46 PM
Sorry, but I don't have enough time, and when one's taste has become somewhat solid through a lot of listening of all genres, such very long lists often appear of less interest (I own music by about 100 of these lastly listed composers, and there are certainly many goodies on that list). But TC seems to be the place for them to flourish - and this pretty overwhelmingly.
Also, when seeing the long alphabetical list, and taking a look at the first A-composers, I disagree with many of the work selections - which is rather typical and, in a way, personally frustrating.
What do you mean you disagree with the work selections? That's the lowest tier ("the bottom of the barrel"). Most (maybe all) of those composers have works on higher tiers.
Edit:
I just realized that perhaps you actually viewed the alphabetical list rather than the works from the lowest tier. If so, first of all, thank you for taking at least that much time.
But even if you did that, I still wonder what you mean by disagreeing with the selections? Do you mean that they should not have been recommended at all or that other works should have been recommended?
Quote from: foxandpeng on June 24, 2022, 12:33:02 AM
I don't think it is an issue of superiority but of difference. There is real value in different forums having their own flavour, and enjoying those differences without rancour or partisanship.
For me, this list carries less personal interest. I know lots of traditionally well-known works will top the poll in the same way that Classic FM will always celebrate certain pieces. Many of the works I enjoy most don't even appear on this list, and if they did, wouldn't rate in the 'top tiers'. Doesn't necessarily say anything about their quality. Holmboe symphonies and SQs, Simpson, Peter Maxwell Davies to name just three from a host of glaring omissions.
Edit:
It is always nice to see quieter or less active members posting in the music areas at GMG. It would be nice to see you sharing the music you love, coffee, and contributing your own likes. It can be harder to gain traction in a community when inflammatory language starts to appear.
The entire point of this is to share the music you enjoy most, so what I am asking you to do is to add those "glaring omissions" to our list and help us decide which to recommend more highly.
As you can see, right now we've got Holmboe's 8th symphony, Four Symphonic Metamorphoses, violin concerto, and the trio for Recorder, cello and harpsichord. What do you recommend we add next?
And in order to be most helpful, you can't just say something like "all of them." You have to nominate and promote specific works.
We have Simpson's clarinet quintet and 9th symphony. What specific works do you recommend we add next?
We have about a dozen of PMD's works, so what additional specific works do you recommend we add next?
Quote from: foxandpeng on June 24, 2022, 12:33:02 AM
I don't think it is an issue of superiority but of difference. There is real value in different forums having their own flavour, and enjoying those differences without rancour or partisanship.
I had comments like this in mind:
Quote from: Florestan on June 23, 2022, 06:43:31 AM
My opinion is that the good folks at TC are mostly teenagers / youngsters who have only recently discovered "classical music", ie mostly Beethoven and Mahler. GMG is vastly more sophisticated, being to TC what calculus is to arithmetic. ;D
However, I don't actually care about the differences between the fora or anything like that. I am actually surprised to see this become an issue. I don't believe either forum is likely to be consistently superior to the other. I've been active at TC for over a decade during which the membership has almost completely rolled over several times, moderating policies have changed, features have been added and subtracted, and so on, so it's not really one thing or another. I assume the same is true here. Anyway, I don't care.
What I'd actually like is to improve the recommendations, and my intent was to use claims like this just quoted about how much better the people here are than the people at TC simply to encourage people to share their knowledge.
Sadly for me, it appears that there is no appetite for that here. I may apparently have to proceed without your help.
Though I am not yet giving up.
There was no enthusiasm at TC for this either when I first started it back in 2010. The amazon board received it (c. 2008) without complaint.
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 02:24:13 AM
The entire point of this is to share the music you enjoy most, so what I am asking you to do is to add those "glaring omissions" to our list and help us decide which to recommend more highly.
As you can see, right now we've got Holmboe's 8th symphony, Four Symphonic Metamorphoses, violin concerto, and the trio for Recorder, cello and harpsichord. What do you recommend we add next?
And in order to be most helpful, you can't just say something like "all of them." You have to nominate and promote specific works.
We have Simpson's clarinet quintet and 9th symphony. What specific works do you recommend we add next?
We have about a dozen of PMD's works, so what additional specific works do you recommend we add next?
Why is this so important to you?
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 02:15:02 AM
What do you mean you disagree with the work selections? That's the lowest tier ("the bottom of the barrel"). Most (maybe all) of those composers have works on higher tiers.
Edit:
I just realized that perhaps you actually viewed the alphabetical list rather than the works from the lowest tier. If so, first of all, thank you for taking at least that much time.
But even if you did that, I still wonder what you mean by disagreeing with the selections? Do you mean that they should not have been recommended at all or that other works should have been recommended?
Yes, concerning disagreeing with the works list, I meant the long list of 6503 works. Obviously, there are many fine selections I'd agree with there, but also many alternatives I'd prefer in stead, or composers I'd miss. So, in my case and without counting, a large number would be a source of some frustration, if deciding to take the whole thing seriously, since these differences don't tend to change. One's taste can - sometimes - be an island, facing a collective.
Sorry about sounding negative; but just an explanation.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 02:43:21 AM
Why is this so important to you?
I want to know what I'm missing -- and, since I'm missing so much, I especially want to know what I'm most urgently missing, what the most glaring omissions from my own knowledge are.
This is a personal self-education project, though I have some evidence that other people have also benefited from it.
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 24, 2022, 02:43:30 AM
Yes, concerning disagreeing with the works list, I meant the long list of 6503 works. Obviously, there are many fine selections I'd agree with there, but also many alternatives I'd prefer in stead, or composers I'd miss. So, in my case and without counting, a large number would be a source of some frustration, if deciding to take the whole thing seriously, since these differences don't tend to change. One's taste can - sometimes - be an island.
Sorry about sounding negative; but just an explanation.
No, don't be sorry! I think you've made one of the most helpful contributions so far.
We can't delete any works that have been recommended, but that's not so bad since I don't anticipate living long enough to get to many works on the bottom tiers anyway.
What we can do, and what I'd like your help with, is adding more important works and then getting them prioritized more highly.
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 24, 2022, 02:43:30 AM
One's taste can - sometimes - be an island, facing a collective.
I did not appreciate the significance of this in my earlier response.
It's true, of course, and insofar as I have preferences about how strongly some works should be recommended, I am sometimes frustrated with the results.
However, to the extent that I wish to vindicate myself in the face of that collective, I have to understand it better, which is why I am doing this.
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 02:45:09 AM
I want to know what I'm missing -- and, since I'm missing so much, I especially want to know what I'm most urgently missing, what the most glaring omissions from my own knowledge are.
This is a personal self-education project, though I have some evidence that other people have also benefited from it.
It's not like that. It's not that there are hidden gems, because whether something is a gem depends on listeners' responses. Once you move away from popular classics, there is no authoritative body to define a canon. All there is is your reaction at a certain time and at a certain place to hearing the music in a in an equally context specific interpretation.
So it's not a question of education, it's a question of perception.
There have surely been some monumental listing efforts/projects on TC, and they have no doubt supplied structuring/guidance for some readers.
Quote from: MusicTurner on June 24, 2022, 02:56:00 AM
There have surely been some monumental listing efforts/projects on TC, and they have no doubt supplied structuring/guidance for some readers there.
And I'm sure that doing it has increased the number of hits for the website, and the resulting revenue for the owners.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 02:54:58 AM
It's not like that. It's not that there are hidden gems, because whether something is a gem depends on listeners' responses. Once you move away from popular classics, there is no authoritative body to define a canon. All there is is your reaction at a certain time and at a certain place to hearing the music in a in an equally context specific interpretation.
So it's not a question of education, it's a question of perception.
Not quite; if there's no source for somehow discovering a composer name, obviously the composer's music will remain unknown to one.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 02:54:58 AM
It's not like that. It's not that there are hidden gems, because whether something is a gem depends on listeners' responses. Once you move away from popular classics, there is no authoritative body to define a canon. All there is is your reaction at a certain time and at a certain place to hearing the music in a in an equally context specific interpretation.
So it's not a question of education, it's a question of perception.
I suspect it won't be helpful to get too much into philosophy. Assuming you're the same Mandryka from amazon and TC, you will have known me as wyote and science, and if you remember me you know that we have deep, deep philosophical disagreements.
If possible, I'd like to avoid this becoming too much about me personally. I don't respect myself enough for that anyway. Let's discuss someone with much better education and taste and perception and so on but who also wants to learn more about classical music, and specifically someone who is looking for recommendations among the works she is not already familiar with.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 02:56:57 AM
And I'm sure that doing it has increased the number of hits for the website, and the resulting revenue for the owners.
Yet the listings have been done by initiatives from regular members, not owners or moderators there.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 02:56:57 AM
And I'm sure that doing it has increased the number of hits for the website, and the resulting revenue for the owners.
Until recently I believe it was basically a charity. That has changed, and I'm not sure how I feel about it. That is actually the main impetus for me trying to drum up some interest for this project here. I don't intend to volunteer my labor, but yet I also realize that the world works the way the world works, and I have to work with it.
I genuinely am not sure what I want to do. I was hoping, at least, to give it some degree of independence from TC. Of course I was also hoping to benefit from the knowledge and opinions of a wider array of people.
Which is why I might persist with this in spite of the harshly unwelcoming response so far!
I think it is a waste of time. It suggests precision and consensus when it's just a few dozen of random people on the internet. (And often not the more competent and dedicated people on that fora who write more substantial contributions but those who take a strange delight in these endless votings.)
For the real newbie the 50 or 100 typical standard recommendations are usually pretty good. It doesn't matter at all if someone listens first to Beethoven's 5th or 6th or Mozart's 40 or 41 or rather Haydn's 104 and so on. Especially today, when almost everything can be checked out for free and nobody has to spend considerable money on LPs or CDs to get acquainted with music. I have my share of skepticism against *some* of the "best of" classics or "100 masterworks" selections but overall they mostly give a good overview (at least from ca. 1700s-1930s). Sure, it could be improved on but the improvement would be marginal and it would hardly be worth the effort. (I once participated in the lengthy selection of the "basics list" on a German language forum and we started even to write introductions and someone put them on a website but the project was abandoned after some time.)
For intermediate listeners, extended lists with "tiers" might have some benefit, I agree.
But again, the real benefit of an internet forum is that one can ask specific questions, such as: "I like x,y,z a lot but u,v not so much, what can you recommend next?" This is much better than the pseudo-precision of 27 or 58 tiers!
Quote from: coffee on June 23, 2022, 11:09:51 PM
What is a pissing contest?
A vulgar term for an unpleasant affair: trying to show - through petty means - that one is superior.
I found only six quarter-tone works (perhaps there are more), one each by
Julian Carrillo, Alois Haba and
Ivan Wyschnegradsky and three by
Harry Partch, although one does find
Varese and
Xenakis and similar experimentalists decently represented.
Film scores by
Bernard Herrmann (e.g.
Citizen Kane, On Dangerous Ground, Vertigo, The Ghost and Mrs. Muir, Psycho) and
Jerome Moross (
The Big Country, The War Lord) are completely ignored.
I am gratified to find
Louis Vierne and
Les Sept Paroles du Christ by
Theodore Dubois on the list!
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 03:03:41 AM
Which is why I might persist with this in spite of the harshly unwelcoming response so far!
Allow me to apologize, if things seem harshly unwelcoming: I do not necessarily find the comments to be so, but I suppose some might seem that way.
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 03:03:41 AM
I genuinely am not sure what I want to do. I was hoping, at least, to give it some degree of independence from TC. Of course I was also hoping to benefit from the knowledge and opinions of a wider array of people.
Would you like to know more about specific works and find links to them for listening? Out of the thousands of choices, you could choose 7 or so per week, find performances to download or to view on e.g. YouTube, and then offer your opinions - or ask for ours!
Here is a start with some works mentioned above:
Christopher Columbus Prelude by
Julian Carrillohttps://www.youtube.com/v/tDHMnlQri3g
Les Sept Paroles du Christ by
Theodore Duboishttps://www.youtube.com/v/JMa-Ru29j5M&list=OLAK5uy_np108HqiUJiXkjzBOCGyVER2-2xOESqNI
On Dangerous Ground - The Death Hunt by
Bernard Herrmann
https://www.youtube.com/v/z_TMZmJxExE&t=14s
Quote from: Jo498 on June 24, 2022, 04:09:48 AM
I think it is a waste of time. It suggests precision and consensus when it's just a few dozen of random people on the internet. (And often not the more competent and dedicated people on that fora who write more substantial contributions but those who take a strange delight in these endless votings.)
For the real newbie the 50 or 100 typical standard recommendations are usually pretty good. It doesn't matter at all if someone listens first to Beethoven's 5th or 6th or Mozart's 40 or 41 or rather Haydn's 104 and so on. Especially today, when almost everything can be checked out for free and nobody has to spend considerable money on LPs or CDs to get acquainted with music. I have my share of skepticism against *some* of the "best of" classics or "100 masterworks" selections but overall they mostly give a good overview (at least from ca. 1700s-1930s). Sure, it could be improved on but the improvement would be marginal and it would hardly be worth the effort. (I once participated in the lengthy selection of the "basics list" on a German language forum and we started even to write introductions and someone put them on a website but the project was abandoned after some time.)
For intermediate listeners, extended lists with "tiers" might have some benefit, I agree.
But again, the real benefit of an internet forum is that one can ask specific questions, such as: "I like x,y,z a lot but u,v not so much, what can you recommend next?" This is much better than the pseudo-precision of 27 or 58 tiers!
This is all probably true, but it does help me, perhaps because I might be what you consider an intermediate listener.
(I'd classify myself differently, little more than a beginner, though with a lot of empty experiences. It's like the difference between a connoisseur and a gourmand, and of classical music I am the latter. I do not aspire to expertise or anything like that because I think it is beyond my ability.)
For me, the top few dozen tiers are not very interesting or helpful but deeper on the list it really does help me get a sense of what people are likely to know and discuss. I have learned a lot from doing this over the years. I have also heard from others that they have too.
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2022, 04:21:18 AM
A vulgar term for an unpleasant affair: trying to show - through petty means - that one is superior.
That's what I thought but I don't understand how this would be that. Perhaps it doesn't matter.
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2022, 04:21:18 AM
I found only six quarter-tone works (perhaps there are more), one each by Julian Carrillo, Alois Haba and Ivan Wyschnegradsky and three by Harry Partch...
I wonder which quarter-tone works you'd recommend most strongly.
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2022, 04:21:18 AM
Film scores by Bernard Herrmann (e.g. Citizen Kane, On Dangerous Ground, Vertigo, The Ghost and Mrs. Muir, Psycho) and Jerome Moross (The Big Country, The War Lord) are completely ignored.
If I decide to do this on GMG, I will add these to the list!
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2022, 04:21:18 AM
... and then offer your opinions
I will definitely not be doing that!
Thank you so much for your help.
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 02:24:13 AM
The entire point of this is to share the music you enjoy most, so what I am asking you to do is to add those "glaring omissions" to our list and help us decide which to recommend more highly.
As you can see, right now we've got Holmboe's 8th symphony, Four Symphonic Metamorphoses, violin concerto, and the trio for Recorder, cello and harpsichord. What do you recommend we add next?
And in order to be most helpful, you can't just say something like "all of them." You have to nominate and promote specific works.
We have Simpson's clarinet quintet and 9th symphony. What specific works do you recommend we add next?
We have about a dozen of PMD's works, so what additional specific works do you recommend we add next?
Although I wish you well, I'm probably not going to engage too much with this thread. I have too many fundamental questions about what you want to achieve, and about whether there is any meaningful value in the task itself. I hope to see you on one of many, many other music threads on GMG, though :)
Quote from: foxandpeng on June 24, 2022, 04:40:06 AM
Although I wish you well, I'm probably not going to engage too much with this thread. I have too many fundamental questions about what you want to achieve, and about whether there is any meaningful value in the task itself. I hope to see you on one of many, many other music threads on GMG, though :)
I certainly understand, but I still hope you might decide to share some of your knowledge if I do start working on this here.
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 04:29:02 AM
I wonder which quarter-tone works you'd recommend most strongly.
The ones mentioned in the list are a good start.
Also:
https://www.youtube.com/v/GIb6CebsDYA
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2022, 04:52:10 AM
The ones mentioned in the list are a good start.
Also:
[youtube link to Carrillo's Mass for Pope John XXIII]
Thank you.
Quote from: coffee on June 22, 2022, 08:50:25 PM
Please see this link: Classical Music: Recommended Works, but Prioritized (https://docs.google.com/document/d/18t_9MHZTENbmYdezAAj4LRM0-Eak_MYO1HssZW2FX1U/edit?usp=sharing)
A few years ago I attempted to begin a project like this here and the results were (to me) very interestingly different from those I got doing this on other fora. Unfortunately, there was also so much unhappiness with the idea of this project and criticism of each other's voting that I angrily decided not to do it here. I somewhat regret that. If we have some interest here, I will create a thread where people can vote on that project.
We would begin with the lowest tier and work our way up.
Also, even if there is no interest in voting on this project here, feel free to let me know if you know of any works that are missing from our list. I'll add them to the lowest tier and if people feel they should be recommended more strongly, they'll get promoted through the voting. Here (https://jonathan-guide.neocities.org) is an unranked, alphabetical list of the works we've recommended.
Hi Coffee,
Thank you for that list.
A few random thoughts:
* It can potentially be a great tool for newbies and seasoned listeners alike but the multi-tiered system, to my eyes, makes it too cumbersome and jumbled to handle and find relevant information easily. I am not sure you would get enough traction here for a game/voting approach on this basis.
* That said however, I think the list in alphabetical format would be a great starting point here for members to recommend you key works or secondary works to add to each composer. If you start a thread to that effect and focus on a couple of composers only at a time (alphabetically OR "major" composers first OR as per your own exploration, I believe members here would be more inclined to contribute based on their listening experience and advise missing/highly recommended works.
*From a newbie perspective or when approaching an unknown composer, it would be daunting to see a long list of works for that composer and not being sure where to start. For example, I hardly know anything by Adams. If your list were to indicate in a simpler way the "essential" works and mark them *** for instance and then ** for "worthy", that would give a starting pointer to that exploring listener, with the rest of the list to explore further if this music ticks the right boxes for him/her.
* Once a composer's list has been "settled on" so to speak, the forum might also benefit if this section of the list would also be posted in the relevant composer's thread in the Composers section. I for one, would find such entry helpful when I am in a mood to explore a new composer. Having done a British, French then Baroque exploration myself in the last 2-3 years, this would be handy in this area of the forum too. I am sure future visitors might think so too.
* For any missing composer, you could also tally your list versus the composers index on this forum and request similar suggestions for the composers you are missing.
You are the "owner" of the list and how you decide to proceed with it, I am not suggesting taking a hatchet to it ;) I am only offering an angle where you possibly might get valuable answers for your benefit and for the forum's, without going into a voting system, where members would lose interest more quickly.
In any case, I'll keep a copy of the list for my use. Lots of unknown composers to me in there. That will be a useful future reference indeed. So, thank you.
Quote from: Papy Oli on June 24, 2022, 04:58:12 AM
Hi Coffee,
Thank you for that list.
My pleasure!
If you want to explore a particular composer with the aid of this list, you can use the search function (probably CTRL + F or command + F). I would not advise taking our list as gospel, but it could offer assistance.
Quote from: Papy Oli on June 24, 2022, 04:58:12 AM
* It can potentially be a great tool for newbies and seasoned listeners alike but the multi-tiered system, to my eyes, makes it too cumbersome and jumbled to handle and find relevant information easily.
I agree wholeheartedly, and I am definitely eager to find ways to make it less cumbersome, or more visually appealing. I'm really not sure how to do it. In the end, perhaps a list of thousands of items is just never going to look very good.
Quote from: Papy Oli on June 24, 2022, 04:58:12 AM
*From a newbie perspective or when approaching an unknown composer, it would be daunting to see a long list of works for that composer and not being sure where to start. For example, I hardly know anything by Adams. If your list were to indicate in a simpler way the "essential" works and mark them *** for instance and then ** for "worthy", that would give a starting pointer to that exploring listener, with the rest of the list to explore further if this music ticks the right boxes for him/her.
The way I would tackle this if I decided I wanted to explore Adams is (among other things) using the search function to see which of his works are recommended most highly.
I am very much a newbie and this is in fact how I use this list.
Of course I am aware of other resources as well and take them into consideration as well.
Quote from: Papy Oli on June 24, 2022, 04:58:12 AM
You are the "owner" of the list and how you decide to proceed with it, I am not suggesting taking a hatchet to it ;) I am only offering an angle where you possibly might get valuable answers for your benefit and for the forum's, without going into a voting system, where members would lose interest more quickly.
Ah, I didn't realize voting (rather than prioritization) is the problem.
I'm not willing to sacrifice prioritization but I wonder how I could proceed without voting. I'll think about that.
The entire problem is that if I were to, say, ask for recommendations on Baroque opera, my experience is that pretty soon there will be posts collectively listing hundreds of works, and I'll be basically in the same place I started from -- i.e., dependent for guidance on what I should prioritize on whatever I can find elsewhere on the internet or in the books I happen to have access to and whatever I happen to have heard here and there.
Quote from: Papy Oli on June 24, 2022, 04:58:12 AM
In any case, I'll keep a copy of the list for my use. Lots of unknown composers to me in there. That will be a useful future reference indeed. So, thank you.
You might check in every so often since it is updated regularly.
Again, my pleasure.
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 04:22:31 AM
This is all probably true, but it does help me, perhaps because I might be what you consider an intermediate listener.
(I'd classify myself differently, little more than a beginner, though with a lot of empty experiences. It's like the difference between a connoisseur and a gourmand, and of classical music I am the latter. I do not aspire to expertise or anything like that because I think it is beyond my ability.)
I am not sure what you mean with "empty experiences".
Today, I think the "danger" for anyone beginning with classical music is to get overwhelmed and to believe one had to get to know a lot of music quickly to be informed and keep up with smartass people on the internet. When I began listening as a teenager around 35 years ago it was very different. I could only listen to what happened to be on the radio or in the small record shelf of my parents or what I could borrow from or listen to at a friend's, anything else I had to buy myself with little money from odd jobs and birthdays etc. I had rather vague ideas of dozens of pieces because I had read descriptions in guide books or composer's biographies long before having a chance to listen to them.
But the good thing was that one really had time to "digest" the music and slowly develop preferences and and "ear" for different styles etc. Of course, it took years to get around to some pieces or composers that were for some reason absent. I think I heard the first Sibelius symphony about 9 years later, Nielsen considerably later
Quote from: Jo498 on June 24, 2022, 05:55:09 AM
I am not sure what you mean with "empty experiences".
Today, I think the "danger" for anyone beginning with classical music is to get overwhelmed and to believe one had to get to know a lot of music quickly to be informed and keep up with smartass people on the internet. When I began listening as a teenager around 35 years ago it was very different. I could only listen to what happened to be on the radio or in the small record shelf of my parents or what I could borrow from or listen to at a friend's, anything else I had to buy myself with little money from odd jobs and birthdays etc. I had rather vague ideas of dozens of pieces because I had read descriptions in guide books or composer's biographies long before having a chance to listen to them.
But the good thing was that one really had time to "digest" the music and slowly develop preferences and and "ear" for different styles etc. Of course, it took years to get around to some pieces or composers that were for some reason absent. I think I heard the first Sibelius symphony about 9 years later, Nielsen considerably later
I do believe I need to get to know a lot of music very quickly to be well-informed and keep up with people on the internet and in real life.
It's about the accumulation of cultural capital for me. I believe it is so for all of us, but subconsciously.
Of course I like or enjoy or respect some works more than others, but I am not and never can become the kind of person whose tastes in music should be taken seriously.
I suspect we are almost the same age, and I do kind of miss the days of only having 40 CDs and getting to know the music on them so well that I knew every note, and then if I heard another recording of one of those works the differences stood out so clearly.
However, I sure wish I'd had better guidance way back then. I was such an idiot. I generally hate myself now, but I really hate my younger self.
Anyway, it's pretty much too late for me but maybe I can help someone else who is like me.
Multiple superior lists already exist (including this very site!). This one is just garbage. It is far too long, and makes an egregious mistake that the canon needs to be split into multiple tiers (hence the pissing contest remark).
For someone new to classical music, they need something short and sweet. They don't need a gigantic list of TC members favorites. It is usually better to be curated by a single critic. For example when I was young, the NPR's Guide to Classical Music was a great start until I was ready to take off the training wheels.
What is even better are books like Alex Ross's The Rest Is Noise which throws the idea of the list out the window and instead explores the people, the culture and the tradition. Put a face to the music instead of just rattling off endless works and composers.
Finally, I had a student that got into classical music. Within a few months he had heard all the warhorses. And by the end of the year he was just as broad and deep in his listening habits as posters here. Streaming has really changed things. When I see lists like this, I see people that just don't understand where we are at. Exploring music in the past was painful and slow because we had to blind buy cds. That is just not true anymore. There is still a place for basic lists to get started, but something like this doesn't serve anyone except the people that wrote it.
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 06:40:56 AM
This is already in the sub-forum for polls (and I've done two pilots of this here already, one in 2012 and one in 2016).
I'm not sure what there is that could be determined, other than what the participants collectively recommend most strongly.
I've got an idea for you. Why don't you write a bit of code to rip though this site and identify all names of composers and see how frequently they're mentioned. That'll give you a measure of tiers.
I once knew a guy who used statistical methods in hermeneutics. He used to count the frequency of words in texts to find the subject. He did it with
The Philosophical Investigations, and concluded that the main subject of the book is
pain.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 07:56:49 AM
I've got an idea for you. Why don't you write a bit of code to rip though this site and identify all names of composers and see how frequently they're mentioned. That'll give you a measure of tiers.
I once knew a guy who used statistical methods in hermeneutics. He used to count the frequency of words in texts to find the subject. He did it with The Philosophical Investigations, and concluded that the main subject of the book is pain.
I think he will be deeply confused about the unusually high frequency of mentions of Havergal Brian! :laugh:
Quote from: coffee on June 24, 2022, 06:04:14 AM
I do believe I need to get to know a lot of music very quickly to be well-informed and keep up with people on the internet and in real life.
There's so much great music out there. We're all learning more, all the time.
Quote from: DavidW on June 24, 2022, 07:43:26 AMFor someone new to classical music, they need something short and sweet.
I agree, I think the newbie will find this bewildering. Heck,
I find it bewildering.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 07:56:49 AM
Why don't you write a bit of code
There are a few reasons!
:-[
Quote from: Mandryka on June 24, 2022, 02:54:58 AM
It's not like that. It's not that there are hidden gems, because whether something is a gem depends on listeners' responses. Once you move away from popular classics, there is no authoritative body to define a canon. All there is is your reaction at a certain time and at a certain place to hearing the music in a in an equally context specific interpretation.
So it's not a question of education, it's a question of perception.
Surely it's both. A prompt from all sorts of sources, can be very helpful at times. And once one chances on a piece, then perception etc can get to work. The list won't be for everybody, nor for every mood, but that's more a fact of life about most things than a criticism. I think the list could be interesting and would certainly consider using it at certain times. :)
The answer for baroque opera is simple: Purcell's Dido and Aeneas, Monteverdi's L'Orfeo and one of Handel's most famous ones (Alcina, Rinaldo, Giulio Cesare and a few more, it doesn't matter much which one).
Seriously, I am pretty sure that for comparably niche fields, say baroque opera (despite covering 150 years) or French mélodies or Russian piano trios or whatever one will get a pretty manageable set of recommendations. (Maybe here the problem would rather be not getting enough responses.)
It seems most are taking umbridge with the fact that this list is ranking composer's works by popularity or preference, whereas most of the lists made on GMG are shared by each person individually, not corporately. It makes for pleasant comparison and conversation.
Back in the days of video rental stores, the local employees would often offer their picks of the week, and depending on my preferences, I would consider selecting movies from that person I shared interests with. That worked much more successfully for me than a single amalgamated list, put together by whatever shadowy CEO or shareholder board from 1000 miles away.
As I see it, to appease the most people, dividing the list into musical eras, and then into genres, possibly sub-genres as well, would put early music on an equal footing with Romantic, as well as symphonic music on a equal footing with vocal (etc.) without unneeded competition or imbalance. Furthermore, making the list alphabetical would take the unneeded rankings out of contention.
But I am not the warden of this list, not am I putting the footwork in, so my two cents are probably not worth much. I also do not know the ultimate purpose of such a list, so perhaps my suggestions are not hitting the point. Good luck to you, though!
VS
Quote from: VonStupp on June 25, 2022, 06:35:45 AM
It seems most are taking umbridge with the fact that this list is ranking composer's works by popularity or preference, whereas most of the lists made on GMG are shared by each person individually, not corporately. It makes for pleasant comparison and conversation.
Back in the days of video rental stores, the local employees would often offer their picks of the week, and depending on my preferences, I would consider selecting movies from that person I shared interests with. That worked much more successfully for me than a single amalgamated list, put together by whatever shadowy CEO or shareholder board from 1000 miles away.
As I see it, to appease the most people, dividing the list into musical eras, and then into genres, possibly sub-genres as well, would put early music on an equal footing with Romantic, as well as symphonic music on a equal footing with vocal (etc.) without unneeded competition or imbalance. Furthermore, making the list alphabetical would take the unneeded rankings out of contention.
But I am not the warden of this list, not am I putting the footwork in, so my two cents are probably not worth much. I also do not know the ultimate purpose of such a list, so perhaps my suggestions are not hitting the point. Good luck to you, though!
VS
On the contrary, I appreciate these points (and your well wishes) very much!
I think the video rental thing is a great comparison. I used to enjoy that kind of thing at book and music stores too.
I actually made this list originally because I was frustrated by things like "top 100 symphonies" and so on. How far deep into the symphonies should I go before turning to violin concertos and piano trios and violin sonatas? How much romantic music should I know before turning to Renaissance music, and how much of the latter should I know before returning to romantic music?
Even if I had some reason to choose to limit myself to some smaller section of classical music -- let's say, works composed by Haydn, for example -- how many of Haydn's symphonies should I know before turning to his string quartets and masses?
The list can always be reduced in the way you suggest just by eliminating all the works that don't fit your requirements. For example, if you're interested in quarter tone works, you can eliminate all the other works.
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:04:46 AM
What I would like to know is how to prioritize between (say) a Janacek opera and a Josquin mass and a Beethoven cello sonata. I
You might as well like to know how to square the circle...
For God's sake, man --- why can't you just listen to what you like and let everybody else listen to what they like? Why do you need lists, comparisons, classifications, tiers and fuck?
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:04:46 AM
What I would like to know is how to prioritize between (say) a Janacek opera and a Josquin mass and a Beethoven cello sonata. If I could listen to all of them at once, I wouldn't have to prioritize, but I'm kind of stuck making these choices. I have thousands of options and I can only listen to one at a time.
Do you know about Buridan's ass?
Quote from: VonStupp on June 25, 2022, 06:35:45 AM
Back in the days of video rental stores, the local employees would often offer their picks of the week, and depending on my preferences, I would consider selecting movies from that person I shared interests with. That worked much more successfully for me than a single amalgamated list, put together by whatever shadowy CEO or shareholder board from 1000 miles away.
I miss those days. Even though I'm not a social animal, I'm the type that sits quietly in the barber shop... there was someone at my local video store that had the same taste as I did and their recommendations never steered me wrong. The algorithms that streaming services have are no replacement.
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:04:46 AM
What I would like to know is how to prioritize between (say) a Janacek opera and a Josquin mass and a Beethoven cello sonata.
You don't. The listener does. We have to make decisions with what to do with our time frequently. Cutting out other options. Read this book, listen to this cd, make this recipe etc. Did we make the right choice? Doesn't matter, life moves on. None of those three are inherently "better" works, don't pretend otherwise.
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 08:16:44 AM
You might as well like to know how to square the circle...
For God's sake, man --- why can't you just listen to what you like and let everybody else listen to what they like? Why do you need lists, comparisons, classifications, tiers and fuck?
I'm sincerely sorry if I've given the impression that I want to prevent anybody (or everybody) from listening to whatever they like. I have no such aspiration. Never even thought of the possibility.
As for myself, what I'd ideally like is to pursue cultural capital with maximum efficiency. For myself, as I wrote earlier, it's basically too late. I was born trailer park trash and I will die trailer park trash in many ways, but it looks to me like some members of the next generation of my family will be able to rise higher than I've been able to.
I understand that to some degree life is a zero sum game and so I can easily understand why people who already possess that capital may want to make it as difficult as possible for people like my family to get it -- ideally of course by attempting to persuade us that it doesn't even exist. I hope my descendants will be able to play a similar role in their own time.
Anyway, as interesting as I think this discussion is -- it interests me even more than music or almost anything else -- I really don't think my motivations matter, in that anyone is free to use the list in any way they want. I'm not trying to legislate that either.
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:04:46 AM
I have thousands of options and I can only listen to one at a time.
Bloody hell and fuck, just start with one option at a time and proceed from there. It's a strictly personal journey. Heck, I don't care a fig for your most strongly recommended Beethoven's 9th yet I cry to tears when listening to Schubert's Arpeggione Sonata.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 25, 2022, 08:22:54 AM
Do you know about Buridan's ass?
Of course not.
I don't know about Pascal's wager, Rawls's veil of ignorance, Plato's cave, Nietzsche's eternal return, Occam's razor, Kierkegaard's leap of faith, Kant's categorical imperative, or probably anything else.
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:04:46 AM
What I would like to know is how to prioritize between (say) a Janacek opera and a Josquin mass and a Beethoven cello sonata. If I could listen to all of them at once, I wouldn't have to prioritize, but I'm kind of stuck making these choices. I have thousands of options and I can only listen to one at a time.
Sorry, but it seems crazy to me to take some homemade poll on the internet an important factor in such a decision. For me, before I knew the Beethoven cello sonatas this example would have been a no-brainer. Of course the Beethoven. I almost always went along with (semi) major works by composers I already liked other pieces of unless the genre didn't appeal at all.
Now, the two others would still be a decision (as I have some knowledge but little familiarity with either). I'd probably listen to neither UNLESS I knew I had some leisure time because both pieces would require some dedication because I would not be as familiar with their styles as with many other composers. I might pick the Josquin simply because it's shorter and I would have to bother with an action in a foreign language. So either would usually be framed within a "project" to seriously explore that opera or that mass (and maybe a few more by the same composer) but I would have to have motivation and leisure for this. I would not do this just because other people vote one of them into the 23rd and another into the 34th tier...
In any case, I would not be totally uncertain if I felt more like listening to a ca. 1500 mass or a ca. 1900 opera. ;) I would never be like Buridan's ass in such a situation (I might be like that asinus pauper between two Haydn quartets or Mozart sonatas, though.)
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 08:30:50 AM
Bloody hell and fuck, just start with one option at a time and proceed from there. It's a strictly personal journey. Heck, I don't care a fig for your most strongly recommended Beethoven's 9th yet I cry to tears when listening to Schubert's Arpeggione Sonata.
I believe you, of course, but this is not relevant to my concerns.
I'm not very interested in my own response to a given work of music. My opinions are not that important to me.
I think you are seriously overestimating the cultural capital value of classical music beyond some fleeting familiarity with the best known dozens of works. Unless you are in a very specific environment and in such a case it would be better to be able to play a classical instrument. It would have to be a very special environment in which people cared whether you preferred Jenufa or rather Cunning little Vixen...
You are also seriously misestimating the value of polls from random internet fora. If you want to "go with the flow" it would be better to read common guides to CM or the seasonal programs of big orchestras or the Metropolitan opera.
Quote from: Jo498 on June 25, 2022, 08:36:34 AM
Sorry, but it seems crazy to me to take some homemade poll on the internet an important factor in such a decision. For me, before I knew the Beethoven cello sonatas this example would have been a no-brainer. Of course the Beethoven. I almost always went along with (semi) major works by composers I already liked other pieces of unless the genre didn't appeal at all.
Now, the two others would still be a decision (as I have some knowledge but little familiarity with either). I'd probably listen to neither UNLESS I knew I had some leisure time because both pieces would require some dedication because I would not be as familiar with their styles as with many other composers. I might pick the Josquin simply because it's shorter and I would have to bother with an action in a foreign language. So either would usually be framed within a "project" to seriously explore that opera or that mass (and maybe a few more by the same composer) but I would have to have motivation and leisure for this. I would not do this just because other people vote one of them into the 23rd and another into the 34th tier...
In any case, I would not be totally uncertain if I felt more like listening to a ca. 1500 mass or a ca. 1900 opera. ;) I would never be like Buridan's ass in such a situation (I might be like that asinus pauper between two Haydn quartets or Mozart sonatas, though.)
In terms of my own pleasure, I'd be fairly happy just to turn on youtube or whatever and let it go wherever it goes.
And I hope anyone using a list like this is prepared to put in the work to learn what they need to know about something when it becomes a high priority.
To me, my task is never to find out whether I like something or not. I'm not that important. My task (as with literature, film, cuisine, architecture, and any other art) is to gain as full as possible an understanding of why other people have admired or have not admired a work -- in order to pass that information on to other people who can use it more effectively than I will have been able to.
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:29:51 AM
I'm sincerely sorry if I've given the impression that I want to prevent anybody (or everybody) from listening to whatever they like. I have no such aspiration. Never even thought of the possibility.
Don't be sorry, it's my bad in this respect. I'm sure you didn't imply any such thing. Once again, my bad.
Quotewhat I'd ideally like is to pursue cultural capital with maximum efficiency.
Well, music is not stock exchange. One likes what one likes, period.
QuoteFor myself, as I wrote earlier, it's basically too late. I was born trailer park trash and I will die trailer park trash in many ways, but it looks to me like some members of the next generation of my family will be able to rise higher than I've been able to.
Bullshit. It's never too late for anyone to do anything. The very fact that you are willing to discuss classical music on two different fora marks you as a very special person. Never ever sell you as short!
QuoteI understand that to some degree life is a zero sum game
No, it's not! I emphatically disagree! The best things in life are not for sale, nor can the highest bidder get them.
QuoteI can easily understand why people who already possess that capital may want to make it as difficult as possible for people like my family to get it -- ideally of course by attempting to persuade us that it doesn't even exist.
Good Lord! What, if I may ask, is your trade?
Quote from: Jo498 on June 25, 2022, 08:44:29 AM
I think you are seriously overestimating the cultural capital value of classical music beyond some fleeting familiarity with the best known dozens of works. Unless you are in a very specific environment and in such a case it would be better to be able to play a classical instrument. It would have to be a very special environment in which people cared whether you preferred Jenufa or rather Cunning little Vixen...
Well, maybe. It'd be interesting to have a discussion about which forms of cultural capital are in fact most valuable. It may be that I also aim to dress "well" and to avoid saying "I ain't" and "we wasn't" and to hold a wine glass "properly" and walk confidently and so on.
Quote from: Jo498 on June 25, 2022, 08:44:29 AM
You are also seriously misestimating the value of polls from random internet fora. If you want to "go with the flow" it would be better to read common guides to CM or the seasonal programs of big orchestras or the Metropolitan opera.
Of course I do those things too!
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:40:39 AM
I'm not very interested in my own response to a given work of music. My opinions are not that important to me.
Never ever say that again!
On the contrary, the only important opinions about any given piece of music are those of the individual listener, ie yours, your, yours!
Btw, please tell us who are your Top Five composers?
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 08:54:14 AM
which forms of cultural capital are in fact most valuable.
The most valuable forms of cultural capital are the ones
you love the most. Period.
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 08:50:31 AM
Don't be sorry, it's my bad in this respect. I'm sure you didn't imply any such thing. Once again, my bad.
Well, music is not stock exchange. One likes what one likes, period.
Bullshit. It's never too late for anyone to do anything. The very fact that you are willing to discuss classical music on two different fora marks you as a very special person. Never ever sell you as short!
No, it's not! I emphatically disagree! The best things in life are not for sale, nor can the highest bidder get them.
Good Lord! What, if I may ask, is your trade?
Alas, I'm a retired teacher, but I still tutor. I did not understand the world very well when I made the choices that led me here.
To be fair to myself, I had reasons for what I did. I had to do what I had to do. That's cryptic only because it's not worth going into the particular path that led me to realize that while the very best things in life may not for sale, very few of them truly are free, and all of them (like life itself) can be taken away by force -- and, tragically, they often are.
I have experience of a few different situations in life, and I can assure you that while families who send their children to elite universities may not be happier than families who too often cannot even get their children through high school, they do (for example) enjoy better healthcare. A few of my Ivy League friends have died prematurely, but none that I know of from complications of a painkiller addiction or even COVID; far too many of my friends and family from Appalachia have died of both. Nothing in the future can ever be guaranteed but I sure hope my nieces and nephews will suffer from the lack of basic dental care less frequently than my aunts and uncles have, and the nearest thing to making that a certainty is increasing our social status (wealth, power, respect and so on).
There are of course innumerable cultural obstacles to any move from the holler to the yacht club, and classical music is actually one of the easiest to overcome. Mostly it is of course a set of attitudes that have to be adopted, one of which I'm flamboyantly disregarding now simply by admitting that anything like this is a factor in my mind. But there is also at least some component of basic information, and it I happen to have once got tripped up there in spite of my best efforts, which is perhaps one of the reasons it interests me so much.
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 09:14:11 AM
Alas, I'm a retired teacher, but I still tutor. I did not understand the world very well when I made the choices that led me here.
[...]
Thank you for your frank answer and explanations.
I still think you sell yourself short. The worth of a person is not measured by the quality of the healthcare they can afford. In an ideal world, anyone should be able to afford good care of their health --- but we don't live in an ideal world. My idea of a worthy person is someone who did their best to provide for their family and is remembered with loving memory by their family as well as by anyone who had known them.
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 08:58:35 AM
Btw, please tell us who are your Top Five composers?
I assume you mean in terms of my own enjoyment, and in that case I have never had any such thing!
But for the sake of playing the game, I'd probably say Nono, Rzewski, probably Reich, maybe Verdi, maybe Brahms. Hard to stop at five, and I hate not putting a Renaissance guy on there, so I'll kick off Brahms to make room for... I guess I'll go with Dufay today. Byrd and Tallis and Josquin and Ockeghem are all close to Dufay in my affections and would probably replace him if I'd listened to them rather than to him most recently. That's a pretty fair list anyway.
Perhaps you can see why I wouldn't take anything like this very seriously. I'm good with American literature, not too bad with literature in general, but I have almost no basis for judgment in music other than how (in my near-complete ignorance) I happen to have felt at various times. I don't mean to sell myself completely short; I've taken two semesters of high school music theory and read a few books on music. I have a pretty good knowledge of western cultural history in general. But if you assign a paper analyzing a fugue, I'll drop your class before you finish the sentence!
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 09:27:33 AM
Thank you for your frank answer and explanations.
I still think you sell yourself short. The worth of a person is not measured by the quality of the healthcare they can afford. In an ideal world, anyone should be able to afford good care of their health --- but we don't live in an ideal world. My idea of a worthy person is someone who did their best to provide for their family and is remembered with loving memory by their family as well as by anyone who had known them.
I wouldn't try to measure the worth of many people -- I know too little about even myself for that -- but quality of life is a lot easier to see.
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 09:29:56 AM
I assume you mean in terms of my own enjoyment,
Of course! I know of no other terms than one's own enjoyment.
Quoteand in that case I have never had any such thing!
Drat, I'm speechless! I mean, how the fuck can one listen to music (any type of music, be it "classical" or rap or country or whatever) and never like it in terms of one's own enjoyment. Heck, I never ever listen to music which I don't enjoy --- do you?
Speechless, I tellya!
Cultural capital isn't about knowing facts. It's about savoir vivre - knowing how to interact and being able to gain access to influencers. You can be an expert in Beethoven or whatever and all that knowledge has very little capital value because you are too gauche to interact in the right way with the people who hold the cultural power - the impresarios, curators, publishing house owners, concert hall owners etc. To turn culture into capital, you need to be the right sort of person, brought up in the right way, with the right manners and the right contacts. Propositional knowledge - knowing Mozart's influence on Haydn or whatever - is neither necessary nor sufficient to make culture have a value.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 25, 2022, 09:40:47 AM
To turn culture into capital, you need to be the right sort of person, brought up in the right way, with the right manners and the right contacts.
So unlike Beethoven and so like Mendelssohn, right?
I don't know about Beethoven, but I think Bruckner had trouble because of his gaucheness.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 25, 2022, 09:40:47 AM
Cultural capital isn't about knowing facts. It's about savoir vivre - knowing how to interact and being able to gain access to influencers. You can be an expert in Beethoven or whatever and all that knowledge has very little capital value because you are too gauche to interact in the right way with the people who hold the cultural power - the impresarios, curators, publishing house owners, concert hall owners etc. To turn culture into capital, you need to be the right sort of person.
I'd say that background knowledge can make some difference rather than it makes no difference at all.
It might be like the difference between learning the vocabulary of a language and learning to speak the language. The former is not equivalent to the latter but it sure is useful to speed the latter along.
Recently I was having a conversation with the director of a something related to classical music in Leipzig, a very nice guy. He asked me who my favorite composer was. Of course part of having an acceptable answer to that question is knowing how to answer it in terms of tone, gestures, and so on; but part of it is also knowing what a composer is and knowing a few works by a composer or two. My answer was of course that my favorite composer usually depends on what concert I last attended, but if he squeezed me really hard I would give an answer like I gave Florian.
I was once helping a student prepare for an application interview to a prestigious American boarding school. A common question (in practice at least, if not in reality) is what their favorite music is. He tried to impress me by saying classical, and I was like, great, me too, who's your favorite composer. He looked worried and answered Beethoven, and I asked which works he liked best, and he said all of them, and I was like well but which do you really like most, and he said, "Um, the fifth one?"
Of course I advised him to tell the truth instead of that because it wouldn't matter which kind of music he likes best -- what matters is that he is able to speak intelligently about something.
I mention all this to attempt to persuade you that I am not the ignoramus you generally assume I am.
And yet you do know that there was something behind the kid's intuition. There are reasons that the school he wanted to go to has an orchestra and a theater and a few art history classes -- and they're related to the reasons that many people who have the power to do so wish to deny even basic art and music classes to public school kids.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 25, 2022, 09:53:13 AM
I don't know about Beethoven, but I think Bruckner had trouble because of his gaucheness.
Well, let's see...
Quote from: Mandryka on June 25, 2022, 09:40:47 AM
To turn culture into capital, you need to be the right sort of person, brought up in the right way, with the right manners and the right contacts.
Mozart and
Mendelssohn.
Otomh I can think of no other famous composer who fits in the bill.
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 09:59:34 AM
Well, let's see...
Mozart and Mendelssohn.
Otomh I can think of no other famous composer who fits in the bill.
M's description put me in mind of Oswald von Wolkenstein.
Maybe it's not fair to consider any medieval or Renaissance composer famous, but he's no Johann Schobert either.
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 09:59:34 AM
Well, let's see...
Mozart and Mendelssohn.
Otomh I can think of no other famous composer who fits in the bill.
Well Haydn had enough savoir vivre to interact with royalty, as did Lully and Marais. Bach could hobnob with kings well enough to produce opfer. Where things get complicated is in the 19th century, where there's educated lower middle classes who form their own alternative to the academic establishment - Baudelaire, Manet . . . there must be examples in music, but I know so little about 19th century composers I can't comment. (I mean, I've heard the music obviously, but I'm not interested enough in it to research their background.)
Quote from: Florestan on June 25, 2022, 10:26:31 AM
I myself am careless enough about money as to be an aristocrat and mindful enough about morality as to be a bourgeois.
;D
Oh, no, you're doing that exactly backwards! Aristocratic amorality is the most fun by far.
Anyway, it's clear that the people willing to address the question in the OP overwhelmingly wish to keep this project away from GMG.
That was essentially the situation in 2012 and 2016 as well. I hope I'm around in a few years to try again....
Quote from: coffee on June 25, 2022, 10:39:22 AM
Anyway, it's clear that the people willing to address the question in the OP overwhelmingly wish to keep this project away from GMG.
That was essentially the situation in 2012 and 2016 as well. I hope I'm around in a few years to try again....
4 year interval followed by 6 interval... hmm... well see you again in 2030! 8)
Or you could stick around and talk about music in the other threads. Just a thought.
Quote from: DavidW on June 25, 2022, 11:43:09 AM
4 year interval followed by 6 interval... hmm... well see you again in 2030! 8)
Or you could stick around and talk about music in the other threads. Just a thought.
I agree with David. Stay around and contribute to some of the other threads.
Quote from: Mandryka on June 25, 2022, 10:15:14 AM
Well Haydn had enough savoir vivre to interact with royalty, as did Lully and Marais. Bach could hobnob with kings well enough to produce opfer. Where things get complicated is in the 19th century, where there's educated lower middle classes who form their own alternative to the academic establishment - Baudelaire, Manet . . . there must be examples in music, but I know so little about 19th century composers I can't comment. (I mean, I've heard the music obviously, but I'm not interested enough in it to research their background.)
Beethoven got along quite well with nobility. I think his clumsiness has been exaggerated and later in life he didn't care because he could afford it (like unkempt elderly Einstein; Einstein looks quite normal and well groomed in pictures from ~1910-20, i.e. in his 30s, of course paintings are different, but just look at the smart short-haired young Beethoven from paintings around 1800 compared to the wild or very serious grey-haired one around 1820)
Most composers were from the lower middle/middle class of their times but until the 19th century almost everyone would have been (or become during youth and education) sufficiently well dressed and behaved to get along well at the courts or similar institutions they worked for, or the students they taught. They could afford some extravaganza but only when they were reasonably established in their careers.
As you say, the 19th century is a bit more complicated with some artists cultivating the air of a bohemien or others really struggling economically (like Schubert). Nevertheless, the majority was still doing quite well in upper class company. There might be more examples of "misfit" artists as we progress through the 19th and early 20th century but I think it is overall an exaggerated cliché and one that might have been less true in music, partly because of the obvious social dimension, you don't want a stinking, dirty drunk guy giving the councilor's daughter piano lessons or play in your salon for the weekly jour fixe.
Quote from: DavidW on June 25, 2022, 11:43:09 AM
4 year interval followed by 6 interval... hmm... well see you again in 2030! 8)
Or you could stick around and talk about music in the other threads. Just a thought.
Quote from: foxandpeng on June 25, 2022, 11:50:20 AM
I agree with David. Stay around and contribute to some of the other threads.
Thank you guys for the invitation! You may be in the minority, but it is very kind.
I don't find participating in the normal discussions (on any forum) very time-efficient, so I don't do so very often anymore, but I still occasionally do and will continue to.
Actually, what is the purpose of your project? Look, you already have a list. What use, if any, does it have for you? I don't quite get the idea.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 12:21:17 AM
Actually, what is the purpose of your project? Look, you already have a list. What use, if any, does it have for you? I don't quite get the idea.
If I don't know a work on the 60th tier, I consider that probably a bigger gap in my knowledge than if I don't know a work on the 90th tier, and so a higher priority to address.
A work on the 120th tier is probably one I don't need to know much about, but one on the 30th tier is probably one I should know very well.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 12:28:31 AM
If I don't know a work on the 60th tier, I consider that probably a bigger gap in my knowledge than if I don't know a work on the 90th tier, and so a higher priority to address.
A work on the 120th tier is probably one I don't need to know much about, but one on the 30th tier is probably one I should know very well.
All right. How many works from the tiers 1 to 10 have you already listened to?
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 12:32:45 AM
All right. How many works from the tiers 1 to 10 have you already listened to?
I've already listened to most of the works on the top 100 tiers. I don't claim to know them all very well.
I've listened to multiple recordings of all the works on the top ten tiers and I know basic information about the composers, the circumstances of the composition, the history of reception, stuff like that. I have a music-theory level analysis of very few works, but that does not seem to be very rewarding compared to a more basic "listening guide" kind of knowledge.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 12:34:56 AM
I've already listened to most of the works on the top 100 tiers.
Very good. Did you ever feel that a work in a tier actually belonged to another, either higher or lower?
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 12:43:28 AM
Very good. Did you ever feel that a work in a tier actually belonged to another, either higher or lower?
Sure. I vote too.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 12:45:07 AM
Sure. I vote too.
Okay. Then by now you should already have (1) some favorite composers, (2) some composers you'd like to explore more before deciding, and (3) some composers you definitely dislike. Things are so simple then: stick to (1) and (2) and ignore (3). I don't understand why you need another list.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 02:40:18 AM
Okay. Then by now you should already have (1) some favorite composers, (2) some composers you'd like to explore more before deciding, and (3) some composers you definitely dislike. Things are so simple then: stick to (1) and (2) and ignore (3). I don't understand why you need another list.
Well, if we're going to get into this, the first thing I'd note is that I don't frame things by composers so rigidly. I prefer to think in terms of specific works. After all, Beethoven is more famous than Sculthorpe, but the latter's
Kakadu is probably more likely to come up in conversation than the former's piano quartets, WoO 36.
Also, I don't know that there are any composers that I "definitely dislike." But that gets to the question of why I would take my own preferences so seriously anyway.
Were you referring to another list previously? I might have misunderstood that.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 02:46:53 AM
Well, if we're going to get into this, the first thing I'd note is that I don't frame things by composers so rigidly. I prefer to think in terms of specific works. After all, Beethoven is more famous than Sculthorpe, but the latter's Kakadu is probably more likely to come up in conversation than the former's piano quartets, WoO 36.
And yet Beethoven will have far more specific works likely to come up in conversation than Sculthorpe. Comparing an obscure work of a genius to an obscure work of an obscure composer is a moot point.
Quotewhy I would take my own preferences so seriously anyway.
No, the question is rather why you take your own preferences so lightly.
I have the impression that you need these lists precisely because you are so insecure about your own preferences that you need to be told that what you listen to is indeed great and worthwhile. A question, if I may: did you listen to music and have your own oreferences
before that list was compiled?
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 03:11:50 AM
And yet Beethoven will have far more specific works likely to come up in conversation than Sculthorpe. Comparing an obscure work of a genius to an obscure work of an obscure composer is a moot point.
No, the question is rather why you take your own preferences so lightly.
Who am I that I would do otherwise? I'm at most just one person, and not a musically-gifted or musically-trained one.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 03:11:50 AM
I have the impression that you need these lists precisely because you are so insecure about your own preferences that you need to be told that what you listen to is indeed great and worthwhile. A question, if I may: did you listen to music and have your own oreferences before that list was compiled?
I knew very little about classical music when I started working on that list.
At this point I mostly listen to music that is unlikely to be regarded as "great and worthwhile."
Maybe putting it this way will help: I gain more pleasure in learning about music that is new to me than I gain from listening to something I already know. In fact, I ordinarily gain very little pleasure from listening to something I already know except insofar as I am getting to know it better.
So the question is what I will learn about next.
My goal is to maximize the odds that I will know about a work of music that comes up in conversation. Maximizing those odds brings me more pleasure than whatever the hedonic difference is between listening to my favorite works and something that I barely enjoy at all.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 03:17:04 AM
Who am I that I would do otherwise? I'm at most just one person, and not a musically-gifted or musically-trained one.
I am neither musically gifted nor musically trained yet I have firm preferences and stick to them --- the music I listen to should give pleasure, and be enjoyable, to me, not to other people. I can be lectured about how great Bruckner and Wagner are all day long by knowledgeable people who do enjoy their music --- that won't change the fact that they bore the hell out of me and I'm not going to waste my time forcing myself to like them.
Quote
At this point I mostly listen to music that is unlikely to be regarded as "great and worthwhile."
Maybe putting it this way will help: I gain more pleasure in learning about music that is new to me than I gain from listening to something I already know. So the question is what I will learn about next.
How can we help you finding something new to enjoy when we don't even know what you already enjoy?
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 03:27:37 AM
I am neither musically gifted nor musically trained yet I have firm preferences and stick to them --- the music I listen to should give pleasure, and be enjoyable, to me, not to other people. I can be lectured about how great Bruckner and Wagner are all day long by knowledgeable people who do enjoy their music --- that won't change the fact that they bore the hell out of me and I'm not going to waste my time forcing myself to like them.
That's all fine with me. We don't have to do the same things.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 03:27:37 AM
How can we help you finding something new to enjoy when we don't even know what you already enjoy?
What I enjoy is maximizing the odds of knowing about something that is likely to come up in conversation with people I respect.
Quote from: Madiel on June 26, 2022, 04:15:33 AM
I don't respect your opinions about the value of the list. I think the list is completely stupid. But I'm done trying to rescue you from it.
I'm sure our opinions of each other are approximately symmetrical.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 04:14:04 AM
I do know about some things, just not how to analyze music.
For God's sake, you are not supposed to analyze music but to listen to it and enjoy it. Leave musical analysis to professionals.
Quote from: ultralinear on June 26, 2022, 04:26:46 AM
It took me a while, but I think I get what this guy is after. In fact he said it quite clearly at one point:
It is not about his own listening pleasure, but about appearing knowledgeable when discussing music e.g. with a bunch of strangers on the Internet. This is not an ambition that I'm ever likely to share, but if you did, then getting a bunch of strangers on the Internet to compile a list of the works that they consider important might not be a completely stupid idea.
Yes, that's it exactly!
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 04:28:32 AM
For God's sake, you are not supposed to analyze music but to listen to it and enjoy it. Leave musical analysis to professionals.
There is an old, romantic (in the sense of coming from the culture of romanticism) dichotomy between pleasure and analysis. That does not match my experience. I'm more of a modernist in the sense that analysis itself is what brings me most pleasure.
In a sense, I believe the professionals work for me. I want to understand what they find.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 04:29:01 AM
Yes, that's it exactly!
Well, then I'm afraid GMG is the wrong place for you. We talk about music for the sake of it and the enjoyment thereof, not in order to appear knowledgeable and well-informed about things we actually have no deep interest in for their own sake. I doubt you'll find one single kindred spirit here.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 04:38:04 AM
Well, then I'm afraid GMG is the wrong place for you. We talk about music for the sake of it and the enjoyment thereof, not in order to appear knowledgeable and well-informed about things we actually have no deep interest in for their own sake. I doubt you'll find one single kindred spirit here.
I doubt I'll find many anywhere -- if I am honest about it this way. But why would I ever actually do that?
In a sense, classical music (and high culture in general) is our religion, and Machiavelli's advice is as relevant as ever: it is necessary to seem religious, but unwise to be religious.
Quote from: Madiel on June 26, 2022, 04:39:06 AM
It's our opinions about ourselves that are at issue.
Those are probably not symmetrical. :laugh:
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 04:31:47 AM
There is an old, romantic (in the sense of coming from the culture of romanticism) dichotomy between pleasure and analysis. That does not match my experience. I'm more of a modernist in the sense that analysis itself is what brings me most pleasure.
Yes, based on your posts that's exactly my impression. Music for you is not as much a source of pleasure and enjoyment as it is a pretext for intellectualizing. Nothing wrong with that, of course but as I said in my previous post, you're not likely to find many here with the same mindset.
Actually, there are myriads of topics people discuss on the internet that you could have chosen to appear knowledgeable about. Why particularly classical music?
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 04:45:46 AM
Actually, there are myriads of topics people discuss on the internet that you could have chosen to appear knowledgeable about. Why particularly classical music?
This is precisely what I have been asking myself about all the time while reading this thread. And why particularly classical music when it does not in itself give coffee any joy. There is something futile about his efforts.
Quote from: (: premont :) on June 26, 2022, 05:00:51 AM
This is precisely what I have been asking myself about all the time while reading this thread. And why particularly classical music when it does not in itself give coffee any joy. There is something futile about his efforts.
I do enjoy music very much though. It's just that my enjoyment isn't my highest priority -- especially not in terms of making choices about what to listen to next.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 05:02:10 AM
I do enjoy music very much though. It's just that my enjoyment isn't my highest priority -- especially not in terms of making choices about what to listen to next.
What's your highest priority then when listening to a specific musical work? More general, why do you listen to music?
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 05:02:10 AM
I do enjoy music very much though. It's just that my enjoyment isn't my highest priority -- especially not in terms of making choices about what to listen to next.
It shows how different we are, because if my first priority in dealing with music wasn't the urge to enjoy it, I probably wouldn't deal with it at all.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 05:14:12 AM
What's your highest priority then when listening to a specific musical work? More general, why do you listen to music?
Highest priority = to learn something.
Why? I guess it has something to do with membership in human society. That's a question for evolutionary psychologists perhaps.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 05:22:49 AM
Highest priority = to learn something.
What have you learned from listening to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto?
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 05:27:10 AM
What have you learned from listening to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto?
Well, before taking the test, what have I got to gain from it?
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 05:33:02 AM
Well, before taking the test, what have I got to gain from it?
You will learn something.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 05:40:30 AM
You will learn something.
:laugh:
I think I have, actually!
I should not have written that my highest priority is to improve my standing among people who care whether I've listened to Mozart's clarinet concerto.
So basically these tiers are like Dante's circles of hell but without the jokes.......? Asking for a friend.
Quote from: Roasted Swan on June 26, 2022, 06:00:22 AM
So basically these tiers are like Dante's circles of hell but without the jokes.......? Asking for a friend.
Paradiso, but fewer Italians.
Apparently we have to get all philosophical.
Why does music exist?
I assume for the moment that we are limiting ourselves to human music, not counting (for example) birdsong.
So music exists because humans have evolved to make it and take pleasure in it. But why did that happen? Why were our musical ancestors able to survive and reproduce better than their nonmusical kin?
My guess -- only a guess -- is:
The biggest factor in how well an individual survived or reproduced in our evolutionary past (probably now as well, going back a few million years) is how well they fit into a successful group. One factor in the success of a group would be how cohesive it was. Members of the more cohesive groups had access to more resources (especially food) than those of less cohesive groups because they'd be better able to win violent conflicts over those resources. And within the successful groups, the higher status individuals had more resources than lower status ones did.
All that is relevant because making and appreciating music obviously continue to be ways we mark our membership in a group, i.e. our identity.
And our skill in doing so is one of the factors that affects our status within the group.
This is my best guess as to why music exists, why it is so emotionally compelling. This is also my guess for some other culturally-variable human universals: clothing and makeup, dialects, belief in spirits, culinary traditions.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 05:42:05 AM
:laugh:
I think I have, actually!
I should not have written that my highest priority is to improve my standing among people who care whether I've listened to Mozart's clarinet concerto.
My question was genuine and honest. I am really interested in what you have learned from listening to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 06:52:07 AM
My question was genuine and honest. I am really interested in what you have learned from listening to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto.
My question is genuine and honest too. Why am I going to submit to this grilling?
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 06:55:34 AM
My question is genuine and honest too. Why am I going to submit to this grilling?
Grilling?
Man, if you can't stand your beliefs and worldview being questioned then perhaps you should avoid internet fora altogether.
Beside, one's repeatedly avoiding answering a question usually means one doesn't have an answer.
9 pages in...have we answered the question of the thread title?
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 06:59:37 AM
Grilling?
Man, if you can't stand your beliefs and worldview being questioned then perhaps you should avoid internet fora altogether.
Beside, one's repeatedly avoiding answering a question usually means one doesn't have an answer.
I already intended to correct myself, though I see I did it wrong:
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 05:42:05 AM
I should not have written that my highest priority is to improve my standing among people who care whether I've listened to Mozart's clarinet concerto.
Oh, my, that is a terrible mistake. I don't know how that "not" got in there.
I meant the opposite of that:
I should have written that my highest priority is to improve my standing among people who care whether I've listened to Mozart's clarinet concerto.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 07:10:37 AM
I should have written that my highest priority is to improve my standing among people who care whether I've listened to Mozart's clarinet concerto.
I don't care whether you've listened to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto. I am interested in what you have learned from listening to it. And you're certainly not going to improve your standing by avoiding to answer the question yet again.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 07:14:23 AM
I don't care whether you've listened to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto. I am interested in what you have learned from listening to it. And you're certainly not going to improve your standing by avoiding to answer the question yet again.
Are you intending to answer the question about what I have to gain?
Because I'm not trying to improve my standing with you.
Like I said before, I suspect that if we met in real life, I'd play the same game you'd play, and I'd play it about as well as you.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 07:17:44 AM
Are you intending to answer the question about what I have to gain?
I already answered that question. You will gain knowledge.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 07:19:13 AM
I already answered that question. You will gain knowledge.
I don't think I will, or at least I need some more evidence that I will before I agree to take this class. I've already said I can't analyze music very well.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 07:20:39 AM
I don't think I will, or at least I need some more evidence that I will before I agree to take this class. I've already said I can't analyze music very well.
It's not in the least about analyzing music. It's about telling us in your own words what you learned from listening to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto. Why you find the question so vexing is beyond me.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 07:16:13 AM
I do that when I want to do it. I've done it here sometimes too. I rarely do it anywhere anymore, but I'd rather not say why because I'd rather not cause any offense.
Is this what people call passive aggressive? It's certainly a performative with an offensive illocutionary effect.
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 07:26:21 AM
It's not in the least about analyzing music. It's about telling us in your own words what you learned from listening to Mozart's Clarinet Concerto. Why you find the question so vexing is beyond me.
I am having trouble imagining what you're after. Could you give me an example of what you mean? I.e. what did you learn from listening to Mozart's Requiem?
Quote from: Mandryka on June 26, 2022, 07:32:00 AM
Is this what people call passive aggressive? It's certainly a performative with an offensive illocutionary effect.
Ah, let me be direct then.
Most discussion does not interest me very much.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 07:54:54 AM
I am having trouble imagining what you're after. Could you give me an example of what you mean? I.e. what did you learn from listening to Mozart's Requiem?
It's not me who said that the highest priority in listening to music is to learn something. It's you who said that.
Actually, forget about Mozart. Pick whatever piece of music you want and tell us what you have learned from listening to it.
Wow, the last time I saw this thread, it was just two posts, the original and a single reply. I thought, "This doesn't sound interesting," and went to read something else instead. How on earth did it get to 192 replies of flame war and fighting and insults??
Either a lot of us need better hobbies, or we need to start some more interesting discussions ;D
Quote from: Brian on June 26, 2022, 09:14:33 AM
Wow, the last time I saw this thread, it was just two posts, the original and a single reply. I thought, "This doesn't sound interesting," and went to read something else instead. How on earth did it get to 192 replies of flame war and fighting and insults??
Either a lot of us need better hobbies, or we need to start some more interesting discussions ;D
Yeah no kidding! The level of vitriol on this thread is through the roof. I don't think I've seen posters so galvanized since Rob Newman's infamous thread.
Quote from: DavidW on June 26, 2022, 09:37:49 AM
Yeah no kidding! The level of vitriol on this thread is through the roof. I don't think I've seen posters so galvanized since Rob Newman's infamous thread.
And to so little purpose. If coffee is following his bliss, and his was an invitation, not any compulsion, why does anyone want to jam him up?
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 26, 2022, 10:12:56 AM
And to so little purpose. If coffee is following his bliss, and his was an invitation, not any compulsion, why does anyone want to jam him up?
+1
Quote from: Florestan on June 26, 2022, 08:12:44 AM
It's not me who said that the highest priority in listening to music is to learn something. It's you who said that.
Actually, forget about Mozart. Pick whatever piece of music you want and tell us what you have learned from listening to it.
I already took it back.
But in case there's a point to be made, I learn, I guess, what a work sounds like.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 26, 2022, 10:12:56 AM
And to so little purpose. If coffee is following his bliss, and his was an invitation, not any compulsion, why does anyone want to jam him up?
Quote from: Iota on June 26, 2022, 10:46:56 AM+1
I appreciate both you!
I've only read up to tier 20. It is a
very good list of great classical works. I don't necessarily agree with where some of these works are placed but who cares. I will certainly be sending it to a couple of friends from high school that have started to appreciate classical more in their old age as it is a fine guide, and I personally put more stock in a popular "mass opinion" than passing on the list from some classical critic or blog (heck even my opinion as I know what I like, which they might not) which is just a single opinion, where a bias can be far more readily apparent. (This is why we also do meta-analysis in medicine as it naturally weeds out outlier studies, and creates an overall high fidelity summation).
Quote from: Florestan on June 23, 2022, 06:43:31 AM
Mozart popping up for the first time only in the sixth tier, Haydn only in the thirteenth and Chopin only in the sixteenth? Gimme a break.
My opinion is that the good folks at TC are mostly teenagers / youngsters who have only recently discovered "classical music", ie mostly Beethoven and Mahler. GMG is vastly more sophisticated, being to TC what calculus is to arithmetic. ;D
I don't think this is a list from beginners, idiots or teenagers. Just look at the music that is being programmed or recorded and a huge chunk of it would come from those first twenty tiers. There is the chance those musicians and concert programmers are all numpties ;)
You wrote in one other thread in great recordings (Bach thread?) that you mostly listened to music in the background and then attentively listened if something caught your ear. Mahler is going to sound completely senseless with that sort of listening. Holy wars have been raged about andante-scherzo or vice versa in his 6th symphony. It wouldn't matter one iota which came first if you're just listening to it as background listening.
This is anathema to how I listen to music. I want to give nothing but my 100% attention when I hear something, it radically changes the type of music that I like, like not so jokingly referring to the Mozart Divertimenti as music that Aer Lingus would play before takeoff. Perfectly fine background music that would occasionally cause someone to perk up their ear, which is now in line with what you've written as well.
Quote from: hvbias on June 26, 2022, 04:40:35 PM
I've only read up to tier 20. It is a very good list of great classical works. I don't necessarily agree with where some of these works are placed but who cares. I will certainly be sending it to a couple of friends from high school that have started to appreciate classical more in their old age as it is a fine guide, and I personally put more stock in a popular "mass opinion" than passing on the list from some classical critic or blog (heck even my opinion as I know what I like, which they might not) which is just a single opinion, where a bias can be far more readily apparent. (This is why we also do meta-analysis in medicine as it naturally weeds out outlier studies, and creates an overall high fidelity summation).
I don't think this is a list from beginners, idiots or teenagers. Just look at the music that is being programmed or recorded and a huge chunk of it would come from those first twenty tiers. There is the chance those musicians and concert programmers are all numpties ;)
You wrote in one other thread in great recordings (Bach thread?) that you mostly listened to music in the background and then attentively listened if something caught your ear. Mahler is going to sound completely senseless with that sort of listening. Holy wars have been raged about andante-scherzo or vice versa in his 6th symphony. It wouldn't matter one iota which came first if you're just listening to it as background listening.
This is anathema to how I listen to music. I want to give nothing but my 100% attention when I hear something, it radically changes the type of music that I like, like not so jokingly referring to the Mozart Divertimenti as music that Aer Lingus would play before takeoff. Perfectly fine background music that would occasionally cause someone to perk up their ear, which is now in line with what you've written as well.
Thank you so much! I hope they enjoy it and find good things for them there.
If you see any way I can make it potentially more helpful for them -- i.e. changing the visual layout or something, since I'm not good at that kind of thing -- please let me know.
Quote from: Madiel on June 26, 2022, 07:54:33 PM
... you basically suggested that it would correct some sort of deficiency in me.
I repeat that I don't know about and never wrote about any of your deficiencies.
Quote from: Madiel on June 26, 2022, 07:54:33 PM
The total lack of curation is not a feature, it's a fatal flaw.
So we disagree.
Should not be a problem for you, me, or the rest of the world.
Stop letting it bother you and go on with your life.
Quote from: Madiel on June 26, 2022, 09:03:26 PM
You implied that they existed.
It's a problem because you want to get the rest of the world on board with your list. Take your list, go home, and go on with your life.
LOL I'll try.
Take care, man.
Quote from: hvbias on June 26, 2022, 04:40:35 PM
I've only read up to tier 20. It is a very good list of great classical works. I don't necessarily agree with where some of these works are placed but who cares. I will certainly be sending it to a couple of friends from high school that have started to appreciate classical more in their old age as it is a fine guide, and I personally put more stock in a popular "mass opinion" than passing on the list from some classical critic or blog (heck even my opinion as I know what I like, which they might not) which is just a single opinion, where a bias can be far more readily apparent.
As Madiel pointed out, God help a beginner who is most strongly recommended to listen to Beethoven''s Ninth or Wagner's Ring, especially if he's a mature person, ie one whose spare time is usually on rather short supply.
QuoteYou wrote in one other thread in great recordings (Bach thread?) that you mostly listened to music in the background and then attentively listened if something caught your ear. Mahler is going to sound completely senseless with that sort of listening. Holy wars have been raged about andante-scherzo or vice versa in his 6th symphony. It wouldn't matter one iota which came first if you're just listening to it as background listening.
I rarely listen to Mahler (imho Mahler's music is best experienced live) but when I do I listen attentively. Not that I really can stop my mind from wandering, though.
QuoteThis is anathema to how I listen to music. I want to give nothing but my 100% attention when I hear something, it radically changes the type of music that I like, like not so jokingly referring to the Mozart Divertimenti as music that Aer Lingus would play before takeoff. Perfectly fine background music that would occasionally cause someone to perk up their ear, which is now in line with what you've written as well.
That's funny because to me Mozart's music is of such nature that more often than not an inattentive listening quickly turns into an attentive one, the Divertimenti included.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 12:18:07 AM
As Madiel pointed out, God help a beginner who is most strongly recommended to listen to Beethoven''s Ninth or Wagner's Ring, especially if he's a mature person, ie one whose spare time is usually on rather short supply.
I am operating on the assumption that no one's ability to think for themselves is annihilated upon beholding our list.
Actually, I'll engage the point seriously for a moment. I disagree completely with this idea that beginners just want to hear more of what they already like or, even worse, just something light and pretty, that we should try to save them from "the good stuff" until they're "ready for it."
Every now and then a student will ask me what kind of music I like, and I'll say classical, and (most of them being privileged kids with several years studying piano or a string instrument) they'll assume I mean exclusively Mozart et al. And when I'm like, can I play you some, I hit them with Crumb's
Black Angels.
Oh, the horror. They "aren't ready" for anything like that, right?
Well, some aren't and never will be. It's not meant to be everyone's cup of tea.
But some percentage of them -- you can see their eyes light up immediately.
It's the kind of moment an educator lives for.
I'm sure I've turned more kids on to classical music with
Black Angels than I ever could have with the Radetzky March or
Eine kleine Nachtmusik or whatever "appropriate" work comes approved by the authorities.
Quote from: Madiel on June 26, 2022, 07:54:33 PM
As much as I have some issues with the way it's done, this (https://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/archive/) is a far, far more effective way of doing the thing that you're claiming to do, precisely because it has the kind of parameters that you're proud of not having. Apart from the first year, the category is narrower than the entire field of classical music, and the size of the list is manageable rather than listing every single thing that anyone voted for.
I took a look at the Piano category and noticed that one Euphemia Allen's piece Chopsticks is in a higher position than WTC, D960 or Appassionata. :D
Quote from: coffee on June 27, 2022, 02:22:06 AM
I am operating on the assumption that no one's ability to think for themselves is annihilated upon beholding our list.
Actually, I'll engage the point seriously for a moment. I disagree completely with this idea that beginners just want to hear more of what they already like or, even worse, just something light and pretty, that we should try to save them from "the good stuff" until they're "ready for it."
Every now and then a student will ask me what kind of music I like, and I'll say classical, and (most of them being privileged kids with several years studying piano or a string instrument) they'll assume I mean exclusively Mozart et al. And when I'm like, can I play you some, I hit them with Crumb's Black Angels.
Oh, the horror. They "aren't ready" for anything like that, right?
Well, some aren't and never will be. It's not meant to be everyone's cup of tea.
But some percentage of them -- you can see their eyes light up immediately.
It's the kind of moment an educator lives for.
I'm sure I've turned more kids on to classical music with Black Angels than I ever could have with the Radetzky March or Eine kleine Nachtmusik or whatever "appropriate" work comes approved by the authorities.
Why, this very fact makes your list not worth even the paper it can be printed on --- because Crumb's Black Angels is nowhere to be found, not even in the Least Strongly Recommended Tier. Game over, man! ;D
Quote from: Madiel on June 27, 2022, 02:40:29 AM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
But actually, it's in Tier 26. I don't know how you missed it.
Oooops! Well, I did a page search for Crumb which retrieved nothing, but now that I checked it, I get nothing for Beethoven as well. Probably the page is in a non-searchable format, which is a bug in itself.
Anyway, if Black Angels is appropriate for turning kids into classical music afficionados, then any piece in the 26th Tier should do the trick, right? I mean, their being in that tier means they have a lot in common. And indeed, lo and behold!
The 26th Tier:
Bach: Magnificat in D, BWV 243 [1723, 1733]
Bach: Partitas for Keyboard #1-6, BWV 825-830 (Clavier-Übung I) [1725-30]
Beethoven: Piano Sonata #31 in A-flat, op. 110 [1822]
Crumb: Black Angels (Thirteen Images from the Dark Land) [1970]
Debussy: Images pour orchestre, L 122 [1912]
Górecki: Symphony #3 "Symphony of Sorrowful Songs," op. 36 [1976]
Haydn: Symphony #94 in G "Surprise" [1791]
Mozart: String Quintet #4 in G minor, K. 516 [1787]
Prokofiev: Symphony #1 in D, op. 25 "Classical" [1917]
Rachmaninoff: Symphony #2 in E minor, op. 27 [1907]
Ravel: Le Tombeau de Couperin [1917]
Quote from: Madiel on June 27, 2022, 03:10:26 AM
It was searchable for me. Believe me, I didn't keep scrolling scrolling scrolling scrolling until I found it.
How did you search? I used Edit / Search in Page... / Crumb (in the browser) and got nothing. I could find no Search function on the page itself.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 03:20:10 AM
How did you search? I used Edit / Search in Page... / Crumb (in the browser) and got nothing. I could find no Search function on the page itself.
I think I pressed CTRL + F.
Quote from: Madiel on June 27, 2022, 03:54:45 AM
I think I pressed CTRL + F.
Fuck! That way it works. :D
Anyway, the problem still remains. If a beginner, especially a mature person, is given the list and starts from Tier One downward, there is a high probability that he'll give up on the bloody effing classical music long before getting to the Black Angels's tier. ;D
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 02:28:34 AM
I took a look at the Piano category and noticed that one Euphemia Allen's piece Chopsticks is in a higher position than WTC, D960 or Appassionata. :D
By your standards, shouldn't it be the first recommendation?
Quote from: hvbias on June 26, 2022, 04:40:35 PM
There is the chance those musicians and concert programmers are all numpties ;)
Well it is more the audience. One year my local orchestra balanced each concert with a 20th century work. The Beethoven, Brahms etc. piece always met with thundering applause and nearly instantaneous standing ovations. The more modern pieces were met with paltry applause, even when the performances were obviously better. The year after it was back to the warhorses. Disappointing. And it is not the programmers fault, they were just bending to the will of the audience.
Quote from: coffee on June 27, 2022, 04:10:39 AM
By your standards, shouldn't it be the first recommendation?
I never recommended anything to anyone that I had not listened to before. I don't even know who Euphemia Allen is.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 04:29:22 AM
I never recommended anything to anyone that I had not listened to before. I don't even know who Euphemia Allen is.
You don't know Chopsticks?
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 26, 2022, 10:12:56 AM
If coffee is following his bliss, and his was an invitation, not any compulsion, why does anyone want to jam him up?
btw I really couldn't have been the only one that immediately thought of...
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/6102xFVqRfL._SL1200_.jpg) (which is an excellent recording btw, and who wouldn't want to follow it?)
0:)
Quote from: coffee on June 27, 2022, 04:34:56 AM
You don't know Chopsticks?
Never heard about it, although it's quite possible that I might have heard it without knowing what it was.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 05:06:32 AM
Never heard about it, although it's quite possible that I might have heard it without knowing what it was.
Perhaps Romania is spared this particular bit of culture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopsticks_(waltz) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopsticks_(waltz))
Although quite why anyone would recommend it as something
to listen to, I've no idea. It's something you learn to play as a kid. The only reason it would qualify as 'classical' music is because of how old it is.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 04:01:26 AM
Anyway, the problem still remains. If a beginner, especially a mature person, is given the list and starts from Tier One downward, there is a high probability that he'll give up on the bloody effing classical music long before getting to the Black Angels's tier. ;D
Exactly, I had given up on classical music for a good fifty years before stumbling across stuff like Black Angels. This list would not have encouraged me to look further.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 02:53:41 AM
Anyway, if (George Crumb's) Black Angels is appropriate for turning kids into classical music afficionados, then any piece in the 26th Tier should do the trick, right? I mean, their being in that tier means they have a lot in common. And indeed, lo and behold!
I used
Bernd Alois Zimmermann's Tempus Omnia Habent in my 8th-Grade Latin courses and found that many of the kids were really intrigued by it.
One girl stopped by two years after graduation to ask what "the name of that one classical work was, with the wild singer." ;) She had been talking about our "Latin music" with some of her friends in high school, had liked
Zimmermann's work, but had lost her notes about it.
https://www.youtube.com/v/6y5kUbVufAs
Quote from: Madiel on June 27, 2022, 05:28:32 AM
Perhaps Romania is spared this particular bit of culture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopsticks_(waltz) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopsticks_(waltz))
Although quite why anyone would recommend it as something to listen to, I've no idea. It's something you learn to play as a kid. The only reason it would qualify as 'classical' music is because of how old it is.
Definitely never heard it nor about it until today. Imagine my bewilderment when I saw it ranked higher than WTC, D960 and Appassionata.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 06:12:19 AM
Definitely never heard it nor about it until today. Imagine my bewilderment when I saw it ranked higher than WTC, D960 and Appassionata.
Discounting your own personal experience, my speculation is that far, far more people have heard it than any of those supposed more famous works.
🤠😎
Quote from: Cato on June 27, 2022, 05:44:34 AM
I used Bernd Alois Zimmermann's Tempus Omnia Habent in my 8th-Grade Latin courses and found that many of the kids were really intrigued by it.
One girl stopped by two years after graduation to ask what "the name of that one classical work was, with the wild singer." ;) She had been talking about our "Latin music" with some of her friends in high school, had liked Zimmermann's work, but had lost her notes about it.
Very nice!
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 06:22:16 AM
Discounting your own personal experience, my speculation is that far, far more people have heard it than any of those supposed more famous works.
🤠😎
That's quite possible. Actually, save for this oddity, the list is a rather good one. Judge for yourself:
https://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/archive/search/?year=2004-piano (https://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/archive/search/?year=2004-piano)
Quote from: Cato on June 27, 2022, 05:44:34 AM
I used Bernd Alois Zimmermann's Tempus Omnia Habent in my 8th-Grade Latin courses and found that many of the kids were really intrigued by it.
One girl stopped by two years after graduation to ask what "the name of that one classical work was, with the wild singer." ;) She had been talking about our "Latin music" with some of her friends in high school, had liked Zimmermann's work, but had lost her notes about it.
https://www.youtube.com/v/6y5kUbVufAs
I must give it a listen. Thus far
B.A.Z. has not draw me in. I don't mind giving another piece a shot.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 06:46:11 AM
That's quite possible. Actually, save for this oddity, the list is a rather good one. Judge for yourself:
https://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/archive/search/?year=2004-piano (https://www.abc.net.au/classic/classic100/archive/search/?year=2004-piano)
In the Top 30 I find a great percentage of pieces that deserve to be there, most of which I really like, so who am I to argue?
🤠😎
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 07:44:58 AM
In the Top 30 I find a great percentage of pieces that deserve to be there, most of which I really like
Yes, exactly. That Chopstick ditty is really the odd man out.
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 06:12:19 AM
Definitely never heard it nor about it until today.
This is a joke right? Chopsticks is pretty standard repertoire for people learning how to play the piano.
Quote from: DavidW on June 27, 2022, 08:15:01 AM
This is a joke right?
No, it's the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Until today I've never heard it nor about it,
QuoteChopsticks is pretty standard repertoire for people learning how to play the piano.
I've never learned how to play the piano, or any other instrument for that matter --- which is actually my greatest frustration.
Repertoire is kind of over-selling "Chopsticks," but that's not a serious quarrel. 8)
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2022, 08:28:18 AM
Repertoire is kind of over-selling "Chopsticks," but that's not a serious quarrel. 8)
I used to (not seriously) tell any student that sat down at the rehearsal room piano and played either "Chopticks" or "Heart and Soul" that I was taking half a letter grade off of their average.
Saying "Chopsticks" is standard classical music repertoire is not something I ever thought I would hear, to be honest.
Quote from: Szykneij on June 27, 2022, 08:43:55 AM
I used to (not seriously) tell any student that sat down at the rehearsal room piano and played either "Chopticks" or "Heart and Soul" that I was taking half a letter grade off of their average.
Quite right!
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 27, 2022, 07:44:58 AM
In the Top 30 I find a great percentage of pieces that deserve to be there, most of which I really like, so who am I to argue?
🤠😎
Well, I recall one of my playmates playing Chopsticks sometimes, because it was the only piece he could play. Since then I haven't heard it. It ranks in the same category as "frikadellens flugt over plankeværket", a piece (written by the conductor Ole Schmidt) every child is able to play, even if it is in the unfriendly mode of F-sharp major..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7LGGA0u0oA
Quote from: OrchestralNut on June 27, 2022, 08:47:28 AM
Saying "Chopsticks" is standard classical music repertoire is not something I ever thought I would hear, to be honest.
The more depressing way of looking at this is that "Chopsticks" may be the most famous classical musical composition by a woman. Both because it is probably one of the most recognizable tunes in the world, and because of the general organizational failure of the classical industry to promote anything else (or for that matter to encourage women as composers until the last 20 years).
Quote from: Brian on June 27, 2022, 09:55:06 AM
The more depressing way of looking at this is that "Chopsticks" may be the most famous classical musical composition by a woman. Both because it is probably one of the most recognizable tunes in the world, and because of the general organizational failure of the classical industry to promote anything else (or for that matter to encourage women as composers until the last 20 years).
We know the composer of "Chopsticks?" How'd I miss
that?!
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2022, 10:41:31 AM
We know the composer of "Chopsticks?" How'd I miss that?!
Euphemia Allen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopsticks_(waltz)
Her only published work, written at 16. Hard to find more information about her but apparently she lived til her late 80s so I hope she got a lot of royalties from the publication.
Quote from: Brian on June 27, 2022, 06:33:05 PM
Euphemia Allen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chopsticks_(waltz)
Her only published work, written at 16. Hard to find more information about her but apparently she lived til her late 80s so I hope she got a lot of royalties from the publication.
My hat's off to her. Obviously I'll never write anything half as famous.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2022, 06:41:24 PM
My hat's off to her. Obviously I'll never write anything half as famous.
I hadn't really heard of the original, or her, either. Only vaguely remembered a set of piano variations on it, by Lyadov, Cui and others. It's not a work that will cause huge cognitive earthquakes, apparently.
Quote from: coffee on June 26, 2022, 07:43:49 PM
Thank you so much! I hope they enjoy it and find good things for them there.
If you see any way I can make it potentially more helpful for them -- i.e. changing the visual layout or something, since I'm not good at that kind of thing -- please let me know.
No I don't have any suggestions. Any minor suggestion I could offer would be something that would potentially offend people less (like removing the word "tier") but this starts to get into sillyness territory.
For other point that should give you some consolation if you were planning to do a list from scratch for GMG is these sort of things rely on a large userbase, and GMG is a considerably smaller (one among many things that makes this one of my favorite boards) in order to be meaningful. Otherwise you risk having oddities like that horrendous Sea Symphony ranked fairly high :laugh:
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 12:18:07 AM
As Madiel pointed out, God help a beginner who is most strongly recommended to listen to Beethoven''s Ninth or Wagner's Ring, especially if he's a mature person, ie one whose spare time is usually on rather short supply.
I rarely listen to Mahler (imho Mahler's music is best experienced live) but when I do I listen attentively. Not that I really can stop my mind from wandering, though.
That's funny because to me Mozart's music is of such nature that more often than not an inattentive listening quickly turns into an attentive one, the Divertimenti included.
Fair enough, and a very good point about The Ring, I had not even considered that and it is a justifiable criticism for a new person to see that ranked so high up if they were to listen to this early on in their classical journey.
Re-reading my post apologies Florestan if my post came across as rude. I really do try to come across as cordial as (for me) there is nothing worse than getting an asshole reputation online (or especially so in real life) but I was debating inflation on another board and should have simply terminated discussion when some of the more conspiracy tilted views started to emerge, and I was in a sour mood after that. But then I put on 1.5 discs worth of in the zone, eyes closed listening of Harmonies Poétiques et Religieuses and had a supremely fine Sunday evening after that :)
Quote from: Florestan on June 27, 2022, 02:53:41 AM
Oooops! Well, I did a page search for Crumb which retrieved nothing, but now that I checked it, I get nothing for Beethoven as well. Probably the page is in a non-searchable format, which is a bug in itself.
Anyway, if Black Angels is appropriate for turning kids into classical music afficionados, then any piece in the 26th Tier should do the trick, right? I mean, their being in that tier means they have a lot in common. And indeed, lo and behold!
The 26th Tier:
Bach: Magnificat in D, BWV 243 [1723, 1733]
Bach: Partitas for Keyboard #1-6, BWV 825-830 (Clavier-Übung I) [1725-30]
Beethoven: Piano Sonata #31 in A-flat, op. 110 [1822]
Crumb: Black Angels (Thirteen Images from the Dark Land) [1970]
Debussy: Images pour orchestre, L 122 [1912]
Górecki: Symphony #3 "Symphony of Sorrowful Songs," op. 36 [1976]
Haydn: Symphony #94 in G "Surprise" [1791]
Mozart: String Quintet #4 in G minor, K. 516 [1787]
Prokofiev: Symphony #1 in D, op. 25 "Classical" [1917]
Rachmaninoff: Symphony #2 in E minor, op. 27 [1907]
Ravel: Le Tombeau de Couperin [1917]
I'm actually pretty surprised by the consistency even going so far down as 26 tiers. That is a very fine list with but a single oddity, the Crumb piece you pointed out. If one listened to everything before that while gaining an appreciation for the work, that is about a half year to a years worth of listening before they'd get to that difficult piece.
I think even larger numbers of people would have needed to be sampled to remove outliers like that.
I'm actually pretty delighted to see the Górecki Symphony 3 break into the top 30 tiers, had I seen this list a couple of years earlier that would have been a piece new to me, that I now think is an extremely fine work.
Quote from: hvbias on June 29, 2022, 03:02:11 PM
Re-reading my post apologies Florestan if my post came across as rude. I really do try to come across as cordial as (for me) there is nothing worse than getting an asshole reputation online (or especially so in real life) but I was debating inflation on another board and should have simply terminated discussion when some of the more conspiracy tilted views started to emerge, and I was in a sour mood after that.
I took absolutely no offense because there was none whatsoever to take. Your post was perfectly civil (as are all your posts) --- so don't worry.
QuoteBut then I put on 1.5 discs worth of in the zone, eyes closed listening of Harmonies Poétiques et Religieuses and had a supremely fine Sunday evening after that :)
An exquisite way to spend away a Sunday evening. indeed. Who played the HPR?
That Gorecki symphony was in the charts (or at least part of it) in the late 1990s or so.
I still think there is in general nothing wrong with the typical 50-100 pieces included in "Great composer/classics" and they will suffice for most people interested. That fine graining is way too much effort. Partly because in many cases it doesn't matter. It's totally irrelevant if the first Haydn symphony one encounters is 94, 100, 101, 104 or any other of the ~10 most popular ones. One might get a slightly skewed impression, namely towards the very late pieces and sometimes more picturesque, but it will not be a strong distortion. Similar with the typical 3-5 most popular named Beethoven piano sonatas. Fine-graining them into "tiers" is just not worth the effort.
And afterwards I don't think it's a problem to go first for music similar to what one likes, e.g. the remaining Beethoven sonatas instead of trying a Scriabin or Haydn sonata unless one is making a conscious effort to get a broad overview.
Excluding some "bonbons" and taking only complete works, I struggle to think of any typical "best of x" or "greatest classics" pieces I'd find a totally misguided recommendation.
I'll admit that there might be something to be said for suggesting pieces after ca. 1940 and before ca. 1700 that are usually not covered in intros or more niche. Again, I think it's usually a good rule of thumb to leave them for later and no problem at all (apart from the fact that they are not "hidden", they are just not strongly advertised or highly recommended).
And the other thing is that for the few listeners that are not "captured" by the ~50 typical pieces or by the 100 afterwards there won't be much help from the extreme fine graining either. One can make suggestions if one knows what other kinds of music they like but otherwise e.g. "Black Angels" will have as small a probability to appeal as any other modern or niche piece.
Quote from: Jo498 on June 30, 2022, 01:53:50 AM
That Gorecki symphony was in the charts (or at least part of it) in the late 1990s or so.
I still think there is in general nothing wrong with the typical 50-100 pieces included in "Great composer/classics" and they will suffice for most people interested. That fine graining is way too much effort. Partly because in many cases it doesn't matter. It's totally irrelevant if the first Haydn symphony one encounters is 94, 100, 101, 104 or any other of the ~10 most popular ones. One might get a slightly skewed impression, namely towards the very late pieces and sometimes more picturesque, but it will not be a strong distortion. Similar with the typical 3-5 most popular named Beethoven piano sonatas. Fine-graining them into "tiers" is just not worth the effort.
And afterwards I don't think it's a problem to go first for music similar to what one likes, e.g. the remaining Beethoven sonatas instead of trying a Scriabin or Haydn sonata unless one is making a conscious effort to get a broad overview.
Excluding some "bonbons" and taking only complete works, I struggle to think of any typical "best of x" or "greatest classics" pieces I'd find a totally misguided recommendation.
I'll admit that there might be something to be said for suggesting pieces after ca. 1940 and before ca. 1700 that are usually not covered in intros or more niche. Again, I think it's usually a good rule of thumb to leave them for later and no problem at all (apart from the fact that they are not "hidden", they are just not strongly advertised or highly recommended).
And the other thing is that for the few listeners that are not "captured" by the ~50 typical pieces or by the 100 afterwards there won't be much help from the extreme fine graining either. One can make suggestions if one knows what other kinds of music they like but otherwise e.g. "Black Angels" will have as small a probability to appeal as any other modern or niche piece.
All good observations.
Could we stop saying that Black Angels doesn't deserve to be on the list or so high? Neophytes aren't as turned off by modern, baroque, renaissance etc. as people would like to think. That extremely conservative taste of romantic era orchestral only is learned over time.
Quote from: DavidW on June 30, 2022, 05:42:31 AM
Could we stop saying that Black Angels doesn't deserve to be on the list or so high? Neophytes aren't as turned off by modern, baroque, renaissance etc. as people would like to think. That extremely conservative taste of romantic era orchestral only is learned over time.
Perfectly true!
Quote from: DavidW on June 30, 2022, 05:42:31 AM
Could we stop saying that Black Angels doesn't deserve to be on the list or so high? Neophytes aren't as turned off by modern, baroque, renaissance etc. as people would like to think. That extremely conservative taste of romantic era orchestral only is learned over time.
Reading this simple and helpful comment prompted me. Not a negative contribution, I hope, but a critical observation, I guess.
I have to say that one of the fundamental issues that I have of whether this project honestly has any meaningful value at all (and certainly the impossibility of any claim for it to be authoritative), emerges from the very nature of establishing a common plumbline or desirable set of values by which to judge what is 'good'. Without getting overly philosophical, we no longer live in a zeitgeist dominated by a single modernist metanarrative that establishes what is intrinsically beautiful or worthy. Societally we are postmodern to the core, suspicious and disbelieving of the idea of a hypothetical idea of 'the good' or 'the great'. Whether that is necessarily the case when we come to the archetypal consumer of art music is another issue, but it is probably true of most 'neophytes'. Nowadays, folk approaching classical music for the first time or with tentative and limited knowledge have a whole world of cultural, ideological and political drivers that will shape what they value, like or endorse. Questions of tonality and Western cultural and structural assumptions are just the tip of a growing iceberg of patriarchal disapproval, racial, gender and sexual representation, and legitimacy/necessity of genre crossover. How on earth do we concretise greatness?
The walls of Western European 'shoulds' and concrete certainties are pretty much collapsed in the face of swathes of society who are moral and artistic relativists, whose primary touchstone for greatness is social validation and current media temperature.
I'm all for lists of personal preferences that are well explained, but ranking composers in a tiered hierarchy without really well defined selection reasons, and an understanding of who is doing the ranking and the criteria they are using to curate those tiers is worse than pointless. I love lists, but something that sets out for me a list of 'The Greatest Classical Music' leaves me colder than a seal's bikini. Why shouldn't
Black Angels be top of the list, unless the criteria for judgement are a particular musical form, or conformity to a certain structural or academic standard? My lens for beauty may elevate Orientalism, or express itself in a primal desire for rhythm, or discernible tunes, or emotional immanence. What if those are absent from, or of less importance to, those building the 'official list'? If it is a list created by a community, what else do we learn other than the participants in this single, discrete group have made a particular set of choices? Without an accompanying narrative, we don't know even know why they made those selections.
I find some (admittedly, occasionally unwholesome) reaction against the 'establishment' who want to exercise some form of condescending schooling of what one
ought to like. I certainly don't want to conform to conservative, romantic era tastes.
What about 'class' as a factor in quantifying greatness? That is a whole other set of issues...
I do like lists. I like GMG lists. I don't like this list. I do like your right to make it, though :) :P
That is very well said Fox. I think that is probably why I enjoy reading the responses to MI's recent threads but I didn't enjoy this list at all. There is a huge difference between sharing personal preferences and arrogantly asserting that our consensus is canon.
Quote from: DavidW on July 01, 2022, 06:35:58 AM
That is very well said Fox. I think that is probably why I enjoy reading the responses to MI's recent threads but I didn't enjoy this list at all. There is a huge difference between sharing personal preferences and arrogantly asserting that our consensus is canon.
I should be fair to the OP, who said...
Quote from: coffee on June 23, 2022, 11:01:14 PM
"Naturally our list represents the knowledge and tastes of the people who have helped build it. No one claims that it is the single official objective canon of art music!"
Having said that, I still have my stated reservations about the value of such a complex and tiered enterprise. I think there are already lots of informative lists out there already.
I also like this quote from the sig of one of our esteemed members...
'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).
Quote from: DavidW on June 30, 2022, 05:42:31 AM
Could we stop saying that Black Angels doesn't deserve to be on the list or so high? Neophytes aren't as turned off by modern, baroque, renaissance etc. as people would like to think. That extremely conservative taste of romantic era orchestral only is learned over time.
That wasn't the point. The point was that dozens of tiers are not helping much with orientation.
I find Black Angels a gimmicky piece that would not be in top 1000 recommendations and furthermore it requires knowledge of Schubert's Death and Maiden and Renaissance consort music to appreciate the quotes/homages but that's neither here nor there. When I got into classical music it was rather likely that one might encounter this piece because the Kronos quartet became rather popular in the late 80s and early 90s. I remember that I had another disc of them that did contain o.k. music but also a terrible piece by John Zorn with the record player needle being randomly dropped on the record...
The conventional or typical "core recommendations" for newbies or intermediate listeners is by no means only romantic, it would contain Vivaldi, Handel, Bach, maybe even Dowland, Monteverdi or Schütz as well as Debussy and Stravinsky. I don't think it's an underappreciation of Crumb or Reich or Glass if one thinks they can come a bit later...
Quote from: Florestan on June 30, 2022, 12:41:26 AM
I took absolutely no offense because there was none whatsoever to take. Your post was perfectly civil (as are all your posts) --- so don't worry.
Thank you, as are yours 8)
Quote
An exquisite way to spend away a Sunday evening. indeed. Who played the HPR?
Steven Osborne.
Quote from: ultralinear on July 01, 2022, 01:35:27 PM
Some years ago I shared my living space with someone who previously had little voluntary exposure to classical music. One evening I came home early from work to find them playing one of my records. What do you suppose that was? Moonlight Sonata? Jupiter Symphony? Third Brandenburg?
Nope. It was Scriabin's 3rd PIANO SONATA, from this recital disc:
(http://www.exactlabels.com/ap11498816/lm40482207/CDart4081x.jpg)
Which apparently had become a favourite.
There is no way of knowing what piece of music will strike a chord with someone. The idea that you have to work up to it by gradual immersion into "the classics" seems like an effective way to put someone off for good. Particularly if there's thousands of them, stratified into "tiers".
That
Scriabin sonata is a marvelous work!
https://www.youtube.com/v/_-dYmAZQobE
[quote}
There is no way of knowing what piece of music will strike a chord with someone. The idea that you have to work up to it by gradual immersion into "the classics" seems like an effective way to put someone off for good. Particularly if there's
thousands of them, stratified into "tiers".
[/quote]
In another topic, I mentioned that the rather unusual
Tempus Omnia Habent by
Bernd Alois Zimmermann usually enthused some of my 8th-Grade Latin students. One year a few girls came back after graduation to ask about it, as they had forgotten the title and the composer, but wanted to hear it again!
So, yes, you never know!
Quote from: Cato on July 01, 2022, 02:36:03 PM
That Scriabin sonata is a marvelous work!
https://www.youtube.com/v/_-dYmAZQobE
In another topic, I mentioned that the rather unusual Tempus Omnia Habent by Bernd Alois Zimmermann usually enthused some of my 8th-Grade Latin students. One year a few girls came back after graduation to ask about it, as they had forgotten the title and the composer, but wanted to hear it again!
So, yes, you never know!
One of my favorite piano sonatas. I was recently listening to Block play the second at slower tempi than it's normally played and it was gorgeous. https://youtu.be/mxNWJ7zJh40
I fell in love with Scriabin's Piano Sonata cycle immediately after hearing it. A CD store clerk told me to keep an eye on Horowitz CDs and it was possibly the finest introduction to those pieces.
Quote from: ultralinear on July 01, 2022, 01:35:27 PM
The OP has said that he listens happily to music, has developed his own tastes, and doesn't need any recommendations from anybody. Good for him. But still that's not enough. Because he feels he's not sufficiently familiar with "the classics". And therefore, he's not qualified. So he's asking you to help him, by compiling a list. Instead of saying "You're fine as you are, just keep listening, and enjoying what you hear."
I just want to pick out this part to clarify what I mean.
Of course I can "just keep ... enjoying what I hear," but that's not the only thing I want to enjoy. I also hope to become better able to participate in certain discourses.
But I do not aspire to become "qualified" because I lack the time and motivation for things like ear training, studying music theory, and closely analyzing a lot of works. I intend to be a mere fan, not someone whose opinions should count for much.
This statement:
Quote from: coffee on July 01, 2022, 08:32:27 PM
Of course I can "just keep ... enjoying what I hear," but that's not the only thing I want to enjoy. I also hope to become better able to participate in certain discourses.
is mutually contradictory with this one:
QuoteI intend to be a mere fan, not someone whose opinions should count for much.
because (1) being a mere fan means exactly "just enjoying what one hears" and (2) being able to participate in discussions means having opinions which should actually count.
Quote from: Florestan on July 02, 2022, 08:25:32 AM
This statement:
is mutually contradictory with this one:
because (1) being a mere fan means exactly "just enjoying what one hears" and (2( being able to participate in discussions means having opinions which should actually count.
I enjoy what I hear without ignoring the other aspects of the music, and the discourse I aspire to participate in is not expert-level discussions, but only jolly conversations with other relatively knowledgeably fans.
This seems straightforward to me, but I might not be doing a good job of communicating it.
Quote from: coffee on July 02, 2022, 08:28:08 AM
I enjoy what I hear without ignoring the other aspects of the music, and the discourse I aspire to participate in is not expert-level discussions, but only jolly conversations with other relatively knowledgeably fans.
There are plenty of threads ---
other than this one --- where you could have exactly that. How about contributing there?
Quote from: Florestan on July 02, 2022, 08:56:46 AM
There are plenty of threads --- other than this one --- where you could have exactly that. How about contributing there?
I do learn from them. I browse more than you'd think. I don't think I have much to contribute though. Thank you (sincerely!) for the invitation.
Quote from: coffee on July 02, 2022, 09:10:02 AM
I do learn from them. I browse more than you'd think. I don't think I have much to contribute though. Thank you (sincerely!) for the invitation.
You do. You could start with Your Top 5, 20 or 50 Composers threads, or with Pieces that Have Blown You Away Recently. You could go to What Are Listening To Now thread and tell us what you listen to and how do you like it and why. There's a lot you can contribute --- if you really want.