Which of these composers do you struggle with the most and why?

[Karl Henning]

There is no scorn for those composers. Maybe the worship of Sibelius in Finland feels sometimes over the top (while e.g. Einar Englund is ignored).

I see, thanks.

[Brian]

Barber, Britten, Copland, Ives, Mahler and Sibelius of these are in the caterory "I rather listen to Katy Perry's bubblecum pop than struggle with this)."

... "bubblecum"?

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Why did you skip my favorite Piston?

...and William Schuman!

I haven't got around to them just yet, but I surely will.......

[71 dB]

... "bubblecum"?

Whatever you want to call it. 

[Monsieur Croche]

...but, tsk, tsk ~ you forgot the "none of the above" option.

I gather this poll's point is whether for some reason or other listeners find one or more of these composers 'inaccessible,' and what it is not about is composers whose works 'we get' while their ouvre simply does not engage or hold our interest?

Poll Answer, then, "None."

I find all of them quite readily 'accessible' composers with no barriers to listening, while I could readily name six listed there whose works for me do next to nothing or nothing at all, [those likely the more generally 'popular' on that list] but I ain't namin' no names.

[Karl Henning]

...but, tsk, tsk ~ you forgot the "none of the above" option.

I gather this poll's point is whether for some reason or other listeners find one or more of these composers 'inaccessible,' and what it is not about is composers whose works 'we get' while their ouvre simply does not engage or hold our interest?

Poll Answer, then, "None."

I find all of them quite readily 'accessible' composers with no barriers to listening, while I could readily name six listed there whose works for me do next to nothing or nothing at all, but I ain't namin names.

Fair enow.

[Jay F]

I could readily name six listed there whose works for me do next to nothing or nothing at all, [those likely the more generally 'popular' on that list] but I ain't namin' no names.

Aw, c'mon. Brahms?

[Monsieur Croche]

Aw, c'mon. Brahms?

Was he even on that list? I'm still not namin' no names, but since he is not, at least, in the six I was thinking of, I happily disclose that I more than like me some Brahms.

Having already claimed that most people's struggle with composer A or B is mainly due to accumulated constraints via personal listening habits, I think it important to also say that some composer's music is relatively dense, in texture [with Brahms, that usually includes loaded for bear counterpoint and rhythm which obliterates the sense of bar-lines], the amount of ideas presented, or scale and length of the architecture of the piece. Brahms has works which embody all three of those elements, and anyone unaccustomed to that type of writing could find any or all of that a bit daunting.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Sometimes I feel that it is merely a case of peer pressure or even advertising pressure which begins any sense of 'struggle'

By 'struggle' I suppose I mean 'wanting to like music that one hasn't previously liked.' Mirror Image loves music that I have previously not liked and at the moment I am coming to terms with many of these composers. But 'struggle' implies work, and learning to enjoy something isn't work really, it's just looking at (or listening to) something from another perspective. Easy really!

Perhaps M. Croche isn't compelled to listen to certain composers on the list from another perspective just yet and therefore 'struggle' is entirely out of the equation, but I can't speak for him!

[ZauberdrachenNr.7]

Was he even on that list? I'm still not namin' no names, but since he is not, at least, in the six I was thinking of, I happily disclose that I more than like me some Brahms.

Having already claimed that most people's struggle with composer A or B is mainly due to accumulated constraints via personal listening habits, I think it important to also say that some composer's music is relatively dense, in texture [with Brahms, that usually includes loaded for bear counterpoint and rhythm which obliterates the sense of bar-lines], the amount of ideas presented, or scale and length of the architecture of the piece. Brahms has works which embody all three of those elements, and anyone unaccustomed to that type of writing could find any or all of that a bit daunting.

That is indeed a frequent complaint made against Brahms by those who struggle with him   Texture and density are the very words they use and I've never been able to persuade naysayers otherwise nor ever personally known anyone to break the negative spell they are under.  One can merely sigh and remember - maybe it was Bill McGlaughlin - who said that "Musicians typically have two favorite composers, Brahms and someone else..."   

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Well I used to dislike Brahms when I was young.

[ZauberdrachenNr.7]

Well I used to dislike Brahms when I was young.

So glad you saw the light, his!

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

So glad you saw the light, his!

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Well I used to dislike Brahms when I was young.

My first encounters with Brahms were like banging my head against a dense, unfriendly wall of sound. But I stuck with him, and eventually realized that, while he may have a few equals in the art of composition, he has no superiors.

It's the "texture and density" that does it. Someone on this board once said that if Brahms made chili, you'd be able to stand a fork in it.

Also fascinating is the way he looks both forward and backward. Part of the density of his work comes from his studies of Renaissance polyphony and other early music, an unusual interest for his time. Later, Schoenberg called him "Brahms the Progressive."

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Yes, Brahms was basically the forerunner of the second Viennese school. And Bach as well. Without those two composers, the 20th century would be very dull indeed!

[Monsieur Croche]

Sometimes I feel that it is merely a case of peer pressure or even advertising pressure which begins any sense of 'struggle'

By 'struggle' I suppose I mean 'wanting to like music that one hasn't previously liked.' Mirror Image loves music that I have previously not liked and at the moment I am coming to terms with many of these composers. But 'struggle' implies work, and learning to enjoy something isn't work really, it's just looking at (or listening to) something from another perspective. Easy really!

Perhaps M. Croche isn't compelled to listen to certain composers on the list from another perspective just yet and therefore 'struggle' is entirely out of the equation, but I can't speak for him!

I've never felt peer pressure or pressure of public opinion, I suppose because I started young and those mentioning this composer or that piece were all older professional musicians, including teachers, and later, adding to that group, my professional peers.

You've already experienced the far from empirically opinionated and somewhat clinical detachment within the trade when discussing these things -- from the outside that may look dispassionate, while it ain't.

So... I've listened, a lot, to all 'those guys on that list,' and of my own volition and at my own pace, repeatedly, with scores, played through their piano stuff, etc. yada ya. Checked them again, and again, on no particular schedule and without any sense of obligation -- or mystery. I re-visited because I know my tastes have broadened and changed over time. That done several times over, and over more than just a couple of decades, I 'just know' that seven of those composers works could not exist at all and I would not feel deprived of any great listening experience, or would have missed an opportunity to learn something from them which was unique and could not be found elsewhere about 'how music works.'

Sometimes you really know, without needing at all to dis perfectly good and 'great' composers, that their stuff does nothing for you at all, and so it is simply "not your cuppa."

After five solidly immersed decades of instrumental training, study in theory and comp and listening. playing through and analyzing scores, with an ocean of classical rep 'covered' while knowing there are literally oceans more not yet covered, allowing a little time to listen to some works one does want to listen to somewhat repeatedly, and with brand spanking new works coming out all the time which you also want to explore --  well, there ain't the time one has in ones earlier years.

Since I never 'struggled' with the music by any of the composers on that list, even initially [one exception, one Stravinsky neoclassical piece, which was more a one time speed bump / hiccup where only a bit later the work 'fell into place' on a second listen] i.e. found it all immediately accessible, got quite familiar with a fair amount of the output of each, 'get them quite completely,' and that allows me to abandon, without shame, guilt or feeling that any opprobrium is deserved.

[[Edit add: I had, against my previously given word, named those seven composers I can happily live without and without any regret. I've removed them from this post, not to be coy or provoke curiosity, but because I realized after posting that my original impulse was 'correct,' i.e. I saw and now see again no worthwhile purpose in naming them.]]

There is nothing wrong with any of those seven composers, I suppose. They all certainly knew how to compose well enough to gain international play and world-wide recognition.]

Best regards to my young composer friend, and stand up straight, put a feather in your cap, and pat yourself on the back... congratulations on that composition scholarship. I'm thrilled for you!

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

You and I are quite different I suppose. With me, my curiosity always draws me to the path of enjoying every composer I ever explore. But then again, because I am not as old as you, there is still the potential for me to decide I don't like certain music any more...but I hope that never happens!

And thanks, by the way, on congratulating me for that scholarship! 

[Monsieur Croche]

You and I are quite different I suppose. With me, my curiosity always draws me to the path of enjoying every composer I ever explore. But then again, because I am not as old as you, there is still the potential for me to decide I don't like certain music any more...but I hope that never happens!

And thanks, by the way, on congratulating me for that scholarship! 

When in my teens, I could say the same when first investigating just about any composer. I have to qualify a rather wide swath lacuna in my druthers, though, and this was not much less true when I was 'young' -- post Schumann, the later romantics [Brahms is a major exception] have never done much for me, though I eagerly hop back on board with Mahler and as just as heartily love and admire some Nielsen. As a pianist I do like and admire Chopin [far more aggressively wild and modern than many think or render him], while I think his music is far more satisfying to play than to listen to.

A colleague of mine 'blames' this preference [or maybe better, aversion] on the fact I first teethed on listening to Prokofiev, Janacek and Bach, and then at six started piano straight away learning to simultaneously read and play with both hands via Bartok, then was given some simple Bach  I'm not certain he is either wholly or partially correct about that. I'm as sentimental as the next guy, maybe even a bit more than most, but that is just not in a generally 19th century way, I guess.

[Florestan]

My first encounters with Brahms were like banging my head against a dense, unfriendly wall of sound.

I can't even imagine that... When I first heard his chamber music (the big Brilliant box) my reaction was: "This is the most beautiful music I have ever heard!". I stand by it, with a minor correction: "This is some of the most beautiful music ever composed."

I really mean it: Brahms is one of those composers who instantly won my heart, mind and unconditional admiration and devotion.

Fascinating how different people hear different things in one and the same music. 

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I can't even imagine that... When I first heard his chamber music (the big Brilliant box) my reaction was: "This is the most beautiful music I have ever heard!". I stand by it, with a minor correction: "This is some of the most beautiful music ever composed."

Maybe because I started with the symphonies. I didn't actually dislike them at first hearing; it was more like, there's something really impressive and monumental going on here, but I can't quite figure it out.

I do think that the chamber music of Brahms is even greater than his orchestral music, and as a totality constitutes one of the world's greatest musical achievements.