Are You Obsessed with Classical Music?

[brewski]

Like others here, I wouldn't say "obsessed," but "care deeply" is pretty good. Classical music has been a hugely enjoyable part of my life since childhood. Other people in my family are classical lovers (and performers). I have been lucky to live in places with thriving classical music culture, and I do enjoy going to concerts or watching livestreams often — not every day, but 1-2 times a week is a good yardstick. 

That said, I do love many other kinds of music, though I don't often hear much of it live. Some of that is due to a self-imposed limit on volume levels. After a few excruciatingly loud concerts over the years (almost always not classical), I have pulled the plug on anything that looks like it may be too loud. And I also value silence; it's good to have lots of time during the day with no music at all.

Anyway, I can't imagine life without classical music. Love hearing it, thinking about it, writing about it, and talking about it with friends.

-Bruce

[Maestro267]

It is an enjoyable hobby.  A lot of people on this forum appear to think about music too much.  And some people think way too much about what other people think of music.  Go outside.  Smell the roses.  Take a walk.  Eat a sandwich.  Etc.

And now you can take some of your 245 recordings of Beethoven's Pathétique Sonata to listen and compare while you're out touching grass.

[Jo498]

I am not "obsessed". I reject this framing, when does something become an "obsession"?
 
The idea is probably that an obsession has become "unhealthy". I seriously doubt that this could be said even about highly dedicated friends of classical music because unlike smoking, drinking, eating too much etc. even excessive listening or buying music would usually not be hurtful. Sure, if one gets into a lot of debt to finance expensive equipment or concert tickets or spends the weekends away at some opera house, neglecting their family, one might have a point. But I am pretty sure that such cases are quite rare, much rarer than "obsession" with sports or nowadays maybe also computer games.

I think it's generally good when people deeply care about something. In our cynical and superficial age the danger of becoming "obsessed" with something genuinely worth caring about (i.e. not some consumerist fake stuff like collecting Magic cards or StarWars costumes, but even this deserves more respect than cynicism) is not so pressing as the danger of becoming a distant cynic who doesn't care about anything, even if he could pay attention to anything longer than a few minutes.

[prémont]

For me collecting various recordings of a piece is not primarily a question of comparison. It's more about having the choice to experience different interpretations. Listening exclusively to one version would make my perception of the piece quite one-dimensional, because no single recording can capture the entire essence of the work.  My practice stems from a profound interest for the music. Calling it an obsession unfairly highlights the negative associations to what for me has been nothing but positive and mentally enriching encounters with the music that interests me.

[Jo498]

I don't think I have ever collected a piece or recordings of a specific artists obsessively, i.e. hunting for extreme rarities, bootlegs or striving for completeness.

This doesn't mean I have not ordered a few things from abroad when this was the only option or paid a bit more for something I wanted. But both rarely, I'd usually rather wait for a better price and I could probably count my foreign orders (that were not via Amazon dealers) within ~20 years still on both hands (IIRC 2-3 Japan, 2-3 BRO, not sure about within Europe because this was no problem and only little higher costs before Brexit). I am not a casual buyer but neither a collector who obsesses with completeness, rarity or whatever for their own sake.

Most of the time, I was also too poor or too lazy to go out of my way for opera or concert performances. I attended some when I was travelling anyway or when it was close, but have not spent lots of money for travelling and tickets. But I don't think there would be anything with spending on that.

[steve ridgway]

Not obsessed, it's just an enjoyable hobby and the historical and geographical interest spreads wider than with rock music.

[Todd]

Suspiciously specific!

To the point of being an obsession.

[Iota]

.. It seems to me that, for most of us, classical music is really an obsession --- from dawn till dusk we listen to and think about nothing else than classical music, recordings, performances, comparisons etc. Looks like our families, our jobs, our friends and our entire social environment have no other role than to support, and bear with, our classical music obsession. Looks like without this continuous and exclusive focus on classical music, our lives would be devoid of meaning and purpose.

Fwiw, this doesn't describe me at all.
I care very much about music, classical most of all, and it regularly transports me to temporary state I might describe as a kind of ecstasy. I almost never listen to it while doing something else, it diminishes the experience considerably for me.
When I'm not listening, which is most of the time, I think about it, but not remotely close to most of the time. I am though permanently in a state of gratitude that it exists, and a state of astonishment at the gift that so many have for composing and playing it. That never goes away even when I'm not in the mood for listening.

[brewski]

Suppose you were born 200 years ago. No power stations, no recordings, no internet, no Lenny Kravitz. What then?

My longstanding thought: imaging living in Beethoven's time, and hearing the Ninth Symphony once — once only, and never again. It is hard for me to even imagine, after being born in an age when you can hear something hundreds, or even thousands of times. I'm grateful to live in the 21st century, when that option is easily available.

-Bruce

[San Antone]

Suppose you were born 200 years ago. No power stations, no recordings, no internet, no Lenny Kravitz. What then?

It was more common back then for most people play an instrument and make music with their families and friends; an active participation as opposed to our passive method.

[Jo498]

Suppose you were born 200 years ago. No power stations, no recordings, no internet, no Lenny Kravitz. What then?

I don't quite see the point. Do you ask yourself anytime you use any commodity that would not have been (or only rarely) available 200 years ago, not only modern media but also indoor plumbing, affordable exotic fruit, medical service etc. "what if I had been born 200 years ago?"

Some people were as much or more obsessed with music, arts etc. then if they could afford it (or in an escapist way from a life they struggled to cope with). While it's only about 130 years ago, Mann uses the musical obsession of the teenaged Hanno to show the decadence of the Buddenbrooks. Someone like Hoffmann might count as a real life case (although he needed his writing and booze as well)

[DavidW]

My longstanding thought: imaging living in Beethoven's time, and hearing the Ninth Symphony once — once only, and never again. It is hard for me to even imagine, after being born in an age when you can hear something hundreds, or even thousands of times. I'm grateful to live in the 21st century, when that option is easily available.

-Bruce

That still happens to me... not great music but good stuff... the students here have a music class for the interim period where they write their own music and perform it for the school.  I hear it once and never again!

[DavidW]

Exactly. I claim that amateur playing and singing was a much more healthy and profound way of engaging with, and experiencing of, "classical music" than listening to, and comparing of, multiple recordings.

In the time it would take it would take you to learn to play a single Bach partita masterfully I could listen to all keyboard works of Bach, Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn and Faure!

I'll take the easy way.

[VonStupp]

Exactly. I claim that amateur playing and singing was a much more healthy and profound way of engaging with, and experiencing of, "classical music" than listening to, and comparing of, multiple recordings.

I love this!

Had I not prepared and performed Stravinsky's Mass (or insert a preferred title), most likely it would be just another piece of music I learned to enjoy by a composer. But spending the time to work out the structure, the harmonies, the balances, and knowing the piece inside and out, makes it rather special.

The first piano piece I learned from Robert Schumann was Aufschwung. It continues to hold a special place because I know the time and efforts to make it playable (for me), but also I know every nook and cranny of the musical parts and what parts of me it takes to play through it. The same goes with Debussy's Bruyères, which was the first time I read off of three staves and the first time I used the sostenuto pedal.

I hate to overuse the word special, but that is what living with music you work out for yourself is. If composing music is giving birth, then learning and performing music must be love making. Does this make listening to music watching from afar? I personally prefer the learning...
VS 

[Florestan]

In the time it would take it would take you to learn to play a single Bach partita masterfully I could listen to all keyboard works of Bach, Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn and Faure!

I'll take the easy way.

What amateur back then played Bach, let alone masterfully? 

[DavidW]

What amateur back then played Bach, let alone masterfully? 

Oh I thought you meant today.  I thought you were announcing your intentions to jump into performance!

[Spotted Horses]

In the time it would take it would take you to learn to play a single Bach partita masterfully I could listen to all keyboard works of Bach, Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn and Faure!

I'll take the easy way.

As a pretty lousy musician, I still find the process of creating a cringeworthy performance deeply satisfying in a way that listening to Kempff is not.

And, to answer the original question, yes I am obsessed by any reasonable definition, with various negative consequences.

[Florestan]

As a pretty lousy musician, I still find the process of creating a cringeworthy performance deeply satisfying in a way that listening to Kempff is not.

Exactly my point: an active enjoyment of music is more satisfying than a passive one.

[San Antone]

In the time it would take it would take you to learn to play a single Bach partita masterfully I could listen to all keyboard works of Bach, Schubert, Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn and Faure!

I'll take the easy way.

Learning to play an instrument as a child used to be routine; and I understand trying to do that as an adult is very hard.  But having the direct experience of playing the music (AOT listening to it from a recording) is a rewarding and rich experience that I would encourage any music lover to attempt.

One needn't begin with the hardest music, Bach Partita, but the Two Part Inventions would be possible.

[Henk]

Exactly my point: an active enjoyment of music is more satisfying than a passive one.

I doubt that. It's probably different.

I have often a more or less shallow listening experience and sometimes I have deep, captivating ones.

That a performer is closer to the music, doesn't mean he better grasps it. He's busy performing, he's a medium in order for us to fully appreciate the music, which may happen or happen not. Think of it as a cooperation.

Listening to music is not just 'passive'.