# Music that gained or lost appeal as your emotional state and outlook in life shifted?



## Clairvoyance Enough (Jul 25, 2014)

The recent thread about how musical taste changes as we age got me thinking about this. While for the most part I feel that music just expresses itself and, if it is good and I am receptive to it, will leave its inherent impression regardless of my own mood at the time, I do notice a lot of things falling in and out of my favor depending on how I feel.

For instance, Schoenberg, Ligeti, and Webern opens up to me during periods of frustration, tension, uncertainty, and etc, as I usually prefer the catharsis of hearing something that sounds like my negative emotions to counteracting them with something uplifting. That's actually what it took for me to really start enjoying that stuff.

That said, sometimes I feel so fed up that "romanticizing" the hardships of life to myself with any sort of dark or, well, romantic music just seems melodramatic and even repulsive, and lately I actually have preferred to raise myself up with Handel, Haydn, and other joyful composers (quick aside, don't you sometimes wish you could write a gushing thank you letter to composers for helping to lift your spirits? I swear I wanted to kiss Handel's fat face for cheering me up with this gorgeous piece 



).

I've also noticed that my interpretation of things will change depending on my mood. Lately my emotional state has been pretty banal and neutral, and so many things, from Bach's Art of Fugue to Schoenberg's Wind Quintet, that tend to evoke agitation or darkness I instead interpret as cerebral or logical, like the sound of curiosity or the solving of a mystery. On the flipside, I find myself unable to relate to stuff like the chaconne, the first movement of op. 131, rachmaninov's 2nd, and etc, because I just don't have any turmoil or big emotions inside with which to connect myself to them.

Obviously it's often the case that transformations of our taste just follow from innate fascination with the sounds themselves, but when extra-musical factors _do_ come in to play, how do you notice your own listening habits and perceptions of different pieces being influenced by events in your life, shifts of personal philosophy, and etc? And how permanent or severe have these changes been? I know one common trope that I see here and there on TC is people losing interest in the romantic era as they chill out or mature, and I'm sure many people go the opposite direction too, maybe both at the same time?


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

It takes years to sort out the composers which appeal to your sense of being in this world and those which are antithetical to your awareness, experiences, outlook, belief systems, at is your personal Zeitgeist. 

I have certain ideologies I carry around with me. So quite a few composers will, not work with me. 
I had 15 composers represented in my 300 cd collection, with addition of 4 or 5 these few past months. 
I doubt if I will add more. 
I am a happy camper. 
Best to limit who you listen to now,,,as you can explore later on. 
In my beginnings , I only listened to a select few, Mozart, Sibelius, Debussy, Ravel, Rachmaninov. scant few others. 
Just stay with what you like. btw don't think just because you see a composer mentioned often, that you also will like his music. 
Popularity means nothing..Its all about what music reflects your state of ideas, being in this world.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I agree with the OP about changing moods. Back in the day, they used to speak of biorhythms, how each month at certain times certain emotions would rise or subside. I seem to follow patterns like that. I don't think it's so much age/maturity as how much sleep I got the night before, how much pressure I'm under, or even whether it's humid outside.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Beethoven and Brahms pretty much always appeal to me. Composers like Mozart, Schubert, and Mendelssohn are for up moods. Sibelius and Bruckner are for my most contemplative moods. R. Strauss (esp. Metamorphosen) is for my darkest moods.

The composers I came to appreciate more as my tastes matured are Sibelius and Bruckner.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

wrong thread,,,sorry,,,,,


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

As I have aged I find that my taste has grown and broadened. I can't think of anything that I once loved but now avoid. I now have music I love for nearly my whole repertoire of moods.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

As I left my _Sturm und Drang_ years behind me, I became more able to appreciate those composers I associate with occasional and irresistible outbursts of pure joy at being alive: Bach, Mozart for example. In general, my taste for the Romantic composers tends also to be reduced down to very favorite pieces that can withstand repeated hearings without erosion. Generally also, my preference for many works of the first half of the 20th century remains undiminished.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

Brahms is the composer I have the most probelms with, by far - if we only talk about composers that I love. For I truly and utterly revere Brahms, at least when I'm in the right mood for it. If I'm not, I couldn't care less! I have a very peculiar relationship with Brahms, but these days I'm pretty good at reading my own moods and thus only listen to his music when I really want to.

Of course, sometimes you buy a ticket to a concert months in advance and then when the day comes it just doesn't work. This happaned to me and Brahms' 1st symphony once. Oh well...


----------



## Guest (Jul 4, 2019)

For beginners in classical music it's fairly easy to express a dislike of certain composers. This kind of thing is not uncommon, and the people who make such comments appear to do so without much hesitation. 

For people who have been around the classical music scene much longer, it's probably a more difficult thing to do the same. This is especially so on internet forums like this one in case it might create the impression to one's fellow posters that you're haven't properly explored the relevant area. Some people may feel that it would not look good if they expressed a disliking of certain major composers they believe their peers may like, lest they appear to be some kind of ignoramus or philistine. 

I admit that my attachment to some of the more distant composers I once liked has weakened somewhat over recent years. I don't dislike any of them, but in terms of listening time the main casualties have been mainly in the baroque, "classical", and the mid/late romantic areas. In their place, I've been placing more emphasis on early "romantic", and various 20th C composers (mainly English) who were pretty conventional in their composition techniques.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I'm less interested in how my musical interests reflect passing life events and changing moods than in how my general tastes have changed with age (about 70 years now). One major tendency I've noticed is an increasing preference for chamber music - basically, ensembles of soloists - over orchestral music. This might be a matter of a chamber group's greater transparency of sound, of the expressiveness possible to individual players, or of the fact that composers have to produce a finer, more precise quality of musical thinking when they can't seduce or impress us with a big, colorful noise. I've recently been engaged in an intense process of slimming down my overgrown CD collection (ADVERTISEMENT: stay tuned, as I'll be offering many for sale here), and I see much more orchestral music than chamber music going out the door.

In a related manner, I'm becoming really intolerant of music that meanders structurally or fails to make its points with reasonable alacrity. This isn't a question of length per se, although longer pieces are more likely to suffer from amorphousness and bombast. I can tell very quickly whether a composer is in control of his material, and if I'm in doubt about that for more than a few minutes I move on and probably won't be back for a repeat performance. I'm sure I miss out on some interesting music, but life is short and getting shorter.

Maybe I'm becoming an old geezer "set in his ways," but after many decades of eagerly discovering new music (new to me, at least) and learning to appreciate things I didn't necessarily think I would, I'm now more likely to find that if I disliked something mildly ten or fifteen years ago, I dislike it more strongly now, or at least don't care to give it my time. This doesn't worry me or surprise me. What does surprise me is a lack of interest in music I used to like a lot. For example, I seem not to care much now about a lot of 20th-century American composers - Ives, Copland, Schuman, Harris, Diamond, Sowerby, Dello Joio, Persichetti - whose music used to attract me. What could this mean? Am I feeling less American in the era of Trumpelstiltskin, and less enamored of the "American sound" of their music? Or am I more demanding now, and finding that that "American sound" can no longer compensate me for some compositional weaknesses? A bit of both, perhaps.

On the whole, I listen to music less than I once did. But music has always been part of my mental furniture. I don't sit in my recliner much either, but as a decreasing resistance to gravity may have me resorting to it more and more often, I expect my slimmed-down CD collection to become increasingly the resource and comfort I intended it to be.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

> Woodduck: "In a related manner, I'm becoming really intolerant of music that meanders structurally or fails to make its points with reasonable alacrity. This isn't a question of length per se, although longer pieces are more likely to suffer from amorphousness and bombast. I can tell very quickly whether a composer is in control of his material, and if I'm in doubt about that for more than a few minutes I move on and probably won't be back for a repeat performance. I'm sure I miss out on some interesting music, but life is short and getting shorter."


Well put! A lot of seemingly interminable and amorphous music would benefit, or would have benefited, by some ruthless pruning by the musical equivalent of an editor or by such an editor within the mind of the composer. I just imagine too many composers, throbbing with enthusiasm over their latest creation, saying to themselves, "This is so good! The World needs to hear every note of this latest expression of my genius!"


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

I didn't know you were 70 Woodduck... What happens when you listen to something you've never heard before, are you open to it? My guess is the older you are the more you hate what sounds unfamiliar, not only in music either.

I guess that's why many composers had their piece premieres booed, too many old folk in the room.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

1996D said:


> I didn't know you were 70 Woodduck... What happens when you listen to something you've never heard before, are you open to it? My guess is the older you are the more you hate what sounds unfamiliar, not only in music either.
> 
> I guess that's why many composers had their piece premieres booed, too many old folk in the room.


Is that the personal "you" or the impersonal "you"?


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

1996D said:


> I guess that's why many composers had their piece premieres booed, too many old folk in the room.


I'm open to new music, so long as they don't perform it on my lawn.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

1996D said:


> I guess that's why many composers had their piece premieres booed, too many old folk in the room.


The idea that "many" composers were booed is a myth which is itself quite decrepit. Most works acclaimed by posterity were not rejected by audiences at their premieres, and even notorious exceptions such as _Carmen_ and _Le Sacre du Printemps_ met with opposition for largely extra-musical reasons and were soon to find their places in the repertoire. In many cases critics, who are in a sense paid to apply established "standards" to what they hear, are harder on new music than audiences, regardless of the latter's age.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> The idea that "many" composers were booed is a myth which is itself quite decrepit. Most works acclaimed by posterity were not rejected by audiences at their premieres, and even notorious exceptions such as _Carmen_ and _Le Sacre du Printemps_ met with opposition for largely extra-musical reasons and were soon to find their places in the repertoire. In many cases critics, who are in a sense paid to apply established "standards" to what they hear, are harder on new music than audiences, regardless of the latter's age.


Sometimes, too, major works by well-known and popular composers simply fail to find immediate success. Good examples are Beethoven's Violin Concerto and his 4th Piano Concerto, which are not known to have been performed at all for decades after their premieres. Mendelssohn resurrected both works thirty to forty years later, well after Beethoven's death, and they have never left the repertoire since.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I have a feeling that what the mind and body need at any given time is based on instinctive choices just like food. The body knows and it will be drawn to something that it can’t always explain but somehow needs. So it’s not always a matter of conscious choice and one’s evolution in music is based upon what one instinctively chooses every day and it’s easy to notice what drops out and drops in as new. Sometimes things just turn up and that’s what’s needed, especially if one is being exposed to different choices from, say, a forum such as this.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> The idea that "many" composers were booed is a myth which is itself quite decrepit. Most works acclaimed by posterity were not rejected by audiences at their premieres, and even notorious exceptions such as _Carmen_ and _Le Sacre du Printemps_ met with opposition for largely extra-musical reasons and were soon to find their places in the repertoire. In many cases critics, who are in a sense paid to apply established "standards" to what they hear, are harder on new music than audiences, regardless of the latter's age.


Well, off the top of my head I read that Brahms first piano concerto was badly received, as well as Mahler's 1rst, and that Rachmaninoff had depression issues when his works were criticized which apparently was quite often. Then there's the tragedy of Schubert.

And yes I did ask you if you were open to new experiences.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

1996D said:


> Well, off the top of my head I read that Brahms first piano concerto was badly received, as well as Mahler's 1rst, and that Rachmaninoff had depression issues when his works were criticized which apparently was quite often. Then there's the tragedy of Schubert.
> 
> And yes I did ask you if you were open to new experiences.


Your post reads: _"I didn't know you were 70 Woodduck... What happens when you listen to something you've never heard before, are you open to it? My guess is the older you are the more you hate what sounds unfamiliar, not only in music either. I guess that's why many composers had their piece premieres booed, too many old folk in the room."_

That strikes me as quite prejudicial, as if you've already made up your mind about older people in general, and perhaps me in particular. It could in fact be read as insulting.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Due to issues arising from posts between Woodduck (whose initial post in this thread I greatly appreciate) and 1996D, I will not here discuss my age. But I will confirm that my tastes have grown (perhaps a better word than "changed") since my youth, and though I don't so often revisit the music of my youth (though I still do on occasion) it may be simply because of that _growth_, or that _expansion_ in my tastes, which now include so many genres of music beyond pop/rock -- genres such as "classical" (which is so expansive and broad in its own right), jazz, world music, and experimental/avant-garde/noise music. Because there is so much music to hear and so little time to hear it, I don't much philosophize about my tastes or moods, preferring to simply listen to something. I listen to a wide range of sounds, and I don't deliberate much about what I will select at any given time. Generally, there is something to spur my interest in what next appears on my turntable or in my CD player -- I may spot something intriguing on my record shelves, I may come to a realization that it is a particular composer's or performer's birthday or death day or whatever, I may be reading about a certain piece of music, I may receive something in the mail that I had previously ordered …. So many motivations spur my listening habits. Today, for instance, on this 4th of July I chose to hear some American symphonies and listened to several including Ives's Second, Randall Thomson's Second, and Roy Harris's Third (nearly a staple for me on 4th of July and other American holidays). I'm pleased to be able to do so -- to have both ready access to this music and _access_ to time to allow such listening. And with a couple of hours left to the day, perhaps I'll return to music. It is likely more profitable to us all than my further bantering on this web site.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> Sometimes, too, major works by well-known and popular composers simply fail to find immediate success. Good examples are Beethoven's Violin Concerto and his 4th Piano Concerto, which are not known to have been performed at all for decades after their premieres. Mendelssohn resurrected both works thirty to forty years later, well after Beethoven's death, and they have never left the repertoire since.


Good ol' Mendy, resurrected Bach's St. Matthew Passion too. Does anyone call him 'Mendy'? Maybe they should.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> Your post reads: _"I didn't know you were 70 Woodduck... What happens when you listen to something you've never heard before, are you open to it? My guess is the older you are the more you hate what sounds unfamiliar, not only in music either. I guess that's why many composers had their piece premieres booed, too many old folk in the room."_
> 
> That strikes me as quite prejudicial, as if you've already made up your mind about older people in general, and perhaps me in particular. It could in fact be read as insulting.


It wasn't, old people do tend to hold on to what they know. You could be an exception, especially since you were so adamant in your beliefs about female conductors, a viewpoint not shared by members of your generation.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

When I was younger, I was attracted to the emotional appeal, the lyricism of these pieces. 
Nowadays, I can't relate to them emotionally as I used to. I still won't deny the creative genius in harmony and stuff, but they keep reminding me of the kind of stuff Yiruma writes.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

1996D said:


> It wasn't, old people do tend to hold on to what they know. You could be an exception, especially since you were so adamant in your beliefs about female conductors, a viewpoint not shared by members of your generation.


It's true that many people become more conservative in old age. On the other hand, others, once they've finished with the professional, family, and other obligations that tie them to traditional social groups and expectations, enjoy the freedom to experiment with life in new ways. As far as music is concerned, I can't guess how many classical music lovers shrink or expand their areas of interest. I've been a practicing musician all my life, so I've had many decades to explore music and discover what interests me. There is almost no such thing as "new" music for me at this point; although I don't try to "keep up" with the latest developments in classical music, when I do dip into what's being produced currently I find that much of it sounds like recycled Modernism and has nothing significant to say to me, and I have little desire to hear more. But my welcome mat is always out for another fine composer, living or dead.


----------



## Guest (Jul 5, 2019)

paulbest said:


> *It takes years* to sort out the composers which appeal to your sense of being in this world and those which are antithetical to your awareness, experiences, outlook, belief systems, at is your personal Zeitgeist.


It does? I don't think so, though there has to be sufficient passage of time for one to listen to a sufficient range to be able to accept this and reject that. I still listen to and love much of the same music now that I listened to when I was 5, 15, 25, 35, ...



Clairvoyance Enough said:


> Obviously it's often the case that transformations of our taste just follow from innate fascination with the sounds themselves, but when extra-musical factors _do_ come in to play, how do you notice your own listening habits and perceptions of different pieces being influenced by events in your life, shifts of personal philosophy, and etc? And how permanent or severe have these changes been? I know one common trope that I see here and there on TC is people losing interest in the romantic era as they chill out or mature, and I'm sure many people go the opposite direction too, maybe both at the same time?


What I would say is that the music with which I have become most familiar has often lost the emotional intensity it held for me once I first "got it". But that doesn't mean it loses a place in my collection.


----------



## Guest (Jul 5, 2019)

1996D said:


> It wasn't, old people do tend to hold on to what they know. You could be an exception, especially since you were so adamant in your beliefs about female conductors, a viewpoint not shared by members of your generation.


Woodduck, an exception to the opinion held by "members of his generation" about women conductors? So, what is the opinion held by "members of his generation"?

In fact, who or what is "his generation"?


----------



## robin4 (Jun 9, 2019)

"One major tendency I've noticed is an increasing preference for chamber music - basically, ensembles of soloists - over orchestral music."


I have noticed this in myself. A full orchestra playing a piece of music is almost "too much". And I refer to this as "classical indigestion". Burp!


----------



## infracave (May 14, 2019)

I've lost almost all interest in Romantic "parisian" piano over the years.
Like so many people, Chopin's nocturnes were what got me into classical, then moving into Alkan and Liszt virtuoso works.
I can't listen to these composers anymore, except for a few Liszt's late works.

And also surprisingly : Bach's music.
Maybe I've listened to it too much (if there is such thing as "too much Bach"), but I hardly listen to it anymore.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Just a theory, but I'm not sure whether the music taste has anything to do with the age itself, but more likely with the length of the time you have been listening to (classical) music. According to that theory, people who started listening to classical music in teenage years start appreciating some certain music (for example chamber) earlier than those who started listening to classical when they were 30-40 years old, because their taste of music has had more time to develop. This theory is a huge simplification that doesn't consider cultural differences and the way a person has grown up etc. I'm still not certain whether it's even possible to really argue about this topic, because there are too many factors that can affect person's taste of music and its' development.


----------



## Beebert (Jan 3, 2019)

Beethoven was by far my favorite as a teenager. After I turned 21, his music was much less interesting to me. His late sonatas I now deeply love for what they did to me in the past, but for some sad reason, they dont move me these days. They are metaphysical, and these days I see metaphysical thinking as life-denying somehow. I know it is weird. But it feels like Beethoven fools me and himself that life has a meaning that it really doesnt have. Instead, I now appreciate the music of Schubert and Mozart more...


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> It's true that many people become more conservative in old age. On the other hand, others, once they've finished with the professional, family, and other obligations that tie them to traditional social groups and expectations, enjoy the freedom to experiment with life in new ways. As far as music is concerned, I can't guess how many classical music lovers shrink or expand their areas of interest. I've been a practicing musician all my life, so I've had many decades to explore music and discover what interests me. There is almost no such thing as "new" music for me at this point; although I don't try to "keep up" with the latest developments in classical music, when I do dip into what's being produced currently I find that much of it sounds like recycled Modernism and has nothing significant to say to me, and I have little desire to hear more. But my welcome mat is always out for another fine composer, living or dead.


That's nice to hear.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

The most notable examples of such music is the late symphonies of Tchaikovsky - esp #s 4 and 5...
I got to know these early on and liked them pretty well....now I don't care for them much at all - and overexposure as a performer is the reason - I've played them, played them, over and over, and over _ad nauseam_...if I never heard them or played them again, that would be OK...every new conductor ALWAYS programmed both, early on, and then repeated. gawd, so many times....
I do, however, love the first 3 PIT symphonies - these are wonderful listening, and great fun to play...I've played #1 and #2 numerous times, #3 only a couple, but I still enjoy them very much..


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> Your post reads: _"I didn't know you were 70 Woodduck... What happens when you listen to something you've never heard before, are you open to it? My guess is the older you are the more you hate what sounds unfamiliar, not only in music either. I guess that's why many composers had their piece premieres booed, too many old folk in the room."_
> 
> That strikes me as quite prejudicial, as if you've already made up your mind about older people in general, and perhaps me in particular. It could in fact be read as insulting.


I side with 1996D in this issue of folks holding on to dear life, what they once loved in their earlier years. Just look at many of the audiences in the Brahms, Dvorak concerts. Very few under the age of 40.

Our grand parents were set in their ways type of folks, 
And this may get worse in the future. However the old standards like Beethoven, Bruckner, Mahler may not be given the same attentions as they are today. It will be a divisive, divided , CC in the future, with extremely limited acceptance , each man with his own unique set of 5 main composers.

After reading a few of the posts, it is good to see others have similar experiences as myself in the classical journey, 
What appealed early on, has lost much at times, all its glitter and charm, Debussy's piano music remains solidly with me, Can not believe Larkenfield finds some Debussy as not of interest as once before, Arabesque 1? Its a supreme masterpiece.

Again , glad to see folks maturing, changing, adding new composers, dumping onesv that hold no interest as before.

With me, I just can not imagine how I would have found the composers I love now, the many new fantastic discoveries, had I kept all that *baggage* of earlier composers with me.

As I see it, you can not make new discoveries , unless you first sacrifice some previously beloved music./composers. 
Sure I still have some regard for a few Sibelius works, but his symphony's are not represented in my CD collection, when early on, I had 2-4 symphony cycle sets.

These changes are inevitable and will happen , as you grow older.

Yet as 1996D correctly points out, there is a older stubborn, stuck in a rut , past their prime genation of the CC who have no desires at all to change, Mendelssohn is a great composers, since their youth, til death, This group sees no reasons at all to change, 
Death before they die.


----------



## Guest (Jul 6, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> One major tendency I have noticed is an increasing preference for chamber music - basically, ensembles of soloists - over orchestral music.


 Me too. I have mentioned the same thing several times previously in other threads.

I have a few orchestral favourites but they are ones I've had for some time.

I have tried very hard to get into some of the "modern"composers paulb goes on about. I have seen his interests set out on other boards, so I knew what to expect. They're Ok but I'll never become anything like an addict of any of that stuff. It's either far too ordinary, or too miserable for my tastes. I'm not keen on modern Russian and German stuff anyway. Shostakovich is about as much as I can take, but even then only in moderate doses.

In the 20th C the chamber and orchestral music that I do like a lot is by E J Moeran and E Rubbra. They have a strong "English" flavour that's not too taxing on the grey matter. It could be that their works may be of interest to you.




1196D said:


> It wasn't, old people do tend to hold on to what they know. You could be an exception, especially since you were so adamant in your beliefs about female conductors, a viewpoint not shared by members of your generation.


 I think you must have mis-read parts of that thread. There was no clear generation gap. You were pretty isolated in your opinions.




Macleod said:


> What I would say is that the music with which I have become most familiar has often lost the emotional intensity it held forme once I first "got it". But that doesn't mean it loses a place in my collection.


 Same here. The novelty can soon wear off for almost anything, even for some excellent classical 
music. That's why I'm amused when I see the occasional thread like "_Which piece of music sends you into ….(_whatever version of _"raptures"_ the poster cares to use)". I think to myself I bet the OP is very young and only just started with classical music.




infracave said:


> I've lost almost all interest in Romantic "parisian" piano over the years.
> Like so many people, Chopin's nocturnes were what got me into classical, then moving into Alkan and Liszt virtuoso works.
> I can't listen to these composers any more, except for a few Liszt's late works.
> 
> ...



I used to like Chopin, but these days rarely play any if it. Ditto for Bach in whose music I was once a strong devotee, but I don't play much of it these days. The same applies to a lot of Handel, except for various opera and oratorio extracts which I occasionally dust off.

In the baroque era, I do still like some of Purcell's instrumental music, and many of the works of Monteverdi. The latter, especially, will shine on for ever in my estimation as a real class act.




Beebert said:


> Beethoven was by far my favorite as a teenager. After I turned 21, his music was much less interesting to me. His late sonatas I now deeply love for what they did to me in the past, but for some sad reason, they dont move me these days. They are metaphysical, and thesedays I see metaphysical thinking as life-denying somehow. I know it is weird.But it feels like Beethoven fools me and himself that life has a meaning thatit really doesnt have. Instead, I now appreciate the music of Schubert and Mozart more...



Maybe in a few more years you'll have a second "bloom" of interest regards Beethoven. I've had spells of being "on" and "off" Beethoven. Right now I still enjoy some of Beethoven's works. I still list him as a top favourite but I'm hardly a dedicated follower, as I like several others just as much.

I could say much the same about Mozart, in whose music my interest has somewhat waxed and waned. At the present time, he doesn't get much attention. My niece loves Mozart and whenever she and my sister call round we play some of his works on the hi-fi. They especially like the violin sonatas, which I must admit are very much to my liking too.

About 15 years ago, I developed a strong interest in Schubert, Schumann and Mendelssohn. That fascination has continued, and I can't ever see it ever subsiding. 




Heck148 said:


> The most notable examples of such music is the late symphonies of Tchaikovsky - esp #s 4 and 5...
> I got to know these early on and liked them pretty well....now I don't care for them much at all - and overexposure as a performer is the reason - I've played them, played them, over and over, and over _ad nauseam_...if I never heard them or played them again, that would be OK...every new conductor ALWAYS programmed both, early on, and then repeated. gawd, so many times....



I find the best known Tchaikovsky symphonies have a similar effect on me. I give them an occasional blast, like when I want to get the pigeons off my roof. I think they are sort of work most likely to appeal to fairly new classical fans still in their first "bloom". I know that some people do stick with Tchaikovsky for a long time, but for me I soon found a lot of it OTT on the emotional front.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Excellent post , partita, I like your approach to music. That is to say, you have no qualms, no remorse dumping old greats , whose music once before was your whole life. 


I note Bach, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky has lost some of its charms for a few of you, Good for you. 

I see classical music as having effects at different life stages. I see it as having 3 stages, Now this does not equate with a particular age with the listener. One might come to classical , later in life, like I did, at age around 26 or so. 
Some came to CM maybe in the ealy yoyths. 
Age has some influence of course, but what I am about to set out, has less to do with a specific age.
I would say a newbie to CM , best to start with either Mozart, Beethoven or both. I prefer Mozart as you know, so it would be his music I would recommend to a youngster over Beethoven, But you could decide for yourself which to suggest for a new comer to the classical arts, I would also suggest he listens to Sibelius, Rachmaninov, Debussy and Ravel. 
From there he is on how own...After some decade or so, depends on how quickly he absorbs , understands the music,,,he may drop some and pick up others within this 1st decade of CM. 


Then he will begin his middle phase of CM experiences, What before was so so special, has now lost some of its charms and glitter. 
This middle phase may take 10 years or more to complere,,,Now the 3rd late phase of CM listenings, his mature days. 

Now here he will confront the new modern composers. 
It is here he will have to make his own decisions , as to how far he is willing to go, and choose the composers he feels offers legitimate , authentic classical music, within the tradition. 


I would tip toe as far as contemporary composers go, Do not rush in. Listen 1st on YT, and do not buy even 1 cd, until you have made a solid decision,,Nothing wosre than buying cd, and months/years later *why did I buy this cr*p?*,,,*oh it was PB over at TC who made this high recommend,,,he said *must have*,,,that jerk...*. 
The only way to avoid these unwanted regrets is to wait on all new/late modern composers/contemporary/avant garde/post modern music. 
Don't get sucked into buying anything, just because the initial hearing Was *really cool music, I love it*,,,,You may find months/ years later, that you will come to despise, , hate, want to destroy it. 

I've been there , done that. 
Words of wisdom, go softly, slowly in late modern classical. , say music from 1950 - 2000. 

You can not jump ahead into the late modern, until you 1st pass through your Rachmaninov/Sibelius days. 
Its a journey, you have to begin with easy classical first, then you can mature into the middle period, then mature phases. 
You can not just jump ahead to late phase composers. 
It does not work that way...Now it is a individual event how fast he achieves middle phase and late phases,,,Some need years, others decades to reach mature phase.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Beebert said:


> Beethoven was by far my favorite as a teenager. After I turned 21, his music was much less interesting to me. *His late sonatas I now deeply love for what they did to me in the past, but for some sad reason, they dont move me these days. They are metaphysical, and these days I see metaphysical thinking as life-denying somehow. I know it is weird. But it feels like Beethoven fools me and himself that life has a meaning that it really doesnt have.* Instead, I now appreciate the music of Schubert and Mozart more...


That is indeed weird. I don't think I'd agree that Beethoven's late sonatas are inherently "metaphysical" as you say (though perhaps some interpretations are). But I can definitely see where you're coming from; it's an interesting perspective, thanks for sharing.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

As I've gained more experience with music over the past thirty or so years, I've realised that there are some kinds of music which get me into a state similar to what psychologist Mihaly Czikzsentmihalyi calls flow:

_"being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The ego falls away. Time flies. Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one, like playing jazz. Your whole being is involved, and you're using your skills to the utmost."_

A few years ago I embarked on a project to cull my collection, and in making choices about what to keep and what to get rid of, I have realised what gives me this sense of flow and what doesn't. Its a mix of my own personality, needs, where I feel I'm at in life, and other things like aesthetics, genre, era or just the sound of the music itself comes into play here too.

Overall I have little need for music that puts me in a dark space.

Its easy to name the genres which I don't like the most - opera, lieder, and a lot of other classical involving vocals (although not all church music or concert hall works with voice). Generally I respond to instrumental music much more.

If I give a few composers whose pieces that I tend to really like, it may indicate where my tastes are located. These put me into that state of flow where listening is engaged but at the same time effortless and the time goes by without me waiting for the piece to end:

Ravel
Hovhaness
Rachmaninov
Durufle
Gershwin
Bartok
Sculthorpe
Bernstein
Piazzolla
Villa-Lobos

In general I like music that strongly brings some sort of imagery to mind. There is a restorative element for me here, it helps me to be in the moment. I can give other composers but I would have to link them to more specific works. For example I can do without most of Beethoven's symphonies (the eighth is my favourite), and I've got more time for a handful of his concertos, string quartets and piano trios.

In aesthetic terms, overall I think that I'm a classicist, in terms of favouring a sense of restraint and economy of expression. It probably explains how I have increasingly found less affinity with the likes of Mahler and Bruckner. Their symphonies stretch out before me like the Sahara. I'd rather listen to something shorter and less angsty - Saint-Saens' Organ Symphony is a good example - or if its dark not too long (eg. Bernstein's Jeremiah or Strauss' Metamorphosen). So far, a good deal of Shostakovich's music has kept its place, because I see it as a unique expression of the human condition during the darkest moments of the 20th century.


----------

