# My problem of first impressions



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

So I've been pondering about something for quite some time now.

I love classical music. I listen to it all the time and play my favourite pieces whenever I get a chance to sit in front of the piano. I love live concerts and I also buy a lot of recordings, provided that I've got enough money. I spend a lot of time reading about composers and their lives. Searching trivial little details is my passion.

But one thing annoys me enormously. I almost _never_ enjoy a piece the first time I hear it. I mean seriously, never! Or maybe 'enjoy' is the wrong word. I just lose interest very quickly and usually don't remember anything about a piece afterwards.

A case in point would be the Rachmaninoff third piano concerto. I absolutely love the piece now more than any other piece of music I've heard. But yet when I first heard it, I didn't think much of it. The same goes with many of my other favorites, like the Beethoven violin concerto and many more. The situation is even worse with chamber music.

This is very annoying, because I usually have to 'force feed' pieces to myself a couple of times before I can grasp them properly. I know that classical music is like that - appreciation for pieces grows with every subsequent listening - but sometimes it makes me frustrated.

So basically my point is: I have to listen to a piece many times before I can even decide whether I even like it or not. Am I alone, or does this happen to you guys as well? Are there ways to become a better "first time listener"?

The worst thing is that some works that I love are usually paired with (for me) unknown pieces in live concerts. So first I'm having trouble to contain my excitement, but as soon as the "unknown" piece starts my mind just drifts away.

There are a few exceptions to this. The Sibelius violin concerto and Liszt's B minor sonata come to mind. I loved them instantly.

PS. Hello all! I'm pretty new to this forum. I joined last Novemeber but just today decided to start participating in conversations more actively. This seems to be a great forum. =)


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

Moi, Moi!, I think You are right, very little music is instant, most takes repeated exposure to grow on You! And music that takes an effort for You to open up to most often stay with You much longer!

/ptr


----------



## Schubussy (Nov 2, 2012)

A lot of the time, music I like straight away I grow bored of quicker than music that takes longer to appreciate.


----------



## GGluek (Dec 11, 2011)

I sometimes have the opposite reaction -- pieces (even whole genres) I've been indifferent to on recordings have suddenly come alive in concert. String quartets did nothing for me until I went to my first concert, and then I suddenly "understood" them. Of course, sometimes the experience itself -- hearing a whole orchestra onstage -- overwhelms or dwarfs the piece being played, and more familiarity is needed to judge it. Also, I remember hearing a performance in Boston of Scriabin's symphony "Le Divin Poeme" when I was young that actually made it sound like music -- and experience that no subsequent exposure to recordings has duplicated.  I will listen to, and enjoy, Chopin live. But on records he leaves me cold -- don't really like him. No accounting for how these things work.
gerorge


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Hi Janspe!

Welcome to the forum, great post!

I think your reaction to the new is common. It certainly is the same as my own. The music is so involved that a snap judgement would be folly. If it reveals itself in an instant, it would probably be that I've missed what it's really about, or that the piece is a frippery, a whimsy, a slight work that wouldn't reward constant play.

I don't mind this at a live show, however, because the freshness of the unfamiliar, the performance and the occasion combine to excite me anyway...

:tiphat:


----------



## OboeKnight (Jan 25, 2013)

Same thing for me. There is usually so much depth to classical that it takes a few listens to really get all of it. That's exactly why I like to listen to a piece before I hear it live. Sometimes hearing things live really help you enjoy them. Like Tchaik's D Major Violin Concerto for instance. A winner of my youth orchestra's concerto competition played it in our concert and I remember enjoying it but not really getting in to it. He played it exceptionally well, but my mind kept wandering off. That was the first time I'd heard it. Then, I heard the same concerto again when I attended a symphony concert and it completely blew me away. I instantly became obsessed with the piece haha. So, if you don't like it at first, listen to it until it clicks (some pieces never will though).


----------



## BlazeGlory (Jan 16, 2013)

Most common music such as rock and roll and jazz appeal to your basic instincts (love, hate, sadness, loss). It instantly connects with you on the lowest level of intellect. The creators of classical music used the highest levels of their intellect to compose their music. So when you first listen to some of the great compositions you may not appreciate it. It may take several plays for the complexity and intricacy of the music to reach your highest level of intellect.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

Kieran said:


> I don't mind this at a live show, however, because the freshness of the unfamiliar, the performance and the occasion combine to excite me anyway...


That's what I want to have - the ability to enjoy new pieces in a curious way, to experience 'new' as 'fresh', rather than be completely unaffected by the music. I remember one particularly nasty chamber music event where I had to sit x minutes listening to some piece by Beethoven (I don't even remember what it was, something that definitely had a flute in the ensemble, as I remember that the flute player stomped the floor with his foot all the time) and the only thing I could think of was the upcoming glorious moment when I would get out of the damn hall and listen to something familiar to soothe my bored ears. It's not that the music was ugly in any way - I was just overwhelmed by the unfamiliar themes and couldn't wrap my mind around the melodies.

I guess that's the one negative side that this hobby/interest/passion brings with it. Luckily I've just began a tight schedule for force feeding symphonies and string quartets into my conscious mind so that I can attend more concerts without a hint of boredom.

Thanks for all the replies!


----------



## OboeKnight (Jan 25, 2013)

Janspe said:


> That's what I want to have - the ability to enjoy new pieces in a curious way, to experience 'new' as 'fresh', rather than be completely unaffected by the music. I remember one particularly nasty chamber music event where I had to sit x minutes listening to some piece by Beethoven (I don't even remember what it was, something that definitely had a flute in the ensemble, as I remember that the flute player stomped the floor with his foot all the time) and the only thing I could think of was the upcoming glorious moment when I would get out of the damn hall and listen to something familiar to soothe my bored ears. It's not that the music was ugly in any way - I was just overwhelmed by the unfamiliar themes and couldn't wrap my mind around the melodies.
> 
> I guess that's the one negative side that this hobby/interest/passion brings with it. Luckily I've just began a tight schedule for force feeding symphonies and string quartets into my conscious mind so that I can attend more concerts without a hint of boredom.
> 
> Thanks for all the replies!


How I felt when I heard Shubert's 9th for the first time haha. It was at a concert and I couldn't wait for it to end...my mind started protesting unfamiliar music after the second movement.


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

It happens to me too, and I found that the hardest pieces to "learn" to like are sometimes the most rewarding and lasting ones. 

For example, last week I was deeply addicted to Tchaikovsky, since the first time that I listened to the 4th I was amazed. I listened to it like 3 or 4 times a day (huge mistake) and now I am a little tired of hearing it (obviously).

This week I am listening to Sibelius, and his pieces are much harder for me to enjoy. Even the No. 2 (that is probably considered his more popular symphony) was hard. Once it clicked I just love it, but I can't listen to it repeated times (like I was doing with Tchaikovsky's 4th) since I have to concentrate more. I am pretty sure that I will listen to this piece for a long time without getting tired of it.


----------



## userfume (Nov 21, 2012)

You have completely what I have. The first time I listen to a piece, I usually lose interest, think it is boring etc. However there is usually some moment which is instantly likeable, which draws you back in each piece. From then on you can properly listen to the piece as a whole and the better acquainted you become, the more you like the piece. There are naturally some pieces or movements which instantly grab the attention: 
Shostakovich's 10th symphony 2nd Movement
Shostakovich's 8th symphony 3rd movement
Janacek SQ 1 3rd movement

however have you heard the Ravel Piano Trio? it is the only piece I have truly loved the first time I heard it


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

> So basically my point is: I have to listen to a piece many times before I can even decide whether I even like it or not.


Use the repeat function.


----------



## SuperTonic (Jun 3, 2010)

My experience is similar to yours. I often struggle to get into a new piece at first. One thing that has always helped me is to look at a score while listening to new pieces. I am assuming you can read music since you reference playing the piano in your original post. I've found that engaging more than one sense in the task is really helpful in keeping my focus on what I am hearing, especially with new pieces. 
In case you are not aware of it already, a great website that contains scores to many pieces that are in the public domain is imslp.org.


----------



## Llyranor (Dec 20, 2010)

There have been countless times I've come to love a piece, for which my first impressions were not favorable _at all_. Maybe I wasn't in the right state of mind, maybe I was tired or distracted, maybe my ear wasn't ready for the musical genius, maybe I wasn't mature enough as a listener - it could be many reasons.

I think the biggest example for me is the Grosse Fuge. What sounded like a disaster at first (though, I realized it was something I 'didn't get', rather than just dismissing it outright) is now my favorite movement in the string quartet repertoire. I didn't love it, but yet somehow something kept compelling to keep listening to it.


----------



## Schubussy (Nov 2, 2012)

Not really taking about classical as much but I think this is why some people are so dismissive of whole genres; they're used to their genres and don't give enough time to let unfamiliar music grow on them.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

SuperTonic said:


> I am assuming you can read music since you reference playing the piano in your original post. --- In case you are not aware of it already, a great website that contains scores to many pieces that are in the public domain is imslp.org.


I used to do that a lot. I particularly liked YouTube videos that had the score in the background for anyone interested. And yes, IMSLP is pretty much the greatest thing ever. Too bad that I've now moved away from home and at the moment I don't have a computer so using IMSLP isn't really possible. Oh the cruel reality of independent life... No proper access to a decent piano or the joys of the internet (except via my smartphone, with which I'm writing right now).

I can relate to what was said about certain parts of pieces attracting for further listenings. For me those parts are usually rhythmically or dynamically curious moments. I've also come to notice that it's much easier for me to first-time listen modern pieces rather than classical pieces, for example. That being said, I can grasp Stravinsky or Prokofiev easier than, say, Handel or Beethoven. That doesn't necessarily mean that I like them more, but I can familiarize myself with modern works more quickly.

I also agree that it is certainly rewarding to finally get that 'click' with a piece after repeated listenings. Kinda gives a feeling of achieving something.


----------



## Cheyenne (Aug 6, 2012)

The only piece I've had this with is Ligeti's piano concerto - should _I _be worried?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Janspe said:


> I can relate to what was said about certain parts of pieces attracting for further listenings. For me those parts are usually rhythmically or dynamically curious moments. I've also come to notice that it's much easier for me to first-time listen modern pieces rather than classical pieces, for example. That being said, I can grasp Stravinsky or Prokofiev easier than, say, Handel or Beethoven. That doesn't necessarily mean that I like them more, but I can familiarize myself with modern works more quickly.


I'd wager that this is because the pieces seem more immediately distinct in your mind, unlike the surface similarities of Baroque or Classical works.

My preferred period is c. 1850-1950, so I more readily take to music from that era than others, even if it's a "lesser" work or composer. It helps to recognize a few of the factors that influence your subjective reaction to be able to appreciate things you wouldn't normally gravitate towards.


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

Hauskaa nähdä uusi suomalainen foorumilla! 

I think your reaction is very common amongst classical music listeners. Only if I'm very familiar with a certain musical approach, I can fall in love with a piece instantly. More often than not, it takes several listens. But the best first impression is often that of curiosity, being intrigued, perhaps even mystified... I take it that's my brain cells starting to adapt to the new music, and it's a wonderful feeling.


----------



## Feathers (Feb 18, 2013)

Janspe said:


> This is very annoying, because I usually have to 'force feed' pieces to myself a couple of times before I can grasp them properly. I know that classical music is like that - appreciation for pieces grows with every subsequent listening - but sometimes it makes me frustrated.
> 
> So basically my point is: I have to listen to a piece many times before I can even decide whether I even like it or not. Am I alone, or does this happen to you guys as well? Are there ways to become a better "first time listener"?


This happens to me too. It definitely takes more than one listens for me to fully opened my ears to a piece, since I'm quite slow at digesting new music. I used to listen to the same old things in my playlist until I randomly "bumped" into new pieces/composers, but after a while I decided that I needed to search for new music more actively. So, like you, I often "force feed" a piece to myself. I usually do that a couple of times, take a break from the piece for a while (for a few days or something), and then return to it. When I come back to the piece, I often find that I've actually missed it! After that, no more "force feeding" is required.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

My experience is that if I pretty much "get" a work on first listening, I'm likely to tire of it pretty quickly. Others have made the same comment here.


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

Hearing an unfamiliar piece for the first time can be a lot like driving at rapid speed past a road sign in a language that you do not speak. It might be a really important sign but how would anyone expect you to know? 

Give yourself time to learn the language. It could be by repeat listens of the piece, or by listening to various music by the same composer or by contemporaries, or pieces or composers who influenced the piece. Don't worry if you don't get everything at first. Over time the ideas will start to open up and make themselves known to you, and you'll notice new things each time you listen. No one "gets" an artwork by running by it and giving it only a passing glance, or a novel by flipping through the pages in a few seconds.

If you haven't already, gaining a basic working knowledge of form can help you find your way around a new piece, especially if it's a longer classical or romantic piece -- knowing the sections within a movement of a sonata, symphony, concerto, fugue, rondo, theme and variations, etc.

I often listen to recordings ahead of time when I'm planning to attend a concert. If I can go to multiple performances or sit in on a rehearsal, even better.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

Falling in love with a work at first sight, so to speak, is something I've experienced only on a handful of occasions. Górecki's 3rd symphony, the Parsifal prelude, Fauré's requiem, Opening of Glassworks, the first movement of Schubert's Great C Major, Pergolesi's Stabat Mater, but that's about it. And I still hold these works in the highest regard.

Usually, though, it takes a lot more time and effort to make myself familiar with pieces and to form an opinion. Of course, there's some kind of immediate reaction. I remember being put off by the rediculous noises of Ravel's G major concerto, or being totally overwhelmed, though not in a good sense, by the disparate whirlwind of Bach's Goldberg Variations, or being irritated in the most uncomfortable way by the emotional ambiguity of the Tristan prelude.

All this, however, was early on in my career as a listener of classical music. It was a time when I rejected everything by Mozart as Classics for Babys, everything by Richard Strauss as cartoon music, and everything by Debussy as woobly mood pieces. Today, I adore Strauss, respect Debussy and enjoy Mozart.

The easiest thing to fall in love with quickly is an arresting melody, I guess. Next to it, a very peculiar and distinct style. Everything that appears stylistically conventional and melodically nondescript, probably needs more time to fully sink in. I have this a lot with works by Brahms. He's probably my favourite composer, next to Bach, but few of his pieces blew me away immediately. There's little shock value, if you like, in Brahms. But once his pieces have taken root in me, I know few greater delights.


----------

