Tír Na HiFi

Well maybe that's another "in". A common theme I hear from those who don't listen to much classical is that they don't know where to start. This is probably the ideal place to ask away, because there are truly no stupid questions here and we don't do belittling. My "what should I listen to next?" question isn't too far removed from "what should I listen to first?"

Diapason wrote:I actually think that the less "serious" the easier it is to contribute. It's really hard to follow up a well-researched and well-expressed essay, I know I'm inclined to lapse into awed silence when faced with that.

I've cleverly tried to get this started the week before going away for 2 weeks' holiday, so I'm probably not the best person to kick this off. However, let's just pick something that we all feel we can talk about. Fergus posted about the 1812 recently, pointing out that it's somewhat maligned due to its popularity. That might be a topic for discussion itself, I'm sure we all have opinions on similar pieces.

I could say, for example, that I kind of still love Ravel's Bolero...

that's a great idea...!

Take say, The Greatest Classical Album in the World....Ever!! and expand on the movements and excerpts to see the reason why they became so clichéd...

I only introduced the girls to the 1812 tonight! But we'll have to part ways for Bolero (bleeeeeurrghoooooh)

well my level is a good Peer Gynt and tonight's system test will include a 3 CD Baroque Collection from Naxos. I do have a half decent collection of classical stuff by "normal" people's standards but they don't move me in the way a well struck chord on a guitar or a roll up the keyboard of a Hammond B3 organ can... I really shouldn't expect the same emotive response to both kinds of music but.... I can get that from folk, blues, trad, jazz and many other genres... why doesn't classical spark that flame?

Classical music is as much about producing an emotional response as any other type of music.  It initially appears difficult because of the apparent absence of a backbeat or pulse that you find in rock or blues.  The still prevalent snobbery that exists among jazz and classical "afficionados" of "their" music occupying some kind of rarefied intellectual outpost is certainly offputting.  And there is the fear that perhaps an expansion of one's musical boundaries might close the doors to all of the music that you dearly love.  And there is also the matter of acceptance from your peers of your new musical tastes. 

I distinctly recall coming to classical and jazz from rock music and struggling with the alien sound world of this music.  It can be difficult to penetrate and an appreciation of the music can't simply be forced on you.  I don't accept that the only way in is to simplify it.  You have to accept some element of the struggle and try and meet it half way.  And I did struggle with the music for quite a while before I gradually gained a level of familiarity with this new sound world.  I was very influenced by Frank Zappa when I was younger and, to understand more about the man's music, I made an effort to find out more about his influences.  I adored his guitar playing and I discovered his love of the music of Johnny Guitar Watson and Wes Montgomery and so I sought out that music.  He repeatedly namechecked Charles Mingus and Eric Dolphy and so I listened to their recordings.  He mentioned Edgard Varese, Igor Stravinsky and Conlon Nancarrow and I hunted down their music.  I amassed a small collection of this strange new music and listened to it intently.   Much of it I could only play for short periods of time before getting a headache and I would eagerly go back to the music of Zappa with relief.  But I would re-read the interviews with Zappa where he spoke passionately about this music that so inspired him.  Because I loved Zappa's music I went back and listened to this strange music and slowly, very slowly, it began to make sense.  What I am trying to say here is that you have to be prepared to really struggle and engage with the music.  It does help if you try not to actively concentrate on the music too much.  It is really amazing what the mind can absorb subconsciously.

Also, a common danger is that of developing comfort zones wherein you find yourself reflexively listening to the same pieces or buying new interpretations of the same piece or becoming fixated on baroque or 19th century Romantic music.  What makes the achievements of the major composers so awe-inspiring is the way in which they could simultaneously absorb the music of earlier masters as well as their contemporaries and develop the music in a radical way.  There is Einstein's oft-repeated quote that "we are all standing on the shoulders of giants".  In order to discover more about an artist, you discover more about his contemporaries as well as the work that inspired him.  So, to understand T.S. Eliot as a verse poet, you read Donne and Milton and Baudelaire and Claudel.  To understand Haydn as a composer of keyboard sonatas, you listen to the sonatas that Clementi, Dussec and Kozeluch were writing during the same period.  To understand Bach's writing for organ, you listen to Buxtehude and de Grigny.  And so on.

Perhaps a general discussion of themes like Renaissance vocal polyphany, French/Czech/Spanish/Portuguese Baroque music, or 20th century music would be better than concentrating on single works.

Why not leave it open?

no format.... just some description of a theme? whether it be the nuances of different performances of a single Mahler symphony, or a contextualisation of the works of Bach; if it inspires someone to make it a project, it'll illuminate the rest of us!

I wonder, Ivor, whether one factor is that your listening preferences tend toward the "down n' dirty" rather than the "polished to perfection", overproduced style. (I don't want to put words in your mouth here, but that's the sense I get.) Since polish is something that's greatly admired in the classical arena, it can be difficult to find that sense of adventure and spontaneity in some performances. It exists from time to time, but it's probably not the norm.

Hmmm...

One way or the other, I actually know what you mean.

Have you ever been to a live classical concert Ivor?
That was the catalyst for me when I first started to get into it all. At a live event, say a symphony, you get an appreciation for the layout of the orchestra and where and why the different instrument sounds are coming from. When you then sit at home and listen to it on your system you can start to imagine better how the orchestra/ensemble is laid out in front of you.
Classical music is often about painting a picture in music of a scene, landscape or mood. This can be difficult for a newcomer as there are usually no vocals except for the obvious stuff so is a little more difficult to relate to. Also a little backgound reading can help in trying to understand what the composer was trying to convey.
It does take a bit of effort, often repeated listening over a period of time to 'learn' the work and to identify hooks in the music. You wont like it all, there are plenty of classical music pieces/composers that I detest but its really worth the effort as its hugely rewarding in the end.

DaveF wrote:Have you ever been to a live classical concert Ivor?

Not that I can recall, and it's on my "do to" list. I did play classical piano from age 5 - 15 and classical accordion (I'll either go straight to hell or straight to heaven) from 10 - 15. With the accordion I played as part of a large accordion band (it'll be hell won't it?) so I understand the impact of that live music on that scale can have. My whole "down and dirty" taste might well be from a rebellion against all that too.

Ivor wrote:With the accordion I played as part of a large accordion band

This explains everything.

/thread

Ivor wrote:[ played as part of a large accordion band (it'll be hell won't it?).

yes, yes it will