# Overexposure of works



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Frequently on TC people talk about disliking or no longer liking a work due to overexposure (i.e. the work is played or heard too often). I have never experienced that problem. Works I like or love always thrill me when I hear them. So I'm interested in understanding why others experience this phenomenon. I have several questions.

_How much is too much?_ How often does one have to hear a work for the multiple hearings to diminish the work's enjoyment? This could simply be how many times or how many times within a certain period of time. Obviously there are no exact answers, but I'd be interested in a rough estimate.

_What causes one to hear the work too often?_ In general, no one must attend a concert with works one doesn't enjoy. If a work comes on the radio, one can change the station or turn the radio off. Presumably, no one chooses to play a work they feel is overexposed. Understandably, performers do not get to choose, and I can understand someone who plays the Nutcracker many times every year feeling that ballet is overexposed. But generally, if overexposure to a work can be a problem, why does anyone listen to a work that often?

And perhaps the toughest question:

_What exactly about overexposure causes people to like a work less?_ I suppose we all would have some issues with a work we heard several times every day. Given that works generally are heard vastly less often than that, why does overexposure cause a lessening of enjoyment?


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I have been fixated with Mendelssohn's Elijah for the better part of a year, and still listen to it! It draws on some of the best stories in the Bible, and is very dramatic.

However, I've lost interest in some pieces I used to love. Right now, it's late Beethoven; however, I will probably listen to those works many more times in the future.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

mmsbls said:


> Frequently on TC people talk about disliking or no longer liking a work due to overexposure (i.e. the work is played or heard too often). I have never experienced that problem. Works I like or love always thrill me when I hear them. So I'm interested in understanding why others experience this phenomenon. I have several questions.
> 
> _How much is too much?_ How often does one have to hear a work for the multiple hearings to diminish the work's enjoyment? This could simply be how many times or how many times within a certain period of time. Obviously there are no exact answers, but I'd be interested in a rough estimate.
> 
> ...


Do you experience overexposure with other things, like food, movies, or books? It's probably like that.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Orchestra musicians don't have a choice...the music director chooses the program....
Overexposure has certainly affected my musical tastes over the years - it seems that conductors like to program the old warhorses, esp when they first take over an orchestra position.
If i never have to perform or hear Tchaikovsky 4, 5 or Rach-y 2 it would be fine by me...they are way overplayed, overprogrammed. there are so many other symphonies that deserve the exposure, that would gain audience popularity if given the performance time.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

ORigel said:


> Do you experience overexposure with other things, like food, movies, or books? It's probably like that.


I've never experienced enjoying particular food significantly less due to eating it often. I have never watched a movie or read a book enough to experience that effect. I agree that if I were to read a fiction book or watch a movie many times, I would grow tired of it, but I don't choose to do so. I guess I wonder how people manage to hear music that they may grow tired of often enough to experience that effect.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Heck148 said:


> Orchestra musicians don't have a choice...the music director chooses the program....
> Overexposure has certainly affected my musical tastes over the years - it seems that conductors like to program the old warhorses, esp when they first take over an orchestra position.
> If i never have to perform or hear Tchaikovsky 4, 5 or Rach-y 2 it would be fine by me...they are way overplayed, overprogrammed. there are so many other symphonies that deserve the exposure, that would gain audience popularity if given the performance time.


I certainly understand the result when you have no choice. How often do you think you could play a standard work without growing tired of it?


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> Orchestra musicians don't have a choice...the music director chooses the program....
> Overexposure has certainly affected my musical tastes over the years - it seems that conductors like to program the old warhorses, esp when they first take over an orchestra position.
> If i never have to perform or hear Tchaikovsky 4, 5 or Rach-y 2 it would be fine by me...they are way overplayed, overprogrammed. there are so many other symphonies that deserve the exposure, that would gain audience popularity if given the performance time.


Cipriani Potter Symphony no. 6
Raff Symphony no. 5
Lachner Symphony no. 5
Schnittke Symphony no. 2 "St. Florian"
Rorem Symphony no. 3
Nobert Burgmuller Symphony no. 1


----------



## mossyembankment (Jul 28, 2020)

For me, the problem is mainly the way classical works are used in pop culture. For example, the most popular Beethoven symphonies - I heard pieces and themes from there innumerable times before I became an actual fan of classical music. Moreover, they are usually used for comic effect in one way or another. 

When this is your first exposure to something, it makes it really difficult to hear the music without immediately thinking of it in that particular context (i.e., cartoons, comedies, crappy commercials, etc.).


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

mmsbls said:


> I certainly understand the result when you have no choice. How often do you think you could play a standard work without growing tired of it?


Depends on the work....Beethoven 5 is the symphony I've played the most....lots of LvB 7, 6 as well, along with Brahms 1,2 and 4, Dvorak 9....but i don't tire of those works....


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Any work of art, great or not, cannot stand up to repeated exposure for long. The initial magic and wonder of the work eventually wears out its welcome. Several years back I was listening to Mahler 2 and realized I was bored silly and got nothing out of it. I purposefully took a year long break from all Mahler. Coming back to him after the abstinence let me hear it with fresher ears. 

Pop music is notorious for this: a year on the charts is a long time, but after that it's gone. People are tired of it and want something new. Movies have it a bit better. There are some movies that stand up to multiple viewings. Most people can only see a movie once or twice and that's it. Then there are people like me who can watch some movies with regularity and never seem to tire of it just like they can listen to the same symphony over and over without getting bored. I listen to the Elgar 2nd quite often - at least once a month. I watch the Lord of the Rings trilogy two or three times a year. Never tire of either. But the Beethoven 5th? Star Wars? No thanks, overexposed and I just don't care anymore.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

I just played Beethoven 5 at a summer festival, which because of the pandemic was my first performance with orchestra in front of a live audience in 16 months. And it felt absolutely fantastic! It helped that the festival orchestra was very, very good. But I admit I rarely seek out the Fifth for my own listening.

Somehow, despite more performances than I can count, I never get sick of playing _The Nutcracker_. But I admit I don't really seek it out for listening.

What I am most thoroughly sick of, both performing as well listening? Dvořák 9. GAH! Pleasemakeitstop...


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Overexposure of good music alone doesn't kill my enjoyment if I haven't seen the score yet. 

As long as there is some mystery involved, music is interesting to me. I find that it is the music that I have thoroughly analyzed that tends to become boring. This can happen to music of any sophistication, provided it interested me in the first place!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Knorf said:


> I just played Beethoven 5 at a summer festival, which because of the pandemic was my first performance with orchestra in front of a live audience in 16 months. And it felt absolutely fantastic!


Yes!!....it's on my schedule for September, along with #7....always enjoy LvB 5, 6, 7...



> Somehow, despite more performances than I can count, I never get sick of playing _The Nutcracker_. But I admit I don't really seek it out for listening.


Yes, Nutcracker is fun and challenging to play...I've played it complete, or excerpts, hundreds of times...always enjoyed it....same with Peter and the Wolf...fun to play...rarely listen to it, tho the Reiner/NBC with Melchior narrating is a lot of fun...Melchior having a wonderful time of it...


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Yes, I never get sick of playing _Peter and the Wolf_, either. I bring the grouchy to Peter's Grandfather... :devil:

But I never seek it out for listening, either. In fact, I don't even own a recording of it, not even of me playing it.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

For me it's Mozart I feel most overexposed to. When I first started in Classical, he was the only composer I listened to. I got to know a lot of works and know what comes next. I think what made me lose interest in a lot of his music is his music is quite often formulaic, and he uses themes more than motivic development, and it's easier to memorize themes (for me at least). Many of his works reuse basically the same structure with a different set of themes. It becomes like remembering a tune from a commercial or catchy song I'd want to forget. 

On flip side, I never tired of Berlioz's first Symphony, even when I would listen to it more than once a day, every day, and know what's coming next. I believe the material is more varied, and doesn't go down too smoothly, as in parts don't set each other up so readily.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I believe in part it's how we may have learned music. When I was first being exposed to the repertoire (teens, twenties), I would hear a work I hadn't known before and if I liked something about it, I would obtain a record (library or purchase) and play it a bunch of times to see if it stuck, and add it to my playlist. Then, over time, some wore out their welcome. One can imagine being captivated by the Beethoven Fifth and playing it a lot, but then at some point it loses its magic (or parts of it wear thin). It's a function of the recording age, where too much is accessible to listen to on a whim. I can list pieces I listened to a lot when new that I haven't put on in years. The only piece I remember wearing itself out in concert performances was Eine Kleine Nactmusick, which for some reason I had heard once too often by Tenth Grade.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

I suspect that in our recording age, where access is no problem, one can overexpose oneself to a certain piece of music. Still, to my mind there remains a difference between listening to Beethoven's Fifth twenty-five times in a month when one considers (1) hearing the work in the same recording twenty-five times, and (2) hearing the work in twenty-five different interpretations.

As a long-time record collector I realize I've heard many of the masterworks in limited interpretation venues -- i.e., by way of the recording or recordings I have on hand. Chances are if it is a "warhorse" I will have the work in many versions; I suspect I have at least 100 Beethoven Fifth recordings and some 50+ _Rite of Spring_ recordings. Those are two of the extremes, granted. But I regularly listen to these two works, and when I do I tend to vary the recording rather than rely upon a certain one or two or a handful.

On the other hand, I have only one recording of Joly Braga Santos's Symphony No. 4, a favorite work which I program for listening a couple of times a year and always via the same recording, never losing interest. The work startles and impresses me, as do the Beethoven Fifth and the Stravinsky _Rite_.

I must have well over a dozen Tchaikovsky Sixth Symphonies in the collection, and it is a work I will eagerly seek out at a concert or one a critically praised new recording. Still, when I turn to hearing it, I most often find the recording in hand in either the James Levine / Chicago Symphony recording on RCA Red Seal ‎RCD1-5355 or the Mravinsky / Leningrad Philharmonic recording which I have in several releases, including the box set on Deutsche Grammophon ‎- 419 745-2 that packages the Sixth along with recordings of the Fourth and Fifth symphonies. Both of these recordings are stunning in both performance and sound, and yet they are different in tensions and "texture". I seem never to tire of hearing either one. Or of taking on a new (to me) version of the Sixth Symphony.

I was introduced to Mahler by way of the Bruno Walter / New York Philharmonic recording from 1958, a mono recording on Columbia Masterworks ‎- M2L 256. It was my first exposure to Mahler and I was infatuated from the start. I've lived with this work for years, even acquiring the score to accompany my ever increasing number of recordings of this work. Admittedly, I do not listen to this piece as often as I do other works, including the Mahler First and Fourth Symphonies, but then it is a rather large work and takes a great investment in time and energy to hear complete through. But I have sought it out in concerts, and I never tire of hearing the piece, though nearly every note is already in my memory and I get few surprises any more. I do know that each and every time I hear this work I am awe struck with wonder, the question I always ask myself being "How could he [Mahler] have conceived and written such a work?"

And then, there is that aspect of having access to so much music, that I need never repeat hearing a work if I don't so wish to, even if confined to my current personal collection. I likely do not have enough time left to hear each and every recording (repeating no single work) in my collection even should I devote two-thirds of the day to such activity. I simply don't know quite what over-exposure to a work of music is in an environ where there is so much to access and so much quality, awesomeness, and just pure joy to be had by listening to music.

When I hear Tchaikovsky's "Sugar Plum Fairies" tune accompanying a television commercial, I do not think of the work as being boringly ubiquitous. Rather, I am struck once more with that sense of awe. How could the guy have come up with such music?

Admittedly, I am in a position to generally choose what I will listen to, and when, and I certainly choose not to listen to certain music at times. Even works which strike me as not so interesting will on occasion find their way to my listening practice; I sometimes want to see if the piece was as disappointing as I believe it to be or if I was somehow wrong and it has "changed" to become more favorable.

I suspect that I could possibly reach a point of over-saturation and/or 'exposure were I confined to listening to any single recording of any musical work for which I now have a passion, but I don't believe I need worry about that happening. As things stand now, I am doomed to underlive the length and breadth of the music I have access to. And though I write that with some sense of sadness, I know it is a good thing -- a great place to be in at the moment.


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

Hearing the opening movement of Beethoven's 5th, my reaction is ALMOST "Oh no! Not that again!" But once it proceeds to the next 3 movements, I calm down. I still very much enjoy the brilliance of the final movement.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

progmatist said:


> Hearing the opening movement of Beethoven's 5th, my reaction is ALMOST "Oh no! Not that again!" But once it proceeds to the next 3 movements, I calm down. I still very much enjoy the brilliance of the final movement.


My immediate thought upon reading the above post was: is that same reaction provoked by a repeated viewing of the _Oedipus_ play? "Oh no! He's blinding himself, again!"

That which is the unchangeable (the core foundational components of a work of art) -- the text's words, the musical work's notes, the sculpture's form, the painting's color scheme -- is seldom the point in a great work of art. The final movement of Beethoven's Fifth is indeed "brilliant", but it makes sense only in the context of the whole. If the initial movement is not there to set up the warning shot, the terror and anger and sadness and initial hopelessness that comes with "fate knocking at the door", there is no possibility of recognizing the apotheosis of that brilliant Finale.

I've posted previously about the great Fifth, which I believe is Beethoven's way of exploring the psychological stages of the grief he experiences on realization of his impending deafness. Fate knocks on the door, Beethoven rages and even drops a tear (that little solo oboe lachrymae near the end of the first movement, seemingly borrowed from John Dowland's study _Lachrimae, or Seaven Teares Figured in Seaven Passionate Pavans_ (1604), a manuscript Beethoven is known to have studied). The sublime and highly original second movement, which pushes the door knocking of Fate into the background, uttered only as a somewhat subliminal, and haunting rhythmic attack, reflects a kind of denial. Confrontation with Fate is readily resumed in the great angry study that comprises the third movement. The outcome to all this is either acceptance or despair. Beethoven accepts his fate and, being Beethoven, rises above it to triumph. The final movement is Beethoven's response.

I cannot reflect upon the Beethoven Fifth without thinking of Tchaikovsky's great Sixth Symphony, a work about which the Russian composer remarked had a program he never revealed. But it always seems to me the Sixth is a rewrite of Beethoven's Fifth, from Fate "sneaking in under the door" at the beginning, the Beethoven tear-drop of the oboe phrase comprising the great "sad wailing" of the first movement's mighty second theme, to the almost carefree, pastoral celebration of the second movement, akin, to my ears, of a wedding celebration, to that grand third movement (one of my favorite moments in music) where rage is turned to confrontation, though almost seeming a losing battle, till finally we launch into that most sublime of Finales, where despair looms large and there will be no saving grace of apotheosis. Could Tchaikovsky have been musing about a great "trouble" in his own life, one which he felt was ultimately defeating him?

Form is meaning in art, and with the multi-movement symphony we should always caution against an attempt to understand a work by one movement alone.

I've read and studied the _Oedipus_ play hundreds of times, viewed it in the theatre and on the screen dozens of times. Never have I felt unsatisfied, dismayed, or annoyed that the protagonist once again blinds himself. Always have I recognized that the power of the final scenes of the play derive from what comes before. All is set from the start, and, in this particular play, by events well before the start of the play, all of which are reflected upon during the course of the drama. So it is with the Beethoven Fifth. Or any symphony by Beethoven, for that matter.

And I wonder: can one appreciate the "brilliance" of the Fifth Symphony's final movement without ever having the context of what comes before by which to judge the ending?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Anything can wear out its welcome, including one's favorite music, and as the years pass I return to familiar music less and less often, which has the desirable side effect of keeping the music fresher and of continued interest when I do hear it. But I've noticed in myself a diminishing interest in listening to music in general after being absorbed and fascinated and engaged with it almost constantly for some 70 years. In what seems a related phenomenon, I knew a professional violinist and teacher of violin who expressed a need to get away from music when he wasn't specifically engaged in some musical endeavor. It would be wrong to say that either of us cares less for music than formerly. We simply have limits to our ability to find a thing rewarding, no matter how wonderful it is. It isn't as if I've actually lost interest in music; in fact, I return to improvise at the piano frequently, and there is music playing in my head most of the time - often without my noting it consciously until it's already been there a while - unless something else crowds it out (and sometimes not even then). I can hardly set out on a walk without some mental music arising to keep my steps in rhythm, as if I were a one-man virtual parade-plus-spectator. The music that arises may be original, or it may be some well-known and well-loved piece that thereby suffers the indignity of becoming an earworm; one favorite work that accompanies walks particularly well and so undergoes this reverse metamorphosis to its larval stage is the prelude to _Die Meistersinger._ Fortunately the piece still sounds marvelous to me when I hear the real thing - which is, perhaps wisely, not too often.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

Is it possible that growing bored with after being overexposed to a work indicates an individuals accumulated sense of the worth of the piece.
An example from my experience - the two first classical works I was exposed to and really got know were Beethoven's 6th Symphony and Mussorgskys Pictures at an Exhibition (orchestral version), to this day I still listen to and indeed still buy the occasional additional recordings of Pictures but rarely listen to the Pastoral. I still buy Beethoven symphony sets but I probably have 4 or 5 sets that I have never listened to the 6th from.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Heck148 said:


> Depends on the work....Beethoven 5 is the symphony I've played the most....lots of LvB 7, 6 as well, along with Brahms 1,2 and 4, Dvorak 9....but i don't tire of those works....


I went at least a decade avoiding Dvorak's 9th. Now I can listen to it again. Just returning to the Beethoven piano concertos after a long break.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

ORigel said:


> Do you experience overexposure with other things, like food, movies, or books? It's probably like that.


I think you can get tired of many foods if you have them too often. But not all foods. If you live in an environment where everyone eats a staple food you may find that you find that staple fully satisfying day after day once you have got used to it. Staple foods often tend to be bland or, failing that, to have a very simple taste. How this might apply to music, I don't know as I do not think it is the case that simple bland music retains appeal after a few hearings.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> Anything can wear out its welcome, including one's favorite music, and as the years pass I return to familiar music less and less often, which has the desirable side effect of keeping the music fresher and of continued interest when I do hear it. But I've noticed in myself a diminishing interest in listening to music in general after being absorbed and fascinated and engaged with it almost constantly for some 70 years. In what seems a related phenomenon, I knew a professional violinist and teacher of violin who expressed a need to get away from music when he wasn't specifically engaged in some musical endeavor. It would be wrong to say that either of us cares less for music than formerly. We simply have limits to our ability to find a thing rewarding, no matter how wonderful it is. It isn't as if I've actually lost interest in music; in fact, I return to improvise at the piano frequently, and there is music playing in my head most of the time - often without my noting it consciously until it's already been there a while - unless something else crowds it out (and sometimes not even then). I can hardly set out on a walk without some mental music arising to keep my steps in rhythm, as if I were a one-man virtual parade-plus-spectator. The music that arises may be original, or it may be some well-known and well-loved piece that thereby suffers the indignity of becoming an earworm; one favorite work that accompanies walks particularly well and so undergoes this reverse metamorphosis to its larval stage is the prelude to _Die Meistersinger._ Fortunately the piece still sounds marvelous to me when I hear the real thing - which is, perhaps wisely, not too often.


I'm interested in how technology has changed the way we listen to music. On the one hand, the radio, records, CDs, and now the internet, has made it possible to have more classical music available to the average American than any of the royal or noble patrons of Europe did during the times of Mozart or Beethoven. On the other hand, I notice that there is a constant need to have music on ALL THE TIME. Everyone is plugged into their earbuds at all times as if one moment of silence is going to hurt them for the lack of being constantly stimulated. Sometimes when I go to a restaurant the experience of good food and company is ruined by really loud music playing (and wide screen TVs) being a constant distraction.

And I wonder how much actual LISTENING is going on, or is it all just background noise? I remember my grandfather who was Italian-American, nominally Catholic, but barely even religious, would say that when he was growing up in the 1920s and 1930s that he would attend Methodist church services on Sunday because he "liked the music." I guess at a time when there were few radios and before that, there was no other to hear music than to hear it live, there was a greater appreciation for whatever music one did get to hear. I did some research on how Christmas celebrations originated here in the USA, that because Christmas was seen as having it's roots in paganism that it was actively discouraged by the Protestant church authorities up until the great wave of immigration around the time of 1890-1920 when Catholics from Germany, Italy, Poland, etc. brought Christmas with them from the "old country". Since the Protestants also in on the fun, the Protestant church fathers eventually threw up their hands (the way the Catholic church fathers had also done hundreds of years prior) and said "Well since we don't know when Jesus was born we might as well just let the celebrate Christmas and make it part of the liturgy." My point here is that one reason why I imagine Christmas was so hard for anyone to resist was that in a time before music could be enjoyed via technology, Christmas (and other holidays) were some of the only times that common folk (Catholic or Protestant) could enjoy music and good food, and dance, etc. People didn't live a life when they were constantly "plugged in" so they must have savored what music they could hear, so music in and of itself must have been one thing that made Christmas celebrations so attractive to people who didn't get hear music during the majority of the time that they were living and working. I think that Charles Ives captures such a time period quite well with the snippets of folk tunes, marching bands, and hymns going off in different directions, often out of tune; and I read somewhere that Ives loved the sound of amateur musicians and didn't care if they played his music off key or missed the notes, in fact it was probably the sound that he was after.

I often wonder that if Beethoven who composed the beautiful _Pastorale Symphony_; or Schuman who composed _Prophet Bird_ and _Lonely Flowers_; Wagner who composed _Forest Murmurs_ from _Siegfried_, or Debussy with _Clair de Lune_; would even be able to compose such works if they lived in today's world. In a world of constant bombardment, would they have been afforded the time and opportunity to even hear bird sounds, contemplate flowers, the forest, or a full moon, long enough to digest the experience of the natural world and express it musically?


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Coach G said:


> I often wonder that if Beethoven who composed the beautiful _Pastorale Symphony_; or Schuman who composed _Prophet Bird_ and _Lonely Flowers_; Wagner who composed _Forest Murmurs_ from _Siegfried_, or Debussy with _Clair de Lune_; would even be able to compose such works if they lived in today's world. In a world of constant bombardment, would they have been afforded the time and opportunity to even hear bird sounds, contemplate flowers, the forest, or a full moon, long enough to digest the experience of the natural world and express it musically?


I totally agree with the tenor of your post, and also frequently bemoan the omnipresence of music that no one listens to and few even know how to listen to.

It's caused me to avoid putting on a recording unless it's my main activity, but even more so to actively seek locations where I can hear no sounds made by humans. I know a place reasonably near my residence where I have clocked up to 25 minutes at a time with no human sounds at all. Just water, wind, and birds. After just the first small taste, I crave that experience. I didn't even know before that I craved it at all! But now I know.

Moments of quiet mindfulness are very precious, especially outdoors.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Out of curiosity, how many people developed a distaste for classical music/"the greats" specifically due to performance?

I didn't listen to classical for pleasure for two decades because I grew up as a cellist.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Knorf said:


> I totally agree with the tenor of your post, and also frequently bemoan the omnipresence of music that no one listens to and few even know how to listen to.
> 
> It's caused me to avoid putting on a recording unless it's my main activity, but even more so to actively seek locations where I can hear no sounds made by humans. I know a place reasonably near my residence where I have clocked up to 25 minutes at a time with no human sounds at all. Just water, wind, and birds. After just the first small taste, I crave that experience. I didn't even know before that I craved it at all! But now I know.
> 
> Moments of quiet mindfulness are very precious, especially outdoors.


For all its faults (dirty records/noise, rip-off prices, etc) one reason I've started to do more LP/turntable listening is that I like the ritual that comes with it. Cleaning the record, dusting it off, checking the needle is clean, etc. And the time investment really does motivate you to listen carefully, and really try to engage with challenging music, whereas when I'm out and about I'm more likely to listen to something I know I like.

That said, I can't stand pure silence. I love noise and people. I'm a city boy at heart, after all.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I suppose I could get a little tired of any piece if I listened to it again and again. A long rest - perhaps for years - might have me enjoying it again. But some composers seem to produce music that can be interpreted in so many different ways that it is always possible to keep it fresh. For me Beethoven and Mahler are the composers whose music often seems particularly fertile - there are always new insights to find. And then Mozart is a composer who always seems fresh to me.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

fbjim said:


> That said, I can't stand pure silence. I love noise and people. I'm a city boy at heart, after all.


To be clear: in no way do I dislike human city noises. In fact, I like staying in hotels in urban centers for this reason. But human noises are easy to find, and very hard to avoid. Just getting away from regular jet noise can be tricky, depending on where you live.


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

Heck148 said:


> Orchestra musicians don't have a choice...the music director chooses the program....
> Overexposure has certainly affected my musical tastes over the years - it seems that conductors like to program the old warhorses, esp when they first take over an orchestra position.
> If i never have to perform or hear Tchaikovsky 4, 5 or Rach-y 2 it would be fine by me...they are way overplayed, overprogrammed. there are so many other symphonies that deserve the exposure, that would gain audience popularity if given the performance time.


How do musicians deal with the fact that they have to play passages over and over again in practice? I've always wondered this. If the repetition of practice doesn't tire musicians out and make them feel boredom toward a piece of music, why are mere listeners so easily subject to boredom from "over-exposure"?


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

fbjim said:


> For all its faults (dirty records/noise, rip-off prices, etc) one reason I've started to do more LP/turntable listening is that I like the ritual that comes with it. Cleaning the record, dusting it off, checking the needle is clean, etc. And the time investment really does motivate you to listen carefully, and really try to engage with challenging music, whereas when I'm out and about I'm more likely to listen to something I know I like.
> 
> That said, I can't stand pure silence. I love noise and people. I'm a city boy at heart, after all.


I started with records in the early 1980s as a teenager and agree with your sentiments that records gave me a chance to focus upon a single recording, to live with it for a while, before I was able to get the record store for another purchase. I'm a city person myself, and don't mind the sounds of people, children playing in the park, or even as John Cage mentioned, the "sound of traffic". I just don't want to go to the park on Sunday afternoon (and this actually happened) and hear five parties of people having cook-outs, all relatively close to another blasting their own music at one another at the same time. I can't see the enjoyment in it, even if I liked the music. Why would I want to hear the Bach _Toccata and Fugue_; Thelonious Monk, Johnny Cash, Frank Sinatra, and Mahler's _Das Lied von Der Erde_ all going at once?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

fbjim said:


> For all its faults (dirty records/noise, rip-off prices, etc) one reason I've started to do more LP/turntable listening is that I like the ritual that comes with it. Cleaning the record, dusting it off, checking the needle is clean, etc. And the time investment really does motivate you to listen carefully, and really try to engage with challenging music, whereas when I'm out and about I'm more likely to listen to something I know I like.
> 
> That said, I can't stand pure silence. I love noise and people. I'm a city boy at heart, after all.


I'm overexposed to the sound of modified vehicle exhausts. There isn't a night that I'm not woken up by that sound in the part where I live West end of Toronto. I live near a major intersection. I very much miss the quiet of my hometown.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Open Book said:


> How do musicians deal with the fact that they have to play passages over and over again in practice? I've always wondered this. If the repetition of practice doesn't tire musicians out and make them feel boredom toward a piece of music, why are mere listeners so easily subject to boredom from "over-exposure"?


Professional success is a pretty strong motivator to endure large amounts of repetition. I think all professions require intensive, repetitive, and often boring activity.

In any case, as far as professional musicians go, speaking for myself, you will never, _ever_ know from hearing me perform whether I detest what I'm playing or not, or whether I am bored with the music or not. I try to perform everything with my highest level of commitment and polish, no exceptions; that's what being a professional is. My subjective emotional connection to the music is simply not a significant factor as far as the listener is concerned.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Knorf said:


> Professional success is a pretty strong motivator to endure large amounts of repetition. I think all professions require intensive, repetitive, and often boring activity.
> 
> In any case, as far as professional musicians go, speaking for myself, you will never, _ever_ know from hearing me perform whether I detest what I'm playing or not, or whether I am bored with the music or not. I try to perform everything with my highest level of commitment and polish, no exceptions; that's what being a professional is...


Yes, absolutely!! A professional plays everything with most total commitment and artistry possible...one's own subjective preference or non-preference for any particular work is irrelevant, and should be undetectable to the listening audience.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

fbjim said:


> Out of curiosity, how many people developed a distaste for classical music/"the greats" specifically due to performance?
> 
> I didn't listen to classical for pleasure for two decades because I grew up as a cellist.


My daughter is a cellist. She was always surprised that many (most?) students she knew in music school preferred almost exclusively to listen to popular music rather than classical when they were listening for pleasure. I don't think she ever knew exactly why they preferred popular and whether that preference had anything to do with excessive listening to classical. The only piece she dislikes due to overexposure is Pachelbel's Canon, but that's mostly due to the incredibly simplistic cello part.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Phil loves classical said:


> I'm overexposed to the sound of modified vehicle exhausts. There isn't a night that I'm not woken up by that sound in the part where I live West end of Toronto. I live near a major intersection. I very much miss the quiet of my hometown.


I used to live right on Pike Street in Seattle (got too expensive). Every night was crowds, music blasting out speakers, drunk arguments and fights, and all that stuff.

I loved it, hah. Dead quiet makes me feel unnerved.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

mmsbls said:


> My daughter is a cellist. She was always surprised that many (most?) students she knew in music school preferred almost exclusively to listen to popular music rather than classical when they were listening for pleasure. I don't think she ever knew exactly why they preferred popular and whether that preference had anything to do with excessive listening to classical. The only piece she dislikes due to overexposure is Pachelbel's Canon, but that's mostly due to the incredibly simplistic cello part.


From my experience (not specifically about me), not every classical music student is one by choice. Pretty common thing to force a kid into.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Open Book said:


> How do musicians deal with the fact that they have to play passages over and over again in practice? I've always wondered this. If the repetition of practice doesn't tire musicians out and make them feel boredom toward a piece of music, why are mere listeners so easily subject to boredom from "over-exposure"?


I think that's a good question. Of course, it could depend on how often a performer plays a given work. A popular Beethoven symphony might be played every 5 years or so depending on the orchestra. That doesn't sound like too much, but of course over time, a performer might play the work (or parts of it) many, many dozens of times.

I still can't tell from the posts here how many times listening to a work seems to lead to overexposure and a lessening of enjoyment. It clearly depends on time period, the work, and the individual. I wonder if someone could become tired of a major work in 10 or fewer times listening.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Many have posted about growing tired of works. Some have mentioned that they can put a work aside for a long time and come back to it later finding it more enjoyable. I don't grow tired of works (at least so far), but I have noticed that when I do not listen to a loved work for a long time and hear it after many years, I'm somewhat stunned by how much I love the work. 

So my question for those who have experienced overexposure and strong lessening of enjoyment, do you ever regain your enjoyment if you refrain from listening for an extended period of time? Or once lost, the enjoyment is lost forever.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

mmsbls said:


> Many have posted about growing tired of works. Some have mentioned that they can put a work aside for a long time and come back to it later finding it more enjoyable. I don't grow tired of works (at least so far), but I have noticed that when I do not listen to a loved work for a long time and hear it after many years, I'm somewhat stunned by how much I love the work.
> 
> So my question for those who have experienced overexposure and strong lessening of enjoyment, do you ever regain your enjoyment if you refrain from listening for an extended period of time? Or once lost, the enjoyment is lost forever.


I can't answer the question. Forever is too long.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

mmsbls said:


> So my question for those who have experienced overexposure and strong lessening of enjoyment, do you ever regain your enjoyment if you refrain from listening for an extended period of time? Or once lost, the enjoyment is lost forever.


Absolutely it can be regained. In terms of playing, it can be regained with special circumstances and a really satisfying artistic experience. This happened to me with the Schubert "Unfinished" Symphony in B minor. I had grown thoroughly sick of it, but then a couple years ago I played it at a summer festival with a superb chamber orchestra, one that listened really well and made it all like a large chamber ensemble, and I was all, "hey, I can enjoy Schubert's Unfinished again!" 

For listening, a nice time gap can do the trick. I expect that I'll be able to enjoy listening to Dvořák's "New World" again sometime in the 2030s...

In terms of music students, most classical music instrumentalists come to love playing their instrument first, and then listening to classical music second (if at all; some bizarrely never do.) I was a bit of a oddball in that I fell in love _hard_ with specifically listening to classical music well before I got anywhere with an instrument.

The downside is that a surprising number of classical music instrumentalists are remarkably disconnected from what music listeners' priorities are. I don't mean familiar rep vs. avant garde or something; in general, in fact I find musicians to be more conservative in their performing tastes than their listeners typically are in their listening. No, I mean stuff like elevating technical precision and extreme consistency over individuality and creativity, or obsessing over small inconsistencies at the expense of the projection of the whole.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

It's worst of all for poor composers who sometimes have to chew music over and over and over. You listeners have got it easy...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I don’t have much of a problem with overexposure. The core of my listening now is my CD collection, the rest is radio.

I reduced my classical collection of 1,000 down to 350. One of my criteria was to get rid of things I wasn’t listening to, and had no desire to listen to on any regular basis in future.

When I was starting out, and had a small collection of tapes, I listened to the same pieces repeatedly. I still enjoy most of those pieces. There are some works from those early years of listening which I no longer own, such as Beethoven’s 5th, Berlioz’s Fantastique and Stravinsky’s Rite. However, if they come up on radio, I enjoy them.

I’ve never been an annual subscriber to concerts. So, there are many favourite pieces from the warhorse category which I haven’t experienced live (such the Eroica, my favourite Beethoven symphony). The advantage has been that as a casual concertgoer, I can enjoy a diversity of groups and pick out programs which interest me.

Another thing is that a completist approach to classical music would kill my enjoyment of it. Rather than try to own everything, I’ve tended towards branching out in other ways – for example, listening to other types of music (jazz, rock, pop) and also reading books about music that I enjoy.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Explore lesser-known composers and works; ex. Zelenka's Missa votiva (1739) 



 which resembles Bach's B minor, is a gem.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Phil loves classical said:


> I think what made me lose interest in a lot of his music is his music is quite often formulaic, and he uses themes more than motivic development, and it's easier to memorize themes (for me at least). Many of his works reuse basically the same structure with a different set of themes.


Try: 



 Look at the variety in which "F-G-Bb-A" is developed, within just 6 minutes.


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

Deleted post.................. Not even I cared and I was the one who actually wrote the post...


----------



## BobBrines (Jun 14, 2018)

For those who only know Vivaldi from the Four Seasons and the Gloria might try the *rest* of Op.8 and maybe Juditha Triumphans.


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

Deleted post....................... See above...


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

Enthusiast said:


> I think you can get tired of many foods if you have them too often. But not all foods. If you live in an environment where everyone eats a staple food you may find that you find that staple fully satisfying day after day once you have got used to it. Staple foods often tend to be bland or, failing that, to have a very simple taste. How this might apply to music, I don't know as I do not think it is the case that simple bland music retains appeal after a few hearings.


In the 70s, my dad took bologna sandwiches to work every day. He got so sick of it, he still can't stand bologna.



Knorf said:


> To be clear: in no way do I dislike human city noises. In fact, I like staying in hotels in urban centers for this reason. But human noises are easy to find, and very hard to avoid. Just getting away from regular jet noise can be tricky, depending on where you live.


City noise is nothing compared to the early 20th century. Cars did not yet have mufflers, and people used their horns much more...until the "rules of the road" were finalized.


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

Overexposure to my favorite musical works and recordings is one of the reasons why I continually try to seek out new music and composers that I don't know, & set interesting listening projects for myself, in regards to a composer or a collection of works that I don't know, or don't know well. Though after nearly four decades of listening, it's getting harder to find worthwhile music & composers that I've not encountered before. Especially since I don't enjoy music that I view as 3rd tier, or what others might call 'second or third rate'--since when I listen to music that lacks invention & a strong imagination, I get bored quickly. Nevertheless, each year, so far, over the past decade or so, I've found myself surprised by how I'm still able to discover excellent music that was previously unknown to me. It shows the sheer wealth of good music out there to explore, & I hope the discoveries keep coming...

It also helps that I occasionally listen to some of the old rock & folk rock & prog rock & jazz recordings of my youth. Which sometimes makes a nice diversion away from the classical. It helps too that I have a broad range of interests within the larger framework of classical music, and am keenly interested in virtually all the different periods in the history of music. For example, when I return to the music of the Middle Ages or Renaissance after time away, it helps because it allows me to spend time off from the other periods of music. Though it's not impossible that I might occasionally mix things up, and listen to Josquin, Dufay, and Ockeghem one week, and Debussy, Stravinsky, and Ravel the next...

I also deliberately try not to listen to the music that I love the most, in the majority of cases, because I don't want to have happen to me what has happened with certain composer's music--such as Brahms 4 Symphonies, or Mendelssohn's Symphonies Nos. 3 & 4, or any of the other 'war horses' that I've heard too many times over the course of my life. I admit that I don't have a huge desire to hear this music anymore, and when I do, I seldom find myself as deeply engaged as I was many years ago. I suppose I've changed.

Which is why I so seldom listen to Sibelius's Symphonies 1-7 these days, as I don't want to ever get to know these works too closely, or become overly familiar with them (even though I have already done so to certain extent, since it's unavoidable). Instead, I want Sibelius to always remain special, & fresh in mind. I don't want to lose that. In a similar way, Sibelius's home, Ainola, is a more magical place to me because I've not visited it yet. Do you know what I mean?

Overexposure is also one of the reasons why I often buy different recordings of a piece that I particularly like--so that I can hear the music in a number of different ways & interpretations, and therefore feel more engaged than I might have been if I listened to the same old recording and interpretation over and over and over again. In other words, I consciously try not to buy recordings where the interpretations or musicology behind the performances is similar. Which of course opens up another can of worms, because interpretations that are radically "different" from the norm aren't always the most engaging, or musically satisfying. & sometimes I see them as plain bad performances, where the risk taking didn't quite work out.

My other solution to overexposure is to spend time away from music altogether, and focus instead on some of my other favorite passions in the arts--such as Shakespeare, Moliere, & the rest of dramatic literature (my major in college), Flemish and Italian Renaissance painting, the painters of the French Academy (J.L. David to Bourguereau), Lord Leighton & J.M. Waterhouse (my two favorite English painters), the history of architecture, sculpture, poetry, Dante, movies, documentaries, non-fiction books, etc.; as well as the beauty of nature, which never loses its appeal or freshness to me on my daily walks. (I live by the ocean, and the sight of a double rainbow over the water is rare, but when it does appear, it never fails to fill me with a sense of wonder. The ever changing skies are also incredible, especially in the evenings. I also love to spot marine life on my walks, such as turtles, dolphins, sharks, & manatees...) We are so lucky today to have such easy access to so many great works of art & literature across the centuries. It's a blessing, and a wonderful, enriching feast for the mind, heart, and imagination.


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

mmsbls said:


> I think that's a good question. Of course, it could depend on how often a performer plays a given work. A popular Beethoven symphony might be played every 5 years or so depending on the orchestra. That doesn't sound like too much, but of course over time, a performer might play the work (or parts of it) many, many dozens of times.
> 
> I still can't tell from the posts here how many times listening to a work seems to lead to overexposure and a lessening of enjoyment. It clearly depends on time period, the work, and the individual. I wonder if someone could become tired of a major work in 10 or fewer times listening.


If you're going to play a Beethoven symphony in an upcoming concert, in preparation do you practice only the parts of that symphony (and whatever else is on the program) or do you practice "exercise" music that has nearly the same characteristics or performance problems as the parts if that symphony?


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Open Book said:


> If you're going to play a Beethoven symphony in an upcoming concert, in preparation do you practice only the parts of that symphony (and whatever else is on the program)


yes. of course, you'll be playing other stuff as part of your regular practice routine...but, yes, definitely, you practice the part for the upcoming program.



> or do you practice "exercise" music that has nearly the same characteristics or performance problems as the parts if that symphony?


possibly, if there is a really difficult or unusual technique or range issue...generally tho, no....


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

What musicians have to go through to produce beautiful music fascinates me. I can't imagine the repetition in practice and rehearsal that is required. Thanks goodness some talented people are willing to do this. It just seems like it would produce fatigue in most people. If Beethoven's great 5th symphony can produce fatigue in anyone, if I were a musician I'd want to limit my playing of it just so that I could summon the freshness and inspiration needed for an actual performance. I thought substituting other, similar music in practice might be a way to do that. Not really, looks like I was wrong.

Sounds like musicians play for technical perfection in practice and save the sentiments for when they really need them, during performance in front of the audience.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Open Book said:


> .....It just seems like it would produce fatigue in most people. If Beethoven's great 5th symphony can produce fatigue in anyone, if I were a musician I'd want to limit my playing of it just so that I could summon the freshness and inspiration needed for an actual performance.


Good questions, for sure....Generally, an orchestra musician will not practice the entire part of a symphony...but rather, the technical passages and solo, or soli, exposed passages....these you want to work out carefully....this includes expressive content as well - dynamics, phrasing, accents, intonation, legato, etc, etc....



> I thought substituting other, similar music in practice might be a way to do that. Not really, looks like I was wrong.


No, you're not really wrong... musicians may practice many different things at a session - practicing is an art, believe me...there may be many different performances coming up, so time will be spent on all of these, plus whatever else the musician feels the need to address.



> Sounds like musicians play for technical perfection in practice and save the sentiments for when they really need them, during performance in front of the audience.


Almost!!  but not quite....the expressive elements are included in the practice, because they are integral to the playing of that passage...first, you work out the notes, but it needs a crescendo, so you practice that in....or a diminuendo, accents, whatever else...these elements all are practiced into the preparation.

The musician is always concerned with playing expressively, and presenting the musical ideas with phrasing and coherence.
IOW - the expressiveness may well be programmed in already, before the performance....there is a reason for this - 
busy musicians may be playing many, many services a week, one after another....fatigue, concentration, exhaustion, physical energy are real concerns....one must pace oneself - to aim for the performances, for sure, but you can't fall on your face in rehearsal, either....as a student, you may be able to get away with just aiming for the big moments, but in the professional world, consistency is crucial.
so - the expressiveness is built in - "automatic spontaneity" - sounds like an oxymoron, but it really isn't....musicians will often end up on "automatic pilot" performing perfectly if they've practiced correctly, even tho they are fatigued and exhausted...They will perform with great tone, expression, control - it will sound totally _spontaneous_....but it has been prepared carefully. perhaps "pre-programmed spontaneity" is more accurate...tho just as oxymoronic...:lol:

I don't know if I've explained this very coherently, perhaps some of our other performers will chime in and add their viewpoints...every musician will have his/her own individual approach...but the goal is the same - make it sound great every time you play....


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

I agree, Heck148. We try to leave as little to chance as possible. I typically leave a little wiggle room in big solos, for perhaps some little "extra special" bit of spontaneity in interpretation (e.g. getting extra quiet on that one note), but to be honest I'm not sure how many people notice. 

In any case, in general almost everything is planned out, within reason. My emotional state is as neutral as possible, mainly trying to be sure to count accurately! 

If you want a real "dirty secret" for classical musicians, that's one: what's going through our conscious minds during performances is mainly counting. If you let yourself get too distracted by a colleague's gorgeous playing (or something else), you might miscount and come in incorrectly. That's bad...


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Photographers hate it when their works are overexposed.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Knorf said:


> I agree, Heck148. We try to leave as little to chance as possible. I typically leave a little wiggle room in big solos, for perhaps some little "extra special" bit of spontaneity in interpretation (e.g. getting extra quiet on that one note), but to be honest I'm not sure how many people notice.


yes, for sure, a little "extra" at performance is often applied. We notice...



> In any case, in general almost everything is planned out, within reason. My emotional state is as neutral as possible, mainly trying to be sure to count accurately!


Yes, mental state is rather crucial - for me - I like to be "on edge" - up for it, alert, but not overly so, not hyper...you end up getting in your own way...you want maximum concentration, alertness...too relaxed, too laid back is not good either....you make dumb mistakes, then you have to kick yourself in the a*s to get it in gear....


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

progmatist said:


> In the 70s, my dad took bologna sandwiches to work every day. He got so sick of it, he still can't stand bologna.


Back in my first year of college I shared an apartment with two other college students. We generally traded off dinner duty, and ate dinner together to save money.

Another money-saving step we took was that three times a week we would have a product called HAMBURGER HELPER, basically a box of some sort of pasta and a packet of seasoning. Add ground hamburger with the seasoning packet, mix it with the pasta, and there it is: Dinner.

One evening we're sitting around the table, eating our Hamburger Helper, each of us picking at it with our forks, and one of us finally looks up and says, *"We're never having this again, are we?"* We nodded, and never did.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

pianozach said:


> Photographers hate it when their works are overexposed.


Umm, and how about their models being overexposed? :angel:

P.S. No matter how much I love Rossini, but listening to William Tell overture is not the thing I keenly anticipate.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

I think the next time I'll need to hear or play the William Tell Overture is probably roughly around 2038.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

For me, it's the loss of anticipation, critical to my enjoyment of a piece once I've got a handle on it. Although there must be something about a wholly new work to make me listen again, new works can be very difficult to enjoy. Once I have a sense of the whole, often not until between 8-10 listens, and can anticipate the best bits, the work has reached peak enjoyment. Thereafter, it changes shape at each subsequent listen. When it stops changing shape, I'll retire it to the back of the collection for a while.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Azol said:


> Umm, and how about their models being overexposed? :angel:
> 
> P.S. No matter how much I love Rossini, but listening to William Tell overture is not the thing I keenly anticipate.





Knorf said:


> I think the next time I'll need to hear or play the William Tell Overture is probably roughly around 2038.


Victor turns the Wm. Tell overture on its head.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

From reading your post it sounds like works you like the most you dont get tired of rather than any great work cant stand up to repeated listenings. You seem to contradict yourself unless i read it wrong


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

I never listen to music outside my apt. Classical music to me is not background music


----------

