sorry, i'll cancel this

[coffee]

never mind sorry

[coffee]

+3
Vivaldi: Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'inventione

+2
Mozart: Symphony #40

+1
Berlioz: Symphonie fantastique
Brahms: Piano Concerto #1
Rachmaninoff: Piano Concerto #2
Schubert: String Quartet #14

[hopefullytrusting]

+3
Bach: Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin, BWV 1001-1006 [1720]

+2
Vivaldi: Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'inventione, including Le quattro stagioni (The Four Seasons) [1725]

+1
Brahms: Piano Concerto #1 in D minor, op. 15 [1858]
Schubert: Piano Sonata #21 in B-flat, D. 960 [1828]
Schubert: String Quartet #14 in D minor, D. 810 "Death and the Maiden" [1824]
Sibelius: Violin Concerto in D minor, op. 47 [1905]

[Madiel]

The 136th-tier thread went so well that I've decided to try a more traditional voting-style thread at the other end of the list: the 9th tier.

Just when I thought this thing couldn't get any sillier, it turns out we will be playing pot luck with the voting order.

[Florestan]

Just when I thought this thing couldn't get any sillier, it turns out we will be playing pot luck with the voting order.

Indeed, mind-bogglingly silly endeavor. If the 10th tier means "less strongly recommended", then the 136th tier, means, what, "farthest conceivable below even the junkiest conceivable junk"? Then why even bother listening to those works?

And who is supposed to need such highly arbitrary tiers, anyway? Discovering "classical" music is a personal(ized) process. If a newcomer started, say, at the 1st tier and by the 3rd decided that this kind of music was not for them, then they would miss works in the tiers below which they actually might have liked. And I defy anyone to convince me that a newcomer would ever actually use these tiers here, let alone patiently and thoroughly go through them in order, from 1 to 136.

[coffee]

Indeed, mind-bogglingly silly endeavor. If the 10th tier means "less strongly recommended", then the 136th tier, means, what, "farthest conceivable below even the junkiest conceivable junk"? Then why even bother listening to those works?

And who is supposed to need such highly arbitrary tiers, anyway? Discovering "classical" music is a personal(ized) process. If a newcomer started, say, at the 1st tier and by the 3rd decided that this kind of music was not for them, then they would miss works in the tiers below which they actually might have liked. And I defy anyone to convince me that a newcomer would ever actually use these tiers here, let alone patiently and thoroughly go through them in order, from 1 to 136.

I don't know why you think I (or anyone else) would expect that. I really can't believe you actually think anyone would expect that. If someone WANTED to try a project like that, fine, for now at least we still have the freedom to try things like that, but I can't believe you would really believe that anyone would believe that anyone ought to do something like that. (I really like that sentence, incidentally.)

My only goal is to make it easier for people who want to explore classical music to do so. I'm not legislating anything. I'm not sure why you want to make learning about classical music more difficult than it already is. You might not like people like me (who at some point in our lives can benefit from resources like this) learning about your music, but some of us are going to anyway. Your gatekeeping efforts might discourage some people but it's just too late to keep me away.

[coffee]

Just when I thought this thing couldn't get any sillier, it turns out we will be playing pot luck with the voting order.

If anyone were interested, I'd be happy to go systematically from bottom to top.

[Madiel]

My only goal is to make it easier for people who want to explore classical music to do so.

But you're not. You're really not.

You would be better off creating smaller lists of 20 great composers, 50 symphonies and the like. Which is in fact what you can find across the internet BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS.

You are failing to create data in digestible chunks except in a tier (which you disavow the importance of)... which doesn't work because you have so many tiers. It's a gigantic data dump.

[Florestan]

My only goal is to make it easier for people who want to explore classical music to do so.

A very commendable goal, but how are these tiers of yours suppose to achieve it here? In order to make any difference, (1) they must first be known by people who want to explore classical music and then (2) those people must be willing to accept them and made their way through them, otherwise why would you even bother making them? (1) is absolutely redundant here on GMG, where 99% of the membership consists of advanced aficionados who need no such tiers. (2), by your own admittance, is neither achievable nor desirable, which begs the same question: why would you even bother to make them, anyway?

You might not like people like me (who at some point in our lives can benefit from resources like this) learning about your music, but some of us are going to anyway. Your gatekeeping efforts might discourage some people but it's just too late to keep me away. 

I have no idea what you're talking about. First, it's not *my* music. Second, I don't know what kind of people you are, nor do I care. Third, my *gatekeeping efforts* is complete nonsense: I could not prevent anyone from learning about "classical" music even if I wanted to (which is an absurd accusation).

But by all means, carry on and go ahead with your project, disregarding any and all criticism and not pausing for one second to think about its practicality. You clearly are a man with a mission.

[Madiel]

Let me put it this way:

I went travelling last year. Tourist maps often highlight a select number of things in a city and show where they are.

You have created a map that shows every single building, and claiming that it's a tourist guide because some of the addresses are in larger print.

This is the problem. The goal of documenting everything and the goal of helping people explore are fundamentally opposed. You help people explore by simplifying and cutting out detail. Not by handing them a complete list of addresses.

[coffee]

Let me put it this way:

I went travelling last year. Tourist maps often highlight a select number of things in a city and show where they are.

You have created a map that shows every single building, and claiming that it's a tourist guide because some of the addresses are in larger print.

This is the problem. The goal of documenting everything and the goal of helping people explore are fundamentally opposed. You help people explore by simplifying and cutting out detail. Not by handing them a complete list of addresses.

My bucket list currently has over 18,000 items and over 8000 of them are places to visit; I have several thousand more places to add when I get around to it. (The rest are books, movies, works of music to hear, things to taste, various activities....)

Does that make the list completely unhelpful to me? If so, please inform me how long the proper length should be.

[coffee]

Anyway whatever you guys win

[coffee]

But I will go on exploring music and YOU CANNOT STOP ME

You can make me hate the way you look down on me but you cannot stop me from infiltrating your class. I'm already here. And if I met you in real life, you'd respect me without suspecting a thing. Anyway, I and many others are already helping other people make the transition even more easily. It's never been easier. Being in charge isn't what it used to be.

Also, I might be back in a year or so to try again... we'll see....

[Florestan]

But I will go on exploring music and YOU CANNOT STOP ME

You can make me hate the way you look down on me but you cannot stop me from infiltrating your class. I'm already here. And if I met you in real life, you'd respect me without suspecting a thing.

Also, I might be back in a year or so to try again... we'll see....

All this reminds me of a joke widely circulated in communist Romania.

Q: Was comrade Ceaușescu an illegalist during the bourgeois regime?
A: Yes, but only semi-illegalist.
Q: How so?
A: Well, he was indeed hiding, but nobody was looking for him.

[coffee]

All this reminds me of a joke widely circulated in communist Romania.

Q: Was comrade Ceaușescu an illegalist during the bourgeois regime?
A: Yes, but only semi-illegalist.
Q: How so?
A: Well, he was indeed hiding, but nobody was looking for him.

And yet the lists and many other resources like it exist....

[Madiel]

My bucket list currently has over 18,000 items and over 8000 of them are places to visit; I have several thousand more places to add when I get around to it. (The rest are books, movies, works of music to hear, things to taste, various activities....)

Does that make the list completely unhelpful to me? If so, please inform me how long the proper length should be.

You just moved the goalposts. The question isn't whether it's helpful TO YOU. You claim to be helping other people, remember?

And I say this as a major list maker. Right here on this computer I'm typing at, I have lists of the compositions of Barber, Beethoven, Brahms, Bridge, Chopin, Debussy, Duparc, Dvorak, Faure, Holmboe, Janacek, Leifs, Mahler, Medtner, Mendelssohn, Mozart, Nielsen, Norgard, Poulenc, Rachmaninov, Ravel, Schumann, Scriabin, Shostakovich, Sibelius, Stravinsky, Szymanowski, Tubin and Vine.  I've got sublists for some of those, as well as various category lists of Bach and Haydn. I've got lists of chamber music which is a particular interest. I've got some pop music lists. I also look this sort of stuff up constantly.

But how many of those lists do I share with anyone else? Very few. I've given people here summaries of my library investigations of what the heck happened to the opus numbers of Sibelius and Dvorak. And I created the Wikipedia page that lists the compositions of Holmboe.

I have planned queues of TV shows to watch. I have a system for my favourite television network so that I know when various shows are expiring on their on-demand service.

I have all sorts of mini-lists on my phone for music I want to listen to, some of which I discover several years later and then see if there's some newer list they ought to be integrated into. I keep track of what I listen to in both classical and pop, in part so that I'm aware of things in my collection that I haven't listened to for a long time.

I have gone back and documented each day of 77-day long trip from last year, using my bank account statement, to make notes about where I ate and what I ate.

If you want to make lists for you own benefit, knock yourself out (though good luck ever visiting 8000 places, start doing some math about that one). That wasn't the claim. The claim was that you were doing something that would benefit other people. And the problem is you show absolutely no sign of having given thought to how to communicate information to other people. It's a skill.

Also, please stop liking every post. It's actually kind of annoying.

[Madiel]

But I will go on exploring music and YOU CANNOT STOP ME

You can make me hate the way you look down on me but you cannot stop me from infiltrating your class. I'm already here. And if I met you in real life, you'd respect me without suspecting a thing. Anyway, I and many others are already helping other people make the transition even more easily. It's never been easier. Being in charge isn't what it used to be.

Also, I might be back in a year or so to try again... we'll see....

Nobody is trying to stop you exploring music. But this just confirms what I said about a week ago: if this list is for YOUR exploration of music, then you really are treating us like your pawns.

That is not okay. It won't be okay in a year's time.

[Florestan]

And yet the lists and many other resources like it exist....

I was referring to the *me trying to stop you infiltrating my class* part, which made me LMAOL.

[coffee]

You just moved the goalposts. The question isn't whether it's helpful TO YOU. You claim to be helping other people, remember?

And I say this as a major list maker. Right here on this computer I'm typing at, I have lists of the compositions of Barber, Beethoven, Brahms, Bridge, Chopin, Debussy, Duparc, Dvorak, Faure, Holmboe, Janacek, Leifs, Mahler, Medtner, Mendelssohn, Mozart, Nielsen, Norgard, Poulenc, Rachmaninov, Ravel, Schumann, Scriabin, Shostakovich, Sibelius, Stravinsky, Szymanowski, Tubin and Vine.  I've got sublists for some of those, as well as various category lists of Bach and Haydn. I've got lists of chamber music which is a particular interest. I've got some pop music lists. I also look this sort of stuff up constantly.

But how many of those lists do I share with anyone else? Very few. I've given people here summaries of my library investigations of what the heck happened to the opus numbers of Sibelius and Dvorak. And I created the Wikipedia page that lists the compositions of Holmboe.

I have planned queues of TV shows to watch. I have a system for my favourite television network so that I know when various shows are expiring on their on-demand service.

I have all sorts of mini-lists on my phone for music I want to listen to, some of which I discover several years later and then see if there's some newer list they ought to be integrated into. I keep track of what I listen to in both classical and pop, in part so that I'm aware of things in my collection that I haven't listened to for a long time.

I have gone back and documented each day of 77-day long trip from last year, using my bank account statement, to make notes about where I ate and what I ate.

If you want to make lists for you own benefit, knock yourself out (though good luck ever visiting 8000 places, start doing some math about that one). That wasn't the claim. The claim was that you were doing something that would benefit other people. And the problem is you show absolutely no sign of having given thought to how to communicate information to other people. It's a skill.

Also, please stop liking every post. It's actually kind of annoying.

Why is it annoying? I appreciate the dialogue.

If I were the only person who has ever used the list, or if I were completely unlike any other human who might want to learn about classical music, you would have a point. But there are more where I came from.

[coffee]

Nobody is trying to stop you exploring music. But this just confirms what I said about a week ago: if this list is for YOUR exploration of music, then you really are treating us like your pawns.

That is not okay. It won't be okay in a year's time.

Of course that's exactly what you're trying to do. Which is fine. It will be fine in a year's time.

I'm not sure how many ways to tell you that if you don't want to participate, don't participate. Other people were willing to. Why couldn't you let us do so in peace?