# The Most Boring Pieces of Classical Music



## peeyaj

Those music that put you to sleep. "Boring", "tedious", "long-winded" are subjective terms used to describe things, so it's next impossible to rate things as boring, because it is not objective. What may constitute as a "boring music", to others might be "brilliant and fresh" to others. What music may put you into sleep, might be enlightening to someone. Like a popular saying, "it's just a matter of taste".

For example, in 19th century, the music of Schubert was criticized as "too long".I agree but that what you get when you want to experience "heavenly length".



> As Stravinsky once quipped, in a perhaps unconscious trope of Schumann's remark: "So what if I doze off occasionally when listening to Schubert, as long as I always find myself in Paradise when I wake up?"


But, some of us would definitely agree on some music that we consider as "most boring" or bewildering. It is just a matter of opinion and debate.

For me, here are some of the "most boring'', "tedious" and "long winded" classical pieces ever.

In no, particular order.

*a. Symphony no. 3, "Sorrowful Song", Gorecki*

- Honestly, I found this music in other thread and find it boring.

*b. Symphony no. 8, Bruckner*

*c. Die Schoene Mullerin*

- Much I love the music of dear Franz, I can only listen to "Des Müllers Blumen". Winterreise, is a gem though.

*d. The Ring Cycle, Richard Wagner*

*e. Symphony no. 9, Gustav Mahler*

*g. Mass in B Minor, Johann Sebastian Bach*

*h. Symphony no. 2, Johannes Brahms
*

*i. Das Lied von der Erde, Gustav Mahler
*

*j. 4'33'', John Cage *

- I don't if its a piece of music or a philosophic
al idea, but certainly, it manage to was 4 minutes and 33 seconds of my time.  jk.
What else... and what yours, too?


----------



## emiellucifuge




----------



## Delicious Manager

1) I find nearly all Philip Glass's music boring. How many times can one listen to the same arpeggiated chord or harmonic progression? Similarly with Michael Nyman (with a few exceptions). Not that I have anything against 'minimalism', per se.

2) I nearly cried with boredom once in a performance of Brahms _German Requiem_. I know many people adore it. I am not one of Brahms' greatest fans; I suppose this doesn't help.

3) Some late Handel can bore me. While I love his earlier music, some of his late music can come across as a little 'stodgy' to my ears.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Most Baroque music still, for me. Most Classical era too.

Early Romantic is tough for me too, I have trouble listening to Beethoven, Schumann sometimes, and Mendelssohn, no offense to them, I respect them. Berlioz, Schubert escape.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I have yet to hear it but from the reports I've read I think I might have difficulty getting through Dvorak's early sprawling third string quartet - all seventy minutes of it.

I'm not too sure if I could 'handle' too many of Handel's (or any other baroque composer's) four hour- long operas either - would I end up in Recitative Hell?

I don't have any problem with Glass' shorter works apart from not really knowing when one ends and another begins - for instance, the violin concerto doesn't sound too different to his 'Low' and 'Heroes' symphonies.

One work that I think would challenge the will to live of a few people here is Morton Feldman's second string quartet - I don't know if it has been commercially recorded but I gather it can take over six hours and it features just as many pauses and gaps as it does notes. I've got his first string quartet in a performance which lasts over 70 minutes and it's bloody difficult in a sparse, arid kind of way - if I perservere it will probably take me 10 years to peel away the layers of it (such as they are).


----------



## Kieran

I find most Romantic music I've heard - such as Lizst, Schumann, some Brahms, Wagner - to be bloated, pompous, boring. I know, I should listen to it more, but I find any music that's overly egotistic/expressive too difficult to sympathise with, likewise, any Germanic philosophical music has me stifling a yawn.

This includes Beethovens symphonies and late string quartets, but not his piano music, thankfully, which I adore...


----------



## Lipatti

Kieran said:


> I find most Romantic music I've heard - such as Lizst, Schumann, some Brahms, Wagner - to be bloated, pompous, boring. I know, I should listen to it more, but I find any music that's overly egotistic/expressive too difficult to sympathise with, likewise, any Germanic philosophical music has me stifling a yawn.
> 
> This includes Beethovens symphonies and late string quartets, but not his piano music, thankfully, which I adore...


I agree with you. I would add that while I do love the Romantic piano repertoire, and the more intimate works in general, I find the large orchestral works to be much more boring/unattractive to deal with.


----------



## Weston

The ultimate borefest for me is Schoenberg. If every note is a surprise then none of them is. It's not so with all modern music. If it's rhythmic I can put up with its not being common practice tonality, and vice versa. 

Oddly enough, while I find most baroque to range from invigorating and lively fun to fascinating intellectual enigmas, Vivaldi can be quite boring for me. Likewise French baroque composers are played in a style so ornamented and halting I want to go to sleep just to escape. For me, it's okay to obscure the rhythm a little, but not to lose it in a quagmire of faux expression.


----------



## Huge

Strauss. J. Pretty much all of his waltzes are death.


----------



## Pieck

Kieran said:


> I find most Romantic music I've heard - such as Lizst, Schumann, some Brahms, Wagner - to be bloated, pompous, boring. I know, I should listen to it more, but I find any music that's overly egotistic/expressive too difficult to sympathise with, likewise, any Germanic philosophical music has me stifling a yawn.
> 
> This includes Beethovens symphonies and late string quartets, but not his piano music, thankfully, which I adore...


Maybe you have problems with emotins... Try Composobot IG54H's last string quartet, they say it's really good.


----------



## Manxfeeder

I find that a lot of Romantic piano concertos bore me to death. But I hope I get cured of it eventually.


----------



## Kieran

Pieck said:


> Maybe you have problems with emotins... Try Composobot IG54H's last string quartet, they say it's really good.


Hi Pieck,

It's not emotions, but explicit expression. Or overly expressive music. I prefer sublety. I'd rather the composer's anguish was not the first thing that comes to mind. We recently witnessed a performance of some piano music Schumann composed in memory of Beethoven. It was virtuosity enlarged, complex and systematic, almost mathematic, and it left me cold. I felt, "yeah, I get it, you're peeved - and you're clever and you want me to see how brilliant you are." I felt excluded from the work because it came at me like one big hysterical tidal wave of egotism.

I'll readily admit I must be wrong! But this music doesn't do it for me. Likewise, say, Beckett's plays, where I leave the auditorium impressed, but the talking point is Beckett, as if he was a character in the play. I'd never leave a Shakespeare play and discuss the author in any depth, but rather I'd be discussing the work. And we don't really know anything about William Shakespeare from his work, because the author is concealed behind the craft. And yet....Shakespeare expresses everything in his work! And everybody, too. Without being explicitly excited about his own hardships.

Not all this music turns me off, but if it's overly personal to the composer, I can admire it but not get too deep into it. It's exclusive to me and doesn't inspire me in any way...:tiphat:


----------



## Pieck

I find pieces that were written by a very personal feeling, emotion are the most exciting ones. e.g Brahms Horn Trio, Das lied, Mendelssohn's 6th quartet (my favorite work)


----------



## Jacob Singer

Pieck said:


> Mendelssohn's 6th quartet (my favorite work)


It is wicked cool. 



Manxfeeder said:


> I find that a lot of Romantic piano concertos bore me to death. But I hope I get cured of it eventually.


Try Grieg's, Schumann's, Tchaikovsky's 1st, Mendelssohn's 1st and 2nd, Beethoven's 5th...

If you don't like any of those, then I don't know what to tell you.


----------



## Ralfy

Reminds me of that funny scene from the movie _Amadeus_:


----------



## emiellucifuge

I dont like to say that I fInd anything boring. All good music (everything mentioned here has been of good quality) has its separate values, philosophies, purpose or aesthetics which are all valid and all make sense when viewed correctly.

Minimalism may be repetitive and dull when viewed from Beethovens point of view, but then youre not supposed to look at it as a romantic - but as a minimalist. Repeated listening helps.


----------



## Jacob Singer

peeyaj said:


> *a. Symphony no. 3, "Sorrowful Song", Gorecki*
> 
> *b. Symphony no. 8, Bruckner*
> 
> *c. Die Schoene Mullerin*
> 
> *d. The Ring Cycle, Richard Wagner*
> 
> *e. Symphony no. 9, Gustav Mahler*
> 
> *g. Mass in B Minor, Johann Sebastian Bach*
> 
> *h. Symphony no. 2, Johannes Brahms
> *
> 
> *i. Das Lied von der Erde, Gustav Mahler
> *
> 
> *j. 4'33'', John Cage *


I definitely agree with you on each one of those.

Only one question.... where's 'f'? I'll nominate Haydn's 6,000,000 symphonies for the 'f' slot. That 6,000,001st one was sure awesome, though.


----------



## mamascarlatti

Galuppi's L'Olimpiade. Anyone who thinks Handel's 4 hour long operas are boring would find them a feast of inventiveness and variety compared to this endless series of undistinguished and indistinguishable 10 minute da capo arias. Mind you I have only managed 2 hours of it.


----------



## Manxfeeder

emiellucifuge said:


> As a minimalist, repeated listening helps.


Isn't that what minimalism is?


----------



## TresPicos

peeyaj said:


> *j. 4'33'', John Cage *
> 
> - I don't if its a piece of music or a philosophic
> al idea, but certainly, it manage to was 4 minutes and 33 seconds of my time.  jk.
> What else... and what yours, too?


Yay, let's discuss 4'33'' again! 
- It's not even music! 
- Oh yes it is!
- Oh no it isn't!
- Oh yes it is!
...


----------



## Guest

I personally find Beethoven supremely boring, as well as Wagner, Liszt, Berlioz, Tchaikovsky, Chopin, and Bruckner. I know I'm in the minority here...


----------



## Sid James

I find a composer's music boring if he/she simply regurgitates what he/she has done before, or what other composers have done. One example is British "cowpat" pastoralism. Ok, Vaughan Williams' _Tallis Fantasia_ & _Lark Ascending_ were great in their time, but they were the originals and imitations like those by RVW himself or guys like Moeran or Finzi just come off as being carbon copies. Even Hovhaness jumped on the bandwagon, his _Allelulia & Fugue_ for orchestra is pure RVW in cowpat mode. When music becomes as imitative as this, it begins to lose any intrinsic meaning or significance (for me, anyway). Not everything has to be original to be enjoyed - which is what RVW said, probably as an excuse (?) - but there is no sense in a composer simply copying almost verbatim techniques and cliches that had been done a generation or two before. I wouldn't put Haydn in this category, he was at the coalface of innovation, what he was doing with symphonies & string quartets was just unprecedented in so many ways. Skip forward to the c20th with RVW's symphonies, and all I hear is the guy regurgitating his own music endlessly (although they all have different titles, which is maybe the only real difference between them). Shostakovich said something to the effect that with each new piece, a composer is forced to do things differently and come up with different solutions than in their previous works. I think he was spot on...


----------



## Toccata

Andre said:


> I find a composer's music boring if he/she simply regurgitates what he/she has done before, or what other composers have done. One example is British "cowpat" pastoralism. Ok, Vaughan Williams' _Tallis Fantasia_ & _Lark Ascending_ were great in their time, but they were the originals and imitations like those by RVW himself or guys like Moeran or Finzi just come off as being carbon copies. Even Hovhaness jumped on the bandwagon, his _Allelulia & Fugue_ for orchestra is pure RVW in cowpat mode. When music becomes as imitative as this, it begins to lose any intrinsic meaning or significance (for me, anyway). Not everything has to be original to be enjoyed - which is what RVW said, probably as an excuse (?) - but there is no sense in a composer simply copying almost verbatim techniques and cliches that had been done a generation or two before. I wouldn't put Haydn in this category, he was at the coalface of innovation, what he was doing with symphonies & string quartets was just unprecedented in so many ways. Skip forward to the c20th with RVW's symphonies, and all I hear is the guy regurgitating his own music endlessly (although they all have different titles, which is maybe the only real difference between them). Shostakovich said something to the effect that with each new piece, a composer is forced to do things differently and come up with different solutions than in their previous works. I think he was spot on...


I don't agree with any of this.

Lots of music by many of the acknowledged "greats" sounds very similar to other material they wrote. To give an example, if you take all the works of a particular type by J S Bach and put the CD player on random mode I bet after a few hours listening you will be thinking a lot of it sounds repetitive. Many other examples could be given (e.g. Haydn, Handel, Mozart and a lot more). The number of good composers who had something new to say in every piece they wrote is probably zero.

But the point missing in the text quoted above is that it doesn't matter if some lesser-known work of say, Mozart or any other "great" you care to name, is of a more generic quality than the very best works from that composer. Those lesser well-known works still have high value, relative to similar works by lesser-known random dudes of that same era, simply because they are works by Mozart or whoever.

The market has already solved the problem of "boring music". Music which this and previous generations have considered to be so boring that it had nothing to offer has already gone into the trash cans of history by dis-use. That's probably the vast majority of all music ever written intended for wider consumption.

There are two caveats to this. One is that tastes of the majority may change over time and some music considered boring in the past may be re-assessed by a more modern audience as being interesting, but this type of situation is rare. Second, contemporary music is almost by definition too new for it to have been written off yet, but I would guess that most of will be junked eventually just like earlier the music by previous generations of listeners.

Undoubtedly, some music will be considered boring from any individuals' viewpoint, but who cares? No disrespect to anyone here but I couldn't care less what music they find boring, unless they're trying to say to say that people who find that music interesting must have something wrong with them. I think there is a lot that mentality going on in this thread, reading the sub-text in some of these posts.

I'm left with the conclusion that there is no such thing as "boring music", as a recognisable class in itself, in the long run except of course the music which has already been junked. Most "boring music" has already been filtered out by dis-use by previous generations, and anything remaining that may appear to be boring probably still has high value by virtue of having being written by one of the "greats".


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Toccata said:


> There are two caveats to this. One is that tastes of the majority may change over time and some music considered boring in the past may be re-assessed by a more modern audience as being interesting, but this type of situation is rare.


Unless I am misunderstanding your point here, no, it is not rare at all. Baroque opera seria with its entry/exit-recitative/aria formula fell out of fashion because taste changed and Classical opera reforms. (Many of Handel's operas were flops when premiered). Not until relatively recently did many Baroque operas come out of dusty shelves and got staged/recorded for the first time after a few centuries of neglect. Yes, precisely as you said it is because modern audiences now see these works as interesting (to say the least), though not limited to Baroque opera seria, but oratorios, Renaissance/early Baroque madrigals, Classical symphonies (other than Mozart's and Haydn's), etc.

Unless you meant to suggest the really crappy and boring stuff, like today's electronic fart variety would have very little chance of being resurrected in a couple of centuries from now after most listeners seem to avoid it?


----------



## Xaltotun

I find a lot of classical music boring, but I attribute most of that to my newbieness. However, it's just weird that while Brahms is my favourite composer, and I like masses and choral works, I still find his _German Requiem_ quite boring. A strange disconnect there.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Xaltotun said:


> I find a lot of classical music boring, but I attribute most of that to my newbieness. However, it's just weird that while Brahms is my favourite composer, and I like masses and choral works, I still find his _German Requiem_ quite boring. A strange disconnect there.


No, not really a strange disconnect. Rather, you have actually answered your own question: your own "newbiness". You have a journey of exciting discoveries ahead of you!


----------



## Kieran

Toccata said:


> Most "boring music" has already been filtered out by dis-use by previous generations, and anything remaining that may appear to be boring probably still has high value by virtue of having being written by one of the "greats".


Well see, this is the thing, we might find even great music to be boring, and though the fault may lie with us, this is only because not all great music can appeal to all people all of the time. If I find a certain type of music boring - say, jazz, which I find excruciating - doesn't mean to say that jazz is actually boring. It just has the effect on me of making my eyes roll upwards, my eyelids twitch closed and my mouth open wide to snore.

:tiphat:


----------



## Toccata

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Unless I am misunderstanding your point here, no, it is not rare at all. Baroque opera seria with its entry/exit-recitative/aria formula fell out of fashion because taste changed and Classical opera reforms. (Many of Handel's operas were flops when premiered). Not until relatively recently did many Baroque operas come out of dusty shelves and got staged/recorded for the first time after a few centuries of neglect. Yes, precisely as you said it is because modern audiences now see these works as interesting (to say the least), though not limited to Baroque opera seria, but oratorios, Renaissance/early Baroque madrigals, Classical symphonies (other than Mozart's and Haydn's), etc.
> 
> Unless you meant to suggest the really crappy and boring stuff, like today's electronic fart variety would have very little chance of being resurrected in a couple of centuries from now after most listeners seem to avoid it?


I take your point, and of course I was well aware of the developments to which you refer. But I still reckon that if certain types of music don't catch on initially or become out of fashion they normally stay that way for a very long time if not indefinitely. Tastes change only very slowly and not by very much.

Yes, some of Handel's operas are now quite popular compared with former times, but it's not wise to exaggerate their overall appeal. In the _The Talk Classical Top 100 Most Recommended Operas_ there are four Handel operas, with an average position of No 50, which is hardly spectacular. The same old stalwarts dwarf this: Verdi, Wagner, Mozart, Puccini, and Strauss.

I have no trouble agreeing with you that most of today's electronic fart music stands no chance of being around in 200 years. There's a much higher probability that it will be fart music of the 23rd Century, still grubbing around for an audience in competition with much the same material that dominates the scene right now, namely music from c1725-1910. I bet too that large swathes of Second Viennese School (and derivatives) music will have died out long before then. I say this in all honesty, not because I generally dislike it, but because it is not popular now by any stretch of the imagination, and never has been, despite protestations to the contrary by some its supporters.

I listen to BBC Radio 3 quite a lot, and have not noticed much interest in any of this contempoary or earlier "atonal" music (let's not bicker over the exact definitions). They play the occasional piece now and then, but to pretend that it's even remotely popular with audiences is nonsense. I can't remember the last time I had any atonal music ringing in my ear whilst away from any music source. That's the whole point: it's impossible to remember, and the more impossible it is the "better" it is.


----------



## Chris

Andre said:


> Skip forward to the c20th with RVW's symphonies, and all I hear is the guy regurgitating his own music endlessly (although they all have different titles, which is maybe the only real difference between them).


A curious statement. For a start, numbers 4 and 6 are dark works, entirely different from the other seven symphonies.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Chris;146397 said:


> A curious statement. For a start, numbers 4 and 6 are dark works, entirely different from the other seven symphonies.


In my opinion only 4 and 6 have any kind of common ground at all out of the whole 9 anyway.


----------



## Ravellian

I wouldn't call any classical music boring, because there's something for every mood..

"Work" mode: Haydn, Telemann
Intellectually curious: Bach, Babbitt, Marenzio
Insanely depressed: Tchaikovsky
Generally sad: Chopin, Rachmaninov
Stoned out of my mind: Feldman

If I were to call any music boring, I'd go with Nickleback, Panic! at the Disco, 50 Cent, and similar pop-culture filth.


----------



## Argus

Ravellian said:


> I wouldn't call any classical music boring, because there's something for every mood..
> 
> "Work" mode: Haydn, Telemann
> Intellectually curious: Bach, Babbitt, Marenzio
> Insanely depressed: Tchaikovsky
> Generally sad: Chopin, Rachmaninov
> Stoned out of my mind: Feldman
> 
> If I were to call any music boring, I'd go with Nickleback, Panic! at the Disco, 50 Cent, and similar pop-culture filth.


I disagree. I find those bands you listed as being more annoying or tedious than boring.

I'd say most classical music is capable of being boring to me if I'm not in the right mood for it. And I'm never in the mood for a lot of it.

Say I'm not in the mood for some metal and I listen to some anyway, I won't find it boring but I'll problem find it grating or irritable. I rarely find classical music grating (excepting opera and some Modernism) but can be totally disinterested in the sound to the point where I see no reason to listen to it.

I'm the same with Indian classical music as well. Where I'm listening to it but it's not really piquing my interest, just kind of simmering away.



Kieran said:


> Well see, this is the thing, we might find even great music to be boring, and though the fault may lie with us, this is only because not all great music can appeal to all people all of the time. If I find a certain type of music boring - say, jazz, which I find excruciating - doesn't mean to say that jazz is actually boring. It just has the effect on me of making my eyes roll upwards, my eyelids twitch closed and my mouth open wide to snore.


I'm going to try for a conversion.






















Some of them I could see being boring (Evans & Hall) but surely not excruciating. For someone who likes classical music and finds jazz excruciating like you do, I'd recommend ECM jazz as most of doesn't swing and often has more in common with the Western classical music strand of jazz DNA than the blues or supposed Africanism found in Blue Note, Impulse, Columbia, Atlantic etc.

Try Jan Garbarek's Officium with the Hilliard Ensemble. It's hardly definable as jazz so you may not find it excruciating.:tiphat:


----------



## emiellucifuge

Thanks Argus, Ive decided to give Jazz a fair chance and will use your post as a starting point.


----------



## Kieran

Argus said:


> Try Jan Garbarek's Officium with the Hilliard Ensemble. It's hardly definable as jazz so you may not find it excruciating.:tiphat:


Now, I don't want to sound like I skipped the rest of your post and just read the last line, but funny 'nough I witnessed Jan gabarek with these Hilliard boys in concert in Dublin about 6 years back. I nudged the missus and said, they'd be wonderful if they shut up the bloody sax. It was oxymoronic! Beautiful voices interrupted by this ridiculous sax guy, who wandered about the place like a loose cannon on deck. It really irritated me.

I realise that jazz is a respected art form in itself, but to me, it sounds like an orchestra tuning up before the start of a show. In fact, I always crack that one before the show to the missus: "thanks for the free jazz, but we're here for some music!" :trp:

Tickles her ribs, that one...:tiphat:


----------



## Argus

Kieran said:


> Now, I don't want to sound like I skipped the rest of your post and just read the last line, but funny 'nough I witnessed Jan gabarek with these Hilliard boys in concert in Dublin about 6 years back. I nudged the missus and said, they'd be wonderful if they shut up the bloody sax. It was oxymoronic! Beautiful voices interrupted by this ridiculous sax guy, who wandered about the place like a loose cannon on deck. It really irritated me.
> 
> I realise that jazz is a respected art form in itself, but to me, it sounds like an orchestra tuning up before the start of a show. In fact, I always crack that one before the show to the missus: "thanks for the free jazz, but we're here for some music!" :trp:
> 
> Tickles her ribs, that one...:tiphat:


I'm the exact opposite.:lol:

I don't really like Officium _because_ of the chanting, which on it's own I would find incredibly boring. I love that kind of sax sound that Garbarek gets on tenor along with John Surmon on soprano and Sonny Fortune on alto. It's almost borderline _smooth jazz_ devil but all I know is I like it.

I can understand the orchestra tuning up joke in regards to some free jazz but most jazz has strong rhythm, form, melodies and 'all that jazz'.

There's a lot of jazz I don't particularly care for like a lot of Parker bebop imitators, overly stylised/cool Chet Baker wannabes and obviously the dreaded smooth jazz. A lot of 'jazz cats' don't like fusion but I dig some of it like Davis and some of his former sidemen (McLaughlin, Hancock, Cobham) but others (Zawinul's Weather Report, Corea's RTF) I find cheesy.

I was going to post Miles Davis' Zimbabwe and Cecil Taylor's Unit Structures, but if you find Garbarek's extremely palatable playing too much then you'd have no chance with that.


----------



## Kieran

We have Miles Davis "Bitches Brew" and "Kind of Blue." They're moody and urban and sound sexy, but the music doesn't entice me. Or - just when it does, it changes for no apparent reason. It's too arbitrary and subjective. I can recognise that these guys can play, but it doesn't develop ideas in the ways I like. Sometimes classical music can be like that too, but the form is more friendly to me, less a jungle of soundscapes and effects.

Last year we heard Simon Nabotov. I swear, it must have been like hearing Beethoven on piano for the first time. He was ground shattering. He made the piano sound like footsteps, like rain, like a cacophany of bored people. he was tremendous - but it struck me as being just so many effects. Nothing of real expression, but just like a photographic piano, showing snapshots of emotions or street sounds. "Ohh listen honey, the piano sounds just like a beeping horn in Manhatten!"

I loved it, but was generally unmoved. Plus, he seemed like an irritable guy. Cheerful, but switchy in temperament. I wondered, when did jazz move from the bars and nightclubs into such formal settings, better suited to classical? 

:tiphat:


----------



## Sid James

> Unless you meant to suggest the really crappy and boring stuff, like today's electronic fart variety would have very little chance of being resurrected in a couple of centuries from now after most listeners seem to avoid it?





> I have no trouble agreeing with you that most of today's electronic fart music stands no chance of being around in 200 years. There's a much higher probability that it will be fart music of the 23rd Century, still grubbing around for an audience in competition with much the same material that dominates the scene right now, namely music from c1725-1910. I bet too that large swathes of Second Viennese School (and derivatives) music will have died out long before then. I say this in all honesty, not because I generally dislike it, but because it is not popular now by any stretch of the imagination, and never has been, despite protestations to the contrary by some its supporters.
> 
> I listen to BBC Radio 3 quite a lot, and have not noticed much interest in any of this contempoary or earlier "atonal" music (let's not bicker over the exact definitions). They play the occasional piece now and then, but to pretend that it's even remotely popular with audiences is nonsense. I can't remember the last time I had any atonal music ringing in my ear whilst away from any music source. That's the whole point: it's impossible to remember, and the more impossible it is the "better" it is.


Why is it so popular on this site to denigrate electronic music? Is it because some people are discomfited that they can't understand it? Some of electronic music is probably rubbish, but the stuff by the greats - Xenakis, Stockhausen, Boulez to talk about the older generation - is just as highly sophisticated as the traditional acoustic classical music. I don't get people's obsessions with knocking things that they don't understand.

& yes, the music of the Second Viennese School has never been as popular as the classical warhorses & probably never will be. That doesn't mean it's boring, far from it. It's actually more challenging than something like Mozart's Eine Kleine, and where's the problem with that? Atonal music will probably never gain the same sort of foothold that the classics have in the repertoire. But it is still being played & recorded by the top musicians of the world, so it does have a lot of value to musicians & audiences alike.



> A curious statement. For a start, numbers 4 and 6 are dark works, entirely different from the other seven symphonies.


When I first heard them, I thought that RVW's 4th & 6th symphonies were the bees knees. But after having explored other music of that era & before, I just realised that they were regurgitations of so many cliches from Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Mahler, Bartok, you name it, RVW just grabbed it & used it. Sure, RVW's placing of a slow movement at the end of the 6th - which does create a kind of creepy atmosphere quite well - was not his idea, it was Tchaikovsky's (& old Pyotr did it much more effectively & in an integrated way, imo). If you listen closely to RVW's symphonies, they pile up cliche after cliche (of his own & other composers). They're really just a grab bag & hotch potch of ideas & styles, imo. Listened to the 9th for the first time in 10 years or so, and while I liked Boult's conducting, the piece itself was largely derivative - the ending a copy of what Wagner did in his orchestral music.

It's not a problem if there is consistency in a composer's output, that is a given, as all of them had unique styles. But surely, when writing a new work, a composer is aiming to do it because they have something new & unique to say. Of course, they are not reinventing the wheel in every new piece, but adding to what they have already done before. I simply find music that regurgitates almost verbatim ideas or techniques from a composer's ealier works to be highly boring & unengaging. But if you like endless reruns, then so be it. You can enjoy it even though I hate it...


----------



## bassClef

Why do people listen to music they find boring?


----------



## Xaltotun

To learn and to educate themselves?


----------



## Toccata

bassClef said:


> Why do people listen to music they find boring?


It's the best sort for giving you something to talk about when you come here.

You could equally ask why some people get divorced. They didn't plan things that way, but it's way things can turn out unexpectedly.


----------



## Manxfeeder

bassClef said:


> Why do people listen to music they find boring?


In my case, I do it to try to find out what others hear in it. I've had pieces I couldn't stand until someone who loved them explained them.

Sometimes the passage of time opens areas of interest that weren't there previously.

Sometimes repeating hearing a piece opens it up; I hated the Missa Solemnis the first five times, but after the sixth hearing, it's one of my favorites.

That's been my experience, anyway.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

This was posted just recently in another thread. It sure is boring. By minimalist composer La Monte Young (born 1935). There are twelve instalments from youtube, each about 10 minutes.

_Just Charles & Cello in The Romantic Chord_ (2002-2003)

First clip out of twelve!


----------



## the_emptier

as with classical music, jazz, although with a significantly shorter history, has undergone through a ton of change. there are a lot of facets to it; bebop, swing, hard bop, cool, modal, free/avant-garde, modern, fusion etc...i personally love both but there was a time where i could care less about them as well. so sometimes it just takes time


----------



## Igneous01

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> This was posted just recently in another thread. It sure is boring. By minimalist composer La Monte Young (born 1935). There are twelve instalments from youtube, each about 10 minutes.
> 
> _Just Charles & Cello in The Romantic Chord_ (2002-2003)
> 
> First clip out of twelve!


yes this piece is just....................................................... one long tone.

might be useful for meditation, but i think the strings make it too harsh as a meditative.

might be better listening to the old monks sing.


----------



## Argus

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> This was posted just recently in another thread. It sure is boring. By minimalist composer La Monte Young (born 1935). There are twelve instalments from youtube, each about 10 minutes.
> 
> _Just Charles & Cello in The Romantic Chord_ (2002-2003)
> 
> First clip out of twelve!


It doesn't try not to be boring, unlike a mass of other music I could name.

Here's his magnum opus for reference.:tiphat:






Immeasurably more interesting than anything Handel every scribbled on manuscript paper, wouldn't you agree?


----------



## Igneous01

its better than the other one, but still, an hour? he shouldve compressed this to 15 minutes, with all the motifs and themes he couldve written it much better.


And i dont think he surpasses handel - handel to me is simple, but elegant.


----------



## peeyaj

Honestly, all of Bruckner's symphonies bore me.. What's wrong??


----------



## DavidMahler

Beethoven symphony 9 finale 

Haydn surprise symphony first mvmt


----------



## clavichorder

DavidMahler said:


> Haydn surprise symphony first mvmt


You surprise me at every turn in a mildly offensive way(no pun with "surprise intended". Just how many Haydn symphonies have you listened to? The surprise symphony first movement has one of the finest first movements of his lot, its very pastoral and joyful, without much dissonance, but its up there, where do you get this idea?


----------



## DavidMahler

Haha I meant the second mvmt. The famous mvmt


----------



## clavichorder

DavidMahler said:


> Haha I meant the second mvmt. The famous mvmt


Phew! I still like that movement, but taken out of context, its an overrated war horse. The first movement, there's absolutely nothing the matter with, I'm glad to see that its the famous one.


----------



## Igneous01

ill admit, I find mahlers symphonies really boring. Its not that they are always boring, its just the length of each movement and how everything is stretched out makes it really difficult to keep up with the music. I still like the resurrection symphony though, but Its length really puts me off from listening to it alot.


----------



## starthrower

It's the listener who is bored, not the music that is boring. This should be obvious from the get go.


----------



## kv466

The andante from Mozart's kv467.


----------



## DavidMahler

kv466 said:


> The andante from Mozart's kv467.


bless you! I agree


----------



## jalex

Last movement of Schubert #9 (only got through the whole symphony once enjoying every moment). If repeats are taken it becomes boring towards the end of the first movement, is temporarily saved by the second and then the bottom falls out in the third.


----------



## DavidMahler

Igneous01 said:


> ill admit, I find mahlers symphonies really boring. Its not that they are always boring, its just the length of each movement and how everything is stretched out makes it really difficult to keep up with the music. I still like the resurrection symphony though, but Its length really puts me off from listening to it alot.


Mahler's symphonies are only boring if:

1) in the hands of a very poor conductor. If the Adagietto runs on for 15 minutes it can put me to sleep.

2) you are not in the mood for something weighty. None of Mahler's symphonies are particularly breezy. Not even the 4th.

3)if you think the Ode To Joy theme is the most exciting a symphony can get, then all of Mahler will be lost on you


----------



## Eviticus

kv466 said:


> The andante from Mozart's kv467.


Surely because you've heard it so many times??? I'm sure if you'd only just heard it a handful of times you'd be lapping it up. It's beauty made it famous.

Most of Bach's organ works make me feel like someone has slipped lithium in my drink. His Chorale preludes and especially his Fantasia in G (BMV.572) are like hangovers. His cantata's leave me punch-drunk too. Some parts of his masses i have to skip as they just irritate me. Fortunately some of his works such as those for small ensembles are not only charming but courageously complex as are some of his fugues and works for the cello. But he does teeter on the edge of room 101 often!


----------



## Eviticus

jalex said:


> Last movement of Schubert #9 (only got through the whole symphony once enjoying every moment). If repeats are taken it becomes boring towards the end of the first movement, is temporarily saved by the second and then the bottom falls out in the third.


:lol: The Schubertian witch hunters are gonna come for you soon... your'll see


----------



## Dodecaplex

starthrower said:


> It's the listener who is bored, not the music that is boring. This should be obvious from the get go.


:tiphat:

Someone should make a thread titled "Wiser Words Have Never Been Spoken", and this beautiful post of yours should most definitely be in it.


----------



## moody

Huge said:


> Strauss. J. Pretty much all of his waltzes are death.


Now that's really sad!


----------



## moody

starthrower said:


> It's the listener who is bored, not the music that is boring. This should be obvious from the get go.


That makes no sense, if the listener is bored then the music is boring TO HIM and that I believe is what the question was. You can be too clever for your own good you know.


----------



## moody

bassClef said:


> Why do people listen to music they find boring?


Believe it or not they didn't know it was boring until they listened to it... duh!


----------



## moody

Ravellian said:


> I wouldn't call any classical music boring, because there's something for every mood..
> 
> "Work" mode: Haydn, Telemann
> Intellectually curious: Bach, Babbitt, Marenzio
> Insanely depressed: Tchaikovsky
> Generally sad: Chopin, Rachmaninov
> Stoned out of my mind: Feldman
> 
> If I were to call any music boring, I'd go with Nickleback, Panic! at the Disco, 50 Cent, and similar pop-culture filth.


There are some monstropusly boring pieces of music ,but all is not lost because Sid probably loves them. If he doesn't Avant Garde certainly does. You see there is something for everybody in this garden.


----------



## TrazomGangflow

I find the first movement of Mendelssohn's Symphony No. 3 to be a bit long winded and difficult to sit through. Although I don't disslike Mendelssohn's 3rd, I find his 4th and 5th to be much more diverse and exciting. The 3rd does speak very deeply but I guess I'm too shallow to appriciate it.


----------



## moody

moody said:


> There are some monstropusly boring pieces of music ,but all is not lost because Sid probably loves them. If he doesn't Avant Garde certainly does. You see there is something for everybody in this garden.


I think that monstropusly is a great new word that describes the the situation exactly, perhaps I'll use it more often.


----------



## poconoron

Some pieces become boring (temporarily) when over-listened to - I've had it happen with Eine Kleine (K525) of Mozart and Beethoven's 5th. After staying away for some time, however, I can re-discover their fascinations.


----------



## chopianist

Bartok is the worst. I know, people love him- but I just can't take it.


----------



## violadude

chopianist said:


> Bartok is the worst. I know, people love him- but I just can't take it.


Hmm I know Bartok is horribly dissonant and angular to some, but boring? What have you heard?


----------



## Crudblud

I can understand why that criticism would be levelled against Bartók, but I've found almost all of his pieces outside his piano music grows on you a lot with repeated listens.


----------



## tdc

Crudblud said:


> I can understand why that criticism would be levelled against Bartók, but I've found almost all of his pieces outside his piano music grows on you a lot with repeated listens.


I would agree with this, except I think his piano music also grows on you with repeated listens, and his piano concertos are some of the best in the repertoire imo...After Ravel's concertos Bartok's would be my vote for the best PC's (all of them) of the 20th century.


----------



## Guest

TrazomGangflow said:


> I find the first movement of Mendelssohn's Symphony No. 3 to be a bit long winded and difficult to sit through. Although I don't disslike Mendelssohn's 3rd, I find his 4th and 5th to be much more diverse and exciting. The 3rd does speak very deeply but I guess I'm too shallow to appriciate it.


That's interesting, because I've always found the Scottish Symphony to be not only my favorite Mendelssohn symphony but one of my all-time favorites. The first movement I find particularly moving, but the whole thing for me is quite deep and powerful.


----------



## TresPicos

kv466 said:


> The andante from Mozart's kv467.


Indeed. The first and third movements are fantastic, but that andante destroys everything. So, I solved it by replacing it with the inconspicuous andante from his 8th piano concerto, and now I can really enjoy this "revised" 21st.


----------



## madman

a lot depends on how well they are performed


----------



## starthrower

Crudblud said:


> I can understand why that criticism would be levelled against Bartók, but I've found almost all of his pieces outside his piano music grows on you a lot with repeated listens.


Yup! And I'm starting to think the same for the piano music. Each time I take out my Bartok piano set and play something, it sounds better than the last time.

So what is perceived as boring at first is what your brain can't process and absorb until you spend more time with the music.


----------



## celegorma

Reading the score at the same time can make the most boring music most exciting all of a sudden.


----------



## Nivmizzet

The most boring?

Antiphon: studium divinitatis: by hildegard of bingen.


----------



## Jord

I love Baroque, Classical and Romantic, atonal music from time to time grabs my attention, from what i've heard of minimalism most of it bores the hell out of me, i just don't see the point of dragging ideas out to the extent that it becomes repetitive, my view on minimalism anyway


----------



## GGluek

I'm trying to decide if there's a difference between "boring" and "uninteresting." Most Delius, for instance, I find pretty but uninteresting, so I avoid it or tune it out. Similarly, I find a lot of Bruckner to be uninteresting (to me). Boring? Franck's Symphony. Most of Avro Part. A lot of Baroque busywork (especially dreary slow movements).


----------



## Morgante

Richard Wagner.


----------



## neoshredder

Something in the Minimalism category.


----------



## bassClef

I rate very highly music that relaxes me enough to drift me off to sleep - I think that's different to boring.


----------



## Norse

With a few exceptions; Mozart and Haydn symphonies.


----------



## Kieran

I put the *Hammerklavier* on last night. I was yawning after the 7000th bar of the slow movement.

As a Mozart fan, I find *Eine Kleine Nachtmusik* to be a case of _death by over-familiarity_.

Usually a complicated work can bore me, but that's down to my own lack of knowledge. When it becomes clearer, it appeals to me more. But sometimes it doesn't. Maybe this is why I have some difficulty with Wagner... :tiphat:


----------



## moody

GGluek said:


> I'm trying to decide if there's a difference between "boring" and "uninteresting." Most Delius, for instance, I find pretty but uninteresting, so I avoid it or tune it out. Similarly, I find a lot of Bruckner to be uninteresting (to me). Boring? Franck's Symphony. Most of Avro Part. A lot of Baroque busywork (especially dreary slow movements).


I've given you a like but it excludes the Franck.


----------



## kv466

_referring to my prior post of "...andante from kv467..."_



Eviticus said:


> Surely because you've heard it so many times??? I'm sure if you'd only just heard it a handful of times you'd be lapping it up. It's beauty made it famous.


Not the case. I've only heard it a handful of times and it is simply not my glass of sweet, iced tea. If I wanna hear that brand of so-called Mozartean beauty I'd much rather turn to his andantino from kv299, which I've surely heard way too many times. Beauty also made Alessandra Ambrosio famous but that doesn't mean everyone likes her; although I'm sure Phillip does, nyah!


----------



## violadude

Ravellian said:


> I wouldn't call any classical music boring, because there's something for every mood..
> 
> "Work" mode: Haydn, Telemann
> Intellectually curious: Bach, Babbitt, Marenzio
> Insanely depressed: Tchaikovsky
> Generally sad: Chopin, Rachmaninov
> Stoned out of my mind: Feldman
> 
> If I were to call any music boring, I'd go with Nickleback, Panic! at the Disco, 50 Cent, and similar pop-culture filth.


Feldman IS good music for when you're stoned out of your mind.


----------



## Aries

peeyaj said:


> *b. Symphony no. 8, Bruckner*
> 
> ...
> 
> *d. The Ring Cycle, Richard Wagner*
> 
> *e. Symphony no. 9, Gustav Mahler*


I completely disagree with that. These works are among my very favorites.

Examples of boring music for me:
- slow movements of baroque
- slow movements of Mozart
- menuetts of Haydn and Mozart
- Chopin
- many modern composers


----------



## bigshot

I'm beginning to really pity young people with so much overfamiliarity and boredom for some of the greatest pieces of music ever created by mankind. It's really sad that some people can't appreciate limitless things because of their own limitations. If I sat down to make a list of the music that bores me or I am tired of, I would write down Ravel's Bolero and then stare off into space trying to think of another. I feel guilty about Bolero. Ravel is one of my favorite composers. I want to like it more than I do. There is so much great music. It's a shame to waste it.


----------



## drpraetorus

Anything by 
Brahms
Mahler
Delius
Ketelby
Finzy
Bruckner
Most Debusy
Durefley (sp)
Most Hayden
WORLDS MOST BORING PIECE OF CLASSICAL MUSIC (drum role) Brahms GERMAN REQUIEM.


----------



## stanchinsky

Generally speaking I think Wagner has produced some of the most boring music, not because his ideas are bad, but just simply because sometimes his pieces are just too long. I also think Beethoven is guilty of this at times (please don't kill me).


----------



## dionisio

drpraetorus said:


> WORLDS MOST BORING PIECE OF CLASSICAL MUSIC (drum role) Brahms GERMAN REQUIEM.


It saddens me to say this but i understand you prefectly. Of all sacred music i've heard (well i think it is impossible for one to hear every one of it), i have felt asleep a couple of times with this one.

And about Wagner, what others think it is boring, i couldn't disagree more. To listen to Wagner (the opera composer) simply has pure music i do not advise. His music is suppose to follow the plot faithfully. And that Wagner (and Verdi, but in a whole other universe) did with such majesty...

And at last, i don't understand how one finds Wagner boring when we wrote Die Meistersinger! I understand the criticism of its length (as the oper operas). But length and boring music are two different concepts.


----------



## StevenOBrien

In my limited experience, Wagner's music is always boring on the first listen, and with every subsequent listen, it gets better and better.


----------



## clavichorder

I believe it was Mendlessohn's 2nd symphony that I heard once, the one that is structured like a cantata, that I found disappointingly boring.


----------



## Art Rock

drpraetorus said:


> Anything by
> Brahms
> Mahler
> Delius
> Ketelby
> Finzy
> Bruckner
> Most Debusy
> Durefley (sp)
> Most Hayden
> WORLDS MOST BORING PIECE OF CLASSICAL MUSIC (drum role) Brahms GERMAN REQUIEM.


You forgot to put your (sp) disclaimer with Hayden, Finzy, Debusy and Ketelby as well.


----------



## drpraetorus

Yeah spilin ain't no gud somtams.


----------



## Webernite

dionisio said:


> It saddens me to say this but i understand you prefectly. Of all sacred music i've heard (well i think it is impossible for one to hear every one of it), i have felt asleep a couple of times with this one.
> 
> And about Wagner, what others think it is boring, i couldn't disagree more. To listen to Wagner (the opera composer) simply has pure music i do not advise. His music is suppose to follow the plot faithfully. And that Wagner (and Verdi, but in a whole other universe) did with such majesty...
> 
> And at last, i don't understand how one finds Wagner boring when we wrote Die Meistersinger! I understand the criticism of its length (as the oper operas). But length and boring music are two different concepts.


Funny, because (in a strange way) I hear Brahms's _Requiem _as his most Wagnerian work. Not harmonically, but in scale, the treatment of voices, even orchestration.


----------



## jani

I guess Cages 4'33 or Ravel Bolero


----------



## Guest

jani said:


> I guess Cages 4'33 or Ravel Borello


Not sure what "Borello" is, but I agree that Ravel's _Bolero_ is a boring piece.

After listening to a pianist in my studio play a Liszt piece, I have to say I find a lot of Liszt boring. Along with Wagner. And Bruckner. And Mahler...


----------



## Norse

He's probably talking about Ravel's Bordello. It sounds like it shouldn't be boring, but it is.


----------



## starthrower

moody said:


> That makes no sense, if the listener is bored then the music is boring TO HIM and that I believe is what the question was. You can be too clever for your own good you know.


Could be the performance is more boring than the music? And there was no question posed in the thread title. But there is a reference to sleep inducing music.


----------



## neoshredder

Bolero would be a great piece if it ended after about 5 minutes or they had more parts to it.


----------



## presto

Getting to know pieces better can make you view them in a far better light.
I bought a CD of some recorder music by Robert De Visee, first play I was disappointed, it all sounded dull and samey.
I persevered and I now love the disc.


----------



## dionisio

Webernite said:


> Funny, because (in a strange way) I hear Brahms's _Requiem _as his most Wagnerian work. Not harmonically, but in scale, the treatment of voices, even orchestration.


I never understood the whole War of the romantics dispute.

I think to our modern ears, the differences aren't that great as they were in those days.


----------



## starthrower

neoshredder said:


> Bolero would be a great piece if it ended after about 5 minutes or they had more parts to it.


Frank Zappa did a good 5 minute version. It's probably up on YouTube. But Ravel, having the full orchestra at his disposal did a masterful job of orchestrating the bare ingredients.


----------



## Sonata

Sad to see Brahms Requiem on here, it's my favorite choral work. But that's how it goes! 



neoshredder said:


> Bolero would be a great piece if it ended after about 5 minutes or they had more parts to it.


Exactly


----------



## clavichorder

Without a lot of suspense of disbelief, I find the variations in the Beethoven Sonata op. 111 tedious. Hammerklavier is boring on the whole. Can't get into the late string quartets. Much of late Beethoven. Things that are unusual and unique about them are considered by many folks to be revolutionary, divine, ect, to me they are boring and not worth it. 

Also, Philip Glass's violin concerto...that's of another level.


----------



## Mahlerian

Sonata said:


> Sad to see Brahms Requiem on here, it's my favorite choral work. But that's how it goes!


People have cited some of my favorite works and composers on here as well. Others' tastes are always incomprehensible to us, because our own just make so much more sense...

Anyway, I find much of pop and EDM far more boring and mind-numbing than almost any classical music. If I have to hear the rambling incoherent chord progression of Nickelback's "How You Remind Me" one more time....

As for classical, the most boring piece I've ever heard was Ernst Boehe's Taormina. Try to make it through if you can.


----------



## DeepR

Everything I don't like I find boring in some way.


----------



## Zabirilog

Cage's ASLSP


----------



## jani

canon in d mmmmmmm


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Zabirilog said:


> Cage's ASLSP


Patience patience.............................................................................


----------



## Bone

I love Brahms but would rather not listen to the German Requiem: not sure i find it boring exactly, but less compelling than almost everything else he wrote. I understand how some could find Bruckner, Gorecki, and Mahler boring, but I have never had the same experience twice listening to any of their compositions; for me, they pass the boredom test.


----------



## Serge

Pretty much anything by Haydn, with a couple of exceptions maybe.

The dude takes the cake, just because of his productivity skills.

And anything by Handel for sure.


----------



## dan

Brahms 2nd Symphony? It may begin as a snoozer, but the final movement is a rouser.


----------



## Aquaria

For mindless tedium, nothing exceeds Bruckner to me.

Philip Glass can be tedious, although I can admire individual movements or tracks. He improves tremendously if I select him as artist on my iPod, and then hit shuffle, to play the different pieces from different albums in a random order. When you get a good shuffle, it sounds like an acid trip or a massive organic epic.


----------



## DavidA

Much of this minimalist modern music. Just goes on and on!


----------



## Andreas

DavidA said:


> Much of this minimalist modern music. Just goes on and on!


When I think of Reich, for instance, and perhaps other minimalists too, I am sometimes reminded of this Buddhist saying: If you do something for two minutes and you find it boring, do it for four minutes. If it's still boring, do it for eight. If it's still boring ...

To sit through a performance of Music for 18 Musicians, or Drumming, or Desert Music, even if it's just a recording, is like an invitation to a party without guests. Maybe this could be the greatest party you've ever been to.


----------



## udscbt

I just finished Philip Glass' opera Satyagraha. I actually liked the first act, and the concept (no plot, singing in sanskrit without subtitles) worked surprisingly well. However, act two and three felt like repeats of the first. And there were a lot of repeats in the first act alone. Also, the entire opera felt like a repeat of Akhnaten...


----------



## Winterreisender

Aquaria said:


> For mindless tedium, nothing exceeds Bruckner to me.


Not sure if I'd put it quite so bluntly, but Bruckner is a composer whom I too have never really warmed to. His slow movements are just too slow and too tuneless.

I would also nominate Vaughan Williams' _Sea Symphony_. I usually love Vaughan Williams, but this one seems to run out of ideas after about 5 minutes.


----------



## arpeggio

*75th Army Band*

Like I have stated in other threads I played with the 75th Army Band for 2 1/2 years. During that time I played more garbage than most people hear in a lifetime.

Also most Christmas works we play at concerts are boring. Exception was the last Christmas concert with the Fairfax City Band. Leroy Anderson's Christmas Festival may be fun to listen to but it is boring to play. The audience loves it but every member of every ensemble I play with is sick of it.


----------



## hpowders

The Pachelbel Canon never fails to place me in a rather somnambulant state.


----------



## arpeggio

hpowders said:


> The Pachelbel Canon never fails to place me in a rather somnambulant state.


Have you ever seen the You Tube of the singer who made fun of the _Canon_ or the PDQ Bach routine concerning the _Canon_?


----------



## Winterreisender

hpowders said:


> The Pachelbel Canon never fails to place me in a rather somnambulant state.


I'm not sure why some people find Pachelbel's Canon so boring, given that it only lasts about three minutes. Is it the repetitive ground bass you don't like? Because ground bass is a pretty common technique in a lot of baroque music, yet I don't hear many people criticising Bach's famous C Minor Passacaglia for example. Or is it just that it is "overplayed" that you don't like?


----------



## arpeggio

I was just having a little fun with the piece.


----------



## Winterreisender

arpeggio said:


> I was just having a little fun with the piece.


Ok, well I don't deny that the YouTube "Pachelbel Rant" is a classic...


----------



## Winterreisender

By the way, I'm horrified to see _Die Schöne Müllerin_ on the OP (even though the thread is three years old). The songs _Morgen Gruß _and _Des Baches Wiegenlied _ are among my absolute favourites!!


----------



## Art Rock

Winterreisender said:


> By the way, I'm horrified to see _Die Schöne Müllerin_ on the OP (even though the thread is three years old). The songs _Morgen Gruß _and _Des Baches Wiegenlied _ are among my absolute favourites!!


Join the club - if you look at the first post alone, it only states compositions that are among my selected favourites, with the exception of the Cage.


----------



## apricissimus

It's really interesting when someone finds your favorite works to be utterly boring. It actually excites me to consider the wide variety of tastes that exist.


----------



## SixFootScowl

There are many boring works out there. One that I can think of is Holst's Planets, other than "Mars the Bringer of War."

Some music can be boring at times and not boring at other times, depending on our mood and how busy we may be.


----------



## hpowders

Prokofiev's Sixth Symphony. The great composer cruising on auto-pilot.


----------



## nightscape

Florestan said:


> There are many boring works out there. One that I can think of is Holst's Planets, other than "Mars the Bringer of War."


I'm throwing a penalty flag on this and calling a violation.


----------



## lupinix

clementi the famous sonatine in C


----------



## ArtMusic

I find Messiean's works to be very boring.


----------



## stevederekson

peeyaj said:


> *a. Symphony no. 3, "Sorrowful Song", Gorecki*
> *b. Symphony no. 8, Bruckner*
> *d. The Ring Cycle, Richard Wagner*
> *e. Symphony no. 9, Gustav Mahler*
> *g. Mass in B Minor, Johann Sebastian Bach*
> *h. Symphony no. 2, Johannes Brahms*
> *i. Das Lied von der Erde, Gustav Mahler*


----------



## peeyaj

Three years later, I actually found Gorecki, Mahler and Bruckner NOT that boring (some of, but NOT that much as before). Guess that three years of education can gives you.. 

And Mullerin is a beautiful, sparkling gem of Schubert's oeuvre..


----------



## Mahlerian

peeyaj said:


> Three years later, I actually found Gorecki, Mahler and Bruckner NOT that boring (some of, but NOT that much as before). Guess that three years of education can gives you..


We forgive you, and we'll forgive you even more if your tastes continue to mature!

Anyway, I forgot what I said last time, but I find Satie's "mystic period" chordal stuff dry as dust. I do like the Prelude to Fils de etoiles, but that's in large part because of Takemitsu's arrangement for flute and harp.


----------



## hpowders

I'm so glad to hear that Mahler is not that boring!!


----------



## neoshredder

hpowders said:


> I'm so glad to hear that Mahler is not that boring!!


His music takes a lot of patience.


----------



## Cosmos

Most Mozart, Brahms' symphonies, and Schubert's piano sonatas all make my eyes tear over


----------



## violadude

ArtMusic said:


> I find Messiean's works to be very boring.


Notice how no one jumps on your opinions when you word them nicely like this


----------



## KenOC

Cosmos said:


> Most Mozart, Brahms' symphonies, and Schubert's piano sonatas all make my eyes tear over


With uncontrollable emotion, one presumes?


----------



## trazom

Cosmos said:


> Most Mozart, Brahms' symphonies, and Schubert's piano sonatas all make my eyes *tear* over


Me too! Which is why I love those composers. On a serious note, I'm guessing you meant "glaze over"?


----------



## hpowders

apricissimus said:


> It's really interesting when someone finds your favorite works to be utterly boring. It actually excites me to consider the wide variety of tastes that exist.


"Interesting"? I think a lot of folks would take that as a slap in the face, even if they try to hide it!


----------



## PaulmtAZ

For some reason I find most contemporary music to be boring but every once in awhile a contemporary piece will perk my interest


----------



## neoshredder

PaulmtAZ said:


> For some reason I find most contemporary music to be boring but every once in awhile a contemporary piece will perk my interest


Try Schnittke's Piano Quintet. But yeah you got to be in the mood for it. Expect the beehive sound. But he mixes it in with some melodic stuff. Which I like.


----------



## violadude

neoshredder said:


> Try Schnittke's Piano Quintet. But yeah you got to be in the mood for it. Expect the beehive sound. But he mixes it in with some melodic stuff. Which I like.


Beehive sound?........


----------



## hpowders

Schnittke? Familiar with his music. Doesn't do anything for me.


----------



## neoshredder

violadude said:


> Beehive sound?........


You know. The strings making that buzzing sound with minor 2nds. It sounds like bees. lol


----------



## lupinix

Arvo Part can be a bit boring too, especially Fratres


----------



## Mahlerian

violadude said:


> Beehive sound?........


Perhaps he means sul ponticello?


----------



## neoshredder

Mahlerian said:


> Perhaps he means sul ponticello?


Yeah multiple string instruments playing a minor 2nd away from each other. Creates a heavy dissonance sound that sounds like bees. It was noticeable in the Piano Quintet with the strings doing the heavy dissonance part.


----------



## Mal

Beethoven piano trio no.6, apart from the 3rd movement.


----------



## hpowders

OP: Any of those 7 minute Vivaldi concertos used as time fillers on US Public Radio Stations.


----------



## EarthBoundRules

I'm too afraid to post anything I don't like now in case I end up loving it in the future (which has happened on numerous occasions).


----------



## Sloe

I had to listen to New York Counterpoint for clarinet and tape by Steve Reich two days ago that was really boring.


----------



## violadude

I'll admit, I have to be in a very particular mindset to listen to something like Alvin Lucier's "I am sitting in a room" without getting a little antsy.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

Something by Satie


----------



## Guest

Debussy is generally boring to me, except his masterpiece Pelleas et Melisandre, which some find boring but I find fascinating and extremely well-written.


----------



## Sloe

DoReFaMi said:


> Debussy is generally boring to me, except his masterpiece Pelleas et Melisandre, which some find boring but I find fascinating and extremely well-written.


It has a mysterious calmness like much other music by Debussy that I like.


----------



## atsizat

I find Mozart's major key works pretty boring except piano concerto no 23 adagio and piano concerto no 4 andante.


----------



## Tristan

Honestly I can't really even think of anything. I suppose sometimes while listening to Pandora, unremarkable pieces will come on and I'll hardly notice them, but I can't think of anything that really stands out as _boring_.


----------



## mstar

z


EarthBoundRules said:


> I'm too afraid to post anything I don't like now in case I end up loving it in the future (which has happened on numerous occasions).


That's the Mahler symphonies for me. I'm just starting to enjoy the later ones.


----------



## isorhythm

violadude said:


> I'll admit, I have to be in a very particular mindset to listen to something like Alvin Lucier's "I am sitting in a room" without getting a little antsy.


It sort of blew my mind when I first heard it college but I've never felt any desire to hear it again....


----------



## dzc4627

Anything by Eric Whitacre or scum like Todd Stalter


----------



## EarthBoundRules

mstar said:


> That's the Mahler symphonies for me. I'm just starting to enjoy the later ones.


Haha, the same happened to me.


----------



## dzc4627

Or maybe this


----------



## Guest

Mendelssohn. Not boring but rather underwhelming. For example, I was listening to the violin concerto today, with James Ehnes. A great version. But it doesn't move me like the Bruch, Brahms, Prokofiev (both), Beethoven, and so many others. I could say the same about his string quartets, or his overtures. Nice work!! But doesn't move me.

That being said, his symphonies 3&4, Scottish and Italian, are masterpieces that I love.


----------



## OldFashionedGirl

Mmm... Chopin and Liszt. Some Schubert and some Rachmaninov.


----------



## Pugg

Anything to do with a name I dare not speak


----------



## hpowders

All Liszt. Wagner monologues. Debussy's La Mer but *Not* Pelléas et Mélisande or L'isle joyeuse. Most Vivaldi. Some Scarlatti Sonatas. Schumann serialized piano works but *NOT* Frauenliebe und leben or the Symphonic Etudes. Schubert symphonies. Schubert string quartets *EXCEPT* the last, the great G Major or sometimes when I'm in the mood, the C Major String Quintet. Gluck operas.


----------



## Ilarion

Pachelbel Canon - I call it *Pachel's Hell*


----------



## isorhythm

Pachelbel's Canon is proto-minimalism. I like it and I'm not afraid to say so.


----------



## DeepR

hpowders said:


> All Liszt.


Does that mean you've heard all Liszt?


----------



## Ilarion

isorhythm said:


> Pachelbel's Canon is proto-minimalism. I like it and I'm not afraid to say so.


Having played Pachel's Hell for countless weddings, I detest it :scold: and I'm not afraid to say so.


----------



## Antiquarian

I have always found Samuel Barber's compositions to be a bit on the boring side. Most likely, the *Adagio* first comes to mind, but I have a similar problem enjoying his symphonies. I've listened to the _American Classics_ series on Naxos, (Marin Alsop/Royal Scottish National Orchestra). I should probably listen to other interpretations though, it might make me change my mind.


----------



## starthrower

Most romantic concertos. Anything by Saint Saens. And 98% of baroque music.


----------



## Harmonie

I hate to generalize, but pretty much any violin concertos from the romantic era are dreadfully boring to me.


----------



## Guest

Ballet music. 
Compositions that sound like a movie score, like many of the recent compositions I've heard recently at concerts. 
La Finta Giardiniera (horrible libretto! I saw it in Santa Fe this year and heard it before.)
Renaissance music.


----------



## Andolink

Anything by Steve Reich, Terry Riley or Phillip Glass. Also anything by Alan Hovaness


----------



## PresenTense

Same here. I get bored when listening to baroque and classical eras aswell.


----------



## hpowders

The first movement of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata.

The entire Schubert 9th Symphony: a study in monotonous rhythms.

Any 21st century orchestral music receiving its premiere by a major orchestra attempting to be important and profound.

All the Debussy piano preludes with the exception of "The Girl With The Flaxen Hair".

All Liszt piano music.

I have many more, but I'll save them for another day.

Can you wait?


----------



## Dr Johnson

hpowders said:


> The first movement of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata.
> 
> The entire Schubert 9th Symphony: a study in monotonous rhythms.
> 
> Any 21st century orchestral music receiving its premiere by a major orchestra attempting to be important and profound.
> 
> All the Debussy piano preludes with the exception of "The Girl With The Flaxen Hair".
> 
> All Liszt piano music.
> 
> I have many more, but I'll save them for another day.
> 
> Can you wait?


I see we are not to be afraid of upsetting the applecart here. 

Thus I feel free to nominate Dvorak's Piano Concerto.


----------



## helenora

There is no such pieces for me, even Cage's 4'33 ( if it counts as a classical music example ) still isn't boring if used as an accompaniment for a meditation. Good music for any form of meditation :lol:


----------



## Pugg

hpowders said:


> The first movement of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata.
> 
> The entire Schubert 9th Symphony: a study in monotonous rhythms.
> 
> Any 21st century orchestral music receiving its premiere by a major orchestra attempting to be important and profound.
> 
> All the Debussy piano preludes with the exception of "The Girl With The Flaxen Hair".
> 
> All Liszt piano music.
> 
> I have many more, but I'll save them for another day.
> 
> Can you wait?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Pergolesi - Lo Frate 'Nnamorato. I bought a DVD of this and got about 1/3 into it, gave up and got rid of the DVD.


----------



## starthrower

Harmonie said:


> I hate to generalize, but pretty much any violin concertos from the romantic era are dreadfully boring to me.


I am coming around on some of these. I can now listen to Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Mendelssohn, but still can't get through the Beethoven. I don't know if it's considered romantic or classical?


----------



## KenOC

starthrower said:


> I am coming around on some of these. I can now listen to Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Mendelssohn, but still can't get through the Beethoven. I don't know if it's considered romantic or classical?


Beethoven is often called a "transitional composer" between classical and romantic, but I can't buy that. He's just Beethoven. Some people didn't like his music them, and some don't like it now. Just the way it is. But he still fills the halls 200 years later.


----------



## Merl

Pugg said:


> Anything to do with a name I dare not speak


Give us a clue.

I'd place quite a lot of choral music in the 'awful' category rather than boring.


----------



## starthrower

I was bored out of my mind listening a Philip Glass piano concerto at a concert two weeks ago, but everyone else jumped to their feet when it was over. I wasn't sure how to interpret the reaction?


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith

Liszt's Faust symphony.


----------



## Adam Weber




----------



## hpowders

With the exception of Giulio Cesare and a few others, I consider Handel operas to be deadly.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith

starthrower said:


> I was bored out of my mind listening a Philip Glass piano concerto at a concert two weeks ago, but everyone else jumped to their feet when it was over. I wasn't sure how to interpret the reaction?


Was there a stampede for the doors?


----------



## Poodle

Anything without nice tune I can hum


----------



## bioluminescentsquid

I'd like to confess, father.

- Everything by D. Scarlatti
- Bach's WTC (!) In large doses. I love it, but it bores me to listen to the whole thing in one sitting. It's like a science class - interesting and exciting if you pay attention, but boring if you're not engaging with the music. His Suites and toccatas are better for extended listenings.
- Anything by Hadyn, unless it's played by Il Giardino Armonico. That ensemble is magic.


----------



## Judith

If I haven't heard a piece before, it can be boring but l
persevere and listen to it a few times, becomes less boring and not so bad after all!


----------



## manyene

Yet another work in which he recycles earlier works?


----------



## hpowders

Pachelbel Canon. Never fails to give me a migraine.


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> Pachelbel Canon. Never fails to give me a migraine.


That's worse than just boring!


----------



## Pugg

Judith said:


> If I haven't heard a piece before, it can be boring but l
> persevere and listen to it a few times, becomes less boring and not so bad after all!


The most wise answer so far.


----------



## LOLWUT

I don't usually get bored with music. I can dislike music, like most atonal music, but it is a negative emotion rather than a neutral boredom. Then again, that's what they were trying to achieve anyway isn't it?


----------



## hpowders

Ravel's Bolero. Loved it as a kid. Now I find its repetitiveness boring.

So what can you deduce from this?

I ain't no kid.


----------



## Pugg

LOLWUT said:


> I don't usually get bored with music. I can dislike music, like most atonal music, but it is a negative emotion rather than a neutral boredom. Then again, that's what they were trying to achieve anyway isn't it?


Amen to this, live and let live I say.


----------



## Ariasexta

I can not put up with the very idea of 20th century or contemporary classical music, they sound aberrant, abnomal, obnoxious, vacuous. In term of the most boring composers I have experienced: Prokofiev, Star Trek symphonies. I never dared to try more after having heard these peoples supposed "compositions".


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

helenora said:


> There is no such pieces for me, even Cage's 4'33 ( if it counts as a classical music example ) still isn't boring if used as an accompaniment for a meditation. Good music for any form of meditation :lol:


AMATEUR PERFORMERS BOTCH UP JOHN CAGE'S 4'33"

GUEST 
ARTS/ENTERTAINMENT 
OCTOBER 13, 2013










An ensemble of enthusiastic amateur musicians have received overwhelming criticism for their 'inadequate' rendition of John Cage's 4'33′.
One reviewer called attention to the whispering between performers during the performance, calling it 'undisciplined', whilst another accused a trombone not-player of texting during the piece. It was clear the ensemble hadn't learnt their parts thoroughly, several members of the ensemble reportedly looking as if they were about to play a note before nervously deciding against it. 'They just lacked any conviction', a local paper states bluntly.
Many reviews appear self-congratulatory, claiming that the audience did most of the work for the musicians.
Most audience members also complained of the piece lagging, ending up lasting nearly twenty minutes, and at times appearing simply to be an awkward silence in which the performers contemplated their ineptitude.
'It was as if someone had made a joke about dead babies,' one critic declared. 'Everyone was just anxiously waiting for the situation to diffuse. It's a classic case of not messing with the classics. Everyone has their own favourite memory of the piece, and a group of students are only going to end up butchering it. It's a piece which people really love. Families perform it at the dinner table when they have nothing better to do, and a virtuosic rendition has been known to win big favours from mobsters. I personally had it as a ringtone for quite some time, although that admittedly did cause some issues.'
Those more lenient amongst the audience have blamed the performance environment, saying the toilets were too close by, and at times one could hear the miasmic melée a touch too clearly. 'It felt depressingly symbolic,' admitted conductor Gunter Hasselhoven.
What they performed wasn't even really 4'33′. Given it's radical deviation from what is accepted, some in the art community have hailed the performance as 'challenging the very nature of challenging the very nature of music.'

See 4'33'' is not boring..............


----------



## KenOC

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> *AMATEUR PERFORMERS BOTCH UP JOHN CAGE'S 4'33"*
> 
> 
> GUEST
> ARTS/ENTERTAINMENT
> OCTOBER 13, 2013


Absolutely priceless.

...some in the art community have hailed the performance as 'challenging the very nature of challenging the very nature of music.'

Snort, snarfle, etc. :lol:


----------



## Pugg

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> AMATEUR PERFORMERS BOTCH UP JOHN CAGE'S 4'33"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An ensemble of enthusiastic amateur musicians have received overwhelming criticism for their 'inadequate' rendition of John Cage's 4'33′.
> One reviewer called attention to the whispering between performers during the performance, calling it 'undisciplined', whilst another accused a trombone not-player of texting during the piece. It was clear the ensemble hadn't learnt their parts thoroughly, several members of the ensemble reportedly looking as if they were about to play a note before nervously deciding against it. 'They just lacked any conviction', a local paper states bluntly.
> Many reviews appear self-congratulatory, claiming that the audience did most of the work for the musicians.
> Most audience members also complained of the piece lagging, ending up lasting nearly twenty minutes, and at times appearing simply to be an awkward silence in which the performers contemplated their ineptitude.
> 'It was as if someone had made a joke about dead babies,' one critic declared. 'Everyone was just anxiously waiting for the situation to diffuse. It's a classic case of not messing with the classics. Everyone has their own favourite memory of the piece, and a group of students are only going to end up butchering it. It's a piece which people really love. Families perform it at the dinner table when they have nothing better to do, and a virtuosic rendition has been known to win big favours from mobsters. I personally had it as a ringtone for quite some time, although that admittedly did cause some issues.'
> Those more lenient amongst the audience have blamed the performance environment, saying the toilets were too close by, and at times one could hear the miasmic melée a touch too clearly. 'It felt depressingly symbolic,' admitted conductor Gunter Hasselhoven.
> What they performed wasn't even really 4'33′. Given it's radical deviation from what is accepted, some in the art community have hailed the performance as 'challenging the very nature of challenging the very nature of music.'
> 
> See 4'33'' is not boring..............


Hilarious and post of the day!


----------



## hpowders

Beethoven's Wellington's Victory. A rare miss.


----------



## Richard8655

Vivaldi Four Seasons. Maybe not his fault, but so overplayed.


----------



## Pugg

Richard8655 said:


> Vivaldi Four Seasons. Maybe not his fault, but so overplayed.


If the people asking for it , let them .
Do not lose sleep over it.


----------



## Richard8655

Pugg said:


> If the people asking for it , let them .
> Do not lose sleep over it.


Good advice. If that's what makes them happy, who are we to judge?  I'll need a Benadryl, though.


----------



## Friendlyneighbourhood

Mozart's music is usually boring 
Beethoven's 5th Symphony and 9th Symphony are also incredibly boring, when his 3rd, 6th and 7th are actually fun


----------



## Lenny

I find the music of Richard Wetz incredibly demanding, I cannot get the hold of it. Usually that's a good sign, I felt the same about Mahler, until I "saw the light"


----------



## Redsilas

arpeggio said:


> Like I have stated in other threads I played with the 75th Army Band for 2 1/2 years. During that time I played more garbage than most people hear in a lifetime.
> 
> Also most Christmas works we play at concerts are boring. Exception was the last Christmas concert with the Fairfax City Band. Leroy Anderson's Christmas Festival may be fun to listen to but it is boring to play. The audience loves it but every member of every ensemble I play with is sick of it.


As a fellow bassoonist...I had to play that piece several times each holiday season. Gag.


----------



## hpowders

The Brahms Double Concerto. Far from Brahms at his best. Disappointingly dull from the great Brahms.


----------



## PlaySalieri

hpowders said:


> Ravel's Bolero. Loved it as a kid. Now I find its repetitiveness boring.
> 
> *So what can you deduce from this?*
> 
> I ain't no kid.


you liked it then but not now


----------



## Genoveva

hpowders said:


> Ravel's Bolero. Loved it as a kid. Now I find its repetitiveness boring.
> 
> So what can you deduce from this?
> 
> I ain't no kid.


It's a pity there isn't a place you can recycle pre-loved music items, like for example part-exchanging Bolero for a movement from somebody's symphony you don't have, or maybe a slice of cheese cake or whatever.


----------



## neoshredder

Lots of piano music. I definitely prefer strings or orchestra. Violin Concertos probably my favorite format to listen to. But the best piano works are not so boring. Also almost everything before the 18th Century. Both Baroque and Classical Eras seem to get repetitive at times. But I still enjoy them regardless of predictable patterns.


----------



## John Zito

Surprised _Nightride and Sunrise_ by Sibelius hasn't been mentioned. The Sunrise is nice enough, but you may not be awake for it after the Nightride.


----------



## Ariasexta

Look through this old thread makes me excusing myself of early rampage against certain views.


----------



## Strange Magic

I shall not name names--not my custom to knock anybody else's specific music--but there is much late 19th and early 20th century music that lacks clearly-stated melodies that are then repeated such that human memory can absorb them. Instead we have climaxes and then fadings away, fortissimo alternating with diminuendo, and "endless", unbounded so-called "melody" that quickly becomes free-flowing background noise--there is no focus, the mind wanders and one wants instead to hear Bach or Prokofiev. It only happens, in my case, that I find clear melody boring is if I have heard it just too many times over the decades or if the melody is too predictable.

There are (always) exceptions to this. Some composers through other means can overcome the tedium of unbounded "melody" by their genius--it is mostly secondary or tertiary composers whose efforts induce tedium through lack of defined melody. One may not care for some composer's clearly stated melodies; they may be banal or too repetitious, but often they have produced other works that please much more. But there are reasons why Brahms, Rachmaninoff, Tchaikovsky, Sibelius tower over so many lesser late 19th-early 20th century composers.


----------



## haziz

Bruckner .............


----------



## elgar's ghost

John Zito said:


> Surprised _Nightride and Sunrise_ by Sibelius hasn't been mentioned. The Sunrise is nice enough, but you may not be awake for it after the Nightride.


I can't agree but you get a like for pithiness.


----------



## HenryPenfold

Anything by Florence Price.


----------



## marlow

Those so-called ‘minimalist’ composers who appear to want to give a minimalist amount of enjoyment with their repetitive stuff.


----------



## HenryPenfold

marlow said:


> Those so-called 'minimalist' composers who appear to want to give a minimalist amount of enjoyment with their repetitive stuff.


Except Steve Reich?


----------



## marlow

HenryPenfold said:


> Except Steve Reich?


Especially him….


----------



## Ethereality

neoshredder said:


> Lots of piano music. I definitely prefer strings or orchestra. Violin Concertos probably my favorite format to listen to. But the best piano works are not so boring. Also almost everything before the 18th Century. Both Baroque and Classical Eras seem to get repetitive at times. But I still enjoy them regardless of predictable patterns.


A majority of instrumental choices in Classical are boring to me (piano especially, I agree.) It's not always the instruments themselves but what composers do with them or add to them--a huge part of why I listen to other ensembles with ethnic instruments. In the favorite instrument thread, I voted for Congas and Cello, but this could easily be extended to many other percussive instruments, flute, guitar, and violin. The thing with Congas is the range of their effects and pitch is so wide, they can account for almost every percussion sound.


----------



## ORigel

neoshredder said:


> Lots of piano music. I definitely prefer strings or orchestra. Violin Concertos probably my favorite format to listen to. But the best piano works are not so boring. Also almost everything before the 18th Century. Both Baroque and Classical Eras seem to get repetitive at times. But I still enjoy them regardless of predictable patterns.


An orchestration of the Appassionata Sonata. Unfortunately, it's not played by a real orchestra.


----------



## Ethereality

ORigel said:


> An orchestration of the Appassionata Sonata. Unfortunately, it's not played by a real orchestra.


Already sounds way better, not that piano isn't a great side-instrument. Now if they would fix Beethoven a little more so there's not just some repetitive timpani beating. Eclectic and adventurous percussive parts in the quirkier halves, fuller string backdrops of crescendos and build-ups, tense harpsichord or harp arpeggios and trills, better dynamic range, tighter horns and cellos with more creative arrangement of their parts, stronger emphasis of _counterpoint_ in instrumental sections! It's about fluiditizing without losing simplicity. Small wind and piano counter-melodies. There's so much to do to improve on some Classical works, to me--but hey, I'm a composer. I do this in my head, and might work on this if I find any interest later.


----------



## OCEANE

haziz said:


> Bruckner .............


So much music require time and effort to get into them and Bruckner's symphonies are really that kind.


----------



## haziz

OCEANE said:


> So much music require time and effort to get into them and Bruckner's symphonies are really that kind.


no. No. NO. I am not a masochist. I tried, really, really tried. I have listened to his symphonies repeatedly. I have also been listening to classical music for over 40 years, so I am not new to the genre. I don't understand Bruckner's music, don't like it, and don't enjoy it. And I have no interest in torturing myself further with his music.


----------



## hammeredklavier

haziz said:


> Bruckner


On the forum, I feel there's not enough talk about how good his music is, just endless lists of favorite recordings.



Friendlyneighbourhood said:


> Mozart's music is usually boring











Well, your username and avatar are not boring


----------



## Waehnen

I find some Hindemith rather boring — he wrote rather much indeed. And some predictable contemporary music — when I am able to describe the pieces beforehand to my fellows without having yet heard the music. Also some baroque music, which is not Bach, but using most typical terraced dynamics. Again the predictability bores me.


----------



## FrankinUsa

haziz said:


> no. No. NO. I am not a masochist. I tried, really, really tried. I have listened to his symphonies repeatedly. I have also been listening to classical music for over 40 years, so I am not new to the genre. I don't understand Bruckner's music, don't like it, and don't enjoy it. And I have no interest in torturing myself further with his music.


I would agree as well. I am limiting myself to the major symphonies. I just decided to listen to all 9 symphonies/Jochum,Dresden/ and it was torture. I van listen to the 9th if i get the feeling. There has been the cliche that Bruckner wrote the same symphony but just 9 times over and frankly i agree. Another piece that I have extreme difficulty listening to Mahler Symphony 8. I just think the whole concept is wrong. I love all of Mahler(less so with the songs but love DLvDE. I am still having difficulty with Shostakovich.


----------



## HenryPenfold

FrankinUsa said:


> I would agree as well. I am limiting myself to the major symphonies. I just decided to listen to all 9 symphonies/Jochum,Dresden/ and it was torture. I van listen to the 9th if i get the feeling. There has been the cliche that Bruckner wrote the same symphony but just 9 times over and frankly i agree. Another piece that I have extreme difficulty listening to Mahler Symphony 8. I just think the whole concept is wrong. I love all of Mahler(less so with the songs but love DLvDE. I am still having difficulty with Shostakovich.


Reading this, I think you should take up jazz or c&w


----------



## FrankinUsa

HenryPenfold said:


> Reading this, I think you should take up jazz or c&w


The other music I listen to is jazz/Great American Songbook especially vocals a la Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra etc


----------



## HenryPenfold

FrankinUsa said:


> The other music I listen to is jazz/Great American Songbook especially vocals a la Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra etc


Uncanny!

………………….


----------



## haziz

Just as I said, earlier today, that I did not wish to be tortured by Bruckner's music again, guess what I stumble across perusing the BBC Radio 3 schedule for yesterday! I just can't resist playing this BBC Radio 3 program! I doubt he will manage to change my mind regarding the man's music, but let's see. Listening to this with an open mind.










*
Bruckner and the Symphonic Boa Constrictors*
_The Listening Service_
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0003rpg

Even today, some music lovers will nod knowingly when they hear Brahms's comparison of Anton Bruckner's epic symphonies with a nightmare-scary giant snake that kills its victims in the inescapable embrace of its crushing coils. Poor Bruckner, ever the easy target of sneering critics. At once childishly obsessive and intensely spiritual, ultra-sophisticated musician and naive country bumpkin: even by composers' standards he stood out as weird. No wonder the music was so hopeless!

But Tom Service wants you to think of Bruckner as one of the greatest and most original symphonists of all time (whose symphonies really don't all sound the same), as much master of daring long-range musical form as of the perfect miniature.

David Papp (producer)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0003rpg


----------



## Kreisler jr

FrankinUsa said:


> I would agree as well. I am limiting myself to the major symphonies. I just decided to listen to all 9 symphonies/Jochum,Dresden/ and it was torture. I van listen to the 9th if i get the feeling. There has been the cliche that Bruckner wrote the same symphony but just 9 times over and frankly i agree. Another piece that I have extreme difficulty listening to Mahler Symphony 8. I just think the whole concept is wrong. I love all of Mahler(less so with the songs but love DLvDE. I am still having difficulty with Shostakovich.


Don't let people tell you that you need to like X to like classical music. Especially, if X is (sometimes too) long symphonies by Bruckner, Mahler, Shostakovich that were considered niche repertoire less than 40 years ago by many classical listeners. One of the strongest points of "classical" is that you have hundreds of years of music from many different styles and genres to choose your favorites from.
[edit: I personally don't dislike Brucker, Mahler, DSCH symphonies but I don't think they are core of classical or likely to be liked by almost everyone.]


----------



## FrankinUsa

Haziz.......Thank you for that BBC LINK. I added this to my favorites and will continue to listen.

As for Bruckner,I remain unconvinced. One thing I can say is that I like snippets of Buckner. Perhaps we need a CD of "bleeding chunks" of Buckner a la Wagner. One interesting point brought in the program is the perspective (brought out close to the end) that the problem is not Buckner but,rather,conductors post-Furtwangler, interpreted Buckner as spiritual cathedrals of sound versus a more passionate interpretation. So,this is my plan. I will look at Whatever Furtwangler/Buckner CDs I have and give it a chance. Although I have thrown out a Furtwangler Buckner 8th because the sound engineering was so so dismal.


----------



## AaronSF

haziz said:


> Just as I said, earlier today, that I did not wish to be tortured by Bruckner's music again, guess what I stumble across perusing the BBC Radio 3 schedule for yesterday! I just can't resist playing this BBC Radio 3 program! I doubt he will manage to change my mind regarding the man's music, but let's see. Listening to this with an open mind.


I hope BBC 3 gives you a new perspective on Bruckner. Brahms's "boa constrictor" quote was, perhaps, Johannes being too clever by half, and I suspect was said more out of cleverness than meant as a sincere criticism. (Brahms could be so catty!) Still there is a scintilla of truth in it.

And I thought long ago that Bruckner's symphonies are remarkably similar to each other, and have even found myself saying it's the same symphony 9 times over. I even found them boring on first hearing.

But somehow, in my early 20s, I found myself a Bruckner convert. What finally convinced me was hearing Bruckner live. Suddenly all that seemed bombastic and self-indulgent before made sense. The massive horns in particular. In a good hall (like Carnegie) those first-movement horn climaxes startled and gripped me, all the more so as they are so often followed by a profound caesura. The slow movements pull you in if you let them, the scherzi can be exhilarating with their nervous energy, and the finales can get pretty wild.

I can understand how it seems he wrote the same symphony 9 times, as the structure of the movements are identical from one to the other. But if you listen to, say, the scherzi back to back, you realize he progressed from something relatively tame to something quite scary in the 9th symphony. How interesting that he dedicated that symphony to God, and yet the scherzo sounds like the devil himself is pursuing him.

The good German friend who introduced me to Bruckner said, "Just let it all wash over you, like the waves of the ocean." Easier said than done, I know.

Best of luck on your venture into Bruckner-land.


----------



## OCEANE

AaronSF said:


> I hope BBC 3 gives you a new perspective on Bruckner. Brahms's "boa constrictor" quote was, perhaps, Johannes being too clever by half, and I suspect was said more out of cleverness than meant as a sincere criticism. (Brahms could be so catty!) Still there is a scintilla of truth in it.
> 
> And I thought long ago that Bruckner's symphonies are remarkably similar to each other, and have even found myself saying it's the same symphony 9 times over. I even found them boring on first hearing.
> 
> But somehow, in my early 20s, I found myself a Bruckner convert. What finally convinced me was hearing Bruckner live. Suddenly all that seemed bombastic and self-indulgent before made sense. The massive horns in particular. In a good hall (like Carnegie) those first-movement horn climaxes startled and gripped me, all the more so as they are so often followed by a profound caesura. The slow movements pull you in if you let them, the scherzi can be exhilarating with their nervous energy, and the finales can get pretty wild.
> 
> I can understand how it seems he wrote the same symphony 9 times, as the structure of the movements are identical from one to the other. But if you listen to, say, the scherzi back to back, you realize he progressed from something relatively tame to something quite scary in the 9th symphony. How interesting that he dedicated that symphony to God, and yet the scherzo sounds like the devil himself is pursuing him.
> 
> The good German friend who introduced me to Bruckner said, "Just let it all wash over you, like the waves of the ocean." Easier said than done, I know.
> 
> Best of luck on your venture into Bruckner-land.


Agreed with Kreisler that don't let people tell you what to like in music world...but for we as music lovers.....it is always nice to someone introducing to us some music worthy a try.... someone like Aaron's good German friend..


----------



## methuselah

call me negative, but 99% of classical music.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Sorry, hate to say it, but just about anything by Richard Strauss. I keep trying and keep being disappointed.


----------



## Waehnen

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Sorry, hate to say it, but just about anything by Richard Strauss. I keep trying and keep being disappointed.


I have similar experiences. I do not dislike or disrespect Strauss but for some reason I am not interested in what he does and I find myself bored. Never really admitted it to myself before but now that I read your post…


----------



## John Zito

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Sorry, hate to say it, but just about anything by Richard Strauss. I keep trying and keep being disappointed.





Waehnen said:


> I have similar experiences. I do not dislike or disrespect Strauss but for some reason I am not interested in what he does and I find myself bored. Never really admitted it to myself before but now that I read your post…


I like some of the lighter stuff: _Till Eulenspiegel_, excerpts from _Rosenkavalier_. But otherwise, not really my thing either.


----------



## Kreisler jr

Many people preach for what they love and that's perfectly o.k. I do it myself, of course... 
And I am all for people trying to get into music they find a bit difficult at first encounter, it's very often worth it.
But in classical music there are fashions, regional/national and long time trends and also niches that don't feel like it if one has spent so long in them. As I wrote above, when I began listening to classical in the late 1980s, Shostakovich was not on my radar for years, it was niche repertoire hardly ever included in introductory/"best of" or whatever anthologies or series. The modern Russian composers everyone knew were Prokofiev (obviously Peter and the Wolf already for children but also R&J and the famous concertos) and Stravinsky (with Le sacre, Soldier's tale etc. presented as key works of the early 20th century). Bruckner or Mahler were also considered "advanced" or "acquired tastes". For every listener who appreciated Bruckner or Mahler as some "Über-Beethoven" there were probably two who rather disliked one or the other as overblown, overlong etc.
This has changed in the last 30 years although not to the extent one might assume by reading typical internet discussion fora on classical music. There are several possible reasons and one is probably the demographics of interent users.


----------



## 4chamberedklavier

methuselah said:


> call me negative, but 99% of classical music.


Sturgeon's law taken to the max.

As for classical music I find boring: parts that are silent for too long, and parts that are slow & monophonic for too long. I don't find repetition to be something that makes a piece boring, I just like my music busy.


----------



## FrankinUsa

John Zito said:


> I like some of the lighter stuff: _Till Eulenspiegel_, excerpts from _Rosenkavalier_. But otherwise, not really my thing either.


I had trouble with Richard Strauss. What I did with the tone poems was that I just forgot about the 'plot" and just listened to the music. I found that I enjoy it more but I still don't listen to Strauss that much. . Strauss has seem to gone out of favor compared to 1940 - 2000(ish) when everyone made recordings and was frequently programmed. Last few years Strauss recordings and programming seems to have dwindled quite a bit.


----------



## 59540

Most of Ralph Vaughan Williams and Frederick Delius, sorry.


Kreisler jr said:


> As I wrote above, when I began listening to classical in the late 1980s, Shostakovich was not on my radar for years, it was niche repertoire hardly ever included in introductory/"best of" or whatever anthologies or series. The modern Russian composers everyone knew were Prokofiev (obviously Peter and the Wolf already for children but also R&J and the famous concertos) and Stravinsky (with Le sacre, Soldier's tale etc. presented as key works of the early 20th century).


The more I listen to Prokofiev, the more I find his work to be much more musically interesting than Shostakovich's.


----------



## Strange Magic

dissident said:


> Most of Ralph Vaughan Williams and Frederick Delius, sorry.
> The more I listen to Prokofiev, the more I find his work to be much more musically interesting than Shostakovich's.


You just haven't heard the right RV-W. Try the 5th Symphony. Your appreciation of Prokofiev mirrors my own--I continue to regard him as the Mozart of the 20th century, but with more acid and bite.


----------



## 59540

Strange Magic said:


> You just haven't heard the right RV-W. Try the 5th Symphony. Your appreciation of Prokofiev mirrors my own--I continue to regard him as the Mozart of the 20th century, but with more acid and bite.


Yes I'll have to give RVW and Delius more of a careful listen. I'm not really trashing either, maybe it's just not being familiar enough with their whole output. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll listen to it. I've been known to change my opinions on this or that composer.


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus

This is not the *most *boring piece of music but there is something wrong with it. It has beauty in it no doubt but it is also boring.


----------



## SONNET CLV

*The Most Boring Pieces of Classical Music*



peeyaj said:


> Those music that put you to sleep. "Boring", "tedious", "long-winded" are subjective terms used to describe things, so it's next impossible to rate things as boring, because it is not objective. What may constitute as a "boring music", to others might be "brilliant and fresh" to others. What music may put you into sleep, might be enlightening to someone. Like a popular saying, "it's just a matter of taste".
> 
> ...
> 
> *j. 4'33'', John Cage *
> 
> - I don't if its a piece of music or a philosophic
> al idea, but certainly, it manage to was 4 minutes and 33 seconds of my time.  jk.
> What else... and what yours, too?


I agree with you on the Cage piece ... but only when music by Philip Glass is playing in the background.


----------



## BachIsBest

Wilhelm Theophilus said:


> This is not the *most *boring piece of music but there is something wrong with it. It has beauty in it no doubt but it is also boring.


Perhaps you don't enjoy impeccable counterpoint and inventive interplay between instruments?


----------



## Ethereality




----------



## Simon Moon

Wow!

An 11 year old thread, with a 7 year gap from 2016. 

I like posting on a zombie as much as the next person...


For me, pretty much anything from earlier than around the late 1920's bores me.

I had a short liking for minimalism back in the 80's, but, with just a few exceptions, it bores me now.


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus

BachIsBest said:


> Perhaps you don't enjoy impeccable counterpoint and inventive interplay between instruments?


Possibly. As I said it has beauty, I just find there's something wrong with it, I cant put my finger on what that is. It just drags on and seems like something is missing. Is it a piece of music you would miss or one you wish to listen to often?


----------



## mmsbls

Wilhelm Theophilus said:


> Possibly. As I said it has beauty, I just find there's something wrong with it, I cant put my finger on what that is. It just drags on and seems like something is missing. Is it a piece of music you would miss or one you wish to listen to often?


I can't answer for BachIsBest, but it was voted 4th TC Top Recommended String Concerto. I probably would be happy to listen to it every week for the rest of my life.


----------



## Bulldog

Some folks here get bored easily. A more exciting life is recommended.


----------

