# What kind of classical music do you prefer? (created on Myakosvky2002's behalf)



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Member Myaskosvsky2002 had some trouble creating a poll, and asked me to create this one for him. The options are his.


----------



## GoneBaroque (Jun 16, 2011)

That was easy!


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

So hard to choose between orchestra and chamber/solo! I eventually went with the latter because I can listen to it any time of day - not the case with orchestra, which I find a little overbearing for the more delicate hours.


----------



## Webernite (Sep 4, 2010)

I like orchestras in general. They don't have to be _grand_ orchestras. :lol:


----------



## Aksel (Dec 3, 2010)

The kind that goes BOOOOOOM, CHRASH, BANG!!!!! As that is not an option, I chose opera.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

I only like Venti Orchestra. Therefore, I chose Opera.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I love both Chamber and orchestral music. When I explore a new composer and can choose between many works, I almost always choose concertos or symphonies before smaller works. So I went with orchestra.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I used to be into oratorios. But I'm usually listening while I'm doing something else, like working or driving, so I can't follow the text. So now I'm usually listening to orchestras, and if voices are combined, usually they're humming.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

For those who have chosen other...






Were you speaking about this? stupid LOL

Martin


----------



## Conor71 (Feb 19, 2009)

Chamber Music all the way!


----------



## Guest (Oct 6, 2011)

Martin, have you been hallucinating again? (Up to now, there have been no "Other" votes.)

Otherwise, I definitely prefer whatever it is I'm currently listening to. I have an idea that I probably buy less vocal than anything else, but then I put a random CD on and, hey presto, it's got vocal cuts on it.

So yeah. I'd have to say either "no preference" or "whatever I'm listening to at the time." Those are _my_ only options.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

I avoid singing in all its aspects, with few exceptions (I listened to Alkan's 'Papagallo' today). I chose chamber/solo over orchestral only because I listen to it more often.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

I went the "other" route ... as a classical organist, I prefer listening to organ music, and have a love for organ/orchestra works, too.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

I listen to and can enjoy all genres. For the purpose of this poll, I would select opera for the simple reason that the best of several of my favourites wrote damn fine operas.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

some guy said:


> ...
> So yeah. I'd have to say either "no preference" or "whatever I'm listening to at the time." Those are _my_ only options.


It's a commonsense question. People on this thread have answered in terms of what they mostly listen to, eg. what's the "bread and butter" of their daily or weekly listening or whatever.

An everyday example is that if I go to a cafe, 9 times out of 10 I'll have my coffee with milk (eg. not black), and my most usual order is a cappuccino with one sugar.

Make of that analogy what you will, if you want to talk commonsense...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Chamber, soloist was my choice.

Of course it includes my favourite areas of chamber rep - string quartets, piano trios, "duo" sonatas, etc. - & I assume solo instrumental as well. If we push it to include chamber orchestra or string orchestra, then I have all my bases covered for most of the music I listen to on a regular basis.

Currently I'm in a guitar phase, with a strong sideline of music involving the harp as well...


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

some guy said:


> Martin, have you been hallucinating again? (Up to now, there have been no "Other" votes.)
> 
> Otherwise, I definitely prefer whatever it is I'm currently listening to. I have an idea that I probably buy less vocal than anything else, but then I put a random CD on and, hey presto, it's got vocal cuts on it.
> 
> So yeah. I'd have to say either "no preference" or "whatever I'm listening to at the time." Those are _my_ only options.


No preference. No judgement. Everything under the sun is all good, right?


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

No preference. No judgement. Everything under the sun is all good, right?

When there is no "good" nor "bad" what does it matter what you pop into the CD player?


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Deletion of long winded irrelevant rant...


----------



## Guest (Oct 7, 2011)

Please let's just share our enthusiasms and minimize our bickering and navel gazing. + + + Be the positive + + +

I really like romantic chamber music, but ironically, I'm not a big fan of string quartets, which seems to be about 50% of the chamber music sub-genre. I like more diverse combinations of sound.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

BPS said:


> Please let's just share our enthusiasms and minimize our bickering and navel gazing. + + + Be the positive + + +...


Agreed, I took out the rant above, it was me going too far.



> ...I really like romantic chamber music, but ironically, I'm not a big fan of string quartets, which seems to be about 50% of the chamber music sub-genre. I like more diverse combinations of sound.


I was the other way, or kind of. I started 20 years ago with string quartets, piano trios, the quintet of Schubert, Brahms' string sextets & Mozart's _Clarinet Quintet _amongst other things. I've had a phase of SQs & quartet combinations with other instruments - eg. piano quartet or piano quintet, etc. - and also string orchestra and combos like Beethoven's septet & octet, some things by Carter, Penderecki, Schubert's octet, etc. Now I've dropped back to solo things, esp. solo guitar and harp. It's odd but I've gone through phases of the chamber area, still heaps to explore. Such a vast area it is, such a rich soil to immerse myself into...


----------



## Guest (Oct 7, 2011)

Martin's categories were Opera, Grand Orchestra, Chamber, Soloists, Oratorio, Vocal, and other.

Some of my favorite music is opera.
Some of my favorite music is orchestral.
Some of my favorite music is chamber.
Some of my favorite music is oratorio.
Some of my favorite music is vocal.
And, oddly enough, some of my favorite music is "other."

There are pieces in all of Martin's categories that I dislike. There are pieces in all categories that I like. That's where my preferences lie, within the categories. From category to category, though, no. No preference.

That's quite different from HC's and St.'s by now predictably sneering interpretation of what I think. 

I remember the first time I heard that classical listeners often divided into orchestra fans and chamber fans and opera fans and vocal fans. I didn't understand that then. I don't understand it now. There's good music in all those categories.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

My own preferences are clearly geared toward vocal music: choral music, followed by opera, and finally lieder and other art songs.

After vocal music I go toward full symphonic works, followed by solo instrumental, concertos, and finally chamber music (string quartets, etc...).

I have tried to make some sense of my preferences and I think the best I can do goes back to a description I once read of Haydn and Beethoven's development of the string quartets. Opera, lieder, choral music, the concerto, and instrumental music all rely upon the soloist... the "star" if you will. The string quartet, so it was described, is a far more democratic art form. It is something like a discussion between 4 equal individuals who take turns talking, laughing, cajoling, and yelling at each other. Personally I have little use for a democratic or egalitarian art. I love the virtuoso... the incredibly talented "star". 

That is the best reason I can give outlining my particular biases. Of course it's probably all ** and I'll deny every word of it tomorrow.:lol:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I'm not a big fan of string quartets...

I don't dislike string quartets... or chamber music in general. I just like some other musical forms more. I actually have the quartet cycles by most of the big names: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Dvorak, Shostakovitch, Bartok, etc... and I would include Mozart's Clarinet Quintet and many of Brahms' chamber works among my favorite pieces of music.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

some guy said:


> ...
> There are pieces in all of Martin's categories that I dislike. There are pieces in all categories that I like. That's where my preferences lie, within the categories. From category to category, though, no. No preference...


Well that makes more sense, maybe there should have been an "all of the above" option, but the way the poll is is how Martin wanted it.



> ...
> I remember the first time I heard that classical listeners often divided into orchestra fans and chamber fans and opera fans and vocal fans. I didn't understand that then. I don't understand it now. There's good music in all those categories.


I agree, I try to be as broad as possible. Of course not everyone is like that, some people like to focus on one or a couple of things, which is fine. I'm here more for general discussion, as in real life. In real life if I talk to someone about Beethoven, and I mainly know his instrumental works and the other person knows his vocal/opera works more, we can still talk about Beethoven in general. There isn't a need to be partisan in that situation if we both basically love Beethoven. Same here on this forum, I try to be general as well as specific when called for. I don't usually go on the opera forum to contribute as it's my least strongest area...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I remember the first time I heard that classical listeners often divided into orchestra fans and chamber fans and opera fans and vocal fans. I didn't understand that then. I don't understand it now. There's good music in all those categories.

No one has suggested otherwise. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone is saying "Symphonies Rule!" or "String Quartets Suck!" We are all just admitting to our personal biases. I tend to listen to vocal music more than I do to chamber music... not that I would suggest chamber music is inferior or even that I dislike it. I also tend to read poetry more than novels, look more at paintings than I do at sculpture, and eat more Italian food than Indian. Clearly, unlike yourself, I am biased... and I will admit as much.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> ...Clearly, unlike yourself, I am biased... and I will admit as much.


Well, call them biases or preferences or whatever, these differences between people's tastes and opinions are the stuff of life for discussions involving the arts.

I am interested in these as long as they provide for fruitful discussion not ideology, whether hard conservative or ultra progressivist. Most people are in the middle, and it's possible to discuss our differences AND commonalities. It's that simple. Unfortunately, often people's blind following of certain dogmas or ideologies that have basically nothing to do with the music at hand correspondingly blinds their good judgement (yours truly has been guilty of this, as have we all from time to time, it's human, it's just no good if it gets out of hand)...


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Clearly, unlike yourself, I am biased... and I will admit as much.


Ya.

"_All music is good but some music is more good than others"_, HarpsichordConcerto, October 2011. :lol:


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

"All music is good but some music is more good than others", HarpsichordConcerto, October 2011.:lol:

You probably should have dated that 1984.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

I chose other because I have no preference when it comes to ensemble, genre, or time period, in art music. The problem with Sid James' reference to common sense, is that I have none


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Lukecash12 said:


> I chose other because I have no preference when it comes to ensemble, genre, or time period, in art music. The problem with Sid James' reference to common sense, is that I have none


Do you think that's kind of rare?

I think it is, I've even been told that I am rare, in terms of breadth of classical, I can take it all in, a huge variety of it (the only thing I don't like is opera, esp. listening to them complete & I hate the very long ones). Some people think it's wierd that I listen to things that are completely different/opposite, eg. operetta & atonal music, string quartets and electro-acoustic/experimental, light & serious, solo & orchestral, etc. But many people appreciate it, they see it as a kind of strength (even though i'm not really in-depth, I'm an all-rounder).

But as I said before, I tend to go through phases with the various genres, & my overall focus has been chamber...


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Sid James said:


> Do you think that's kind of rare?
> 
> I think it is, I've even been told that I am rare, in terms of breadth of classical, I can take it all in, a huge variety of it (the only thing I don't like is opera, esp. listening to them complete & I hate the very long ones). Some people think it's wierd that I listen to things that are completely different/opposite, eg. operetta & atonal music, string quartets and electro-acoustic/experimental, light & serious, solo & orchestral, etc. But many people appreciate it, they see it as a kind of strength (even though i'm not really in-depth, I'm an all-rounder).
> 
> But as I said before, I tend to go through phases with the various genres, & my overall focus has been chamber...


There are tons of musicologists out there. I happen to have taken a minor in it (musicology), so if it's something you could have taken at UOP back in the day, then I'm pretty sure there are a good deal of people out there without much in the way of "ear preferences". You may be rare if you "simply" get pleasure from all of it, but that's not that rare either. I met plenty of people taking the listening, theory, history, and appreciation courses I was taking, who could listen to anything because they somehow found a "simplistic" pleasure in it all, or they managed to learn enough about it to be fascinated by it.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Lukecash12 said:


> There are tons of musicologists out there. I happen to have taken a minor in it (musicology), so if it's something you could have taken at UOP back in the day, then I'm pretty sure there are a good deal of people out there without much in the way of "ear preferences"...


You sound similar to many musicians & esp. former musicians I personally know. They tend to be quite flexible with music. Of course, they have their preferences or areas of interest (as well as pet hates, they're nothing if not human!), but at the end of the day they know their music because they haven't avoided anything significant, they've tried hard to listen to as much as they could, to get the full "big picture" view, not just certain niches or closed off dead ends.

*RE* your talking to finding a "simplistic pleasure" in music, that's what I try to do now, I cast my net wide & open myself up, my aim is just to simply enjoy as much as I can. & be flexible, eg. I don't particularly like Elgar's symphonies, but I really dig his chamber music & to a certain degree his concertos, even the _Pomp & Circumstance Marches_ are good once in a while. If I don't like one thing by a composer, I'll go to another thing/s by him. It's like a smorgasbord from which I choose, try different and new things.

Having said that, my "first love" is chamber music, that's what I like the most, it's what I listen to the most, it's what I enjoy the most, etc...


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Sid James said:


> You sound similar to many musicians & esp. former musicians I personally know. They tend to be quite flexible with music. Of course, they have their preferences or areas of interest (as well as pet hates, they're nothing if not human!), but at the end of the day they know their music because they haven't avoided anything significant, they've tried hard to listen to as much as they could, to get the full "big picture" view, not just certain niches or closed off dead ends.
> 
> *RE* your talking to finding a "simplistic pleasure" in music, that's what I try to do now, I cast my net wide & open myself up, my aim is just to simply enjoy as much as I can. & be flexible, eg. I don't particularly like Elgar's symphonies, but I really dig his chamber music & to a certain degree his concertos, even the _Pomp & Circumstance Marches_ are good once in a while. If I don't like one thing by a composer, I'll go to another thing/s by him. It's like a smorgasbord from which I choose, try different and new things.
> 
> Having said that, my "first love" is chamber music, that's what I like the most, it's what I listen to the most, it's what I enjoy the most, etc...


Yes, I can agree to divulging in that kind of pleasure everywhere. However, I've taken the position (probably silly to a lot of people), that there is intellectual substance worthy of my study and emotional response, in every form of art music.


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

Grand works for special occasions, chamber/solo for everyday.


----------



## eorrific (May 14, 2011)

Agree with what have been said, it depends on the mood I am in. As for now, it's orchestras (and doesn't have to be necessarily grand). Chamber music is delightful for a relatively more "easy-listening" moment.


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

I voted 'Other' because I love it all!


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

some guy said:


> Martin, have you been hallucinating again? (Up to now, there have been no "Other" votes.)
> 
> Otherwise, I definitely prefer whatever it is I'm currently listening to. I have an idea that I probably buy less vocal than anything else, but then I put a random CD on and, hey presto, it's got vocal cuts on it.
> 
> So yeah. I'd have to say either "no preference" or "whatever I'm listening to at the time." Those are _my_ only options.


Do I have to justify when I'm simply kidding? I'll never lose my sense of humor

Read my paragraphe...Life is a comedy

Martin

Martin


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

some guy said:


> Martin's categories were Opera, Grand Orchestra, Chamber, Soloists, Oratorio, Vocal, and other.
> 
> Some of my favorite music is opera.
> Some of my favorite music is orchestral.
> ...


I agree plenty...however we have predispositions...and I'm kind of measuring for example: in the last month which kind have you chosen more often...Personally, I feel more satisfied with opera...It is like a "main dish" for me, a very very "hearty meal", chamber is a nice "hors d'oeuvre". Full orchestra depending on the work...I love full orchestra when I'm in "that" special mood (e.g. Myaskovsky, my dearest friend). I love the piano when it sounds like a full orchestra (Scriabin sonatas, for example)

Martin, simplistic
Martin


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

I'm sorry to say that people having NO preferences at all, shouldn't vote here. Am I wrong? Thank you for voting anyhow.....I love the participation rate! Thank you to all of you!!!!



:tiphat:
Martin, grateful


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> "All music is good but some music is more good than others", HarpsichordConcerto, October 2011.:lol:
> 
> You probably should have dated that 1984.


I would have said 1917

Martin


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Sid James said:


> Do you think that's kind of rare?
> 
> I think it is, I've even been told that I am rare, in terms of breadth of classical, I can take it all in, a huge variety of it (the only thing I don't like is opera, esp. listening to them complete & I hate the very long ones). Some people think it's wierd that I listen to things that are completely different/opposite, eg. operetta & atonal music, string quartets and electro-acoustic/experimental, light & serious, solo & orchestral, etc. But many people appreciate it, they see it as a kind of strength (even though i'm not really in-depth, I'm an all-rounder).
> 
> But as I said before, I tend to go through phases with the various genres, & my overall focus has been chamber...


I agree with you, how can you say "I don't like snails" if you have never tasted them.
I'm open to new stuff...But, as soon as I don't like the style of a composer I don't go deeper, I change.



Martin


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

some guy said:


> Martin, have you been hallucinating again? (Up to now, there have been no "Other" votes.)
> 
> Otherwise, I definitely prefer whatever it is I'm currently listening to. I have an idea that I probably buy less vocal than anything else, but then I put a random CD on and, hey presto, it's got vocal cuts on it.
> 
> So yeah. I'd have to say either "no preference" or "whatever I'm listening to at the time." Those are _my_ only options.


Hallucinating?...LOL Some have already voted other...LOL Triple LOL. You haven't waited enough...

Martin


----------



## Dadof5 (Mar 25, 2011)

I voted other because my preferences move in phases over time. This includes time periods as well as genres. For instance, recently my phases have gone this way: a few Modern / Contemporary violin concertos preceded by Renaissance instrumental ensembles preceded by contemporary music (any genre) preceded by Piano sonatas and concertos (mostly Classical and Romantic). I think I do this because, I am still learning a lot about classical music and I find this to be the best way for me to explore and find enjoyment.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I picked orchestral. If Chamber music had been a separate entry, that might have gotten my vote. Lumping it with soloists tipped the balance for the full orchestra.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

Sid James said:


> It's a commonsense question. People on this thread have answered in terms of what they mostly listen to, eg. what's the "bread and butter" of their daily or weekly listening or whatever.
> 
> An everyday example is that if I go to a cafe, 9 times out of 10 I'll have my coffee with milk (eg. not black), and my most usual order is a cappuccino with one sugar.
> 
> Make of that analogy what you will, if you want to talk commonsense...


Exactly. I go about 4 times a week to the gym...What I usually listen to there? Opera. I do my treadmill three times a week while watching opera! Then I have chosen OPERA!

Martin


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> Exactly. I go about 4 times a week to the gym...What I usually listen to there? Opera. I do my treadmill three times a week while watching opera! Then I have chosen OPERA!
> 
> Martin


When I'm on my threadmill, I don't listen to any. I did try several times (run with music) but it was too much of a distraction. But good to see you are keeping fit with your runs - three times a week is great!


----------



## eorrific (May 14, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> When I'm on my threadmill, I don't listen to any. I did try several times (run with music) *but it was too much of a distraction*. But good to see you are keeping fit with your runs - three times a week is great!


The running or the music?  Okay, the topic has just gone off on a tangent there...


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

All of it really. But I voted for opera.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

eorrific said:


> The running or the music?  Okay, the topic has just gone off on a tangent there...


Oh. I meant trying to run and listen to fine music at the same time because the threadmill has its own distractive sounds, and me getting tired during the run and having to concentrate with pace and music.


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Oh. I meant trying to run and listen to fine music at the same time because the threadmill has its own distractive sounds, and me getting tired during the run and having to concentrate with pace and music.


What kind of threadmill do you have? Do you have technical problems? I always watch opera DVDs meanwhile...but it is not plugged to the machine. My TV is just in front of me. But I cannot connect my TV/DVD on the same plug than my threadmill...The interferences are too strong. I cannot/don't want to concentrate on my pace. My legs and my ears are separate parts of my body! LOL

Martin


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

myaskovsky2002 said:


> What kind of threadmill do you have? Do you have technical problems? I always watch opera DVDs meanwhile...but it is not plugged to the machine. My TV is just in front of me. But I cannot connect my TV/DVD on the same plug than my threadmill...The interferences are too strong. I cannot/don't want to concentrate on my pace. My legs and my ears are separate parts of my body! LOL
> 
> Martin


I have a fine threadmill. I just prefer not to listen to music when there is distractive noise around. I run almost daily, it's a healthy task I set to do. But very lucky you if you can manage to enjoy both listening and running concurrently. I just prefer to be seated and relaxed when listening to opera.

Time for my run soon!


----------



## Kansenji (Jul 19, 2011)

I voted for Grand Orchestra. I'm quite eclectic, meaning that my musical tastes are wide, though as far as orchestral music goes, I listen mostly to symphonies. Those are usually the symphonies of Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner, Dvořák, Franck, Albéric Magnard, Nielsen, Saint-Saëns, Sibelius, Suk & Tchaikovsky. I do enjoy a lot of other orchestral music, especially that of Uuno Klami, Holst, Janacek, Kodaly, Liszt, Nielsen, Respighi, Shostakovich & Vila-Lobos.

I ABHOR most choral music, though I'm very fond of Nielsen's "Fynsk Forar", even though it is always sung in Danish (if _only_ the English had colonised Denmark!). I also abhor "music" that has little discernable melody or pulse; those "composers" are delusional charlatans as far as I'm concerned. I know that some members will love those "composers" that I hate, so I won't take the Penderecki out of them by naming any names 

I don't restrict myself to just "serious" music and have quite a collection of popular music from the 1950s to the 1970s, plus some "light" and electronically generated music; Tomita, for instance. At almost 60 years of age, I'm not quite old enough yet to appreciate jazz, fortunately.:lol:


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2011)

Kansenji said:


> I also abhor "music" that has little discernable melody or pulse; those "composers" are delusional charlatans as far as I'm concerned.


This depends on who's doing the discerning, though, doesn't it? So "delusional" would be more aptly applied to that group rather than the composers, hein?


----------



## musicclass (Oct 1, 2011)

--------------


----------



## myaskovsky2002 (Oct 3, 2010)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> I have a fine threadmill. I just prefer not to listen to music when there is distractive noise around. I run almost daily, it's a healthy task I set to do. But very lucky you if you can manage to enjoy both listening and running concurrently. I just prefer to be seated and relaxed when listening to opera.
> 
> Time for my run soon!


I NEED to be distacted. Threadmill is sooooooooooooooooooooo boring. 1/2 hour running without music? I just can't!
I need music to live, music is so important for me! I need music many hours a day. If I were deaf I'd die.

Martin


----------

