Great composers that are not your cup of tea

[karlhenning]

I tried the Liszt tone poem Karl so avidly recommends - wow, that's a bizarre little piece, isn't it? Short, snappy, and rather disconcertingly weird. I'll have to hear it again.

Delighted to have introduced it to you, Brian!

[Sergeant Rock]

Also, Ray . . . although I'm not sure how fond you may be of 19^th-c. piano music, try Martha Argerich in the Sonata in b minor, S.178. If her playing doesn't engage you in this work, no one's will : )

With the exception of Hélène Grimaud    She's the one who finally convinced me about the Liszt Sonata.

Sarge

[karlhenning]

Nor I.

In fairness, of course, this thread is by design a sort of confessional of musical disharmony.

Still, the statement that a piece which I like so well, and which I find both surpassingly musical and of keen interest, could be nominated as a dictionary definition of boring!

[karlhenning]

With the exception of Hélène Grimaud    She's the one who finally convinced me about the Liszt Sonata.

Sarge

Ah, nice to know, Sarge!

[Grazioso]

You are right Karl.  I need to explore his symphonic poems.  I have to be honest and have not heard them yet, perhaps one or two?

It is his piano music that just doesn't seem to do anything for me (at least at this point in time).  As with many other composers whose first impressions to me weren't the rosiest (see Mozart and Tchaikovsky).....well, obviously that can change.

I have no doubt that I will eventually find a great deal that I do enjoy in Liszt. 

For the symphonic poems, try



This is where HvK's wallowing in sonority works to great advantage. All this talk of our dear Abbe made me dig out my Masur set of the orchestral works for a listen to "Mazeppa," after which I had to pull out my Karajan disc for some real blood and thunder. Gotta love that BPO brass.

Now, it is Liszt, so you'll still need to open the window and air out the room after playing it 

[karlhenning]

FWIW, HvK didn't seal the deal for me on the Liszt tone-poems.  I know reverence for HvK is near-universal, but he's not everybody's money, really.

And, I strongly encourage Ray to check out the last (which is an isolated, late tone-poem) first . . . call it a palate-cleanser.

[Grazioso]

FWIW, HvK didn't seal the deal for me on the Liszt tone-poems.  I know reverence for HvK is near-universal, but he's not everybody's money, really.

And, I strongly encourage Ray to check out the last (which is an isolated, late tone-poem) first . . . call it a palate-cleanser.

HvK is certainly not normally my cup of tea: that disc is a happy exception. Btw, has anyone mentioned the Bolet box set of piano works? His relatively slow, meditative pace on many pieces is interesting. (Some say it's to cover for flaws in technique, but I'm in no position to comment.)

[karlhenning]

FWIW, HvK didn't seal the deal for me on the Liszt tone-poems.  I know reverence for HvK is near-universal, but he's not everybody's money, really.

And, fact is, he was the conductor of the first recording I ever heard of the Liszt tone-poems. Here's the story:

We had played Les Préludes in the UVa orchestra in Charlottesville. Great experience, loved the piece, found it an entirely exciting and satisfying piece of music.

A couple of years later, I pick up a CD of Liszt tone-poems, Berliner Philharmoniker/HvK. They all sound flat to me, the brass are muffled (might almost say, muzzled) and the overall sound is wubba-wubba. HvK succeeds in making a piece dull, which I knew from experience was the opposite of dull.

Here's what I think of HvK, who was of course a genuinely great artist, but like any mortal, has his limitations: his musical mind was a sort of food processor.  You put in the pitcher some Mozart, some Beethoven, some Liszt, some Stravinsky — and a boatload of Wagner, and slightly lesser boatloads of Bruckner, R. Strauss and Brahms.  Push the Mix button.

Voilà! You've got a composer who, if not necessarily the very greatest, is in the front rank of conductors of Wagner, R. Strauss Bruckner and Brahms — and you've got some mannered recordings of (e.g.) Mozart & Stravinsky which sound a little uncomfortably like WWRD (What Would Jesus Richard Do?).

Even though Wagner was Liszt's son-in-law, his music requires a different sensibility, closer to Berlioz or even Mendelssohn than to Wagner.

HvK is certainly not normally my cup of tea: that disc is a happy exception.

Well, I am glad you like it. Of course, per this:

Cozy hermetic tanks, perhaps, but at least the academics are intellectually engaging art on a rigorous, systematic level, whatever the validity of their end results. That trumps the "I listened to and it sucks. Why? Because, it does, dumbass!" school of art criticism 

. . . there's a corresponding school which goes, "I listened to and it's great. Why? Because, it is!"

Seriously, one likes what one likes, one dislikes what one dislikes.  And it is not always an easy matter, figuring out whether anyone else on the planet will like or dislike quite what I like or dislike.

[Brahmsian]

It's funny how it works, for me.  I'm now looking forward to hearing Liszt's symphonic poems.  When I already feel like I don't particularly dig a certain composer's music, it is then much easier for me to keep an open mind when I revisit again and perhaps try some different works.

It's worked great in the past.  I will soon be re-exploring Liszt, more in depth, and I thank everyone for their recommendations.

[Grazioso]

It's funny how it works, for me.  I'm now looking forward to hearing Liszt's symphonic poems.  When I already feel like I don't particularly dig a certain composer's music, it is then much easier for me to keep an open mind when I revisit again and perhaps try some different works.

It's worked great in the past.  I will soon be re-exploring Liszt, more in depth, and I thank everyone for their recommendations.

It's definitely easier if you don't have an emotional investment in liking or disliking something. I'm not normally a big Liszt fan, but I had fun listening to him again last night after reading this thread.

[karlhenning]

Groovimondo.

[Grazioso]

Well, I am glad you like it. Of course, per this:

. . . there's a corresponding school which goes, "I listened to and it's great. Why? Because, it is!"

Seriously, one likes what one likes, one dislikes what one dislikes.  And it is not always an easy matter, figuring out whether anyone else on the planet will like or dislike quite what I like or dislike.

Sure. De gustibus... "You like grape jelly!? You're wrong!" 

I think it's important, though, to differentiate between the statement of an emotional reaction and a critical analysis. It's the difference between someone saying, "Moby-Dick is boring" and a trained scholar writing a 300-page analysis of the novel according to an explicit critical framework, wherein elements X, Y, and Z are discussed in the context of A, B, and C. With the latter, specific evidence is cited, and conclusions are put forward as part of an ongoing critical discussion among experts.

You may not agree with the conclusions, but hopefully the scholar makes it clear he thought about the issues carefully. Just as importantly, following his thought processes hopefully gets you to read the novel through a new lens.

[karlhenning]

I think it's important, though, to differentiate between the statement of an emotional reaction and a critical analysis.

Yes. You didn't suppose that I know the difference? Actually, part of my point is the difference ; )

[Amfortas]

Sure. De gustibus... "You like grape jelly!? You're wrong!" 

I think it's important, though, to differentiate between the statement of an emotional reaction and a critical analysis. It's the difference between someone saying, "Moby-Dick is boring" and a trained scholar writing a 300-page analysis of the novel according to an explicit critical framework, wherein elements X, Y, and Z are discussed in the context of A, B, and C. With the latter, specific evidence is cited, and conclusions are put forward as part of an ongoing critical discussion among experts.

You may not agree with the conclusions, but hopefully the scholar makes it clear he thought about the issues carefully. Just as importantly, following his thought processes hopefully gets you to read the novel through a new lens.

I had a friend who used to infuriate me by saying Moby-Dick is boring, right before admitting he'd never read it. And he wasn't kidding....Arrrgghhh!! 

[Brahmsian]

I had a friend who used to infuriate me by saying Moby-Dick is boring, right before admitting he'd never read it. And he wasn't kidding....Arrrgghhh!! 

A chacun son gout.  It's one of my favorite books of all time, and I just read it about a year ago for the first time.

[Grazioso]

Yes. You didn't suppose that I know the difference? Actually, part of my point is the difference ; )

I know you know, but...

I had a friend who used to infuriate me by saying Moby-Dick is boring, right before admitting he'd never read it. And he wasn't kidding....Arrrgghhh!! 

It's the one about the bald techno artist's love life, right? 

A chacun son gout.  It's one of my favorite books of all time, and I just read it about a year ago for the first time.

That book is intriguing--and immensely strange. Modernism way before the fact.

[kishnevi]

In fairness, of course, this thread is by design a sort of confessional of musical disharmony.

Still, the statement that a piece which I like so well, and which I find both surpassingly musical and of keen interest, could be nominated as a dictionary definition of boring!

The Boulez is, like the Ligeti orchestral works,  the sort of music which I take out every so often, as a sort of intellectual duty to myself,  listen to it to try to hear what other people (like you) hear in it,  find  nothing, and put it back on the shelf.  And the recording I have is Boulez conducting the Ensemble Intercontemporain (or whatever it's actually called, don't have it in front of me at the moment), so I have to assume it's not the fault of the conductor or the performers. 

(It probably does say something that I keep have to correct myself all the time when typing his name--my fingers almost automatically turn it into Berlioz.)

But at least it doesn't give me a headache, unlike some of the aforementioned Ligeti--or the Ives symphonies.  (Again, there's another one where I don't like the orchestral works but love the string quartets and the Concord Sonata.)

[Amfortas]

A chacun son gout.  It's one of my favorite books of all time, and I just read it about a year ago for the first time.

One of my favorites as well, holds up well on re-reading and works well as an audiobook too

[Brahmsian]

One of my favorites as well, holds up well on re-reading and works well as an audiobook too

I have to re-read the final chapters (the days of the hunt), as I read through it too fast and felt like I missed a lot of the details.  It seemed before I knew what was going on, the boat was sunk. 

[Amfortas]

I have to re-read the final chapters (the days of the hunt), as I read through it too fast and felt like I missed a lot of the details.  It seemed before I knew what was going on, the boat was sunk. 

And you can listen to Bernard Herrmann's cantata "Moby Dick" while you read