GMG Classical Music Forum

Hi.  Either I've gotten bored with Pop / Top 40 or it's left me behind.  I can't listen fast enough to make out the lyrics any more, especially when they're stepped on by assorted syntho-sounds, and I never liked 'dance music' to begin with.  I'm not even sure if music is still relevant in my life; I listen to so few of my CDs any more, and little on the radio outside NPR.  I've decided to stick a toe into some different waters to see if there's any thrill left for me.

After spending a couple of hours browsing this and other sites for advice, I've randomly chosen the Brandenburg Concertos as a starting place.  (One of my criteria was a piece I hopefully am completely unfamiliar with; I don't want to bring any baggage to the learning process.)  Googling it obviously yielded a multitude of returns, but one thing puzzles me.  (Okay, probably more than one, but this is the one I'm focused on at this hour.)  I'm seeing a wide range of times or durations for what appears to be the same piece, depending on the site returned by the search results.  I'm not talking about a couple of seconds, either; I've found times for recordings of the first concerto ranging from a couple of minutes to over 17!

Can anyone shed some light on what I'm not seeing?

Tempo (how fast it's played) can vary from performance to performance, and some works have sections that are marked to be repeated, which some conductors observe while others ignore.  But those factors can result in timings that differ by a factor of two, at most.  However, the Brandenburg concerto No 1 consists of four distinct movements, and if you are seeing timings of a couple of minutes, that might correspond to one of the movements, or to an excerpt.  The first three movements of Brandenburg #1 are about four minutes each, and the final movement consists of a sequence of dance tunes that add up to about 7 minutes.  17 minutes is about right for the entire thing.

Incidentally, a handy way to get basic information about any well known piece of classical music is to look it up on Wikipedia.  For instance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_concertos

One of the wonderful things about the Brandenburg concertos is how diverse the instruments are.  Brandenburg #1 uses "corni da caccia" (hunting horns).  Later they became standard (referred to as "horns" or "french horns") but at the time they were not considered "polite" instruments and Bach has them playing stylized hunting calls as the "proper" ensemble plays more "sophisticated" music.

Welcome, Palmetto!

I'm not sure I know how anyone could play a Brandenburg concerto in "a couple" minutes  ??? , but playing times do differ pretty widely based on who's performing it. Classical artists do have (or award themselves) a lot of leeway in how fast or how slow to perform things, and in addition, for most music before, say, 1860-80, there are optional repeated sections which can be included or left out depending on how they feel.

So for example I have one recording of Beethoven's Symphony No 6 that lasts for 35 minutes 50 seconds (Berlin Philharmonic, conductor Herbert von Karajan) and one recording of the exact same symphony that lasts for 44:46 (Staatskapelle Berlin, conductor Daniel Barenboim) - or 9 minutes' difference! Karajan and his orchestra play a heck of a lot faster and leave out two big repeated sections.

Of course, it's always possible that iTunes, Rhapsody, eMusic, or whatever websites you're looking at have accidentally labelled part of the piece as if it was the entire piece. And some record companies do "Best of..." compilations or pop versions where it'll just say "Some Famous Person Plays Brahms' Hungarian Dance", even though Brahms wrote 21 Hungarian dances.  (EDIT: I see Karl and Scarpia have addressed the just-an-excerpt possibility while I was typing...)

I really do wish it were less confusing!  :(  But hey... after a while, we all secretly grew to love it. I hope you do too. Stick around; it's worth it!  ;D

P.S. Classical music can serve up spiritual and emotional experiences and connections pop or 'dance' music can't even touch. I'm not sure there's another genre where you can listen to a complete work and feel like it understands you. Glad you're exploring.

:)

You mean like the TV ads to "Get 487 of the World's Greatest Symphonies on two CDs!", where you get about 30 seconds of each?  Those reminded me of the aural equivalent of Cliff's Notes, or a DVD of "Shakespeare's Greatest Plays!" that has just the R&J balcony scene and Hamlet's soliloquy.

Leaving out the repeatable parts?  I've listened to most of Jim Steinman's work (songwriter for Meat Loaf, Bonnie Tyler, others; very operatic and bombastic; reminds me of what little Wagner I've heard) and I hate it when the additional choruses get cut for radio play.  It strikes me that the composer put them in there for a reason, but I'm new at this and am trying to avoid letting my pop music background color the experience.

On further checking, 'a couple of minutes' may have been an exaggeration.  I'm seeing times mostly clustered around the 3:45, 4:00,  7:00, and 17:45 minute marks.  That would seem to coincide with Scarpia's breakdown for 'movements'.  Which leads to ...

What's a 'movement'?  (Insert your bowel joke here.  There, now that we have that out of the way, we can return to the newbie's dumb question.)

Quote from: Palmetto on February 01, 2011, 12:24:27 PM
What's a 'movement'?

Well, most pieces in classical music have multiple movements, individual pieces of music that make up the whole work.  You can think of them like chapters in a book.  Different types of works have different schemes.  A concerto often has 3, a fast movement, a slow movement, and a very fast movement.  Bach's Brandenburg 1 follows the standard concerto layout, with an 'extra' set of dances at the end.  Brandenburg 2 follows the standard concerto layout.  A "suite" is typically a prelude followed by a sequence of dances.  A symphony typically has four movements, a fast movement, a slow movement, a dance movement or interlude, then a very fast movement.   Other types of music, sonatas for solo instrument, for example, often follow the scheme for a concerto or for a symphony.

In earlier music, the movements were often more or less independent, perhaps like songs in an album, but in later works they can build on each other (like in Sargent Pepper).  For instance Beethoven's 5th symphony is a progression from gloomy fate (first movement) to triumph (finale).

There are also single movement pieces in classical music, often for solo piano.  Chopin, for instance, wrote single movement polonaises, ballades, waltzes, scherzos.   The closest thing to what in pop music is called a "song" would be an aria, melodie, or lieder (that's song in Italian, French and German). 

Probably the most important thing to recognize in classical music is that it is not structured like a popular song.  In a popular song you have the same melody, more or less repeated several times with different words, and often with an alternation of verse and chorus.  In classical music there is a lot of repetition, but most of the time they are not repeated verbatim, and the interesting thing is how the composer takes the same melody and presents it a different way when it reappears, in a different harmony, played on a different instrument, in a different tempo, in a different key, or combined with other melodies.  A piece of classical music tells a dramatic story purely in sound.

Can I assume this would be a piece suitable for the dance steps popular at the time the work was composed?  Obviously not to be confused with disco.

I never really got 'Sgt. Pepper'.  I like many of the tracks individually, and I'm aware there's supposed to be some sort of overlying theme or concept, but I've never been able to pick up on it.  The tracks don't seem to have any connection to each other, excluding that abominable film adaptation in the '70s.

Quote from: Palmetto on February 01, 2011, 12:47:17 PM
Can I assume this would be a piece suitable for the dance steps popular at the time the work was composed?  Obviously not to be confused with disco.

Yes, they were based on dances of the time.  Some pieces may have been intended literally for dancing, but in many cases a particular type of "dance" movement is not literally for dancing, but signals that it will have a certain type of rhythm.  A Sarabande is a slow dance, a Gigue is fast, an Menuetto or Allemande is somewhere in between.  Each has a typical rhythm and character.
 

No, there's no real "concept" to Sgt Pepper, aside from the title track which sets up an "alter band ego," and its brisk reprise at the near-end of the album, serving as bookmarks.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 01, 2011, 12:52:46 PM
No, there's no real "concept" to Sgt Pepper, aside from the title track which sets up an "alter band ego," and its brisk reprise at the near-end of the album, serving as bookmarks.

Well, there is no thematic link with regard to lyrics or themes of the songs, but they were sequenced and connected together to make the album play as something more than individual, unrelated tracks.   But we are getting a bit off topic.

Excuse the noob.  I don't frequent many forums, and the one I'm on most often we not only excuse OT but actually encourage it.  My apologies for violating the local customs.

Now to see if I can find these as downloadable .MP3s without dropping too much change.  My only previous downloading experience is with 'Car Talk' and other radio podcasts.

Thanks for the answers.

Quote from: Palmetto on February 01, 2011, 01:07:25 PM
Excuse the noob.  I don't frequent many forums, and the one I'm on most often we not only excuse OT but actually encourage it.  My apologies for violating the local customs.

Now to see if I can find these as downloadable .MP3s without dropping too much change.  My only previous downloading experience is with 'Car Talk' and other radio podcasts.

Thanks for the answers.

Sorry, I'm the one guilty of getting off topic, not you.  I hope you'll come back here often.  There is lots of material for new listeners, as well as for fanatics.

Quote from: Palmetto on February 01, 2011, 01:07:25 PM
Excuse the noob.  I don't frequent many forums, and the one I'm on most often we not only excuse OT but actually encourage it.  My apologies for violating the local customs.

Now to see if I can find these as downloadable .MP3s without dropping too much change.  My only previous downloading experience is with 'Car Talk' and other radio podcasts.

Thanks for the answers.

Welcome, Palmetto. No apology needed. If you like, please feel free to say a little about yourself in the "Introductions" section of the board. You will find a number of people here whose experience with classical music is similar to yours.

And there is a lot of music available online to listen to for free (e.g., on YouTube) so you can try out different composers and pieces to see what appeals to you.

--Bruce

Aye, welcome Palmetto! And as it is an interesting question (I think), I took the off-topic tangent here (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17949.0.html).

Welcome!  The Brandenburg Concertos are an excellent place to begin exploring "our" music; they were my first great musical loves, and I still, after nearly forty years, enjoy them greatly every time. 8)

Be sure you know what you're getting when you look through collections.  Some are priceless, with complete long works in world-class performances; but many are merely snippets that give you little idea of the original music's depth and power. :P

Once you're hooked on Brandenburgs, there are plenty of other concertos to explore.  Try Vivaldi's The Seasons; or, for a style change, some of the Mozart concertos...

Quote from: jochanaan on February 02, 2011, 01:36:16 PMOnce you're hooked on Brandenburgs, there are plenty of other concertos to explore.  Try Vivaldi's The Seasons; or, for a style change, some of the Mozart concertos...

Here's another fun thing to try.  The Brandenburg Concertos were written in about 1720.  In 1937, Igor Stravinsky wrote a concerto which he described as his version of a "Brandenburg Concerto."  It uses a similar ensemble, but is a lot more modern in harmony and melody. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQszFzbxwbM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8_XpOcmB8I

Quote from: jochanaan on February 02, 2011, 01:36:16 PM
Welcome!  The Brandenburg Concertos are an excellent place to begin exploring "our" music; they were my first great musical loves, and I still, after nearly forty years, enjoy them greatly every time. 8)

Be sure you know what you're getting when you look through collections.  Some are priceless, with complete long works in world-class performances; but many are merely snippets that give you little idea of the original music's depth and power. :P

Once you're hooked on Brandenburgs, there are plenty of other concertos to explore.  Try Vivaldi's The Seasons; or, for a style change, some of the Mozart concertos...

Great advice, John.  Hope you are staying warm.

Wecome, Palmetto!

So far in this thread, no one has gotten to the question of which set of Brandenburgs to get, so I think I'll start there, as I own six sets of them.  I have sets conducted by Benjamin Britten, Neville Marriner, Helmuth Rilling, and Trevor Pinnock, and then two others by conductorless ensembles--Akademie fur Alte Musik, Berlin, and the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment.  My personal favorite is the one by Neville Marriner--a modern instruments recording which otherwise, however, adheres to the latest scholarship on how they are to be performed.  I would not, however, recommend it as anyone's first or only recording.  Marriner uses a horn instead of a trumpet in the second concerto.  To my ears, it does sound more persuasive and natural than those with a trumpet, but the fact is that recordings with trumpet are the usual way of doing it.  For that, I would recommend either the Akademie fur Alte Musik, Berlin, or the Trevor Pinnock set.

I do agree that concerti are, generally, a good way to begin branching off into other repertoire.  The Marsalis recording of the Haydn Trumpet Concerto is good, then there are Mozart piano concerti--there, I would recommend anything by pianist Clifford Curzon, and the Casadesus/Szell/Clevland Orchestra recordings of some of them.  Then the Grumiaux/Galeira recording of the Beethoven violin concerto, the Fleisher/Szell/Cleveland recording of the Beethoven piano concerti, the Szerying/Monteux recording of the Brahms Concerto, the 1951 Rostropovich/Talich/Czech Philharmonic recording of the Dvorak Cello Concerto.  Lots of others, too, but Mendelssohn, Schumann, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Bruich, Sibelius, and myriad other composers of concerti can wait.  By the time you get with these recordings I have recommended, you will be eager to branch out on your own in other directions as well as continuing to explore concerti.

Well, so far I'm not making much progress.  This is starting to feel more like an academic exercise than an enjoyable form of entertainment.

Perhaps I'm placing too much emphasis on repeated listening to a piece before forming an opinion.  Perhaps I'm just trying to hard to get something out of Brandenburg I at the expense of moving on and trying something else.   I listened to four different YouTube postings several times a week since my original post, then let it alone for a week until running through all four again today.  I like some performances better than others and I'm not displeased by any of them, but there's no 'bang' there; no imagery, no emotions inspired or conveyed.  I know I'm not going to like EVERYTHING any more than I would with any other genre of music, and maybe I started with something I may never actively like.  I'm not ready to give up but it's obviously time to move on to another work, either B II or something else.

Thanks for all the suggestions so far.

Not everyone likes Bach (or likes it immediately).  If you are interested in something with more dramatic impact, I'd try something by Beethoven (maybe 5th or 7th symphony) or perhaps Tchaikovsky (4th symphony or 5th symphony).  Something more modern would be Bartok (Concerto for Orchestra) Shostakovich 5th Symphony, or Stravinsky, (Rite of Spring, original title Le Sacre du Printemps).

Quote from: Palmetto on March 02, 2011, 12:13:38 PM
Perhaps I'm just trying to hard to get something out of Brandenburg I at the expense of moving on and trying something else...I'm not ready to give up but it's obviously time to move on to another work, either B II or something else.

My two cents (without knowing much about you or your listening habits): maybe the Brandenburgs just aren't what you're looking for at the moment? I'd set them aside and try them again later.

How about Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring? YouTube has a fine performance--that you can watch, as well as listen to--by Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Francisco Symphony, starting here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf0e_n49dcQ).

Just saw Scarpia's post, with more excellent ideas.  ;D

--Bruce

Per Bruce & Scarpia's excellent suggestions, here's a youtube clip of the complete Concerto for Orchestra:

http://www.youtube.com/v/jKl2X4ubs6c

Or Prokofiev's 3rd Piano Concerto:

http://www.youtube.com/v/KDfGBmbNbMw&feature=related

Or Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue:

http://www.youtube.com/v/ZmUHI2yTtVY&feature=related

Or Adams's Short Ride in a Fast Machine:

http://www.youtube.com/v/Pi4A9bPDvTc

Or RVW's Lark Ascending:

http://www.youtube.com/v/wbcuteYm-EA

or even:

http://www.youtube.com/v/fdjhNN0R-XU&feature=related

Quote from: Palmetto on March 02, 2011, 12:13:38 PM
Well, so far I'm not making much progress.  This is starting to feel more like an academic exercise than an enjoyable form of entertainment.

Perhaps I'm placing too much emphasis on repeated listening to a piece before forming an opinion.  Perhaps I'm just trying to hard to get something out of Brandenburg I at the expense of moving on and trying something else.   I listened to four different YouTube postings several times a week since my original post, then let it alone for a week until running through all four again today.  I like some performances better than others and I'm not displeased by any of them, but there's no 'bang' there; no imagery, no emotions inspired or conveyed.  I know I'm not going to like EVERYTHING any more than I would with any other genre of music, and maybe I started with something I may never actively like.  I'm not ready to give up but it's obviously time to move on to another work, either B II or something else.

Thanks for all the suggestions so far.

Hmmm...There are a couple of ways you can go if it's "starting to feel like an academic exercise."  One is simply to bask in the sounds, let the music wash over you, perhaps as you're doing something else.  Another is to check out technical aspects like, what happens to the opening theme once it's stated?  Is there any relation between, say, themes in the first and third movements?  Which trumpeters can really play that jaw-dropping part in Brandenburg 2 and make it effective?  What kind of an oboe sound works best for B1's second movement?  Such features were among the things that fascinated me with the Brandenburgs from the first. 8)

Quote from: jochanaan on March 02, 2011, 09:18:22 PM
Another is to check out technical aspects like, what happens to the opening theme once it's stated?  Is there any relation between, say, themes in the first and third movements?  Which trumpeters can really play that jaw-dropping part in Brandenburg 2 and make it effective?  What kind of an oboe sound works best for B1's second movement?  Such features were among the things that fascinated me with the Brandenburgs from the first. 8)

That sounds like an academic exercise to me. ;D

I'd go with your first suggestion. It's not a taboo to have the music play in the background while you're doing something else. Of course, once you're hooked on to the music, something else might have to wait for some other time. :)

Since you are looking for a starting place to get into the music, I'd suggest not too much repeat listening unless you really loved it and want to hear it again (meaning don't force it). Right now, I'd look to explore a bit. Some people have posted some good examples (especially the Gershwin and Rimsky-Korsakov). I would suggest a few more, trying to pick some different composers:

Strauss II - Die Fledermaus (the Bat): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqJK_s7I9EY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqJK_s7I9EY)
Holst - Mars, from the Planets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnmExy4tF4Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnmExy4tF4Q)
Tchaikovsky - Swan Lake excerpt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P_5pjHee5I&feature=channel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P_5pjHee5I&feature=channel)
Mozart - Overture from the Marriage of Figaro: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgSPCWSAACs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgSPCWSAACs)
Chopin - Ballade #1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6VxVmt6UOA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6VxVmt6UOA)
Beethoven - start of 3rd movement from Piano Concerto #5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4zpyTi_MTw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4zpyTi_MTw)
Dvorak - Slavonic Dances 1-3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7WSmygW-gM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7WSmygW-gM)
Elgar - First movement from Cello Concerto: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5C99JyP2ns (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5C99JyP2ns)
Gliere - Russian Sailor's Dance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJgZ-GiPlvM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJgZ-GiPlvM)
Brahms - First movement of Piano Trio #1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj26RzWKq38 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj26RzWKq38)

If you don't like something, just go on to the next one. Let us know if you do come across something you like (whether posted here or on your own).

We've already determined I'm not afraid of looking ignorant so, ...

What's a theme?  Is it different from a melody?  What can happen to it?
Oboes make different sounds?  I presume you mean other than individual notes and chords.

Sorry, but I'm with Opus106; you're making this sound more like an academic exercise, not less like one.  I have no musical training.  My only exposure to what I'll call 'orchestral instruments' is via popular media - movie soundtracks, commercials, etc.  I don't know that I can differentiate an oboe from a bassoon from a french horn when they're played individually, much less with multiple other instruments (yet).  Unfortunately, I'll  have to ask you to dumb down your terminology.

In the meantime I'm going to try the suggested pieces, taking the approach of listening for something that grabs me immediately instead of over time.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 03, 2011, 03:42:45 AM
We've already determined I'm not afraid of looking ignorant so, ...

What's a theme?  What can happen to it?
Oboes make different sounds?  I presume you mean other than individual notes and chords.

Sorry, but I'm with Opus106; you're making this sound more like an academic exercise, not less like one.  I have no musical training.  My only exposure to what I'll call 'orchestral instruments' is via popular media - movie soundtracks, commercials, etc.  Unfortunately, I'll  have to ask you to dumb down your suggestions.

In the meantime, I'm going to try the suggested pieces, taking the approach of listening for something that grabs me immediately instead of over time.

All good questions. A theme is the main melody and the theme can change or develop as the piece goes on.  Wikipedia writes, "[A] theme is the material, usually a recognizable melody, upon which part or all of a composition is based."

I think jochanaan was trying to give you different ideas on how to listen to the Bach piece, but I would put that suggestion to the side for the time being. I'm not entirely sure what he means by the different Oboe sound myself, so we'll both learn on that one.

EDIT: And don't hesitate to ask questions - happy to help. Besides, we don't charge much!  ;)

Quote from: Palmetto on March 03, 2011, 03:42:45 AM
What's a theme?  Is it different from a melody?  What can happen to it?
Oboes make different sounds?  I presume you mean other than individual notes and chords.

I will not attempt to answer your questions, but I will recommend you to listen to these BBC programmes...

Rhythm: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0401slat1of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0401slat1of4.ram)
Melody: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0402slat2of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0402slat2of4.ram)
Harmony: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0403slat3of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0403slat3of4.ram)
Tone Colour: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0404slat4of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0404slat4of4.ram)

And when you have the time, pretty much the rest of the episodes as well: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/listeninglibrary.shtml (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/listeninglibrary.shtml)

In the first four links, conductor Leonard Slatkin, along with one of the BBC orchestras, helps the beginner to understand these basic elements of western music. These were based on the book by Aaron Copland (a well-known American composer), What to Listen for in Music?. I have a copy, but beyond a point I did not find it useful, as he tends to use excerpts from sheet music/score, which I don't know how to read yet. And an advantage of the programmes over the book is that examples like an excerpt from a symphony are performed then and there, so that it becomes easier to grasp what Slatkin is talking about.

QuoteMy only exposure to what I'll call 'orchestral instruments' is via popular media - movie soundtracks, commercials, etc.  I don't know that I can differentiate an oboe from a bassoon from a french horn when they're played individually, much less with multiple other instruments (yet).

I didn't either, when I started listening to this music about five years ago. Familiarity solves the problem. Listen to the music, watch a few videos on YouTube to see who is playing what, read a little about the instruments, and in no time, you should be able to tell instruments apart.

Apparently it's not Windows Media Player.  I assume an .MP3 player won't know what to do with it either.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 03, 2011, 06:28:50 AM
Apparently it's not Windows Media Player.  I assume an .MP3 player won't know what to do with it either.

That's "Real Media" -- used to be a standard till got cluttered with junkware, still used by many streaming sites.  See http://www.real.com/realplayer/affiliate

Quote from: Palmetto on March 03, 2011, 06:28:50 AM
Apparently it's not Windows Media Player.  I assume an .MP3 player won't know what to do with it either.

It's Real Audio, unfortunately; if you have Real Media Player, it should work. However, I remember someone somewhere posting the entire archive in mp3. I'll post the links if I find them.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 03, 2011, 06:28:50 AM
Apparently it's not Windows Media Player.  I assume an .MP3 player won't know what to do with it either.

You can download real media player for free.

I found the links at SymphonyShare, but the files have been deleted. But the person who posted them has most of the programmes on his blog: http://histoiresoldat.blogspot.com/search/label/BBC%20Radio3%20Discovering%20music

Just as an aside about media players: I've been using this one from VideoLAN (www.videolan.org) for about two years now, and it will play seemingly anything. I use it for both audio and video files, and it's free to download.

--Bruce

Opus106's links led me to Google 'BBC Radio 3 Discovering Music'.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006tn54

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/listeninglibrary.shtml

Apparently 'full content' programs have a 1-week shelf life, but they open in a separate browser with no additional software.  Coincidentally, one still available this week looks at ... the Brandenburgs.  I'll give it a whirl to see if that helps with my past month's labors, then check some of the older, limited content shows that may correspond to everyone's recent recommendations.

Thanks for your patience.

I've tried Il Barone Scarpia's suggestion of Beethoven's 7th symphony, along with the Youtube videos Brewski and Sherman Peabody provided links to.  Maybe it was the Columbia University recording of Beethoven, or maybe I just don't know how to juggle the multiple volume controls across Windows, YouTube, and my speakers.  I'm constantly fiddling with the volume to either increase sounds I can't hear or keep from blowing out my eardrums.  I admit this is complicated by trying to keep the beeps of incoming e-mail and other system sounds at a moderate level.  I seem able to redirect Windows Media Player to my headphones while leaving all other sounds on my external speakers, but it doesn't look like I can do the same with YouTube / Firefox.

I don't remember having this trouble with the Brandenburg I via YouTube.

Any suggestions?  I realize this more of a technology question than a musical one, but I assume some of y'all have more experience with some of these tools than I do.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 08:29:16 AM
I've tried Il Barone Scarpia's suggestion of Beethoven's 7th symphony, along with the Youtube videos Brewski and Sherman Peabody provided links to.  Maybe it was the Columbia University recording of Beethoven, or maybe I just don't know how to juggle the multiple volume controls across Windows, YouTube, and my speakers.  I'm constantly fiddling with the volume to either increase sounds I can't hear or keep from blowing out my eardrums.  I admit this is complicated by trying to keep the beeps of incoming e-mail and other system sounds at a moderate level.  I seem able to redirect Windows Media Player to my headphones while leaving all other sounds on my external speakers, but it doesn't look like I can do the same with YouTube / Firefox.

I don't remember having this trouble with the Brandenburg I via YouTube.

Any suggestions?  I realize this more of a technology question than a musical one, but I assume some of y'all have more experience with some of these tools than I do.

That is one of the main glories of "classical" music, dramatic dynamic contrasts.   Music that goes from quiet passages with a few instruments playing, to thundering climaxes with a hundred instruments (including kettle drums, bass drum and cymbals, maybe a gong) playing for all they are worth.  It is very different from pop music, where music is electronically processed to suppress any fluctuations in volume.   

Ideally you should listen in a quiet environment and adjust the volume so that the loudest passages are as loud as you are comfortable with and the soft passages are still audible.  In a noisy environment, fiddling with the volume control may be necessary.   The right equipment can also be a big factor.  The most cost effective way to get good sound from a computer is typically a moderately priced set of headphones and an external sound card that attaches by USB.

On an unrelated note, I think this one might qualify for best use of a gong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cryf6nruD_I

What do you consider moderately priced?  Until now, my prime criteria for headphones has an unshielded cord to improve FM reception and a solid fit so they don't shift or fall off when I'm working in the yard.  Audio quality isn't much of a factor for 'Car Talk', news programming, or other 'listen once and discard' formats.

As to pop music being less dynamic in volume, I think that statement might be stereotyping as much as saying classical music is dull.  Many (unfortunately not enough) pop musicians have come from classical roots.  Pat Benetar studied opera at a conservatory level.  Gods know Jim Steinman has listened to way too much Wagner.  Barry Manilow, among others, has had pop hits with adaptations of classical pieces.  I'd be greatly disappointed to learn that of first chair violinists who haven't at least occasionally tried a bit of country fiddling, or of a concert pianist who doesn't sneak in a little 'Great Balls of Fire" when warming up.

My apologies for adding additional remarks after Scarpia had already quoted this.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 09:43:43 AM
What do you consider moderately priced?  Until now, my prime criteria for headphones has an unshielded cord to improve FM reception and a solid fit so they don't shift or fall off when I'm working in the yard.  Audio quality isn't much of a factor for 'Car Talk', news programming, or other 'listen once and discard' formats.

I'm a fanatic and have a pair that cost me $300 (probably there are others here who paid a lot more).  But I also have headphones in the $20-50 range that are pretty good. 

The best site I know for seeing what is available is www.headphone.com

The site has reviews, ratings, and explanations of different styles of headphone.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 09:43:43 AM

As to pop music being less dynamic in volume, I think that statement might be stereotyping as much as saying classical music is dull.  Many (unfortunately not enough) pop musicians have come from classical roots.  Pat Benetar studied opera at a conservatory level.  Gods know Jim Steinman has listened to way too much Wagner.  Barry Manilow, among others, has had pop hits with adaptations of classical pieces.

No, pop music is less dynamic in volume than classical. Can you name a Barry Manilow, Pat Benatar or Meatloaf tune that has any significant dynamic variation at all? Certainly none that would be played by a Top 40 station.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 09:43:43 AM
What do you consider moderately priced?  Until now, my prime criteria for headphones has an unshielded cord to improve FM reception and a solid fit so they don't shift or fall off when I'm working in the yard.  Audio quality isn't much of a factor for 'Car Talk', news programming, or other 'listen once and discard' formats.

Price is less important as there are good headphones at every price point. A good resource is head-fi forum if you are interested in getting advice. There are a lot of helpful and knowledgeable people over there.

That said, you could get a Senn PX100 or low level Koss for $30-50. It wil be a nice step up at a reasonable price. Alternatively, there is the Senn HD 595, a very all around can that might suit you better in some ways as it is built to be all around (at least marketed that way) and can be had for $150. But I would suggest setting your price first (if you choose to get anything) and then match the phone to your price level. 

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 04, 2011, 09:53:18 AM
The best site I know for seeing what is available is www.headphone.com

Very helpful, indeed! I was just in the process of trying to pick some portable headphones for use with my iPhone.

Quote from: mc ukrneal on March 04, 2011, 10:34:18 AM
Price is less important as there are good headphones at every price point. A good resource is head-fi forum if you are interested in getting advice. There are a lot of helpful and knowledgeable people over there.

That said, you could get a Senn PX100 or low level Koss for $30-50. It wil be a nice step up at a reasonable price. Alternatively, there is the Senn HD 595, a very all around can that might suit you better in some ways as it is built to be all around (at least marketed that way) and can be had for $150. But I would suggest setting your price first (if you choose to get anything) and then match the phone to your price level. 

Question: amazon has the Senn MM60 on sale for $45, down from $129. I am considering these for use with my iPhone. Can't stand the stupid earbuds. I hear the MM60 is essentially a mobile version (with mic and iphone music/phone control) of thr PX100. Does it produce a realistic sound? The one thing I can't stand at any price point is artifically boosted, boomy bass.

Quote from: Mensch on March 04, 2011, 10:36:47 AM
Question: amazon has the Senn MM60 on sale for $45, down from $129. I am considering these for use with my iPhone. Can't stand the stupid earbuds. I hear the MM60 is essentially a mobile version (with mic and iphone music/phone control) of thr PX100. Does it produce a realistic sound? The one thing I can't stand at any price point is artifically boosted, boomy bass.

Sorry, I'm just not familiar enough with that one to comment. I have the PX100 and love it though if that helps.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 09:43:43 AMAs to pop music being less dynamic in volume, I think that statement might be stereotyping as much as saying classical music is dull.  Many (unfortunately not enough) pop musicians have come from classical roots.  Pat Benetar studied opera at a conservatory level.  Gods know Jim Steinman has listened to way too much Wagner.  Barry Manilow, among others, has had pop hits with adaptations of classical pieces.  I'd be greatly disappointed to learn that of first chair violinists who haven't at least occasionally tried a bit of country fiddling, or of a concert pianist who doesn't sneak in a little 'Great Balls of Fire" when warming up.

I am not trying to make a value judgement regarding pop music (I've listened to a lot of it) just making the observation that the vast majority of pop music proceeds at a fairly uniform volume level.  Certainly there are songs (like the classic 'Stairway to Heaven') which start with a solo guitar before the rhythm section kicks in, for example, but there you have the piece getting twice or four times as loud.  But I do not know of any pop music which goes from, for example, a solo flute playing softly to a 100 piece orchestra with every instrument playing as loudly as physically possible.   Classical recordings try to approximate this, but cannot duplicate the experience of being in the concert hall.   As you noted yourself, these dramatic changes in volume strain audio equipment in a way that pop music doesn't.

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 04, 2011, 10:57:13 AM
I am not trying to make a value judgement regarding pop music, just making the observation that the vast majority of pop music proceeds at a fairly uniform volume level.  Certainly there are songs (like the classic 'Stairway to Heaven') which, for example, start with a solo guitar before the rhythm section kicks in, and so forth, but there you have the piece getting twice or four times as loud.  But I do not know of any pop music which goes from, for example, a solo flute playing softly to a 100 piece orchestra with every instrument playing as loudly as physically possible.   Classical recordings try to approximate this, but cannot duplicate the experience of being in the concert hall.   As you noted yourself, these dramatic changes in volume strain audio equipment in a way that pop music doesn't.

It's not just the difference from ppp to fff that taxes the equipment. Orchestral music is the most sonically complex stuff out there. The variety of colors it can produce (in the hands of good musicians and conductors) is much larger than what you even find in very inventive rock music like Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody. It takes really exceptional audio equipment to reproduce a full orchestral sound without congestion in tutti passages.

Benitar - try "Hell is for Children".

Meat Loaf - go with "Objects in the Rear View Mirror" or "For Crying Out Loud".  (No, these didn't get much radio play; the problem with Steinman is most of his stuff is too long for Top 40 radio formats)  "I'd Do Anything for Love" went Top 10 in the US.  Heck, if I had a better grasp of movements, I'd try to make a case that "Paradise" can be broken into three.

Manilow - okay, it's been a while since I've listened to any Barry.  A bit of Googling brought "Could It Be Magic" back to mind.  It's the one I was trying to remember in the first place, the one that opens and closes with a bit of Chopin.

I'll toss in Simon and Garfunkel's "The Boxer" at no extra charge.  I still get goose bumps when the final layer of tubas kick in at the end, even though I know they're coming and they only get the same note eight times.

I'm not here to make a case that any of these will have the lasting appeal of 'Ode to Joy', just that seeing popular music disparaged en masse strikes me as narrow-minded as regarding 'classical music' as the realm of college music departments and stuffy upper crust matrons (see Margaret Dumont in "A Night at the Opera").  Yeah, there's a lot of fluff but that doesn't mean it's all the same.  Geez, I'll bet even Beethoven has some pieces that don't get played very often because they just aren't considered his 'A' game.  Even Shakespeare wrote stuff just to put food on the table.  (Put down the tar and pitchforks.)

Maybe I'm not ready for something that goes from a flute solo to 100 instruments and back.  I suspect I'd be scrabbling for the volume control regardless of the quality of the speakers.  I've been known to wear ear plugs when attending some pop or rock concerts that are more about the experience than the music.  I certainly wear them full time when attending auto races, where some bare-eared fans find the roar of the engines every bit as beautiful as anything Bach wrote.

Perhaps I need to seek forms where the variation is more gradual or over less wide a range.  Say, gregorian chants or piano solos.

Oh, and Mensch, what do you mean by 'ppp' and 'fff'?

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 11:47:50 AM
Maybe I'm not ready for something that goes from a flute solo to 100 instruments and back.

Then you'll be forgoing some of the killer stuff.  How about one trumpet to 100 piece orchestra.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj6_MSF4bPA

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 11:47:50 AM
Oh, and Mensch, what do you mean by 'ppp' and 'fff'?

p means piano (softly) f means forte (loud).  pp means pianissimo (very soft), ff means fortissimo (very loud).  fff is like a specially designed marshal amp that goes to 11.   :D

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 11:47:50 AM
Maybe I'm not ready for something that goes from a flute solo to 100 instruments and back.  I suspect I'd be scrabbling for the volume control regardless of the quality of the speakers.  I've been known to wear ear plugs when attending some pop or rock concerts that are more about the experience than the music.  I certainly wear them full time when attending auto races, where some bare-eared fans find the roar of the engines every bit as beautiful as anything Bach wrote.

Perhaps I need to seek forms where the variation is more gradual or over less wide a range.  Say, gregorian chants or piano solos.

Oh, and Mensch, what do you mean by 'ppp' and 'fff'?

ppp and fff are markings used on sheet music. They tell the performer how loudly or quietly to play. ppp is very, very soft and fff is very,very lound. The 'p' stands for piano and the 'f' for forte. It is a standard marking in music that is still used today.

Of the ones I listed for you, perhaps try the Chopin (piano piece) or Brahms (chamber piece). These will have less of the issue you were complaining about.

By the way, another super piece to start off with, and a brilliant piece, is Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf. It is a piece that tells a fairy tale type story to music and narration (about animals). It uses different, short melodies for each character in the story. It is often used with kids, but I think it is one of the most brilliant pieces ever written and is wonderful for any age.

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 04, 2011, 11:53:17 AM
p means piano (softly) f means forte (loud).  pp means pianissimo (very soft), ff means fortissimo (very loud).  fff is like a specially designed marshal amp that goes to 11.   :D

And ppp is on the verge of inaudibility. It's also a difference between older analog and newer digital recordings. Older recordings have a compressed dynamic range, whereas some newer digital recordings have a huge difference between the softest and loudest bits (Barenboim's Mahler 5 comes to mind), such that unless you turn it up you can't hear the soft parts, but the loud parts will blow your neighbors a few blocks farther. In other words, it more accurately replicates the real concert experience.  ;D

Aw, c'mon!  I've still got training wheels on!

"Marty, that was very ... interesting music."

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 11:22:15 AM
Benitar - try "Hell is for Children".

Meat Loaf - go with "Objects in the Rear View Mirror" or "For Crying Out Loud".  (No, these didn't get much radio play; the problem with Steinman is most of his stuff is too long for Top 40 radio formats)  "I'd Do Anything for Love" went Top 10 in the US.  Heck, if I had a better grasp of movements, I'd try to make a case that "Paradise" can be broken into three.

Manilow - okay, it's been a while since I've listened to any Barry.  A bit of Googling brought "Could It Be Magic" back to mind.  It's the one I was trying to remember in the first place, the one that opens and closes with a bit of Chopin.

I'll toss in Simon and Garfunkel's "The Boxer" at no extra charge.  I still get goose bumps when the final layer of tubas kick in at the end, even though I know they're coming and they only get the same note eight times.

I'm not here to make a case that any of these will have the lasting appeal of 'Ode to Joy', just that seeing popular music disparaged en masse strikes me as narrow-minded as regarding 'classical music' as the realm of college music departments and stuffy upper crust matrons (see Margaret Dumont in "A Night at the Opera").  Yeah, there's a lot of fluff but that doesn't mean it's all the same.  Geez, I'll bet even Beethoven has some pieces that don't get played very often because they just aren't considered his 'A' game.  Even Shakespeare wrote stuff just to put food on the table.  (Put down the tar and pitchforks.)

The music you've mentioned has limited dynamic variety. There might be changes in intensity, but not in actual volume. If there were, this stuff would never get played on the radio. That isn't a value judgement. It's not a disparaging statement. It's just stating the way things are.
  I enjoy all types of music and probably listen to more pop/rock than I do classical. Simon and Garfunkel are high on my list of favorites. I've played in bands that covered Pat Benatar and Meatloaf as well as in classical orchestras and it's clear to me that one of the many major differences between pop and classical is the dynamic palette. Even Manilow's "Could it be Magic" based on Chopin's Prelude in C Minor is pretty even in dynamic level throughout.
To make sure my memory wasn't failing me, I just leafed through several books of pop sheet music I've accumulated over the years, and as I  remembered, there are virtually no dynamic markings at all. Pick up any orchestral score, and you'll find all kinds of dynamic markings (pp. ff, sfz, cresc., dim., etc.) attesting to the importance of these elements to the composition.

Quote from: Mensch on March 04, 2011, 11:04:43 AM
It's not just the difference from ppp to fff that taxes the equipment. Orchstral music is the most sonically complex stuff out there. The variety of colors it can produce (in the hads of good musicians and conductors) is much larger than what you even find in very inventive rock music like Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody. It takes really exceptional audio equipment to reproduce a full orchestral sound without congestion in tutti passages.

And this doesn't take into account the fact that virtually all pop recordings these days suffer from horrendous dynamic compression.  The phenomenon is well documented.  See The Loudness Wars: Why Music Sounds Worse (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122114058).

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 11:22:15 AM
Benitar - try "Hell is for Children".

Guess I'm not the only one here who likes this--pretty damned kickass stuff for mainstream rock in its day!

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 04, 2011, 11:53:17 AM
Then you'll be forgoing some of the killer stuff.  How about one trumpet to 100 piece orchestra.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj6_MSF4bPA

Exactly what came to mind! :D


If I may be permitted to interject in this wonderful thread, Palmetto, as a listener frequently going from classical (which comprises about 98% of my collection), to genres such as black metal and early electronica, what has always distinguished my classical listening from anything else is what you could call its dialectic dimension.

Otherwise put, classical music is, more often than any other kind of music, arranged as a discussion: an argument.

You know the opening bar - the first few notes - of Beethoven's 5th, right? Everyone does. But not many outside the classical crowd realise how that theme is only one half of the equation. There's two sides of the argument! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEhF-7suDsM)

Now, you'll rarely get such obvious demonstration (or such obvious presentation, musically) of a classical 'argument'. But almost all classical music contains these musical dialogues, which pop can also contain, but is not defined by.

Pet Sounds wouldn't be nearly as awesome without all those (instrumental) voices Brian Wilson came up with.

But Beethoven's 5th wouldn't exist at all, if a tune was all it was.


On another note, quite related to my extra-classical musical interests, all music is about sound.

That is, about the experience of sound. In some cases, this is a deliberately beautiful experience. In others, a deliberately ugly one. Yet in every case, there is something aurally interesting going on, or we wouldn't call it music*.

Classical music, apart from (but hand-in-hand with) the formal elements, is about sound, in its purest, prettiest, ugliest, loneliest, busiest, quietest, or loudest form. In many instances, it explores sound for its own sake.

That's a very big part of why classical music is so dynamically extreme - quiet, then loud, then quiet again, perhaps. Listen to the Mahler piece linked above: the trumpet blurts out its fanfare, and then the music crashes down on it.

Imagine that same crash with just more voices coming in, around the same volume. It's not a crash, is it?


Another example: you've tried your hand at the 1st Brandenburg, and saw how performances can differ in length.

Although it's not the only reason, sometimes playing something slower, or faster, can also change the way it sounds. What was once lazy and plodding becomes insistent, even angry; or nervous, anxious, like in Mahler's music.



All this must come with the caveat that the appreciation of music, the 'whether-you-like-it', as well as the 'how-you-like-it" is a very subjective thing. Some people just don't like loud sounds, period. Some people only like loud sounds!

For some of us, as you've probably seen from the various responses you've received, classical music is a lifetime journey, an adventure; for some, like jochanaan, a vocation. Try to get to know it like you would a new friend.

Most importantly, give it time. If a piece doesn't do it now, move on. It may do it later. Or never! Sometimes, it's just a matter of adjusting your expectations to the context: you don't look for tunes in black metal. But since classical pieces hardly ever come with tags - 'this has tunes', 'this is about math, really' - you really have to listen to find out!





* Since someone is bound to notice eventually, and point it out: I don't think Cage's 4'33'' fails this criterion.

S., I can only express how I hear it, using the vocabulary I have.  If you say it's changing in intensity more than volume, I'll have to get back to you if / when I know the difference.

R., I can follow where you're going with Pet Sounds, and carry it over to the Carpenters, Wilson Phillips, and other demonstrations of vocal pyrotechnics.  I don't know how to apply that to instruments yet.  Maybe I'm missing something, but right now that crashing that many respondents enjoy I find jarring and disruptive.  I tried the Mahler piece.  I didn't think it spread over as wide a volume range as the pieces I noted earlier (especially Beethoven's 7th) but still adjusted the volume control frequently.  To abuse your 'argument' analogy, it's like one participant is presenting his position calmly while his opponent chooses TO SUDDENLY SCREAM AT YOU!!!  (See how unpleasant that could seem?  ;D )

"...you don't look for tunes in black metal."

I've never heard the term before today, and the Wikipedia description gave me plenty of interest in maintaining my ignorance.  But you won't run me off that easily.  There's got to be something here that will make me say "Holy $#!+" and beat the replay button to death.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 03:56:55 PM
o abuse your 'argument' analogy, it's like one participant is presenting his position calmly while his opponent chooses TO SUDDENLY SCREAM AT YOU!!!  (See how unpleasant that could seem?  ;D )

Hah! That is a fairly apt description of what I perceive as Mahler's intent - as well as a paraphrase of what someone once told me, to whom I played a recording of Mahler's 5th. The same person now swears by the piece.

Without wishing to make this (yet another - I can almost hear someone say) thread about Mahler, the same piece, the 5th symphony, contains this movement here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAHweK524Wc) [edit: of which this is an extract], a bit later on. Quite the contrast, isn't it?

(That's a good example of why 'movements' are useful: they cut up a work into parts, giving it macro-structure.)

Quote from: Palmetto on March 04, 2011, 03:56:55 PM
"...you don't look for tunes in black metal."

I've never heard the term before today, and the Wikipedia description gave me plenty of interest in maintaining my ignorance.  But you won't run me off that easily.  There's got to be something here that will make me say "Holy $#!+" and beat the replay button to death.

You will typically find even more derision addressed towards extreme forms of metal than you will towards pop!

To me, however, black metal in specific - the Scandinavian-born 'ugly' metal subgenre - is like listening to structurally minimalistic symphonic music (not unlike, say, certain English compositions for string ensemble) played very fast in drums and electric guitars, with superimposed effects and lyrics no one, including the singers, is really interested in.

This is a fairly hardcore example (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfCHwsp9bSc&feature=related) - this is more traditional (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgQRRI9goFg). Phasing out black metal vocals is about as involving an exercise as following Bach's counterpoint (i.e. juxtaposed musical voices), sometimes! Certainly not everyone's cup of tea.


Going back on topic, I think you'll find that a lot of the things classical listeners tend to talk about as if they listened, say, to Bruckner's chorales in their mother's womb (which they may have, admittedly) are all products of experience.

Speaking from experience (and a casual, if consistent professional interest in music as a cognitive phenomenon), many features of music as complex as classical may only 'resolve' in your head after quite a bit of listening.

It's quite a surprising, almost cartoon-like 'pop-up' effect when you notice something that previously just wasn't there.

Quote from: Opus106 on March 03, 2011, 05:34:18 AM
Rhythm: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0401slat1of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0401slat1of4.ram)
Melody: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0402slat2of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0402slat2of4.ram)
Harmony: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0403slat3of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0403slat3of4.ram)
Tone Colour: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0404slat4of4.ram (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/ram/cdm0404slat4of4.ram)

I was looking forward to hearing these this evening.  Unfortunately, my experience with RealPlayer was less than satisfactory.  Clicking the links started the app, but nothing happened.  The file name was displayed at the bottom, but the progress bar never moved and the 'time elapsed' never changed.  I clicked the 'play / pause' button several times, closed and reopened the app, clicked the link repeatedly; nothing.  When I uninstalled it a survey opened in my browser, so at least I could relate my problems to them.  Most discouraging.  My attempts to find these in MP3 were fruitless.

However, somewhere above Opus106 also linked to other content from the same site in MP3 form.  I pulled down the discussion of Holst's 'The Planets' and spent a pleasant hour learning the depths of my ignorance.  That's why I wanted to listen to the above content this evening.  I didn't follow the discussions of beats, measures, times, or other technical terms.  (I also think Holst's interpretation of heavenly bodies was based more on the gods they were named after than their physical characteristics, but that's a whole 'nuther conversation and I'm looking at them with 100 years of additional astronomical knowledge.  He does seem to have nailed Mercury and Neptune.)

I'm going to take the suggestion of whoever mentioned 'Peter and the Wolf' and see if I can find it.  I think at this point I'm not ready for 'great music'; I need 'easy to grasp music'.  I want to go from frozen pizza to maybe putting jarred sauce and toppings on a ready-made crust.  I'm not prepared to grind flour, make sauce from fresh tomatoes, or age mozzarella yet.

EDITED - Found it for free, and even I've heard of conductor Leopold Stokowski.

http://www.archive.org/details/PeterAndTheWolf_753

Quote from: Renfield on March 04, 2011, 04:58:05 PM
You will typically find even more derision addressed towards extreme forms of metal than you will towards pop!

And often equally enough from listeners of extreme forms of metal towards pop.  ;D

Quote from: Palmetto on March 05, 2011, 04:45:47 PM
I was looking forward to hearing these this evening.  Unfortunately, my experience with RealPlayer was less than satisfactory.  Clicking the links started the app, but nothing happened.  The file name was displayed at the bottom, but the progress bar never moved and the 'time elapsed' never changed.  I clicked the 'play / pause' button several times, closed and reopened the app, clicked the link repeatedly; nothing.

Just a guess here: a slow Internet connection might have hampered with the streaming*. However, if you were able to watch YouTube videos at the same time, that shouldn't have been a problem. Have you tried VLC, per Bruce's (Brewski) suggestion?



*EDIT: Scratch that. I just remembered that you work as a network support technician. :-[

I have now, but it behaved the same way.  Just for giggles I told Windows Firewall to allow VLC out; I'd also done that with RealPlayer but it didn't affect it either.  TaskManager doesn't show VLC doing anything in terms of disk activity or I/O.  I get no error messages, it just sits there

No, I don't have any problems with YouTube videos.  I didn't have problems with Am I just not waiting long enough?  I'm expecting to see something after at least five minutes.  While I deal with these systems for a semi-living, multimedia and players doesn't come up at work.  I've never had reason or interest in these type of applications before.

A-HA! It's not the players, it's the links or the content!  I had already been to

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/discoveringmusic/listeninglibrary.shtml

and tried the links for these four topics with no success.  This time I tried some of the others and noticed a pattern.  I had no problems with anything linked from /discoveringmusic/pip, but it's 'hit or miss' with links to /discoveringmusic/ram.  More specifically, it looks like those programs that are 45 minutes long come through okay, but those that RealPlayer or VLC display as 1:15:02 in length don't work for me.

Palmetto, do you have a classical music radio station in your area? Everyone here is trying to be helpful, but I think we've made this whole process too confusing and intimidating. My suggestion is, tune in to your local radio station or find one to listen to here:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,338.0.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,338.0.html)il

Then just listen until you find something that catches your ear and explore it further. Up until a couple of weeks ago, I had never heard of Jack Gallagher until my local station played one of his pieces that blew me away. Oftentimes, if I hear something in my car that appeals to me, I jot it down so I don't forget about it and I check into later. The best part is, it won't cost you any money to find something that really grabs you.

The local public radio stations run several hours of classical content daily.  Unfortunately, that programming doesn't overlap with my commute.  I've run their Internet feed at work over the last couple of weeks, but I can't always stay put while a piece finishes.  It's a good start though.  If nothing else it's building my working vocabulary!

Thanks.

Quote from: Szykneij on March 06, 2011, 03:44:47 PM
Palmetto, do you have a classical music radio station in your area? Everyone here is trying to be helpful, but I think we've made this whole process too confusing and intimidating. My suggestion is, tune in to your local radio station or find one to listen to here:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,338.0.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,338.0.html)il

Then just listen until you find something that catches your ear and explore it further.

Indeed a good idea. I say that to every person who is new to the music and does not know where to start. It was the way in which I began, and even today the way of radio station programming affects how I listen to my CDs, to some extent! Since I joined thread rather late, when it was in the middle of some another discussion, it never occurred to me to tell Palmetto about classical radio stations. However, it's good to know that he already listens to them.

I've been "discovering" good music via the radio--especially in the car--for 40 years.  These days I'm lucky enough to live in the broadcast area of Sacramento's Capital Public Radio.  KXPR, the classical side, is available via streaming at http://www.capradio.org/stream/aplayer.aspx?stationid=2

It never occurred to me to try the stream from radio stations other than my local one.  Member loyalty, I guess.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 07, 2011, 06:15:47 AM
It never occurred to me to try the stream from radio stations other than my local one.  Member loyalty, I guess.

Here's a listing of several from around the world: http://classicalwebcast.com/

Some other sources of note are the Netherlands Radio 4 and their free album preview player plaatpaal: http://viertakt.radio4.nl/plaatpaal-overzicht/1/plaatpaal.html , NPR classical http://www.npr.org/music/genres/classical/ , and Rhapsody http://www.rhapsody.com/home.html and Last http://www.last.fm/music

Quote from: Palmetto on March 07, 2011, 06:15:47 AM
It never occurred to me to try the stream from radio stations other than my local one.  Member loyalty, I guess.

Also, about being tied down to the computer to listen to streams, you may want to download podcasts (I don't have anything in particular in mind, though a search might help) which you can then load onto an MP3 player.

It appears I'm too ignorant to use VLC.  Despite my earlier perceived success, I'm now unable open any .RAM content.  Since I'm finding multiple resouces that I'd really like to view, I'm going to wander through the application's tutorial and see if I can get it to do something with non-classical content.

Thanks to everyone who responded to my initial questions.  Let me get over this technological bump and I'll be back in touch.  In the meantime, rest assured that I understand classical music doesn't include 'Rock Me, Amadeus'.

   One problem with listening to different recordings of the same classical works is that you may get accustomed to the tempos of the first recording you hear of a piece, and when you hear different recordings, the others may seem either too fast or too slow to you. 
   But with repeated hearings of the other recordings, you can get accustomed to the ones taken at different speeds.
   This has happened to me more than a few times in the past. But after more than 40 years of listening since I was a teenager, I'm now much more flexible,and can tolerate different tempos.
   Other Bach works you should enjoy are the four Suites for orchestra, which are somewhat similar tot he Brandenburgs in that the different movements use different dance rhythms, but  there's no use of a solo instruments being accompanies by the larger group of instruments,except for the second suite,which features a solo flute.
   Or the Goldberg Variations ,which can vbe played either on harpsichord or piano , and are an elaborate theme followed by many different cvariations on that theme.  Supposedly , there was a harpsichordist by the name of Goldberg who was employed by a Russian diplomat in Germany to play for him at night while he suffered from insomnia, and Bach wrote this famous work for Goldberg to play for the insomniac diplomat.
   There is a famous recording by the legendary GlennGould from the 1950s which many consider the one to have,or the later digital remake from the early 80s,which not every one likes as much.
   Or you can hear on of the many on harpsichord.  Try Gould's famous recordings of the other Bach keyboard works too. 
   Or the famous mass in D Minor, which is for orchestra,chorus and vocal soloists, and is a setting of the Roman Catholic mass . The text of the mass has also been set by many other composers for orchestra,chorus and soloists,such as Mozart,Haydn and others.  This is a solemn and majestic work. 
   A good website for reliable CD recommendations in classicstoday.com, which has reviews every day of the latest recordings and access to earlier ones, plus recommeded recordings by expert critics. 
   Welcome to the wonderful world of classical music ! You'll never regret entering it ! 

I've gone through the first 15 or so of these:

http://www.gardnermuseum.org/music/listen/podcasts

but I haven't found anything that sets me on fire.  I've tried listening to one piece repeatedly, tried going through a list like this one, tried streaming public radio in the background while I work.  Nothing has offended me to the point of reaching for a mute / kill button, although I don't know if I like the metallic sound of a harpsichord.  But nothing is affecting me beyond just being pleasant sounds.  It's not work, but so far I've found nothing I've been moved to listen to a second time, much less spend money on.

Palmetto, thanks for posting those Gardner Museum podcasts, which I didn't know about.

Maybe chamber music just isn't what you're looking for? Just for fun, see how this strikes you, a piece by Iannis Xenakis called Metastaseis 1953-54) for 61 musicians. The reason I mention it is that people with rock music backgrounds sometimes seem to gravitate toward his music. If you don't like it, no worries, but it's quite different from those Gardner concerts.

--Bruce

http://www.youtube.com/v/SZazYFchLRI

What it sounds like to me is this initial poster doesn't want to make the effort in getting to know this music.

To the poster:

There's nothing wrong with asking people questions about the music or getting recommendations, but, in the end, you have to put in the time and research that is absolutely required to getting to know a piece of music. Apart of this comes from actually taking the time to listen to a piece of music. You don't like Bach, that's okay, I'm not a big fan either, but take note of all the suggestions that have been made to you. Listening to classical music isn't like listening to a "pop hit." It requires your attention both intellectually and emotionally. It also requires you to be patient. Sometimes it takes a specific movement to build up to its climax. You're very lucky in the regard that this forum is a valuable resource. You have people here that are encouraging you to take the necessary steps in order for you to enjoy this music. Classical music is some of the most remarkable music I've ever heard and it continues to leave me breathless not only in terms of its emotional/intellectual appeal, but also for its wide variety of styles and genres. It encompasses so much.

Brewski, that's chamber music?  I should have made that connection myself, I just didn't put the pieces together.

MI, I never said I don't like Bach.  I never said I like him either.  Right now I don't have any feelings one way or the other.  I'm listening to music two or three hours a day; I'm not sure how else to direct my efforts but I'm wide open for suggestions.  As to a movement building, I'm listening to entire pieces; I'm not stopping after a few minutes and moving on. 

Bluntly, what I don't want to do at this stage of interest is spend much money.  There seems to be a sufficient selection of music available on the web for free for me to be able to find something I like (although I admit to difficulties accessing some models of it; I'm spending time on technology I'd rather spend on the subject at hand.).  As I noted originally, I'm investigating a form of entertainment that is new to me; something I've heard about most of my life but never really heard.  I'll get to the selections others suggested, but there are a lot of concepts I don't understand yet.  Rhythm, keys, time, measures; the Wikipedia articles on these appear to have been written by musicians for musicians, and assume knowledge I don't yet have.  I'm trying to build a working vocabulary so I don't have another confusing moment like I did over the term 'dynamic'.

I'm in no hurry, but I'm also not going to bust my @$$.  I'm listening for entertainment, not working on a degree.  If I find something, great; if not, I'll at least know more than I did at the first of the year.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 22, 2011, 04:41:00 PM
I'm in no hurry, but I'm also not going to bust my @$$.  I'm listening for entertainment, not working on a degree.  If I find something, great; if not, I'll at least know more than I did at the first of the year.

And this is a good attitude!  :)

Quote from: Palmetto on March 22, 2011, 04:41:00 PMI'm in no hurry, but I'm also not going to bust my @$$.  I'm listening for entertainment, not working on a degree.  If I find something, great; if not, I'll at least know more than I did at the first of the year.

I think you're taking what I'm saying way out of context and a little over-the-top with your reply. What I'm saying to you is in order for you to have perhaps a better understanding of a piece of music is to read about that work and, more importantly, understand that composer's own history. Nobody is forcing you to like the music, all we can do is encourage you and hope that you find something that catches your ear. Until then, good luck finding it. Classical music for the novice can be very intimidating because it is so vast and spans centuries.

My little brother is trying to get into classical music as well. I'm always catching him reading one of my books about all of the composers, and he is always telling me stuff he has learned about them.  :D

He still seems to like Haydn and Stravinsky (at least, The Rite of Spring) most out of what he's heard. One day, he started playing something rhythmic stuff on the low keys of the piano, and I told him that if he thinks that sounds cool, you should try Bartok's 1st Piano Concerto. So, he listened to it and liked it.  8) (He also recently listened to Mahler's 5th and liked the opening!)

It's a slow process, and very hit-and-miss. I don't know how much he will like in 5 years, but simply listening to/learning about whatever out of boredom/curiosity/just doing it because it's there actually helps a lot, like what he's doing. That's how I learned to play guitar.  :-X

Quote from: Greg on March 22, 2011, 07:19:08 PM
My little brother is trying to get into classical music as well. I'm always catching him reading one of my books about all of the composers, and he is always telling me stuff he has learned about them.  :D

He still seems to like Haydn and Stravinsky (at least, The Rite of Spring) most out of what he's heard. One day, he started playing something rhythmic stuff on the low keys of the piano, and I told him that if he thinks that sounds cool, you should try Bartok's 1st Piano Concerto. So, he listened to it and liked it.  8) (He also recently listened to Mahler's 5th and liked the opening!)

It's a slow process, and very hit-and-miss. I don't know how much he will like in 5 years, but simply listening to/learning about whatever out of boredom/curiosity/just doing it because it's there actually helps a lot, like what he's doing. That's how I learned to play guitar.  :-X

This was basically where I was getting at in my post above. The only way to appreciate the music is to make the effort to understand it. If something really sounds interesting to you, then go read about the work's history and learn a bit more about the composer. This can only enhance your listening experience. If this poster finds reading unnecessary than good luck to him in finding out what works. I can only speak from my own experience about music and what worked for me, but there's no joking in the fact that the poster is going to need to be more patient. A lot of this music doesn't come right at you to begin with. Sometimes it takes days, months, or even years to appreciate a piece of music.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 22, 2011, 04:41:00 PM
Brewski, that's chamber music?  I should have made that connection myself, I just didn't put the pieces together.

MI, I never said I don't like Bach.  I never said I like him either.  Right now I don't have any feelings one way or the other.  I'm listening to music two or three hours a day; I'm not sure how else to direct my efforts but I'm wide open for suggestions.  As to a movement building, I'm listening to entire pieces; I'm not stopping after a few minutes and moving on. 

Bluntly, what I don't want to do at this stage of interest is spend much money.  There seems to be a sufficient selection of music available on the web for free for me to be able to find something I like (although I admit to difficulties accessing some models of it; I'm spending time on technology I'd rather spend on the subject at hand.).  As I noted originally, I'm investigating a form of entertainment that is new to me; something I've heard about most of my life but never really heard.  I'll get to the selections others suggested, but there are a lot of concepts I don't understand yet.  Rhythm, keys, time, measures; the Wikipedia articles on these appear to have been written by musicians for musicians, and assume knowledge I don't yet have.  I'm trying to build a working vocabulary so I don't have another confusing moment like I did over the term 'dynamic'.

I'm in no hurry, but I'm also not going to bust my @$$.  I'm listening for entertainment, not working on a degree.  If I find something, great; if not, I'll at least know more than I did at the first of the year.

I had not appreciated quite where you were in your exploration of music. Here are a few websites that discuss the basics of music and music theory that you may find of use along the way:
http://neilhawes.com/sstheory/theory.htm (http://neilhawes.com/sstheory/theory.htm)
http://www.musiclearningworkshop.com/basic-music-theory-elements.html (http://www.musiclearningworkshop.com/basic-music-theory-elements.html)
http://www.essentialsofmusic.com/ (http://www.essentialsofmusic.com/) (this is more about the different styles and eras as well as history about them and composers)
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/3477919/Study-Guide-for-Music-Appreciation (http://www.docstoc.com/docs/3477919/Study-Guide-for-Music-Appreciation) (again, more about the periods, composers, but also some basic ideas in music that start in these periods and are used elsewhere)
http://www.oklahomahomeschool.com/musicApprHSU.html (http://www.oklahomahomeschool.com/musicApprHSU.html) (Point 6 has a number of websites that may be of use)

And sometimes, you just need to have a little fun...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7L02tCNi0I&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7L02tCNi0I&feature=related)

Hope that helps.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 22, 2011, 04:41:00 PM
Brewski, that's chamber music?  I should have made that connection myself, I just didn't put the pieces together.

Yes, those Gardner concerts are mostly works for small ensembles: duos, trios, quartets. (My hunch is that the performance space is small, like many concert spaces in museums, and a large orchestra wouldn't fit onstage.)

Anyway, maybe your taste just lies elsewhere, with larger works, maybe even opera. If you can get a media player installed, you won't have to spend any money at all. The Internet has tons of free stuff to listen to--and there's YouTube, of course.

Good luck, and hope you do discover something that appeals to you. The classical music universe is a rich one.

--Bruce

"If something really sounds interesting to you, then go read about the work's history and learn a bit more about the composer."

MI, I agree completely.  Nothing has really sounded interesting to me yet.

Brewski, I don't have problem with Windows Media Player with .MP3s, and I can easily load them on my .MP3 player.  What I could never get anything done with is .RAM files via either RealPlayer or VNC; frankly, I've given up.  I've found substitutes for the non-musical, academic content I wanted to hear that way, so I've stopped wasting time on what appears to be a non-portable niche format.  I'm going to look at Amazon this weekend and see how much they're charging for CDs.  Of course, I'll use the link from here so the site will get its cut.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 24, 2011, 08:15:02 AMI'm going to look at Amazon this weekend and see how much they're charging for CDs.  Of course, I'll use the link from here so the site will get its cut.

Remember that almost always Amazon Marketplace sellers undercut Amazon proper dramatically.  I'd recommend visiting the on-line stores thread on this site to get a run down on different buying options.

Another thing I sometimes do is go to ebay.  If you look at the classical CD catagory you will see thousands of entries for mostly high prices.  But you can put in a cutoff of $1, $2, $3 and find great bargains.  Legit retail stores trying to make a profit sell for high-prices on ebay, but people trying to sell off grandpa's cd collection may set very low prices to move the stuff.  There's a risk of getting something in poor condition, but I've almost always had good experieces.

I second trying eBay. Yes, there's a small risk of getting an unplayable CD, but I've never had a problem with anything I've bought, either.

--Bruce

Just did a check, saw some fine stuff (that I already have).  Anyone want Bartok String Quartets (Takacs) for $2, Complete Ravel Piano Music (Thibaudet) for the same price?  Many other prime recordings (that I already have) among the trashy stuff.

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 24, 2011, 09:28:39 AM
Just did a check, saw some fine stuff (that I already have).  Anyone want Bartok String Quartets (Takacs) for $2, Complete Ravel Piano Music (Thibaudet) for the same price?  Many other prime recordings (that I already have) among the trashy stuff.

I would (the Bartok and the Ravel)  :)

Quote from: ChamberNut on March 24, 2011, 09:36:46 AM
I would (the Bartok and the Ravel)  :)

Bid away!  I have my bids in but I'm not telling where.    >:D

Aw c'mon, guys; I've got enough on my plate already without taking on the task of learning how to use eBay too!  Especially since I discovered Amazon sells downloadable .MP3s.

Scarpia, what's 'Amazon Marketplace'?  I've only purchased from Amazon three or four times; maybe once every couple of years.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 24, 2011, 09:59:19 AMScarpia, what's 'Amazon Marketplace'?  I've only purchased from Amazon three or four times; maybe once every couple of years.

For any item listed on Amazon if you use the generic "Add to Cart" button you will be purchasing from Amazon (shipped from their warehouse).  But if you look carefully you will also see a link saying for new and used copies from other sellers. 

For instance, I happened to be looking at this listing:

http://www.amazon.com/Bartok-Concerto-Orchestra-Percussion-Hungarian/dp/B000003FEJ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300991090&sr=8-1 (http://www.amazon.com/Bartok-Concerto-Orchestra-Percussion-Hungarian/dp/B000003FEJ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300991090&sr=8-1)

And if I hit "Add to Cart" it costs $10.88 but I can click "23 new from $6.41" and "25 used from $4.50," which takes me to pages of listing independent sellers listing stuff to sell on Amazon's site.  The sellers can be major retailers, or they can be people like me trying to sell off a CD I didn't like.

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 24, 2011, 10:28:47 AM
For any item listed on Amazon if you use the generic "Add to Cart" button you will be purchasing from Amazon (shipped from their warehouse).  But if you look carefully you will also see a link saying for new and used copies from other sellers. 

For instance, I happened to be looking at this listing:

http://www.amazon.com/Bartok-Concerto-Orchestra-Percussion-Hungarian/dp/B000003FEJ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300991090&sr=8-1 (http://www.amazon.com/Bartok-Concerto-Orchestra-Percussion-Hungarian/dp/B000003FEJ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300991090&sr=8-1)

And if I hit "Add to Cart" it costs $10.88 but I can click "23 new from $6.41" and "25 used from $4.50," which takes me to pages of listing independent sellers listing stuff to sell on Amazon's site.  The sellers can be major retailers, or they can be people like me trying to sell off a CD I didn't like.

One thing to keep in mind is sales tax and shipping. If you live in some states, sales tax are added to regular Amazon purchases. Shipping will be free if you buy over $25. When you buy from marketplace sellers, shipping is $2.98 for EACH ITEM. However, there is no sales tax.

"Maybe chamber music just isn't what you're looking for? Just for fun, see how this strikes you, a piece by Iannis Xenakis called Metastaseis 1953-54) for 61 musicians. The reason I mention it is that people with rock music backgrounds sometimes seem to gravitate toward his music. If you don't like it, no worries, but it's quite different from those Gardner concerts."

Congratulations!  You're the first one to suggest something I don't want to hear again!

Still . . . come back to it in 30 years, see if you hear it any differently then.  Hey, you never know . . . .

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 24, 2011, 09:40:56 AM
Bid away!  I have my bids in but I'm not telling where.    >:D

Sorry Scarpia.  I totally misunderstood your post.  I thought you were offering the Bartok and Ravel sets for $2 each, plus shipping.  My bad.  :-[

Quote from: ChamberNut on March 24, 2011, 12:26:24 PM
Sorry Scarpia.  I totally misunderstood your post.  I thought you were offering the Bartok and Ravel sets for $2 each, plus shipping.  My bad.  :-[

No, just advising you that you can find these deals, among many others, on ebay.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 24, 2011, 11:40:56 AM
"Maybe chamber music just isn't what you're looking for? Just for fun, see how this strikes you, a piece by Iannis Xenakis called Metastaseis 1953-54) for 61 musicians. The reason I mention it is that people with rock music backgrounds sometimes seem to gravitate toward his music. If you don't like it, no worries, but it's quite different from those Gardner concerts."

Congratulations!  You're the first one to suggest something I don't want to hear again!

LOL. I've seen this a lot with classical fans proselytising to heavy metal listeners - the logic seems to be "Hey, metal is just crazy noise, so you'll LOVE this crazy noise!" Handily forgetting that metal may be wild and dissonant, but it's also highly rhythmic and consonant.

I think the most attractive classical genres for rock music fans would be late Romantic and early Modern orchestral music. (Plus highlights from Beethoven and Mozart, and some Vivaldi concertos.) This music is highly melodic and dramatic, plus has very lush and varied sound textures. Easy to follow, emotionally engaging and gratifying to the ear. Try a compilation that has complete symphonies by several different composers.

Quote from: Leon on March 24, 2011, 11:54:15 AM
Pandora (http://www.pandora.com/) has a Classical station.  You can listen to music from various periods - and when you find something that you like, you can find other things similar.

I forgot about Pandora. This is a very useful tool for a classical newbie. Hey Palmetto check this out:

Prokofiev: Scythian Suite - excerpt from the second movement. CHECK THIS OUT NOW!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfQb6BKq_ZU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfQb6BKq_ZU)

If this doesn't attract and hold your attention I don't know what will! I think one of the biggest problems with new classical listeners is they go where they think they need to go. They may start off with someone like Mozart or Beethoven, but honestly that music never attracted me like late-Romantic and 20th Century music. I acknowledge the masters that came before with great respect, but I don't care for their music. I like music that's a bit more sinister and dissonant.

Quote from: eyeresist on March 24, 2011, 06:20:31 PM
I've seen this a lot with classical fans proselytising to heavy metal listeners

I realize you're commenting on the suggestions of others.  I just don't know what I said that gave people the impression I listen to metal.

For the official record (tape, 8-track, cassette, CD, or .MP3), I don't.  Or 'hard rock' or 'Southern rock' or 'hair bands'.  I'm from a "Late '60s-thru-Early '90s" pop / Top 40 background; Meat Loaf and Tom Petty are about as wild as I get.  The only Kiss tune I like is 'Beth', and George Thorogood gives me hair balls.

MI, that's a bit, uh, ... bombastic for my tastes; would the word 'dissonant' also apply to the middle minute or so of this excerpt?  If John Williams leaves the radio on while he sleeps, this is what played the night before he wrote Vader's theme.  I might have used it for the final three minutes of a mix tape for running, back when the Army made me run.  I usually reserved the theme from the final fight in 'Rocky' for that honor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3P7fucxdpc&feature=related

"Adriaaaane!"

Quote from: Palmetto on March 25, 2011, 03:33:09 AMMI, that's a bit, uh, ... bombastic for my tastes; would the word 'dissonant' also apply to the middle minute or so of this excerpt?

Bombastic? ::) I don't really care if you liked the excerpt or not because now I realize that no matter what I asked you listen to it wasn't going to be to your liking anyway. For someone who is "open-minded" about music, you sure do shoot down people's suggestions pretty quickly. You don't like this, you don't like that. Well I'll leave you to your exploration of whatever the hell it is you're trying to find because I give up. You're a hopeless case. ???

Quote from: Palmetto on March 25, 2011, 03:33:09 AM
I realize you're commenting on the suggestions of others.  I just don't know what I said that gave people the impression I listen to metal.

For the official record (tape, 8-track, cassette, CD, or .MP3), I don't.  Or 'hard rock' or 'Southern rock' or 'hair bands'.  I'm from a "Late '60s-thru-Early '90s" pop / Top 40 background; Meat Loaf and Tom Petty are about as wild as I get.  The only Kiss tune I like is 'Beth', and George Thorogood gives me hair balls.

MI, that's a bit, uh, ... bombastic for my tastes; would the word 'dissonant' also apply to the middle minute or so of this excerpt?  If John Williams leaves the radio on while he sleeps, this is what played the night before he wrote Vader's theme.  I might have used it for the final three minutes of a mix tape for running, back when the Army made me run.  I usually reserved the theme from the final fight in 'Rocky' for that honor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3P7fucxdpc&feature=related

"Adriaaaane!"

I think the best suggestion is just listen to a classical station, streaming or on the radio, and if something grabs you, find out what it was.  Pick a station that has a play list so that you will be able to find out what it was after you hear something you like.  Once you've identified something you like, then you can go into wikipedia, or whatever, and learn a little more about it, or just find more stuff by the same composer.

NPR stations tend to be a good choice because they are more likely to play a wide variety of music, and not just "lite classical" etc.  One station I like that plays classical for a fair chunk of the day is WSKG (they're in upstate NY so you'd get it by internet streaming).  I'm sure there are many others. 

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 25, 2011, 08:04:46 PM
I think the best suggestion is just listen to a classical station, streaming or on the radio, and if something grabs you, find out what it was.  Pick a station that has a play list so that you will be able to find out what it was after you hear something you like.  Once you've identified something you like, then you can go into wikipedia, or whatever, and learn a little more about it, or just find more stuff by the same composer.

NPR stations tend to be a good choice because they are more likely to play a wide variety of music, and not just "lite classical" etc.  One station I like that plays classical for a fair chunk of the day is WSKG (they're in upstate NY so you'd get it by internet streaming).  I'm sure there are many others. 

Add WCPE and KING FM to that. Both have daily playlists, except when the former is in the midst of a fund-raiser or on a day when they are taking in user requests. But I don't remember them playing a lot of Twentieth Century music.

Quote from: Mirror Image on March 25, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
Bombastic? ::) I don't really care if you liked the excerpt or not because now I realize that no matter what I asked you listen to it wasn't going to be to your liking anyway. For someone who is "open-minded" about music, you sure do shoot down people's suggestions pretty quickly. You don't like this, you don't like that. Well I'll leave you to your exploration of whatever the hell it is you're trying to find because I give up. You're a hopeless case. ???

There is really no need for this sort of post. You seem to be taking this personally, which this isn't.  Some of us find the going difficult, in some cases because we don't have the background or because we don't understand what we are hearing.  Patience and persistance are sometimes the only things that keep us in the game. Maybe Palmetto won't like any of the suggestions. Maybe he's just not ready for them yet. Whatever the case, we can help him along if we want to. If you feel you are not adding something, and want to bow out, there is no shame in that. That you even tried is appreciated (both by Palmetto and those of us participating as well).

I've been exploring this music for maybe six weeks.  With hundreds of years of history, I hardly think that's enough time for even a superficial search.  I am neither surprised nor discouraged by not finding anything that sets me on fire in that limited period.  It's early in my search; there are genres I haven't heard and probably some I haven't even heard OF yet. 

I've opened every single link and embedded video that folks have posted for me.  In retrospect, I find I may not have expressed my thanks enough, so, "Thanks, everyone."  With the exception of one work I noted, I've yet to hear anything I actively dislike.  Most of what I've listened to has been from pleasant to enjoyable.  I've learned I like brass, woodwinds, and piano more than strings.  I've learned there's are more ways to interpret a work than I imagined.  As side projects I've learned more about file formats and applications common to digitally stored media, things I've never had professional reasons to look at.  If nothing else I've learned some new concepts; that alone has been worth the time.  There just hasn't been anything I've felt compelled to replay more than a couple of time, much less purchase.

Apparently my not falling instantly in love with this music bothers you more than it does me.  I don't know "whatever the hell it is you're trying to find"; I don't know yet everything that the hell is available.  That's why I'm looking.  I'm in no hurry, and have no reason to conform to your schedules or expectations.  It may come as a shock, but many people lead happy, full lives without classical music.  I may finish this experiment and return to being one of them.  If that bothers you, I encourage you to ignore me.  This appears to be a big forum on an even bigger Internet; if you feel they aren't big enough for the both of us, I suggest you perform an anatomically impossible act of self-copulation.

Quote from: Palmetto on March 26, 2011, 03:44:20 AM
I've been exploring this music for maybe six weeks.  With hundreds of years of history, I hardly think that's enough time for even a superficial search.  I am neither surprised nor discouraged by not finding anything that sets me on fire in that limited period.  It's early in my search; there are genres I haven't heard and probably some I haven't even heard OF yet. 

I've opened every single link and embedded video that folks have posted for me.  In retrospect, I find I may not have expressed my thanks enough, so, "Thanks, everyone."  With the exception of one work I noted, I've yet to hear anything I actively dislike.  Most of what I've listened to has been from pleasant to enjoyable.  I've learned I like brass, woodwinds, and piano more than strings.  I've learned there's are more ways to interpret a work than I imagined.  As side projects I've learned more about file formats and applications common to digitally stored media, things I've never had professional reasons to look at.  If nothing else I've learned some new concepts; that alone has been worth the time.  There just hasn't been anything I've felt compelled to replay more than a couple of time, much less purchase.

Apparently my not falling instantly in love with this music bothers you more than it does me.  I don't know "whatever the hell it is you're trying to find"; I don't know yet everything that the hell is available.  That's why I'm looking.  I'm in no hurry, and have no reason to conform to your schedules or expectations.  It may come as a shock, but many people lead happy, full lives without classical music.  I may finish this experiment and return to being one of them.  If that bothers you, I encourage you to ignore me.  This appears to be a big forum on an even bigger Internet; if you feel they aren't big enough for the both of us, I suggest you perform an anatomically impossible act of self-copulation.

I don't have time to respond completely to this post, but allow me to say a few things to you:

I don't care if you like classical music or not, but you came here for advice, which you seem very keen on dismissing. Considering your background is in Top 40 bullshit, it's no wonder you can't comprehend what you're hearing. You're looking for hooks, something that grabs your attention immediately, well if you're not willing to make the effort to understand the complexity of this music, then perhaps you should just give up and go back to listening to the music that makes you happy. The only thing worse than Top 40 radio are Top 40 listeners. Your ignorance and unwillingness to make an effort to understand classical music is what I"m bothered by, other than that, good luck to you in whatever the hell your trying to find.

Quote from: Mirror Image on March 26, 2011, 06:37:33 AM
I don't have time to respond completely to this post, but allow me to say a few things to you:

I don't care if you like classical music or not, but you came here for advice, which you seem very keen on dismissing. Considering your background is in Top 40 bullshit, it's no wonder you can't comprehend what you're hearing. You're looking for hooks, something that grabs your attention immediately, well if you're not willing to make the effort to understand the complexity of this music, then perhaps you should just give up and go back to listening to the music that makes you happy. The only thing worse than Top 40 radio are Top 40 listeners. Your ignorance and unwillingness to make an effort to understand classical music is what I"m bothered by, other than that, good luck to you in whatever the hell your trying to find.

He didn't dismiss anything, he simply said he didn't like it.   The fact that you take offense and become abusive or insulting whenever someone lets slip that they don't like something that you have praised is not becoming, to say the least.

We're used to your antics, but that you would pull this on a newcomer to the board is not acceptable.

Quote from: Mirror Image on March 26, 2011, 06:37:33 AM
I don't have time to respond completely to this post, but allow me to say a few things to you:

I don't care if you like classical music or not, but you came here for advice, which you seem very keen on dismissing. Considering your background is in Top 40 bullshit, it's no wonder you can't comprehend what you're hearing. You're looking for hooks, something that grabs your attention immediately, well if you're not willing to make the effort to understand the complexity of this music, then perhaps you should just give up and go back to listening to the music that makes you happy. The only thing worse than Top 40 radio are Top 40 listeners. Your ignorance and unwillingness to make an effort to understand classical music is what I"m bothered by, other than that, good luck to you in whatever the hell your trying to find.

Apart from the comment about the Xenakis piece (which did not surprise me :P ) when did he say that he was not willing to put in the effort to learn? I too did not like many works on first hearing them, for whatever reason (but nothing academic) and put off listening to them until I came back to it on another day, perhaps a couple of years later, when I found it amazing. I think you're letting your impatience in dealing with a newbie who doesn't quite seem to share your tastes turn into unfounded claims. (You weren't so worked up when he moved away from the Brandenburg Concerti, were you?) Now, I don't know how long you have spent listening to Bach or Beethoven, but would you consider it fair if someone who likes these composers' music dismissed you as a hopeless case just because you don't like it now?

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 26, 2011, 06:46:55 AM
He didn't dismiss anything, he simply said he didn't like it.   The fact that you take offense and become abusive or insulting whenever someone lets slip that they don't like something that you have praised is not becoming, to say the least.

We're used to your antics, but that you would pull this on a newcomer to the board is not acceptable.

You don't have to take up for this member, Daddy Scarpia. He's a big boy, he can defend himself. If he finds my post abusive or insulting then maybe he needs to get a psychologist to help him deal with whatever mental disorder he has. It's like the old saying "If you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen" and this is exactly what this member needs to do.

OK, well we're gonna stop this here and take a cool-down. It may be re-opened later (should be, it has things to say yet) but it won't continue in this vein in future. Let's keep in mind people's rights to like/dislike what they please. It is not a pathological character defect on anyone's part to like something different. Even if it should be... :)

8)

----------------
Now playing:
Hamburg Soloists / Emil Klein - Hob 03 10 Divertimento in F for Strings Op 2 #4 5th mvmt - Allegro

Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on March 26, 2011, 07:09:50 AM
OK, well we're gonna stop this here and take a cool-down. It may be re-opened later (should be, it has things to say yet) but it won't continue in this vein in future. Let's keep in mind people's rights to like/dislike what they please. It is not a pathological character defect on anyone's part to like something different. Even if it should be... :)

Indeed. Some here clearly crossed red lines. ::)

Try to keep an open mind and have some understanding for those who are new to classical music! :) Those who can not or will not do so, have no bussiness posting in the Beginners board. $:)

Q