Every once in a while I feel completely burnt out. On music, that is. Sometimes I'm just overwhelmed with new CDs and feel that I'm going through them too quickly. I try to limit myself to only listening to a few pieces a day, but I just can't. It's a mania, and I hate it. I feel like it makes music less important, less special... but I can't help it. I guess it has to do with my current financial situation -- I have no money and therefore can't afford to be jetting off to wherever.
So, everyone else, how much is too much?
Oh, and those of you who just rip through 50 CDs a day need not answer at all.
For me, music is special. That means - by definition - it is not an every day experience. It is a celebration - or it is nothing. I do not understand how people can play music all day every day. For me this would destroy the significance of music.
Harry started an interesting thread on this subject a while ago. I noticed then that I was the only person who thought like this. So I accept it is a minority view.
Music is its own reward, I find it hard to get burned out. I will admit, there are many times where I just passively listen and fewer times where I sit transfixed, repeatedly rewinding, trying to figure out what a composer is trying to say or what an interpreter intends to do. My musical education is rather limited and I was never good at solving metaphors, so often, my scrutiny is unsuccessful. :P I do listen to music almost constantly though. There is enough variety from one composition to the next in my collection that I am never bored. I also listen to all varieties of music, but for the last several months, my habits have leaned towards classical genres.
I can imagine, with financial difficulties, there would be more pressing things on my mind than what to listen to next, however. I am sorry to hear about your trouble and hope there is relief in sight.
Quote from: Choo Choo on June 29, 2007, 05:49:19 PM
For me, music is special. That means - by definition - it is not an every day experience. It is a celebration - or it is nothing. I do not understand how people can play music all day every day. For me this would destroy the significance of music.
Harry started an interesting thread on this subject a while ago. I noticed then that I was the only person who thought like this. So I accept it is a minority view.
Glad I'm not the only one.
I get involved with music at the practical level and there are times when I've had enough. I turn to a different genre rather than turn it off altogether. I'm generally happy to have music in the background - Mozart is quite soothing - but usually opposite to what I'm trying to escape musically. Some works, however, do seem to call for silent reflection afterwards, not that solitude is easy to come by these days!
I only consider it listening if I have a strong emotional response. The rest of the time its spent getting to know the works I listen to.
For myself, there is never too much of classical music. I can easily listen to just Bach for days on end, or a few favored composers for many days, or composers new to me for a number of days, or any other type of combinations.
Does the above reduce the special nature of the listening experience? I suppose it does, but I gladly live with the trade-offs.
I used to ' ... rip through 50 CDs a day ... ' (well, more like eight, but you get my point), though these days I don't have as much opportunity to do so. Much of my time now is invested in my business - building relationships, winning work, chasing unpaid invoices - and preparing for the arrival of our daughter. I'm lucky now if I can hear four CDs a day; quite often, it's only two. How does this make me feel? Anxious to hear more, that's how. Since the age of 13, music of one kind or another has played a significant part in my life. It's helped me through difficult times, been the soundtrack to ordinary and exciting times, and generally keeps me in touch with everything creative, beautiful, spiritual and valuable. Would I feel burned out if music were all I had to fill my days? No. But only because, as Don points out, there's so much variety. A change is very often as good as a rest. ;)
Quote from: Mark on June 30, 2007, 12:20:27 AM
A change is very often as good as a rest. ;)
So true - great sentence.
Quote from: Choo Choo on June 29, 2007, 05:49:19 PM
For me, music is special. That means - by definition - it is not an every day experience. It is a celebration - or it is nothing. I do not understand how people can play music all day every day. For me this would destroy the significance of music.
Harry started an interesting thread on this subject a while ago. I noticed then that I was the only person who thought like this. So I accept it is a minority view.
I'm part of that minority, then: overexposure to anything can lead to satiety if not disgust, and with art, it can certainly start to turn something special into something commonplace, robbing it of its magic. And art at its best is something magical, appealing to our noblest sensibilities, washing off the dust of the world--and even helping lead us toward the spiritual.
I actually relish the times when I don't feel like listening to any music for a day, a week, or whatever, because I know that when I return to it, it will be out of a genuine desire to listen to something particular with full emotional and intellectual attention, and not just the routine indulgence of a habit. Likewise, when I'm concentrating on really experiencing the music I have instead of thinking about what disc I'm going to buy next, I get so much more from it. Then it becomes true appreciation instead of mere consumerism wrapped in fancy dress.
Quote from: Mark on June 30, 2007, 12:20:27 AM
A change is very often as good as a rest. ;)
Quote from: Don on June 30, 2007, 12:23:37 AM
So true - great sentence.
And this is why I will turn to "sreaks" of jazz listening from time to to time (sometimes soundtracks or rock as well). My listening day varies based on what my work schedule is, what we are doing as a family, is my my wife listening with me, did my 4 year-old request Coltrane for the car ride, etc. Sometimes my listening is very focused, other times it is music in the background. In short, it just "depends" and I do not stress about it, but rather enjoy the fact that I am fortunate enough to be able to listen to music almost anytime I want, have a very nice selection to choose from, and some wonderful people here to discuss it with.
Since I'm retired and alone in the house while Mrs. Rock is at the office, I could listen to music all day. But I don't. In fact I actually dislike music before noon and seldom listen to anything until after lunch. I've never owned a portable music player (no Walkman, no iPod). When I go for a walk I want to hear the sounds around me, the sounds of nature, kids playing, ect., not music. When I put a CD in the player or an LP on the turntable, it's because I want to actively listen to it. I don't need or want background music.
Sarge
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on June 30, 2007, 04:39:48 AM
I don't need or want background music.
Sarge
I do not prefer this when I am outside, for the most part, either Sarge. However, when I am working on a model, getting paperwork done, or painting a room, etc., then I find it very pleasant. About the only exception is on my early morning runs, especially in the winter when the only sound is crunching feet and blowing wind. ;D
Quote from: Bogey on June 30, 2007, 05:21:55 AM
I do not prefer this when I am outside, for the most part, either Sarge. However, when I am working on a model, getting paperwork done, or painting a room, etc., then I find it very pleasant. About the only exception is on my early morning runs, especially in the winter when the only sound is crunching feet and blowing wind. ;D
Yes, the exception for me is when I'm doing something that doesn't take a lot of mental effort. I'll listen to music in the kitchen when I'm preparing a meal, cooking, when I'm cleaning up. In those circumstances I'm listening quite closely to the music, though, so I'm not sure I'd call it background music.
Sarge
I'm part of the generation you see sitting on the bus bopping along to their white earphones with the volume turned way too high.
I used to find a portable mp3 player indispensable, listening to music during all my "downtime" (getting from A to B, etc, or on walks). But as classical music came to dominate my listening program, my behavior changed quite a lot. The main reasons:
- the changes in volume during a piece of classical music make listening on the go and actually HEARING the music properly frustratingly difficult;
- classical generally is not as enjoyable as genres of pop if you're not actively listening to it. (I also get a vague feeling of self-loathing if some masterwork is playing in the background and I'm not giving it the attention it deserves ;D)
At the moment I generally listen for less time but spend all that time really listening and I enjoy things more. It was surprising when I started just sitting down to listen how out-of-training I was for it. Sitting at home I still find it hard to give music my full attention for more than 2 hours at a time :o (to compare, I could read a good book for 4 or 5 times as long, watch a good movie for longer without breaking a sweat). But I get so much more out of proper listening sessions of a couple of hours than whole days of passive, background listening.
I'm not one of these "I fear for Western Culture" types, but I do think that the way many people listen to music now - passively, for long periods of time - has definitely changed our relationship with music. Certain genres do very well out of this relationship, others not so well. But maybe it's always been this way - I dunno, I've never seen anything different. Some of my friends (including musical ones) never "just listen" to music.
Edit: I do still listen to music when I am cooking, and I love that. But as Sarge says, I can still give almost all my attention to the music while doing that so it doesn't really count.
On the subject of giving music one's fullest attention, this varies for me. Albinoni's Oboe Concerti are, for me, light listening - much as, I'm sure, a bit of pop or rock might constitute light listening for the next classical music fan. Who knows? I don't feel I'm doing old Albi a disservice by not tuning in with rapt focus and studiously following every note. I know only that I enjoy what I hear of works like his, even when I don't 'hear' everything.
But when it comes to pieces by Mahler, Bruckner, Beethoven, Rachmaninov and countless others - and generally, in my case, late Romantic or early Modern works - there's no hope of me treating such compositions simply as aural wallpaper. Who here can concentrate on the washing up or writing an email when the first two bold chords of the 'Eroica' symphony come slamming through the speakers or headphones?
I think my predilection for headphone listening means I listen less passively, as a rule, than many people might. With cans atop my bonce and straddling my ears, I'm in the concert hall - I'm in 'the zone'. Albinoni rarely makes it to headphone listening with me: he comes out through the speakers, makes his contribution to my legendary vegetarian spaghetti bolognese by inspiring me to add just another dollop of pesto; but he, and many other composers whose names I won't list, isn't likely any time soon to have me sitting on the edge of my seat, heart pounding, mind and emotions waiting for that next note, phrase ... or even silence.
Quote from: Kullervo on June 29, 2007, 05:37:21 PM
So, everyone else, how much is too much?
probably no more than 3 hours a day listening to music, and you can say "Es ist genug".
it's good to make sure you're doing a bunch of other stuff all the time, but have just enough time to listen to music each day, if you want. So just find other stuff to do, i guess.
Quote from: Kullervo on June 29, 2007, 05:37:21 PM
Every once in a while I feel completely burnt out. On music, that is. Sometimes I'm just overwhelmed with new CDs and feel that I'm going through them too quickly. I try to limit myself to only listening to a few pieces a day, but I just can't. It's a mania, and I hate it. I feel like it makes music less important, less special... but I can't help it. I guess it has to do with my current financial situation -- I have no money and therefore can't afford to be jetting off to wherever.
So, everyone else, how much is too much?
Being burnt out by music is quite a distant idea for me. With some pieces perhaps, but with music.. I don't think this is remotely possible. Even when I am not listening to anything I always have some music in my head, or I am humming something, if not music a rhythm, something. This may be because I do not take music seriously. It is a big source og enjoyment for me, but I can't be passionate about music (nor anything else).
I think that when you don't take something seriously you appreciate it for what it is. It's not the CD's, not the collection, and at times sometimes not even the performer.
Music enriches life in such a way that, without it I am quite poor, yet if I have to go without music for a ahile that's OK too.
Quote from: Kullervo on June 29, 2007, 05:37:21 PM
Every once in a while I feel completely burnt out. On music, that is. Sometimes I'm just overwhelmed with new CDs and feel that I'm going through them too quickly. I try to limit myself to only listening to a few pieces a day, but I just can't. It's a mania, and I hate it. I feel like it makes music less important, less special... but I can't help it. I guess it has to do with my current financial situation -- I have no money and therefore can't afford to be jetting off to wherever.
So, everyone else, how much is too much?
How much is too much? Well for me too much is reached when I just can not concentrate on the music anymore and I reach a point where all I hear is noise. Thats when I stop. It also depends on what I am listening to. If its an opera I can go up to 5 hours no problem (enough time to cover one of Wagner's operas or 2 Verdi operas or 2 Mozart operas). With solo piano work, say Beethoven's sonatas or Liszt's compositions the maximum I can go is 2 hours. It does not make sense I know but that's how it is. Different tolerance durations for different types of music.
marvin
Oh, and those of you who just rip through 50 CDs a day need not answer at all.
Quote from: orbital on July 02, 2007, 12:19:30 PM
This may be because I do not take music seriously.
This is where you and I differ.
Quote from: Kullervo on July 02, 2007, 08:50:19 PM
This is where you and I differ.
Perhaps :) But doesn't that take the enjoyment away a bit at least?
The seriousness is the reason why people like to fight even over music! Because, taking it seriously makes you act defensive when someone does not share your views about a piece, composer or a performer.
But again, perhaps the main reason why we listen to music in the first place may be different too.
On another note, I also think that having music (whatever it may be, even the music that may have the most reasons to be taken seriously) in the background helos in understanding it. I always play a new piece, particularly it is an unfamiliar one, inthe background a few times. Even though you are not paying attention the music still reaches your (sub?)conscious and in time you start recognizing bits and parts of it. I find it a great way to familiarize oneself with a new piece of music without actually spending the effort to purposefully understand it.
Well, I am not versed enough to stress over performers. 90% of the time I buy a CD, it is my introduction to the piece.
I have played music in the background before, and I don't like it. Everything just starts to sound like noise. I also think it is demeaning to the music and the composer's intentions. There's enough background music floating around anyway these days. I'd prefer not to add to it.
Yes, I take music very seriously, as I do all great art. It's worth fighting over to me. It makes life a lot more livable for me.
I take art and music seriously but don't feel the need to fight over it or get upset when someone doesn't share my opinions. Insecurity and seriousness are two different things.
As opposed to some of the more popular genres of music, most classical music practically demands serious attention and study. By nature, it's a complex, sophisticated art form. To appreciate and enjoy its nuances requires real listener engagement. To just half-listen to it as background noise, as if it were high-end Muzak, is to do it and yourself a disservice. And as Kullervo says, it's also something of a slight against the memory of the composers to treat their masterpieces lightly.
Bear in mind, I don't argue that one should listen to classical music with grim-faced intensity and perpetually furrowed brow--obviously music should be fun--but high art is best enjoyed and understood, in my experience, when you try to meet it on its own level.
Quote from: Grazioso on July 04, 2007, 04:51:28 AM
I take art and music seriously but don't feel the need to fight over it or get upset when someone doesn't share my opinions. Insecurity and seriousness are two different things.
Agreed.
Quote from: Grazioso on July 04, 2007, 04:51:28 AM
As opposed to some of the more popular genres of music, most classical music practically demands serious attention and study. By nature, it's a complex, sophisticated art form. To appreciate and enjoy its nuances requires real listener engagement. To just half-listen to it as background noise, as if it were high-end Muzak, is to do it and yourself a disservice. And as Kullervo says, it's also something of a slight against the memory of the composers to treat their masterpieces lightly.
Serious attention and study to do what exactly? I am listening to music, and the music I choose to listen gives me pleasure like nothing else in the world. I am even afraid to think about paying too much attention, as it may eventually spoil the enjoyment for me. It is not really important to "understand" music, what (if anything) the composer is trying to say. To me,
how s/he says it is more important that
what s/he says, because we will never be able to hear the music from the composer's point of view. S/he is just another human being with a different perception than ours. But if how he says it (and here enters the performer) resonates with us, that's all that matters for me. I don't care to understand why that particular note is there; that it is, and that I can't imagine the music without it satisfying enough.
The bit about the memory of the composer does not mean much either. I am doing his/her memory the best imaginable service by having his/her music play on my stereo.
That being said, I am not, of course, always half-listening. There are times when I want to immerse myself in a certain piece. And that is a great experience too. However, I can easily imagine being burnt out by music if I do that all the time.
It is just like all other important things in my life. Sometimes (though rarely)I want my family to encompass my life, but other times I just want them to be there, and not think about appreciating them. And if I have to live without them for a while, that's OK.
Also, I listen to a piece with utmost intensity if Iam planning to learn it. There it makes sense. I plan on actively participating in the music created, so to understand the mechanics, the underlying idioms may be crucial at that point as the intention is to recreate the creation.
Quote from: orbital on July 05, 2007, 07:58:04 AM
Serious attention and study to do what exactly? I am listening to music, and the music I choose to listen gives me pleasure like nothing else in the world. I am even afraid to think about paying too much attention, as it may eventually spoil the enjoyment for me. It is not really important to "understand" music, what (if anything) the composer is trying to say. To me, how s/he says it is more important that what s/he says, because we will never be able to hear the music from the composer's point of view. S/he is just another human being with a different perception than ours. But if how he says it (and here enters the performer) resonates with us, that's all that matters for me. I don't care to understand why that particular note is there; that it is, and that I can't imagine the music without it satisfying enough.
I have always argued that too much academic work, overanalyzing peices of music etc. never brings me much joy. If I am having to STUDY something it is hardly ever enjoyable. More to the point sometimes I play classical music as background music then suddenly out of nowhere a melody, or a mood in the music I am listening to jumps out and grabs my attention...it is those moments that I love the most. Couldn't care less what notes went where or how many beats per measure are in each and every bar or what is the composer's intent when he wrote the peice...knowledge of all these technicalities hardly makes the music enjoyable to listen to.
marvin
Quote from: marvinbrown on July 05, 2007, 08:15:28 AM
Couldn't care less what notes went where or how many beats per measure are in each and every bar or what is the composer's intent when he wrote the peice...knowledge of all these technicalities hardly makes the music enjoyable to listen to.
But that's not it. I listen closely for things like variation and recurring themes because they are concepts that are, to me, integral to the human experience. I cannot express the emotional impact of a theme that occurs in the beginning of a piece, reappearing again in the piece, slightly changed, or even unchanged. For an example of this, listen to the "Aino" trombone theme in Sibelius's 7th symphony. The theme appears three times throughout the symphony, each time within a completely different musical context, and each time bringing the key back to C major. It symbolizes, for me, the strength of love and the triumph of the human spirit over all obstacles.
But, perhaps I'm just reading too much into it. After all,
it's just music.
Quote from: Kullervo on July 05, 2007, 08:33:38 AM
But that's not it. I listen closely for things like variation and recurring themes because they are concepts that are, to me, integral to the human experience. I cannot express the emotional impact of a theme that occurs in the beginning of a piece, reappearing again in the piece, slightly changed, or even unchanged. For an example of this, listen to the "Aino" trombone theme in Sibelius's 7th symphony. The theme appears three times throughout the symphony, each time within a completely different musical context, and each time bringing the key back to C major. It symbolizes, for me, the strength of love and the triumph of the human spirit over all obstacles.
But, perhaps I'm just reading too much into it. After all, it's just music.
Sorry I have misunderstood you then, listening closely to variations in recurring themes is needed to "engage" in a piece and enhances understanding and enjoyment. What I was complaining about is an excercise I have had to do when I was taking piano lessons a long time ago (I had to identify what notes were sharps, flats, how many beats per measure, a rigorous academic analysis or in my opinion microanalysis) .....I never really enjoyed playing that instrument, nor the music I was playing.....I wonder why ::) !!!
marvin
Quote from: marvinbrown on July 05, 2007, 02:15:06 PM
Sorry I have misunderstood you then, listening closely to variations in recurring themes is needed to "engage" in a piece and enhances understanding and enjoyment. What I was complaining about is an excercise I have had to do when I was taking piano lessons a long time ago (I had to identify what notes were sharps, flats, how many beats per measure, a rigorous academic analysis or in my opinion microanalysis) .....I never really enjoyed playing that instrument, nor the music I was playing.....I wonder why ::) !!!
marvin
No problem, I probably should have made myself more clear to begin with.
I'm like a kid with a new toy when discovering new music or recordings. I repeat, explore it from practically every angle. Then there's a kind of saturation point where I don't even look at the recordings and go on to others. Usually the peak experience of being hit by a piece averages out to one a day. Going to a concert or opera is a good substitute for a fix although there can be shorter works that sort of grab my attention. If I'm working on a piece, sort of the opposite happens. I NEVER feel like I reached bottom and up until the last minute of performing have the anxious thought "Did I miss something?"
ZB
Quote from: orbital on July 05, 2007, 07:58:04 AM
Serious attention and study to do what exactly? I am listening to music, and the music I choose to listen gives me pleasure like nothing else in the world. I am even afraid to think about paying too much attention, as it may eventually spoil the enjoyment for me. It is not
Serious attention and study to more fully experience and understand the piece. Classical music is not just about providing the fleeting, momentary thrills that come from a catchy melody or driving rhythm. Classical music has a deep intellectual side: it often tells a story, it's rhetorical, it builds musical meaning through exposition, development, and recapitulation--through structure and form. If you listen carefully to a piece with due attention and ideally read up on it and/or study the score, you can start to hear it from new angles instead of just your usual default "hearing" of it. New details and connections start to appear. The differences between interpretations start to take on deeper significances.
There's something to be said for the naive enjoyment of art, but more to be said for the educated and attentive appreciation of art, which includes the former but also encompasses trying to understand what the creator is doing technically and what he might be trying to "say". Why be content just experiencing 10% of an artwork when you can start enjoying the other 90% with some extra effort?
And the best art will repay and easily bear that sort of investigation. If you're afraid of losing your enjoyment of a piece, maybe it's because you're only enjoying it superficially or in the same manner every time. Why not make an effort to dig deeper and hear more?