# Issue to do with age & classical music. . .



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Over the past few weeks, there's been various threads where people talked about age in relation to classical music.

Things like this have been cropping up:
- Experience
- Maturity
- Attitudes to and perceptions about various types of music (eg. of different eras)
- Generation gap
- Ageism/stereotyping

...and so on.

What I'm aiming to do with this thread is to have an open forum on your opinion to these sorts of things. But as with the http://www.talkclassical.com/21577-wagner-poll.html#post361455 thread I did recently, the rules are the same:

- Observe the forum rules of course
- Focus on your own experiences 
- You can refer to others on the forum - but not to insult, push agendas or score cheap points, etc.
- You can disclose as much or as little as you want
- Leave your sour grapes and gloating (schadenfreude) at home

Anyway, its about attitude. I think it will be good to hear people's views. The threads this has been going on are not appropriate for this debate, centred on 'feuds' between fans of various composers or whatever.

I will join with my experiences later. Be kind to one another, people.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2012)

Sid James said:


> Be kind to one another, people.


We'll do no such thing!:lol:


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

Sid James;362600 Be kind to one another said:


> Jesus Christ said that long time ago.
> 
> About the age, although i'm still blow thirty, i only regret why i didn't started sooner. The rest doesn't bother me.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

A few thoughts: I don't think it's fair to judge others by their listening experience. I am 15 years old and have been learnig musical instruments, theory, I have been composing and even go to a school where half the week I do music subjects. I have been listening to classical music all my life with a very limited knowledge on the best recordings, conductors, orchestras etc. and I have only really started expanding my tiny cd collection this year. Other people might have been listening to classical music for many more years than I have and know about all the best recordings, have a very large cd collection with many great performers, orchestras and ensembles and know a lot about their interpretations of many pieces of music but wouldn't be able to explain fourth species counterpoint or give an outline on the history of the sonata form. Everyone has different areas of expertise in classical music and we should respect that. 

Another thought: How come when I go see an opera like Le Nozze di Figaro I mainly see old people in the audience but when I see an opera by Elliott Carter that audience has a much higher percentage of younger people?


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

Pianist Andras Schiff said in some interviews that he deliberately waited until he was around 50 before he recorded the Beethoven sonatas. Young pianists shouldn't record them, he said, because they're not mature enough and lack the life experience to fully grasp the depth of these sonatas.

I used to think somewhat like that. But now I think it's nonsense. Of course 14-year-old Mutter or Hahn or Kissin didn't inject their performances with the emotional baggage of personal tragedies or with philosophical profoundity and wisdom. But they played the music in the score, and they played it stunningly well. Perhaps they didn't so much interpret the music than execute it, but great works will shine when they're simply well executed, without any particular interpretation on top of that.


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Another thought: How come when I go see an opera like Le Nozze di Figaro I mainly see old people in the audience but when I see an opera by Elliott Carter that audience has a much higher percentage of younger people?


It's just preference it doesn't mean anything in another city/country it could be the opposite. Also I think you hold your own on the forum the fact your 15 doesn't matter it just means you have more time to learn new things which is a good thing.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

I have been listening to and enjoying classical music since I was about 11 - so a very long time! But even back then when glam-rock and prog-rock were about to hit their peak, listening to classical music was un-cool. The words 'geek' and 'nerd' had not hit the UK back then, but the implication was still the same: classical music belonged to another age; it was stuffy, boring...'nerdy'. This, despite the fact that Shostakovich was yet to write his 15th symphony, Mahler was yet to become fashionable and 'The Three Tenors' were years away from being a money-making populist venture.
My musical experience broadened as the media and my peers influenced my listening, but at no time did my enjoyment and exploration of 'classical' music diminish. I got into Shostakovich and Prokofiev especially, as the HMV/Melodiya label launched and the local libraries started to stock a variety of new discs (remember that this was in an age when libraries were both valued and resourced). I discovered Shchedrin, Khachaturian and Petrov, and the less known symphonies of my favourites such as Shostakovich 7 and 11, and Prokofiev 2 and 3.
Today, my experience of classical music is no different to how it was way back then: it is about how music makes me feel; about the emotional connection I can make with the music. Because I am now old, there is no pressure on me whatsoever to like or dislike anything, since, the older we get, the less value we have in terms of marketing. Personally I think that the pressure on younger people now to like the sorts of things that'll bring in the most money is huge: where are the celebrity icons in the classical music field?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Andreas said:


> Pianist Andras Schiff said in some interviews that he deliberately waited until he was around 50 before he recorded the Beethoven sonatas. Young pianists shouldn't record them, he said, because they're not mature enough and lack the life experience to fully grasp the depth of these sonatas.
> 
> I used to think somewhat like that. But now I think it's nonsense. Of course 14-year-old Mutter or Hahn or Kissin didn't inject their performances with the emotional baggage of personal tragedies or with philosophical profoundity and wisdom. But they played the music in the score, and they played it stunningly well. Perhaps they didn't so much interpret the music than execute it, but great works will shine when they're simply well executed, without any particular interpretation on top of that.


I could not disagree more,there are plenty of young robot pianists who can play anything and faster than anybody. But they are empty and you don't remember them, You can't act King Lear when you are 20 years old because you haven't had the life experience to put into your performance.
I would rather hear Cortot playing Chopin with mistakes than listen to the latest boy wonder.
Tell us which pianists you have playing the late beethoven sonatas.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

techniquest said:


> I have been listening to and enjoying classical music since I was about 11 - so a very long time! But even back then when glam-rock and prog-rock were about to hit their peak, listening to classical music was un-cool. The words 'geek' and 'nerd' had not hit the UK back then, but the implication was still the same: classical music belonged to another age; it was stuffy, boring...'nerdy'. This, despite the fact that Shostakovich was yet to write his 15th symphony, Mahler was yet to become fashionable and 'The Three Tenors' were years away from being a money-making populist venture.
> My musical experience broadened as the media and my peers influenced my listening, but at no time did my enjoyment and exploration of 'classical' music diminish. I got into Shostakovich and Prokofiev especially, as the HMV/Melodiya label launched and the local libraries started to stock a variety of new discs (remember that this was in an age when libraries were both valued and resourced). I discovered Shchedrin, Khachaturian and Petrov, and the less known symphonies of my favourites such as Shostakovich 7 and 11, and Prokofiev 2 and 3.
> Today, my experience of classical music is no different to how it was way back then: it is about how music makes me feel; about the emotional connection I can make with the music. Because I am now old, there is no pressure on me whatsoever to like or dislike anything, since, the older we get, the less value we have in terms of marketing. Personally I think that the pressure on younger people now to like the sorts of things that'll bring in the most money is huge: where are the celebrity icons in the classical music field?


You are most certainly a geezer.


----------



## hocket (Feb 21, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Another thought: How come when I go see an opera like Le Nozze di Figaro I mainly see old people in the audience but when I see an opera by Elliott Carter that audience has a much higher percentage of younger people?


On the one hand, young people tend to avoid things where there are a lot of old people. On the other, well when I was at school I was really into Pop Art and modernists like Picasso, Klee, Matisse etc. Nowadays I'd much rather look at Rembrandt. It's not that I don't like Picasso though, it's just that it's not something that excites me anymore (still, barring some interesting but purely intellectual aspects that'd be better in written form, I don't think pop art has any real value these days). Mind you, in the spirit of book burning I could readily engage in an installation burning of the works of Tracy Emin and the rest of the YBA's!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

You can be just as stupid at 80 as you can at 18 ,but the important thing thing is that you've seen,heard and experienced more,so
it's up to the individual to use that experience sensibly.
The main thing to remember is to keep your mouth shut when you have no real knowledge ot the subject under discussion, because you will be found out.
Try listening,most people don't and miss the point of what's being discussed. I don't get into Wagner issues and when I did recently I was off centre and i knew it!
I am 74 now and still know little about quite a lot.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

moody said:


> I could not disagree more,there are plenty of young robot pianists who can play anything and faster than anybody. But they are empty and you don't remember them, You can't act King Lear when you are 20 years old because you haven't had the life experience to put into your performance.
> I would rather hear Cortot playing Chopin with mistakes than listen to the latest boy wonder.
> Tell us which pianists you have playing the late beethoven sonatas.


Well, Beethoven and (definitely :lol Chopin composed most of their music before the age of fifty. If they weren't too young to write it I don't see why pianists would necessarily be too young to play it. Maybe some are, but it depends on the musician and it's in my opinion not a rule that applies to everyone.


----------



## principe (Sep 3, 2012)

Classical Music is such a great Art that requires some constant homework from the side of the listener (or the audience); it's not the sort of "folk", "pop" etc. _easy come easy go_ thing.
So, for a youngster, the task is harder but not impossible. However, the statistics show that youth goes with other stuff (something called _fun_) rather than serious business in Art. As we grow, we are given the chances to exploit the benefits of age. However, quite a few prefer to stay _young at heart!.._
However, none is to blame.

Principe


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Another thought: How come when I go see an opera like Le Nozze di Figaro I mainly see old people in the audience but when I see an opera by Elliott Carter that audience has a much higher percentage of younger people?


Maybe because younger people like to be cutting edge and like the idea that the're listening to something that others aren't. Older people care less about being cool or hip and just listen to something because they like it. Besides, 200 years from now people will probably still listen to Figaro while most of those that were considered cool in 2012 will be long forgotten. Carter probably won't belong to that category though.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

> You are most certainly a geezer.


I hope that's a good thing...(?)


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

> Well, Beethoven and (definitely ) Chopin composed most of their music before the age of fifty. If they weren't too young to write it I don't see why pianists would necessarily be too young to play it. Maybe some are, but it depends on the musician and it's in my opinion not a rule that applies to everyone.


However we have to understand of course that life expectancy and life experience were very different in Beethoven's and Chopin's times than they are today.


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

im sure their ages do matter. it has done for thousands of years.

but younger people have idealism and a perspective older people have forgotten or hide.

the kids compose the music and the old people perform it.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

principe said:


> Classical Music is such a great Art that requires some constant homework from the side of the listener (or the audience); it's not the sort of "folk", "pop" etc. _easy come easy go_ thing.
> So, for a youngster, the task is harder but not impossible. However, the statistics show that youth goes with other stuff (something called _fun_) rather than serious business in Art. As we grow, we are given the chances to exploit the benefits of age. However, quite a few prefer to stay _young at heart!.._
> However, none is to blame.
> 
> Principe


I don't think all classical music is such that it requires great focus or study. While you certainly MAY study Chopin Waltzes in depth, it's hardly neccessary to enjoy them. You can enjoy the beauty of a Bach cantata as it washes over you in a church without digging in to a book on counterpoint.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Andreas said:


> Pianist Andras Schiff said in some interviews that he deliberately waited until he was around 50 before he recorded the Beethoven sonatas. Young pianists shouldn't record them, he said, because they're not mature enough and lack the life experience to fully grasp the depth of these sonatas.
> 
> I used to think somewhat like that. But now I think it's nonsense. Of course 14-year-old Mutter or Hahn or Kissin didn't inject their performances with the emotional baggage of personal tragedies or with philosophical profoundity and wisdom. But they played the music in the score, and they played it stunningly well. Perhaps they didn't so much interpret the music than execute it, but great works will shine when they're simply well executed, without any particular interpretation on top of that.


My personal opinion is that A. Schiff should have waited another 50 years. Only peripherally related to that opinion is the one that considers the maturity of individuals to be rather loosely connected to chronological age. Listening to his recordings, it is clear to me that the 26 y.o. Perahia could see/feel _behind_ the scores of Schumann's piano music; he 'brings it off'.

Listening experience beyond a fairly modest minimum is an overrated quality. On the other hand, musicology/music theory knowledge is severely overrated as a qualification for connecting with/'getting' music; the mechanics of music composition are separate from the hearing of it. On yet another hand, posts that 'rate' music by how it makes _you feel_ are usually made by whippersnappers, who are thereby developing a bad habit.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

jhar26 said:


> Well, Beethoven and (definitely :lol Chopin composed most of their music before the age of fifty. If they weren't too young to write it I don't see why pianists would necessarily be too young to play it. Maybe some are, but it depends on the musician and it's in my opinion not a rule that applies to everyone.


You are quite right and Shakespeare was not old either,but these are geniuses and it takes somebody special to translate what they produced. I know some exceptions like Leon Fleischer and Dinu Lipatti but all in all I think you need the depth of thought.
My favourite Beethoven pianist is Schnabel and there is some huge mental effort there.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Sonata said:


> I don't think all classical music is such that it requires great focus or study. While you certainly MAY study Chopin Waltzes in depth, it's hardly neccessary to enjoy them. You can enjoy the beauty of a Bach cantata as it washes over you in a church without digging in to a book on counterpoint.


I think that choosing Chopin waltzes to quote is aside from the point,but his sonatas need far more .Listen to Rachmaninoff plaing the "Funeral March" sonata.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Strike; down with them; cut the villains’ throats: ah! whoreson caterpillars! bacon-fed knaves! they hate us youth: down with them; fleece them!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

techniquest said:


> I hope that's a good thing...(?)


Yes, it's the opposite from Whippersnappers.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

moody said:


> I am 74 now and still know little about quite a lot.


I'm 50, and I fear I'll be in the same boat at 74. Like other non-musicians/composers, I can only express an opinion based on aesthetics, and my own likes/dislikes. And this changes constantly as I re-listen to various pieces. I'm not in the position to critique music on a technical level. At least not classical music, as I only have a rudimentary musical education.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Originally Posted by techniquest
I hope that's a good thing...(?)



moody said:


> Yes, it's the opposite from Whippersnappers.


Hah.  'Geezer' isn't really the opposite of 'whippersnapper', it's what in the normal course of time whippersnappers become. Based on self-contemplation, I see little evidence that it's 'a good thing'.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

Talent and greatness knows no age.


----------



## appoggiatura (Feb 6, 2012)

This is an interesting subject. 

*Age?*
When hearing the word 'classical music', a lot of people imagine a party of old-fashioned and dull men in secondhand green suits, playing old music with their cracky instruments. It's sad, but true. Young people in general are not acquainted with this genre because of their prejudices and also because it's just not 'hot'. When do you hear classical music on MTV or popular radio stations?

However, I do not think it's an age-issue.

If I look at myself... I'm really blessed with my background: parents are professional pianists, all the members of my family are professional musicians as well. My mother took me to concerts as a baby, trusting that I wouldn't cry. I assisted as a child to my father's classes with his students, I accompany my uncle's violin's class as a pianist, I can attend masterclasses at my father's conservatory whenever I want... Basically my life is music. 
I absolutely don't say that I'm an expert and as I grow older (I'm 20 now) I keep learning, _but_ I can definitely say that my musical education started since I was born and therefore I think that I have quite 'a lot of knowledge.' 
Then comes my personality: I'm very sensitive, I went through very strong depressions and a lot of sad things happened in my life. That really contributed to the depth of my inner self, of my emotions. Then, another thing is that I love analysing, theater and I have a great imagination.. Exaggerating, looking for the 'essence' in a piece. That helps as well.. I like to analyse pieces of music on my blog and to write articles and that also helps me to develop my view on music.
Oh and I love history! 

Because of my background I'm not easily satisfied when I listen to a performance. I'm very critical and I think technique is a way to reach a goal, _not a goal itself_! So I get kind of annoyed if there's a lack of musicality even though the technique is perfect. But is a focus on expression a matter of musical knowledge or a matter of taste?

*Expression*
My younger brother on the other hand, (same background) has not such great imagination and he has a colder personality, he doesn't like expression, emotions etc... So we play and think very differently and we look for other things in music. I said before: technique is not a goal. 
My brother thinks it _is_. I don't say it's wrong to think so, but in my opinion it's not the essence of music. Most composers, think of Chopin, Rachmaninoff, Beethoven, Schubert, wrote their compositions as an extention of their inner self. They didn't write it as a 'finger exercise'. 
(Not only Romantic and Classical composers, also in Baroque. Both styles need a different approach though.)

I've heard mediocre amateurs play more beautiful than the best professional pianists.

May I say this? 
Perfect technique as a goal = superficial
Perfect expression as a goal = depth?

I think a lot of people will disagree... Because to some, the essence of music is not expression. But is this a matter of taste or a matter of understanding? I mean, to be a world famous pianist now is incredibly challenging. It's like sport. You have to play better and faster to impress the jury and your audience. But doest that make you automatically a good _musician?_ I don't know. 
I understand something a member posted a few posts ago, that a famous pianist said that he started playing Beethoven after his fifties. Perhaps it was the age at which he finally had the 'emotional depth' or maturity to understand the meaning of Beethoven.

I think maturity doesn't necessarily come with a certain age. It depends on your background, your personality, musical environment, knowledge... There's no 'rule'. Music is so personal.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> A few thoughts: I don't think it's fair to judge others by their listening experience. I am 15 years old and have been learnig musical instruments, theory, I have been composing and even go to a school where half the week I do music subjects. I have been listening to classical music all my life with a very limited knowledge on the best recordings, conductors, orchestras etc. and I have only really started expanding my tiny cd collection this year. Other people might have been listening to classical music for many more years than I have and know about all the best recordings, have a very large cd collection with many great performers, orchestras and ensembles and know a lot about their interpretations of many pieces of music but wouldn't be able to explain fourth species counterpoint or give an outline on the history of the sonata form. Everyone has different areas of expertise in classical music and we should respect that.
> 
> Another thought: How come when I go see an opera like Le Nozze di Figaro I mainly see old people in the audience but when I see an opera by Elliott Carter that audience has a much higher percentage of younger people?


Honestly I think I'd probably rather see The Marriage of Figaro X3 Not that I wouldn't want to see Carter's opera, but I'm not a _huge_ fan of his work.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Originally Posted by techniquest
> I hope that's a good thing...(?)
> 
> Hah.  'Geezer' isn't really the opposite of 'whippersnapper', it's what in the normal course of time whippersnappers become. Based on self-contemplation, I see little evidence that it's 'a good thing'.


Well in London we use the expression "Old Geezer"--you couldn't really call a Whippersnapper a Geezer until much time elapses.
So,what expression are we using then ?
You are aware that "they" have a Whippersnapper Club.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

moody said:


> Well in London we use the expression "Old Geezer"--you couldn't really call a Whippersnapper a Geezer until much time elapses.
> So,what expression are we using then ?
> You are aware that "they" have a Whippersnapper Club.


I am not denying that there are differences between whippersnappers and geezers that appear to be related to age. Those differences are not as great as those between tadpoles and mature frogs, and yet a significant percentage of tadpoles become frogs. Humans have an intermediate form though, post-whippersnapper and pre-geezer. Hmm; maybe those are separate forms too; Alkan separated them.

Our TC whippersnappers need a Club of their own, where they are not challenged by Geezer Superiority (evidenced by pomposity, crankiness and interminable discussions about 'regularity').


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I'm the one who's been scolded by the mods for discussing these issues. There's a perception among some that to refer to someone as "young and inexperienced" is an insult. Of course it isn't- everyone starts out young and inexperienced, and the young part is a very good thing. Young people have decades of exploration ahead of them and the energy and time to devote to that exploration. The potential is tremendous. Older folks hopefully haven't wasted time going down blind alleys or neglecting the things that really matter to them because of mundane day to day distractions.

The experience part is what really matters. Classical music is an art form that is too huge for any single person to fully grasp. I would bet that all of us from time to time are daunted by the myriad of choices we face in composers, works and interpretation. Just when you think you are familiar with the composers in a particular genre, along comes a new batch to research and explore. Just when you think you know something about a work, another performance of it comes along that makes you rethink your conclusions about it. Just when you think you understand Bach or Beethoven or Mozart, you hear a work that's new to you that puts a new spin on things. This is an ongoing process, and it will continue to the day you die.

Hopefully all of us are always learning, but time gives one certain advantages. Those of us who have been through this process for a few decades have mapped out a good sized chunk. I much prefer spending time with music lovers who know more than I do, because I can pump them for tips. The more experienced classical music fans can leave a trail of breadcrumbs for those with less experience under their belts. That's the way it should work.

The monkey wrench to all this is the internet. When we strip away our identities and post under a nickname and avatar, the newbies look exactly the same as the old timers. Add to this the moronic concept that in order to "play nice" we all have to subscribe to the theory that all opinions are created equal, and you completely circumvent the ability for experience to guide inexperience. We have well spoken posters here who are teenagers. It's great that they're enthusiastic and are trying to flex their creative and intellectual muscles, but they would do a lot better if they were mining the experience of older members instead of arguing with them.

In another thread, some kids got mad because someone asked how many years we had been listening to classical music. I think this is a completely valid question. If that number was listed alongside our nick and avatar, it would be a very good thing. I know it's not going to happen, but whenever I read any of your posts, I'm trying to make that calculation in my head to put your words into context.

There is nothing wrong with being young and inexperienced. It's a great place to be. The way to avoid becoming old and inexperienced is to listen to those who are older and more experienced and try to learn from them. That's the reason I'm here. It should be like that with everyone.


----------



## Guest (Sep 27, 2012)

moody said:


> You can be just as stupid at 80 as you can at 18


Boy howdy!!



moody said:


> The main thing to remember is to keep your mouth shut when you have no real knowledge ot the subject under discussion, because you will be found out.


This, however, is just the opposite of what actually happens. In the world of internet forums, what actually happens is that people with no real knowledge of the subject not only talk all the time but find support from many other posters for their ideas. Anyone with real knowledge is shouted down and excoriated for being such a condescending prick.

You will not be found out. You will be almost universally praised and lauded.



moody said:


> Try listening....


Ah, yes. The magic pill. If only it would work. But we (most of us) are so far out of touch with what's happening now that mere listening brings very questionable results. Look at what happens here when HarpsichordConcerto listens to any Karkowski or Goeringer or Yoshihide. Without any background in new music, it all sounds like undifferentiated noise. Kind of like how Oulibicheff felt about Beethoven. He wrote in 1857 about Beethoven's "agglomerations of notes intolerable to anyone who is not completely deprived of the auditory sense." For people of that sort, "listening" only confirms their prejudices, I'm afraid.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Bruckner didn't start composing his (9) symphonies until age 39.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> A few thoughts: I don't think it's fair to judge others by their listening experience. I am 15 years old and have been learnig musical instruments, theory, I have been composing and even go to a school where half the week I do music subjects. I have been listening to classical music all my life with a very limited knowledge on the best recordings, conductors, orchestras etc. and I have only really started expanding my tiny cd collection this year. Other people might have been listening to classical music for many more years than I have and know about all the best recordings, have a very large cd collection with many great performers, orchestras and ensembles and know a lot about their interpretations of many pieces of music but wouldn't be able to explain fourth species counterpoint or give an outline on the history of the sonata form. Everyone has different areas of expertise in classical music and we should respect that.


Excellent. This is your best post, _EVER_.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I discovered classical music on my own at the age of about 13 in the late 1960s ; nobody introduced me to it and I didn't come from a particularly musical family , although I had already started to learn the French horn a few years before in elementary school .
I discovered that my local library on Long Isalnd had an extensive collection of classical LPs of all kinds, including a wide variety of complete opera sets with the librettos and English trnaslations . I had never been a fan of rock or pop music and I became a classical music nut, not only listening to every recording I could get my hands on at the library and some which I bought for myslef, but reading every book and magazine about it I could find . I was also lucky ,living on Long Island, to have access to WQXR , which enabled me to hear all kinds of classical music as well as taped broadcasts of the Boston symphony and New York Philharmonic .
Of course, I've heard other kinds of music, rock,pop, you name it . I never had anything against other kinds of music ; classical was always what interested me the most . I've never been a snob who looked down on other people because they were fans of other kinds of music , but I've always been extremely annoyed by reverse snobs who dismiss classical music out of hand while knowing virtually nothing about it (and there plenty of those) .


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Of course we are all nice to each other. We give each other the "like" thing at the click of a button. That's being nice, isn't it? Take me for example, I have given "like" hundreds of times. And I thank you very much for giving me a "like" or two.

Have a lovely day,
HC


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

science said:


> Excellent. This is your best post, _EVER_.


Thank you, but I disagree.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

I find the continuous mindless unpleasantness and arguing over composers,particularly Mozart and Beethoven,pretty distasteful.
I have never been involved in a forum before but I have been surrounded by music people and friends for years.
I have witnessed fierce arguments over singers--very fierce--but never composers.
It is a strange phenomenon and I don't understand the reasons, I am very keen on both Mozart and Beethoven, but don't find any reason whatever to choose---why ever would you?
The behaviour here reminds me of the school playground ,somebody pins a fellow pupil against the railings and shouts at him to do what he's told. If he refuses the gang gather round jeering and making threatening noises.
It is quite possible to rub along respecting other members' choices and there is no need to rubbish these choices.
But I do part company with those that say I have to respect comments and opinions that are blatantly uninformed and obviously faulty.I don't respect somebody who says that your opinion is your opinion but it's wrong.
You should be willing to prove your point as far as possible because your opinion in not sacrosanct,maybe it's sometimes wrong.
However disagreement over artists and their interpretations is normal and healthy and should be encouraged.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

techniquest said:


> I hope that's a good thing...(?)


If you like Prokofiev's 2nd and 3rd symphonies, you're my kind of geezer then. 

On the side, I'd like to say that age is not so great of a factor in one's knowledge and appreciation of classical music as _experience _is. Thus, a young person like me could be pretty experienced with classical music repertoire but not a middle aged person who never discovered Dvorak. Young people can be mature, and older people immature. Plus, learning _about _music is an entirely different thing from simply knowing a bunch of good melodies. Studying music in college, I'm surrounded by people who care about music, though a wide spectrum of knowledge and appreciation. Everyone comes to the table (be it class or rehearsal) with something unique.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> If you like Prokofiev's 2nd and 3rd symphonies, you're my kind of geezer then.
> 
> On the side, I'd like to say that age is not so great of a factor in one's knowledge and appreciation of classical music as _experience _is. Thus, a young person like me could be pretty experienced with classical music repertoire but not a middle aged person who never discovered Dvorak. Young people can be mature, and older people immature. Plus, learning _about _music is an entirely different thing from simply knowing a bunch of good melodies. Studying music in college, I'm surrounded by people who care about music, though a wide spectrum of knowledge and appreciation. Everyone comes to the table (be it class or rehearsal) with something unique.


Hah; that's interesting. You seem to be not wrong, but not quite right either, on multiple points. I think you probably have a better handle on your subject than Mitt has on his, but still... . The 'older people' vs. 'experience' doesn't quite compute; the 'bunch of good melodies' thing seems to be a non sequiter. The 'surrounded in college' part seems to be a claim for the superiority of saturation over duration; at least that is valid enough to be debatable.

I hope you find the time and the interest to elucidate, _@Huilun_. This geezer ain't getting it.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Hah; that's interesting. You seem to be not wrong, but not quite right either, on multiple points. I think you probably have a better handle on your subject than Mitt has on his, but still... . The 'older people' vs. 'experience' doesn't quite compute; the 'bunch of good melodies' thing seems to be a non sequiter. The 'surrounded in college' part seems to be a claim for the superiority of saturation over duration; at least that is valid enough to be debatable.
> 
> I hope you find the time and the interest to elucidate, _@Huilun_. This geezer ain't getting it.


I was talking about 2 separate situations of experience, one as the simple appreciator, and the other as the studier. Knowledge can be knowing many pieces of music, but knowledge can also be how the music works at its fundamentals. One gains those kinds knowledge over time (that is what experience is all about) but that isn't always tied to an age group. Also, speaking of "in college," I'm not just talking about students my age, there are quite a few people older than me there, especially the professors/directors who have tons of knowledge and experience. But you can also have undergrad students who play just as well as grad students, despite lesser years on the earth.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

LordBlackudder said:


> ...
> but younger people have idealism and a perspective older people have forgotten or hide.
> 
> ....


I think that's a good point. Younger people will tend to push boundaries, and as with a school teacher, anyone older than them can become the target. This kind of rebellious attitude is part of growing up. I remember things I did back then, and I think now I would act with more common sense and restraint. But hey, that's with hindsight.

But when we had an influx of younger people (I mean about 25-30 and under) on this forum, I did notice a change in vibe. I kind of balked. But eventually I got used to it.

But with what older people are saying re experience, how many younger people you know listen to Mozart, or Bach, or Ligeti, Schnittke, and so on? When I was growing up, the vast majority of my school mates did not care for or know classical music. & even I did not listen to Berg until in my late teens and Ligeti until my twenties. Most of the new music I got into was in the past couple of years. Same with much of the older stuff, I only listened to Monteverdi's 'Vespers' in the past 2 years.

So if I think back to when I was in my teens or twenties, I would have been happy to have people my age to share my interest in classical music, or any music that was not what most people that age listen to. I'm not denigrating it, I'm just saying that people like the younger people on this forum are few and far between (unless say like those studying music at uni, they of course are 'clustered' together with people sharing their interest).

It was interesting to read what people related of their own experiences here.


----------



## Ondine (Aug 24, 2012)

Sid James said:


> Over the past few weeks, there's been various threads where people talked about age in relation to classical music.
> 
> Things like this have been cropping up:
> - Experience
> ...


Wow! I'm always late into threads. When I come into them, there are at least more than 40 posts. Sorry if I am posting something that has been explained.

I don't see any problem to say that age, maturity, experience, etc., are contextual elements when appreciating music.

It has to be. We are not machines. We change. We are reflexive beings, so all this elements are part of what we are and of how we approach life... and thus... music experience.

Also I can add to the list that 'cultural background' has something to say about how and why we appreciate an specific oeuvre, compositor or style.

I can tell that during adolescence Beethoven was 'the boss' and then Bach for some years after. At that time I remember listening to something of Mozart and it didn't impress me.

After that 'Beethoven/Bach' stage, when I again listened Mozart, it looked like I was listening him 'for the first time' and I got enchanted definitely with him. Is this about maturity, getting older, age? In my case, I think so. Maybe yes.

Is like philosophy. Some philosophers impress us a lot when being young and others latter on.

Seems to me that life experience has something to say about how our tastes develop, change or get fixed with us.

As any other humanistic issues dealing with the intimacy of a person, it is difficult to state absolutes because we are building ourselves though processes, experiences and developments, all them changing constantly.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I was talking about 2 separate situations of experience, one as the simple appreciator, and the other as the studier. Knowledge can be knowing many pieces of music, but knowledge can also be how the music works at its fundamentals. One gains those kinds knowledge over time (that is what experience is all about) but that isn't always tied to an age group. Also, speaking of "in college," I'm not just talking about students my age, there are quite a few people older than me there, especially the professors/directors who have tons of knowledge and experience. But you can also have undergrad students who play just as well as grad students, despite lesser years on the earth.


OK. We are clearly 'ships in the night' as far as understanding goes. Be well, stranger.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

some guy said:


> ...But we (most of us) are so far out of touch with what's happening now that mere listening brings very questionable results. Look at what happens here when HarpsichordConcerto listens to any Karkowski or Goeringer or Yoshihide. Without any background in new music, it all sounds like undifferentiated noise. ...


What are you talking about - Zbigniew Karkowski, Goeringer, Yoshihide are underground _noise musicians_. So of course they sound like noise to me, it should.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> What are you talking about - Zbigniew Karkowski, Goeringer, Yoshihide are underground _noise musicians_. So of course they sound like noise to me, it should.


Well at least it "noise" and not "fart."


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well at least it "noise" and not "fart."


Fart makes me laugh. Noise does not.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

moody said:


> I think that choosing Chopin waltzes to quote is aside from the point,but his sonatas need far more .Listen to Rachmaninoff plaing the "Funeral March" sonata.


Why is it beside the point? I think it's a very good point. It's a fallacy to assume that one needs to seriously study classical music to enjoy it. Can you obtain more insight by studying the music in depth? Sure. But you don't have to. Some it, dare I say it, fun


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

Listen for too long and you can forget how to hear.




...is my randomly pretentious comment for the day.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

We had this 'tussle' re 'noise music' at this thread. I'm trying to keep this kind of back and forth stuff out of this thread. We already discussed it. I got my nose out of joint a bit in that too. But its better if people don't go in for this kind of 'aggro' stuff here. Just relate things back to YOUR experiences, as most people have done.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Fart makes me laugh. Noise does not.


Ligeti's Nouvelle Aventures makes me laugh.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Having more experience is never a bad thing.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

bigshot said:


> Ligeti's Nouvelle Aventures makes me laugh.


Well that would depend on the story chosen for the production. There would be comedies, tragedies and whatnot but all using the same music. It's a different story for each production.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Age - I have no use for it.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Couchie said:


> Age - I have no use for it.


What, for you, is the ideal age for Venus from Tannhäuser?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Sonata said:


> Why is it beside the point? I think it's a very good point. It's a fallacy to assume that one needs to seriously study classical music to enjoy it. Can you obtain more insight by studying the music in depth? Sure. But you don't have to. Some it, dare I say it, fun


I can only wonder if you are pretending not to understand. I would not include Chopin Waltzes among works that needed deep study, I alluded to Cortot playing Chopin because an earlier member had talked about technical facility.
The original point made,if you can drag your mind back,was by Andreas regarding Mr. Schiff and his comments on Beethoven. I would think that the "Hammerklavier" would need more than feelings of "fun" to perform well.
I'm not sure that anybody would need to study Chopin deeply---apart from maybe the sonatas. I really can't add any more,and with luck perhaps you won't either as Chopin was not the subject under scrutiny.
Lastly,I said aside from the point not beside the point,meaning a side issue.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

moody: you are not understanding my original intent of the post actually. I was not involved in the conversation re: Beethoven or Schiff at all. I was replying to a single poster, principe. He noted that classical was "high art" which required homework to understand and enjoy. That was the notion I was challenging. You are welcome to look back at my original post, if you've any desire to, and you'll see that I quoted principe specifically in my response.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Sonata said:


> moody: you are not understanding my original intent of the post actually. I was not involved in the conversation re: Beethoven or Schiff at all. I was replying to a single poster, principe. He noted that classical was "high art" which required homework to understand and enjoy. That was the notion I was challenging. You are welcome to look back at my original post, if you've any desire to, and you'll see that I quoted principe specifically in my response.


OK,OK,I withdraw my comments.


----------



## MaestroViolinist (May 22, 2012)

My experience I'm sure no one wants to hear, but I'll tell you all anyway, just for the fun of it: 

I'm 14 so I'm not considered "mature" but I've been listening to classical music on and off since I was born. Of course, I "specialise" in violin music so I may not be able to go into great detail about some composer's symphonies but I could tell you a thing or two about Bach's Chaconne or Wieniawski's Legende. 

Is there a stereotype of young people? I wouldn't know, I just listen to what I like.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Couchie said:


> Age - I have no use for it.


It will have a use for you.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

MaestroViolinist said:


> My experience I'm sure no one wants to hear, but I'll tell you all anyway, just for the fun of it:
> 
> I'm 14 so I'm not considered "mature" but I've been listening to classical music on and off since I was born. Of course, I "specialise" in violin music so I may not be able to go into great detail about some composer's symphonies but I could tell you a thing or two about Bach's Chaconne or Wieniawski's Legende.
> 
> Is there a stereotype of young people? I wouldn't know, I just listen to what I like.


What was your favourite piece of music at age six months?


----------



## MaestroViolinist (May 22, 2012)

moody said:


> What was your favourite piece of music at age six months?


Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker suite.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

When I was fourteen years old, I now still recall very well that my favourite classical music piece was JS Bach's _Brandenburg_ #3, especially the first movement. I knew little else about Bach's music.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> When I was fourteen years old, I now still recall very well that my favourite classical music piece was JS Bach's _Brandenburg_ #3, especially the first movement. I knew little else about Bach's music.


When I was 14 my favourite piece of music was *Ligeti's* Chamber Concerto.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Mine was Für Elise . I didn't start really listening later, more seriously. Although I never knew the name of the piece until just recently *facepalm*


----------



## Carpenoctem (May 15, 2012)

Sonata said:


> (sorry, I don't know how to put the accent over the u)


Here you go: Für Elise


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Sonata said:


> Mine was Fur Elise. I didn't start really listening later, more seriously. Although I never knew the name of the piece until just recently *facepalm* (sorry, I don't know how to put the accent over the u)


I think that sort of music is the hardest to get to know - no one with experience wants to talk about it.

I only heard of the Radetzky March last Christmas. Made me violently angry. Why did I have to wait that long to find out about such a famous bit of music?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

MaestroViolinist said:


> Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker suite.


Mine was the complete works of Ligetti and then again sometimes Ligeti!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

moody said:


> Mine was the complete works of Ligetti and then again sometimes Ligeti!


Unless I'm mistaken about the chronology involved, that was probably a short list of works at the time....


----------



## Carpenoctem (May 15, 2012)

science said:


> Unless I'm mistaken about the chronology involved, that was probably a short list of works at the time....


He's being sarcastic.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Carpenoctem said:


> He's being sarcastic.


My favorite works when I was fifteen months old were Sorabji's Transcendental Etudes. Because I was so short at the time, I could only play them on a really miniature keyboard. But I'd gotten positively sick of Alkan and Godowski, Alkan and Godowski, Alkan and Godowski. Sorabji was like a cool drink of milk for my infant virtuosity.


----------



## Carpenoctem (May 15, 2012)

science said:


> My favorite works when I was fifteen months old were Sorabji's Transcendental Etudes. Because I was so short at the time, I could only play them on a really miniature keyboard. But I'd gotten positively sick of Alkan and Godowski, Alkan and Godowski, Alkan and Godowski. Sorabji was like a cool drink of milk for my infant virtuosity.


You were an even greater child prodigy than Mozart and Mendelssohn.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

science said:


> Unless I'm mistaken about the chronology involved, that was probably a short list of works at the time....


But then again I was quite short myself.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Carpenoctem said:


> You were an even greater child prodigy than Mozart and Mendelssohn.


Well, I'm usually too bashful to admit it. But at that time _improvisation_ was my strength.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Carpenoctem said:


> He's being sarcastic.


I still can't see how to put an umlaut when called for,or do you have a German keyboard?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

science said:


> Well, I'm usually too bashful to admit it. But at that time _improvisation_ was my strength.


I've noticed that in your posts.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

moody said:


> I've noticed that in your quotes.


My bashfulness?

I recently took a quiz to find out if I'm a psychopath, and it turns out I'm not, but there is a chance I have narcissistic personality disorder. A really good chance, I figure, because I found that result oddly gratifying.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Carpenoctem said:


> You were an even greater child prodigy than Mozart and Mendelssohn.


Which causes me to think of an insult - or is it an insult? If I posted in response to your post: 'And he is still a child prodigy', is that an insult? ...By golly, I don't know. Maybe the mods would think so, but that authority has limited domain.



[Note to _@science_: whatever the preponderance of opinion, no insult to you is intended. This is merely a scientific investigation.]


----------



## Carpenoctem (May 15, 2012)

moody said:


> I still can't see how to put an umlaut when called for,or do you have a German keyboard?


Nope, I don't. I've actually just copied it here from wikipedia page!



Hilltroll72 said:


> Which causes me to think of an insult - or is it an insult? If I posted in response to your post: 'And he is still a child prodigy', is that an insult? ...By golly, I don't know. Maybe the mods would think so, but that authority has limited domain.


Haha, I'm sorry but what are you talking about? How did I insult him?


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Wait a minute! Nobody insulted anybody. Hilltroll just speculated on the possibility of interpreting comments about my prodigious childishness. 

Did I get that right? 

No, but seriously, nobody insulted anybody. I don't think there's been a serious post for half an hour.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

moody said:


> I still can't see how to put an umlaut when called for,or do you have a German keyboard?


Several of the diacriticals for specific letters are available - if you're running Windows - from the number pad, when 'numlock is engaged. For instance: [ü] is produced by holding down an [Alt] key and then typing 0252 on the number pad. I have forgotten where the list is found, but someone here must know.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

And if you have a Mac (at least my Mac), push option-u and you get the ¨ just waiting for a vowel to get stuck under it.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

science said:


> My bashfulness?
> 
> I recently took a quiz to find out if I'm a psychopath, and it turns out I'm not, but there is a chance I have narcissistic personality disorder. A really good chance, I figure, because I found that result oddly gratifying.


No,your improvisation!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

moody said:


> No,your improvisation!


Oh.

Now I don't what to say. I, um, hmmm....

Probably should've prepared for this a bit more.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

science said:


> Oh.
> 
> Now I don't what to say. I, um, hmmm....
> 
> Probably should've prepared for this a bit more.


You should probably improvise!


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I listened to classical music when I was a kid, but I didn't start to listen seriously until around 20. I had a grasp of a few things within five years, but it took about 20 to get really fluent.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Yes, but if you'd taken it up at birth you would have been an expert at three.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

moody said:


> You should probably improvise!


Between you and Carpenoctum, none of my jokes shall remain unexplained.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

science said:


> Between you and Carpenoctum, none of my jokes shall remain unexplained.


Ah, the perils of obnubilation!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

science said:


> Between you and Carpenoctum, none of my jokes shall remain unexplained.


You make jokes??


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Ah, the perils of obnubilation!


Don't let COAG see that,he'll think it's one of those things he hunts for online.


----------



## Carpenoctem (May 15, 2012)

science said:


> Between you and Carpenoctum, none of my jokes shall remain unexplained.


It's Carpenoctem! Carpenoctum doesn't have the same meaning.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

moody said:


> You make jokes??


Existence is too tragic to take seriously.



Hilltroll72 said:


> Ah, the perils of obnubilation!


You keep doing that, I'm going to have to start quoting holy writ at you.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Carpenoctem said:


> It's Carpenoctem! Carpenoctum doesn't have the same meaning.


Dang Latten. Nocta, nocta, noctam... ok, that's enough unum for me.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

moody said:


> Don't let COAG see that,he'll think it's one of those things he hunts for online.


Not an unreasonable reaction. When I sprung 'obnubilate' on a friend, he surmised that it is related to 'nubile'. ( It ain't.) I came across the word in the book "America's Constitution - a Biography", by A.R. Amar. He quotes a passage by James Wilson, writing in 1791. 'Obscure' is an approximate synonym.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

science said:


> My bashfulness?
> 
> I recently took a quiz to find out if I'm a psychopath, and it turns out I'm not, but there is a chance I have narcissistic personality disorder. A really good chance, I figure, because I found that result oddly gratifying.


Bit like COAG then.


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

I've loved 'Art of Fugue' since the first time I heard it, two years ago. Then Liszt's Transcendental Etudes and Bartok's String Quartets. This is how I got into classical, pretty late I would say... But fortunately I learn fast.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Renaissance said:


> I've loved 'Art of Fugue' since the first time I heard it, two years ago. Then Liszt's Transcendental Etudes and Bartok's String Quartets. This is how I got into classical, pretty late I would say... But fortunately I learn fast.


Do you detect (or intuit) relationships between those works? If so, elucidation might enlighten me. (Sorry about that, I'm feeling a bit silly today.)


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Do you detect (or intuit) relationships between those works? If so, elucidation might enlighten me. (Sorry about that, I'm feeling a bit silly today.)


Not much, but I find them to be very "intellectual" works. Maybe their complexity with a bit of counterpoint, I don't know.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

science said:


> I recently took a quiz to find out if I'm a psychopath, and it turns out I'm not, but there is a chance I have narcissistic personality disorder. A really good chance, I figure, because I found that result oddly gratifying.


Is this on the internet? Because I hate internet tests. They keep telling me I should seek out help.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

I wish I had more experience, and value it highly. I have some technical knowledge, and will acquire a lot more in the next few years, but it will take decades for me to acquire a good amount of experience.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

moody said:


> Bit like COAG then.


Quite a bit unlike me.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Renaissance said:


> Not much, but I find them to be very "intellectual" works. Maybe their complexity with a bit of counterpoint, I don't know.


I'll buy 'intellectual' for the Bach, but not the Liszt. Most of the Liszt TE seems overly virtuosic for the content. The Bartók I enjoy as... serious entertainment? It requires constant attention, but encourages and rewards the effort. I guess it depends on one's understanding of the word 'intellectual'.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

moody said:


> I could not disagree more,there are plenty of young robot pianists who can play anything and faster than anybody. But they are empty and you don't remember them,
> I would rather hear Cortot playing Chopin with mistakes than listen to the latest boy wonder.
> Tell us which pianists you have playing the late beethoven sonatas.


This is nonsense. Great performers usually record their best work in youth and middle age, not old age. Karajan declined with age, so did Klemperer and many other conductors. Rostropovich's Bach Cello recording is considered by many to be a failure because his technique declined. This is just your nostalgia talking. It's been scientifically documented that people tend to have the most affection for music they were exposed during adolescence, you have nostalgia goggles on. Listen to Argerich's early mono Chopin recordings - they're as soulful as anybody's, and she was in her late teens/early twenties. This is empty?  Compare with Rubinstein's and tell me which one is robotic and hollow. Carlos Kleiber made his best recordings in his 30s and 40s, Karajan's best conducting was during his Philharmonia years. Mutter played a searing Mozart violin concerto at 13, as good as anybody's. Jacqueline de Pre. Julia Fischer's Bach. The list goes on.

Music is music. Emotions are emotions.



> You can't act King Lear when you are 20 years old because you haven't had the life experience to put into your performance.


*Music is not method acting.
*
Genuine experiences can be drawn to improve acting insofar as acting tries to capture reactions to those experiences. In acting, reacting is is technique. No such thing is true for music.

Richard Strauss said he doesn't understand the obsession of Mahler with suffering and redemption. He simply didn't know what he needed redemption from.

Barenboim: There is a very beautiful, very poetic, video document with Leonard Bernstein, called The Little Drummer Boy, where he talks all about Mahler's Jewish background, and that Mahler had this feeling of guilt over having been Jewish. It's very lovely and it's very poetic, but it doesn't help to understand the music one bit, in my view, not one bit. I remember the most wonderful performance of Mahler's 9th with Giulini, but then people were saying: Oh yes, Giulini is a fervent Catholic, and you feel this redemption, and you feel this being as one with God, and all these things. In the end, I'm reminded of a reply by Toscanini, when he was asked about the 'Eroica' Symphony and they said: "Maestro, what do you think? Some people say that Beethoven wrote the 'Eroica' against Napoleon." "Ah!" he said, "I know, they say it is against Napoleon, and then they say it is against Mussolini and against Hitler. For me, the 'Eroica' of Beethoven is allegro con brio." In other words, it is very dangerous to try to verbalise music, because in the end we don't speak about the music, but we speak about our reaction to it. *And frankly, I am not interested in Leonard Bernstein's reaction to the music, what he says, I am interested in how he conducted the music, and for this I don't need these words. I know this sounds very radical, but it's not an unimportant point. Because, if you think for a moment about all that you have heard and read about Mahler, it mostly uses non-musical terms.*

Well, we are talking on Mahler and he was a very bad yes-sayer, - a quote from Adorno.

Barenboim: And you know, Richard Strauss, who God knows was a great composer, was the master of orchestration, the master of opera, the master of all these things - if you think about it, *Richard Strauss' most innovative works were written in his youth. The early tone poems: Don Juan, Till Eulenspiegel, Tod und Verklärung, and also Elektra and Salome, are more interesting than Daphne, Frau ohne Schatten, Capriccio, the Oboe Concerto and the Four Last Songs*. So, it's not an example of how to deal with the passage of time. If you want to deal with the passage of time, you have to pick on composers who kept changing, and who kept developing, like Beethoven. Beethoven started as a completely classical composer, out of Haydn and Mozart, developed in his middle period into larger forms, virtuoso writing for the piano, very strong, expression-filled symphonies, and then went into his late periods where he tore everything apart. There is this convention of saying that when you get older you get milder. This is not true; Beethoven is exactly the opposite. Strauss got milder, Beethoven was a fury, and he didn't feel the necessity anymore for these things, everything was extreme and cut into small pieces. Therefore, Strauss' opinion about Mahler is, to me, not that important.

Mahler wrote some of his saddest music during his happiest days, Beethoven wrote some of his most joyful music during his saddest days. Mendelssohn wrote his glorious Octet *at 16. *

A lifetime of anguish and sorrow and triumph and ecstasy will not produce beauty if there is insufficient technique.


----------



## Ondine (Aug 24, 2012)

brianwalker said:


> This is nonsense. Great performers usually record their best work in youth and middle age, not old age. Karajan declined with age, [...]


@brianwalker post offers interesting thoughts that can be good candidates for further threads. Comes to my mind something about emotional life in relation to music technique and expressiveness.

I agree in the part of not needing the personal drama so to understand or perceive a musical oeuvre but I'm not so sure about the statement:



> Music is music. Emotions are emotions.


My approach to this is that music and emotions are both an integral aspect for music composition and/or interpretation. However, the stance given about considering music as it is, with out filters -personal dramas and 'told things'- as an approach to in order to have a kind of direct experience and understanding is an argument with which I concur with brainwalker.

Even when this can give us an interesting approach to the emotional content in the oeuvre itself, aside of what it is told about the author, the opposite option is still open to debate.

Here we can have an issue, because how sure can we be about the feelings of an author when composing his oeuvre?

The only case I have read about is that of Mozart's Eine Kleine Nacht Musik written when his father was recently dead and this oeuvre is full of joy and happiness.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

The greatest performance in Rubinstein's career was in his mid 70s. Stokowski was actually better in his 80s and 90s than he was in his 50s. There are exceptions to every rule, I guess.


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2012)

Hmmm. I'm sure all of us will have something different to say about brian's provocative post.

I really appreciated all the stuff about emotions and music, about biography, about vocabulary.

What I didn't find particularly insightful or even true were the generalizations about age. Particularly this one:



brianwalker said:


> It's been scientifically documented that people tend to have the most affection for music they were exposed during adolescence.


Maybe that just needs to have a wee "most" stuck in there in front of "people." (Though the words "It's been scientifically documented..." always make me flinch. Especially when none of the documents are forthcoming!!)

I'll only say that I have a great deal of affection for music I first heard when I was in college and grad school. That I am most particularly affectionate for a piece I first heard in 2005. Let's see, I was 53 then. Unless brian is claiming--as many other people have done, be fair!--that I'm still an adolescent....

Anyway, I'm not a big fan of nostalgia. I used to be, when I was a kid. Go figure. When I had hardly any past of my own to be nostalgic about was when I was most nostalgic. And, it's true, it _was_ for times (mid to late nineteenth century) and places (UK and Europe) rather distant from the 1950s in the US. The more past of my own that I have, the more interested I am in the present. (Why don't I ever get to participate in any of these "scientific studies"!! :lol


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

bigshot said:


> The greatest performance in Rubinstein's career was in his mid 70s. Stokowski was actually better in his 80s and 90s than he was in his 50s. There are exceptions to every rule, I guess.


I.m not sure that you are correct,how did he make the Philadelphia Orchestra into probably the best ever seen back before his 50's in that case?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Ondine said:


> @brianwalker post offers interesting thoughts that can be good candidates for further threads. Comes to my mind something about emotional life in relation to music technique and expressiveness.
> 
> I agree in the part of not needing the personal drama so to understand or perceive a musical oeuvre but I'm not so sure about the statement:
> 
> ...


You appear to disagree with yourself which is fairly bizarre.
You say that music and emotions are integral and then you talk about considering music as it is without filters,personal dramas,etc.
Absolutely impossible,you can do nothing of any sort without prior experience coming into your judgement.
I wonder who would manage Mahler's "Kindertotenlieder" better, a twenty year old bachelor or a singer who had lost a child himself?
The artist considers what the author meant and then decides how to pass this on to the audience.
In the case of music how do you explain the fact that I have many versions of the "Emperor" Concerto but they are all different.
Why do people go to concerts to hear music they already know--because they want to hear a different take on it if course!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

BRIANWALKER.

You don't change do you? "Nonsense" is not a good word to use and certainly not to me.
Did you ever go to concerts given by Stokowski,Boult,Monteaux and many other conductors in their very late age? I think probably not.
Karl Erb , to me the greatest lieder singer ever,was singing better than ever and made an LP although born about the same time as Caruso, (Is his reputation nostalgia by the way?) Jan Peerce's voice was good up to his death at 81 and I know because I heard it privately. Tancrede Pasero the great bass was singing well into the LP age,born 1893.
There are many others but not to worry there are many,many examples--Mischa Elman the violinist kept his tone right up into old age and that is unusual.
No, I don't wear goggles and by good fortune I have seen so much that I had plenty of chances to change my mind along the way.You've been asked for proof of this scientific documentation that you mention --are we going to see it, I certainly hope so because you should never make statements that can't be backed up.I have many,many Fischer-Dieskau recordings but don't rate his Schubert or Wolf as highly as Erb's and guess what ---I came across them both at the same time when I was a soldier in Germany.
The first pieces of music that I heard as a child were Chopin's A Major Polonaise and "The Waltz of the Flowers" played by the Eight piano symphony they are not that high on my list now at 74.
I did see conductors such as Toscanini,Furtwaengler,de Sabata and Mitropoulos and they were great, read the books and try listening to them.
I thought Wagner was your thing, were Lauritz Melchior and Frieda Leider not great or is that merely nostalgia?
People might think that you were the one talking something like nonsense,but who am I to suggest such a thing even?
Rubinstein was not a particular favourite of mine but I bet Argerich was not as good as Shura Cherkassky( he was a man not a woman you know).Jacqueline du Pre was only 42 when she died so mentioning her doesn't prove much does it?
You mention Mutter, is she not as good now then? I doubt she was at her peak at thirteen and Mozart's concertii are juvenile compositions so probably searing is a quaint descripion.
Music is different from method acting you say, no it isn't because it was a way of getting right inside your subject. I bet musicians do the same ask Glenn Gould--when you get a chance of course--watch Toscanini's face when he is conducting and tell me what reactions you see going on.
Mario del Monaco and Chaliapin certanly did a bit of method acting as do many opera singers--- 
Callas and Gobbi ?
Didn't Barenboim (who could do with a bit of emotion) mention "der Rosenkavalier" or did you happen to miss that out? He was only 57 when he composed it and it is one of the most watched and recorded operas that I know of--and a minor miracle.His judgement on Four Last Songs is somewhat suspect as well.
Your last sentence has nothing to do with anything that I posted.
But among your statistics perhaps you have the average age of conductors who fill concert halls when they appear.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

moody said:


> I.m not sure that you are correct,how did he make the Philadelphia Orchestra into probably the best ever seen back before his 50's in that case?


Yes. That was his 20s through 40s. He left Philadelphia in 38.


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2012)

moody said:


> You appear to disagree with yourself which is fairly bizarre.


Did you even read what you posted? There is no disagreement with himself in Ondine's post. Just consideration of different options. A word like "however" is a good clue, as is the "even when... is still..." pattern. It is bizarre that you missed those obvious cues.



moody said:


> I wonder who would manage Mahler's "Kindertotenlieder" better, a twenty year old bachelor or a singer who had lost a child himself?


Whichever is the better musician, I suppose. The one who'd lost a child himself might be a bit handicapped, his personal emotions possibly getting in the way of a good performance. Mahler would agree. He lost his daughter four years after he'd written this piece. Writing a friend about it, he said "I placed myself in the situation that a child of mine had died. When I really lost my daughter, I could not have written these songs any more." (So much for autobiographical theories of Mahler's music, just by the way. He was a creative artist. He _imagined_ things.)



moody said:


> Why do people go to concerts to hear music they already know--because they want to hear a different take on it if course!


Some I'm sure. A small minority, I'm guessing. Listen to people talking at the break, sometime. I'm sure you'll hear a lot of criticism about how what was just played did not match up to whatever each individual has as the benchmark for that piece.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Quote Originally Posted by moody
I wonder who would manage Mahler's "Kindertotenlieder" better, a twenty year old bachelor or a singer who had lost a child himself?



some guy said:


> [...]
> Whichever is the better musician, I suppose. The one who'd lost a child himself might be a bit handicapped, his personal emotions possibly getting in the way of a good performance. Mahler would agree. He lost his daughter four years after he'd written this piece. Writing a friend about it, he said "I placed myself in the situation that a child of mine had died. When I really lost my daughter, I could not have written these songs any more." (So much for autobiographical theories of Mahler's music, just by the way. He was a creative artist. He _imagined_ things.)


You appear to be confusing the empathy of the performer with the angst of the composer. Mahler felt that he couldn't have composed those songs after his daughter's death because it would be too painful. The associative pain felt by the singer need not be so closely held that he is unable to sing, yet still powerful enough to be evident. He has the misfortune not to have to 'imagine'.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

some guy said:


> Did you even read what you posted? There is no disagreement with himself in Ondine's post. Just consideration of different options. A word like "however" is a good clue, as is the "even when... is still..." pattern. It is bizarre that you missed those obvious cues.
> 
> Whichever is the better musician, I suppose. The one who'd lost a child himself might be a bit handicapped, his personal emotions possibly getting in the way of a good performance. Mahler would agree. He lost his daughter four years after he'd written this piece. Writing a friend about it, he said "I placed myself in the situation that a child of mine had died. When I really lost my daughter, I could not have written these songs any more." (So much for autobiographical theories of Mahler's music, just by the way. He was a creative artist. He _imagined_ things.)
> 
> Some I'm sure. A small minority, I'm guessing. Listen to people talking at the break, sometime. I'm sure you'll hear a lot of criticism about how what was just played did not match up to whatever each individual has as the benchmark for that piece.


I write down everything before I post it,although it is always possible that one can misread a post. I don't believe I have in this case.
Ondine said: I agree in part of not needing the personal drama so to understand or perceive musical oeuvre,but I'm not so sure about the statement 'music is music ,emotion is emotion' my approach to this is that music and emotions are an integral part....etc etc.' {There's the first contradiction.} ' However, the stance given about considering music as it is without filters,personal and "told things"....is an argument with which I concur....'. (there's another one)

Regarding your comment about Mahler,he said this after the event and he had already written the work. But knowing Mahler I would imagine it likely that he would have written something regarding his child.....he was very morbid you will recall.

As for concert audiences, the percentage of people who have heard it all before is very large except in the case of new music. 
But new music does not fill the Royal Albert Hall for many weeks ,however Brahms does and Beethoven does and so does Tchaikovsky'
Are you telling me that 80% at least haven't heard all that before?

Lastly why don't we wait to hear from Ondine,I'm sure she can clarify things although I am also sure she appreciates a knight errant like you riding to the rescue. But try to remember that I'm the only knight around here!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

bigshot said:


> Yes. That was his 20s through 40s. He left Philadelphia in 38.


The year I was born..did I cause something or did he follow a star to my manger?


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

Haha moody, you have outwitted me a second time!

Why would I refer to a person using the name "Ondine" as a he? Don't I know any mythology?

I don't deserve to go riding around on a noble steed defending water nymphs from passersby. I've sold my horse and turned my lance and my sword over to the proper authorities and am now working for a shrubber named Roger.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

some guy said:


> Haha moody, you have outwitted me a second time!
> 
> Why would I refer to a person using the name "Ondine" as a he? Don't I know any mythology?
> 
> I don't deserve to go riding around on a noble steed defending water nymphs from passersby. I've sold my horse and turned my lance and my sword over to the proper authorities and am now working for a shrubber named Roger.


The Ondine isn't exactly a nymph; Somewhat closer in attitude to being a Siren. It can be fatally detrimental to the health of passersby - and knights too probably. Ravel's Ondine is representative.

Hah. Without the horse, a lance ain't much use anyway, eh? Could have kept the sword though, for clearing brush if nothing else. Um, what's a shrubber?


----------



## Ondine (Aug 24, 2012)

moody said:


> Lastly why don't we wait to hear from Ondine,I'm sure she can clarify things[...]


OK. I will try to be clearer in this second intent 

I am not sure about the statement of 'music is music and emotions are emotions'. From that statement I understand that both are set apart and if the case, I can't agree because music is neither composed, nor performed, by machines but by persons that -in a very unique manner- experience live with special nerve, passion and intensity.

Also a musical oeuvre is not just about the private life of the author but also the _ethos_ or _zeitgeist_ of the historical moment of the composer. Musicians are specially sensible to their surroundings.

I agree with @brainwalker that the oeuvre, by itself, generates in ourselves specific emotional responses that can not correspond -exactly or in an absolute way- to _what is told_ about the personal drama of its author.

This do not mean that the oeuvre itself is empty from emotional elements; on the contrary, it is about an emotional content, thus, our emotional responses.

I gave a classical example about Mozart's 'Eine Kleine Nach Musik' which was written shortly after the dead of his father. If somebody hears the oeuvre, the listener will tell that it is full of joy, happiness and beauty or at least that is my emotional response to it.

I have another example. I like the piano performances of Keith Jarrett. It is common that the CD's are accompanied with his personal reflections which are deep in thought but sometimes -not always- do not add any information to the composition itself because my response as a 'wholeness' is not about that but something different whose translation into words can not represent accurately such experience.

Also I will adventure this thought: the reflections given in the booklet _forces,_ in some way, the experience of the listener provoking a sort of 'biased judgement' that is done not from the oeuvre itself but by the thoughts in the booklet.

However, this is a personal position into the issue. I think that the issue is open to debate.



> although I am also sure she appreciates a knight errant like you riding to the rescue.


Of course moody! In that sense I am an absolute romantic about being rescued by a handsome knight 



> But try to remember that I'm the only knight around here!


Then, forgive my misunderstandings and come to my rescue


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

Hey, I'm handsomer than moody. I'm sure I am.

Where's that dratted lance now?

Um, Ondine, you like shrubbery, don't you? Maybe a two-level effect, with a path running down the middle?

(A path!! A path!!)

OK. Enough seriousness from me for the day. Over to you, moody.


----------



## Ondine (Aug 24, 2012)

some guy said:


> Hey, I'm handsomer than moody. I'm sure I am.


From the avatars is hard to say who's the handsomer... 



> Where's that dratted lance now?
> 
> Um, Ondine, you like shrubbery, don't you? Maybe a two-level effect, with a path running down the middle?
> 
> (A path!! A path!!)


Couldn't get the exact meaning of this, some guy. English is not my original language


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

It's a reference to Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Which, if you haven't seen the movie....

There are worse things than not having seen that movie!

As for the avatars, surely the Stravinsky fountain wins, hands down, haha.

(Moody's knight is pretty awesome, though, I must say.)

But back to the topic before those pesky moderators get restive....

We are humans and therefore emotional. We make emotional responses to just about anything. Those responses may or may not correspond to the responses of others, and by others I include the composers themselves.

The responses are all quite strong. They are all valid, what's more. What they are not is descriptive of the music itself, nor are they normative for anyone else. Hard to believe, since they are so strong. But there it is.


----------



## Ondine (Aug 24, 2012)

some guy said:


> It's a reference to Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Which, if you haven't seen the movie....


Oh I see! I can understand now.



> There are worse things than not having seen that movie!


Hope so because I haven't seen that move. But I will 



> As for the avatars, surely the Stravinsky fountain wins, hands down, haha.
> 
> (Moody's knight is pretty awesome, though, I must say.)






> But back to the topic before those pesky moderators get restive....
> 
> We are humans and therefore emotional. We make emotional responses to just about anything. Those responses may or may not correspond to the responses of others, and by others I include the composers themselves.
> 
> The responses are all quite strong. They are all valid, what's more. What they are not is descriptive of the music itself, nor are they normative for anyone else. Hard to believe, since they are so strong. But there it is.


My experience is that much of the music I have listened -except for Mozart- has been not knowing the personal drama that is told here and there and when I know it, sometimes explains me why a given oeuvre results sad or stressing but other times do not.

So, do we need to know that? I think it is not needed at all and going further with this idea, knowing what is told about the author can lead to biased thoughts. But, again, this is just the opinion of a listener that has much more experience listening Viennese Classicism and Baroque than the Romantic era.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm 56 and have been listening to classical music since I was 16. So for forty years I have explored the genre and if there is one thing I have learned in that 40 years is that my taste in music has changed and I would say developed. Many of the things I enjoyed as a teenager no longer give me the same satisfaction. My pretended sophistication as a teenager was just mostly immaturity. I can look back with nostalgia on the many things that drove my parents and friends crazy but I think much of my listening as a teen was "reactionary" and trying to be different. Every young person has to find their way and we all go though strange phases but ultimately they are just that...phases. Most of those phases of my youth I have either outgrown or moved on from. That does not negate the importance they played at the time and are part of who I am today but I would not want to go back to being a 16 year old who thought he had the best taste in music and regarded all who did not enjoy my taste as imbeciles and unintelligent musical ignoramuses. I was so far ahead of everyone else I isolated myself and prided myself on my exclusivity and ability to enjoy what others could not. All I can do now is look back and laugh because the real unintelligent ignoramus was myself but I couldn't see the forest through the trees. Thus I am compelled to patience and feel compassion on the young now who act much the same way as I did in my youth and know that there is hope for them and it's called time. 

What bothers me is the disrespect shown by many young people for their elders in Western culture. Even if you have the attitudes I have expressed above it does not give you the right to be disrespectful and I see that quite a lot. I think it's absurd to think that the listening experience and knowledge of a teenager is on the same level as someone who has been listening to music for forty, fifty or sixty years. The age factor has been responsible for many of the worst debates on this site and mostly the reason I participate in very few discussions. Too often the discussions tend toward what divides us instead of what unites us. In any case the reality is that there is an age difference and that will continue. It's been that way since the beginning of time. My grandmother hated my mom's music, my mom hated my music and I honestly can't stand the majority of what is called music today. And thus it will continue to the end of time.

Kevin


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

Ondine said:


> So, do we need to know [personal drama]? I think it is not needed at all and going further with this idea, knowing what is told about the author can lead to biased thoughts.


Indeed, and I would add that there are several composers whose music can hardly be heard at all because of the interference from narratives.

There was a counterpoint thread here on TC that was going to attempt to list every fugue (or fugal passage). A certain French composer was conspicuous by his absence and then even more conspicuous by being represented on the list by only two major compositions and one very minor one.

There has been--and apparently still is--a perception of Berlioz that he hated fugues (he did not) and that his music is strongly homophonic (it is not). In nine of his twelve major pieces, there are a total of sixteen fugues. At least one of those is a double fugue. His music overall is contrapuntal in nature, as both Felix Weingartner and Charles Koechlin have pointed out. Anyone listening to his music can easily hear not only the sixteen fugues but the consistently contrapuntal nature of his writing. Almost no one does. The story of his anti-fugue attitude is stronger than actual experience of his music.

And what about Schoenberg? Wow.

I went to a concert last year where Schoenberg's third string quartet was played. It was introduced with all the usual hedging that concert promoters seem to think audiences need in order to sit through a piece by the anti-Christ of music. (Well, the former anti-Christ. Now it's Boulez. Or is it Cage?) So they played it. My son and I enjoyed this very pretty piece, a lovely little fin de siecle bit of late Romanticism. At least that's what we heard. A guy in front of us heard something quite different. He heard a piece of sterile and arid academia, suitable for study but not for listening to with any enjoyment. As he said this to his seatmate, my son and I looked at each other in dismay. I bit my tongue, substituting that self-mutilation for beating the guy over the head with a chair, which is anti-social and illegal and not at all nice.

From the look on his face, I think my son may have thrown up a little in his own mouth.

And, of course, there's Shostakovich. Can anyone hear anything by Shostakovich without thinking of the Soviet Union and government repression and the subtle, ironic rebellion that Shostakovich took against it? What about the music? Is that it's only value, really? That it tells us about the Soviet government? What's it _sound_ like? Nobody knows.

Well, that's my rant for the day. Tune in next week, when our topic will be "Stockhausen: outer space megalomaniac or megalomaniacal alien?"


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm 56 and have been listening to classical music since I was 16. So for forty years I have explored the genre and if there is one thing I have learned in that 40 years is that my taste in music has changed and I would say developed. Many of the things I enjoyed as a teenager no longer give me the same satisfaction. My pretended sophistication as a teenager was just mostly immaturity. I can look back with nostalgia on the many things that drove my parents and friends crazy but I think much of my listening as a teen was "reactionary" and trying to be different. Every young person has to find their way and we all go though strange phases but ultimately they are just that...phases. Most of those phases of my youth I have either outgrown or moved on from. That does not negate the importance they played at the time and are part of who I am today but I would not want to go back to being a 16 year old who thought he had the best taste in music and regarded all who did not enjoy my taste as imbeciles and unintelligent musical ignoramuses. I was so far ahead of everyone else I isolated myself and prided myself on my exclusivity and ability to enjoy what others could not. All I can do now is look back and laugh because the real unintelligent ignoramus was myself but I couldn't see the forest through the trees. Thus I am compelled to patience and feel compassion on the young now who act much the same way as I did in my youth and know that there is hope for them and it's called time.
> 
> What bothers me is the disrespect shown by many young people for their elders in Western culture. Even if you have the attitudes I have expressed above it does not give you the right to be disrespectful and I see that quite a lot. I think it's absurd to think that the listening experience and knowledge of a teenager is on the same level as someone who has been listening to music for forty, fifty or sixty years. The age factor has been responsible for many of the worst debates on this site and mostly the reason I participate in very few discussions. Too often the discussions tend toward what divides us instead of what unites us. In any case the reality is that there is an age difference and that will continue. It's been that way since the beginning of time. My grandmother hated my mom's music, my mom hated my music and I honestly can't stand the majority of what is called music today. And thus it will continue to the end of time.
> 
> Kevin


Unfortunately, a couple of posters were going after us young guns for lack of experience. Is it alright for elders to disrespect our opinions due to being considerably younger than them? Sorry it is hard to not fight fire with fire in these instances. The main thing is to avoid generalizations of any sort of group.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

neoshredder said:


> Unfortunately, a couple of posters were going after us young guns for lack of experience. Is it alright for elders to disrespect our opinions due to being considerably younger than them? Sorry it is hard to not fight fire with fire in these instances. The main thing is to avoid generalizations of any sort of group.


Respect is a two way street and I am opposed to belittling of anyone young or old. What I do see a whole lot on here though is well thought out responses by older members and one or two line sarcastic or flippant remarks by younger folks far too often, which certainly implies that the older member's opinion does not count or matter. We're just a bunch of old fuddy duddy dinosaurs who have no clue at all what "real" music is all about and we just are simply not progressive enough. I see far more disrespect by the younger members here than by the older members and intentional threads and posts started that are meant to antagonize such and just stir up controversy for the thrill of it all. And I have seen that on a more increasing basis as of late.

Kevin

EDIT: - Right after posting the above I got this as a good example of exactly what I was talking about:

http://www.talkclassical.com/21676-do-you-recklessly-elevate.html#post364108


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Well I never cared for Couchie's posts tbh. I guess when you are on one side of the coin, you notice those on the other side of the coin more often. But there is plenty of ageism going both ways around here unfortunately. Especially in the Mozart/Beethoven thread or basically anything about Mozart.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

some guy said:


> Hey, I'm handsomer than moody. I'm sure I am.
> 
> Where's that dratted lance now?
> 
> ...


The reason I have my visor down is that my handsomeness would blind most folks.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> Unfortunately, a couple of posters were going after us young guns for lack of experience. Is it alright for elders to disrespect our opinions due to being considerably younger than them? Sorry it is hard to not fight fire with fire in these instances. The main thing is to avoid generalizations of any sort of group.


You are not a young gun as I have pointed out before and normally one gets the posts that one deserves. Most of the age related posts aimed at the younger crowd are done in a joking fashion. Apart from that criticism of particularly crass remarks such as "Your opinion is WRONG" has no relation to age. The biggest battles I have had are with Brianwalker and St.Lukes who are not young guns as far as I know.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

moody said:


> You are not a young gun as I have pointed out before and normally one gets the posts that one deserves. Most of the age related posts aimed at the younger crowd are done in a joking fashion. Apart from that criticism of particularly crass remarks such as "Your opinion is WRONG" has no relation to age. The biggest battles I have had are with Brianwalker and St.Lukes who are not young guns as far as I know.


I thought you were going to ignore my posts. I'm 29 but still feel young. And that 'your opinion is wrong' is just a funny way to say they strongly disagree. CoAG created it here. And jokes about younger posters being infants are not nice. Though I might not be a young gun, I still get offended when posters go after them due to their age.


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> Is it alright for elders to disrespect our opinions due to being considerably younger than them


No, it's not. But is it disrespectful (or ageist?) to observe that younger listeners may lack some experiences available to older listeners (assuming that it is relevant to say so in context).?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm 56 and have been listening to classical music since I was 16. So for forty years I have explored the genre and if there is one thing I have learned in that 40 years is that my taste in music has changed and I would say developed. Many of the things I enjoyed as a teenager no longer give me the same satisfaction. My pretended sophistication as a teenager was just mostly immaturity. I can look back with nostalgia on the many things that drove my parents and friends crazy but I think much of my listening as a teen was "reactionary" and trying to be different. Every young person has to find their way and we all go though strange phases but ultimately they are just that...phases. Most of those phases of my youth I have either outgrown or moved on from. That does not negate the importance they played at the time and are part of who I am today but I would not want to go back to being a 16 year old who thought he had the best taste in music and regarded all who did not enjoy my taste as imbeciles and unintelligent musical ignoramuses. I was so far ahead of everyone else I isolated myself and prided myself on my exclusivity and ability to enjoy what others could not. All I can do now is look back and laugh because the real unintelligent ignoramus was myself but I couldn't see the forest through the trees. Thus I am compelled to patience and feel compassion on the young now who act much the same way as I did in my youth and know that there is hope for them and it's called time.
> 
> What bothers me is the disrespect shown by many young people for their elders in Western culture. Even if you have the attitudes I have expressed above it does not give you the right to be disrespectful and I see that quite a lot. I think it's absurd to think that the listening experience and knowledge of a teenager is on the same level as someone who has been listening to music for forty, fifty or sixty years. The age factor has been responsible for many of the worst debates on this site and mostly the reason I participate in very few discussions. Too often the discussions tend toward what divides us instead of what unites us. In any case the reality is that there is an age difference and that will continue. It's been that way since the beginning of time. My grandmother hated my mom's music, my mom hated my music and I honestly can't stand the majority of what is called music today. And thus it will continue to the end of time.
> 
> Kevin


This is one of the best decriptions of the teenage years that I have ever read. Some people here do not seem to realise that we were teenagers once and that we had teenage children and maybe teenage grandchildren---they should open their minds.
The angst is all one sided here and I do not believe that any of us "old folk" are anti the young,in my own case I have a name for getting on with them well.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

neoshredder said:


> I thought you were going to ignore my posts. I'm 29 but still feel young. And that 'your opinion is wrong' is just a funny way to say they strongly disagree. CoAG created it here. And jokes about younger posters being infants are not nice. Though I might not be a young gun, I still get offended when posters go after them due to their age.


I meant to say your threads---sorry about that.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

moody said:


> This is one of the best decriptions of the teenage years that I have ever read. Some people here do not seem to realise that we were teenagers once and that we had teenage children and maybe teenage grandchildren---they should open their minds.
> The angst is all one sided here and I do not believe that any of us "old folk" are anti the young,in my own case I have a name for getting on with them well.


Not a surprise you believe that.


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

Kevin Pearson said:


> Every young person has to find their way and we all go though strange phases but ultimately they are just that...phases. Most of those phases of my youth I have either outgrown or moved on from. That does not negate the importance they played at the time and are part of who I am today but I would not want to go back to being a 16 year old


And then there's the phase you go through when you look back at life as a set of phases and think that you're no longer in one. As for going back to being a 16 yr old...yes please, with my current knowledge and experience, I'd waste much less of my youth!

(I mostly refuse to use emoticons - they're just an easy way to pretend you're not being insulting, but I hope the irony in my post is coming through)

Seriously though, youth is not always callow, and age is not always wise. The expression round our way is "I fought in the war, don't you know!" In other words, just because I'm old, I'm entitled to an assumption of valid experiences and wise reflection on them, and the respect is automatic.

'T' ain't necessarily so.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Ondine said:


> From the avatars is hard to say who's the handsomer...
> 
> Couldn't get the exact meaning of this, some guy. English is not my original language


A path is what you walk along in your garden between your shrubs.


----------



## Guest (Sep 30, 2012)

Age, eh? Is that really a thing?

Anyway, I spent 9 to 20 listening to the core repertory, and developing a taste for the lesser known pieces by famous composers as well as picking up a lesser known composer or two.

I spent 20 to 30 getting caught up. Starting with Bartok and then careening around the rest of the 20th century. 

I have spent 30 to the present staying caught up and filling in a gap or two. Criminey. I hadda have a gap or two going through things so quickly.

I'm still filling in the gaps and staying caught up. I love all the old stuff still, pretty much, but my passion is for what's being done now. Right now!

Good times!!

Age for me has meant exactly nothing. I'm alive. I'm interested in stuff. 

Cool beans.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

'What bothers me is the disrespect shown by many young people for their elders in Western culture.'

I 'liked' your post, _@Kevin_. Personally, I have no need for respect I haven't earned. I only wish to point out that active _disrespect_ is by its nature discourteous. Common courtesy is "the grease in civilization's wheels".

Unfortunately, I am in the habit of assuming that relative strangers (most of our members are strangers) possess a sense of humor resembling mine. Hell, that isn't even the case in my town - but body language can fill the gap. Maybe TC needs new software that is closer to Skype?


----------



## jani (Jun 15, 2012)

This is kinda related to subject of this thread but i am shocked that we didn't talk about classical or Sibelius'es music on our normal music lessons on elementary and high-school, one thing that i think that is really wrong that we didn't talk/listen/ learn about Sibelius.
WE just played and sang Finnish easy listening radio hits.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

My teenage years were exactly like that description, and it's clear that more than a few kids in this forum are going through that stage right now. The thing that snapped me out of it was jazz. I suddenly came to the realization that jazz was great, but my horizons has spread so far so fast, I had no idea where to start. I also could tell that there was no line outside of jazz. It would go on forever. That's when I admitted to myself that I didn't know everything and started seeking out more experienced music gurus to point me in the right direction.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

some guy said:


> Age, eh? Is that really a thing?
> 
> Anyway, I spent 9 to 20 listening to the core repertory, and developing a taste for the lesser known pieces by famous composers as well as picking up a lesser known composer or two.
> 
> ...


Would you like to hear some of my crappy music?


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2012)

Hahaha, sure. Why not?


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

moody said:


> You are not a young gun as I have pointed out before and normally one gets the posts that one deserves. Most of the age related posts aimed at the younger crowd are done in a joking fashion. Apart from that criticism of particularly crass remarks such as "Your opinion is WRONG" has no relation to age. The biggest battles I have had are with Brianwalker and St.Lukes who are not young guns as far as I know.





neoshredder said:


> Unfortunately, a couple of posters were going after us young guns for lack of experience. Is it alright for elders to disrespect our opinions due to being considerably younger than them? Sorry it is hard to not fight fire with fire in these instances. The main thing is to avoid generalizations of any sort of group.


I'm glad people could discuss things out in the open in this thread. & guys, we have a common enemy. The bullies of this forum. Its not based on age. Lets not tolerate bully behaviour. Best thing is to probably ignore it, which I have tried to do. But realise that most people here can and do behave properly. its only a minority that is hell bent on making everything into a confrontation. Doesn't matter if its about age. Or a composer. They need to be confrontative, that's their life blood.



some guy said:


> Indeed, and I would add that there are several composers whose music can hardly be heard at all because of the interference from narratives.


Well your position is just ideology, just like the one you don't like (to do with narratives and all that). Stravinsky's 'music about nothing but itself' was his ideology, and a popular Modernist type ideology. But its not the only view of music, and my view is that a good deal of music does relate to the composer himself.

But as I said to another person (who has currently 'left the building,' or been made to leave it, more accurately) I am the only biased boy in the village. Yeah, and pigs might fly one day.

I don't want to continue this topic here, just saying that its just an ideological position, this view that all music is just notes and nothing much else, a kind of extreme formalist position.

In any case, I am ceasing doing any threads on aspects of composers lives. I was researching some composers and certain historical periods, and thought I'd do some threads on them. But not a chance now. All I do is get shot down for various reasons and accused of certain things. Again, its just by a small minority of people here, but I don't need even that negativity in my life.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Sid James said:


> I'm glad people could discuss things out in the open in this thread. & guys, we have a common enemy. The bullies of this forum....


A 'correction' here, I should have said something like 'common problem,' not 'common enemy.' In any case, I think people have done well here to focus on their own experiences. Its what I aim to do now. All I can do is ignore bunfights (whether age related or not) and not get caught in the crossfire of any discussions that turn ugly.


----------



## composira (Sep 17, 2014)

I just went to a concert Saturday; I heard Schubert's Rosamunde, his Unfinished Symphony, and Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 17 in G. Music was great but was slightly alarmed at the amount of gray heads in the audience. Plus the lack of "kids" like me. It was an evening concert, but still.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Sid James said:


> Over the past few weeks, there's been various threads where people talked about age in relation to classical music.
> 
> Things like this have been cropping up:
> - Experience
> ...


All new rules must be cleared first with management. :tiphat:


----------



## Declined (Apr 8, 2014)

I'm 19, and I've always liked classical music when I heard but I didn't really know much about it. I took 2 western humanities classes in college (one to 1600 the other to present day), and though neither teacher talked about music, the textbook contained a good amount of information on classical music. That, and I saw the Florida Orchestra perform Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony- the first classical performance I've attended. Those two events have made me a fan of classical music. I have now amassed many CDs of CM and I will view more performances of the FL Orchestra. On Saturday I saw the FL Orchestra perform Beethoven Piano Concerto 1 and Rachmaninoff Symphonic Dances, both were superb. While a lot of the people there were old (this is Florida after all) there was a was amount of young people.

As I get older, I will no doubt become more familiar with the genre.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

All the music courses in the world won't help someone appreciate classical music.

An exciting live performance with a great orchestra playing full blast and the audience screaming their approval at the end would be a lot better.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

I first came to appreciate classical music at the age of 23. When I have my own children, I intend to help them get to know it starting from childhood.


----------



## MoonlightSonata (Mar 29, 2014)

Sometimes, when people see me listening to music on my computer, they ask what I am listening to. I tell them, and they are obviously thinking about the weird title pop musicians give their songs.
Then, I lend them my headphones.
When they have walked hurriedly away thinking about the state of youth today, I return to my Ligeti. :lol:


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

My concert-going is outside the average stats and patterns.
From middle childhood on, concerts I attended always had at least one modern / contemporary piece on the program, and 'back then' I was the middle-school / high-school / college student.

I have yet, with only two exceptions, one being the Concertgebouw Orchestra on tour in the U.S. -- that program devoted to Mahler's Seventh Symphony, the other a piano recital -- to attend any program of 'all classical music pre 1900.'

Now, I am solidly in that demographic called 'the aging concert-going audience,' (i.e. senior citizen) and I still only attend if one or more modern / contemporary works are on the program.

That has been a lifelong pattern, regardless of which decade's number marked my age. I know my taste in music is not 'average,' while if not ever having held / owned a subscription, I have been and remain nonetheless a (minor) but constant long-term customer / supporter.

I have never thought there to be 'an issue,' and think a lot of people make far too much of it.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I first came to appreciate classical music at the age of 23. When I have my own children, I intend to help them get to know it starting from childhood.


You will be a good mom


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

I always kind of liked being one of the few young people around me interested in classical music. Obviously I understand why that can be very frustrating for some people, but I guess I have the hipster-gene in me  Everyone was always impressed when I told them what music I liked, even if they did have some trouble relating to it. Even if I didn't get friends to appreciate classical music the way I do, I was at least able to get many of them off the "it's boring/irrelevant" train. 

As someone who listened to it exclusively for the first half of my life, the main way age affected my love of classical music was being one of the few under-40 people at all the concerts I went to (and probably the only under-20 person who was not also a musician). I do intend to introduce my future kids to it at an early age like my parents did.


----------



## MoonlightSonata (Mar 29, 2014)

Tristan said:


> I always kind of liked being one of the few young people around me interested in classical music...


Out of interest, may I ask why? I know it can be fun sometimes, but other times you hear this sort of thing:
Other Person: What are you listening to?
Me: Thomas Adès.
OP: Who?
Me: He's a composer.
OP:Right. So what's the song called?
Me: It's not a song, it's a violin concerto. _Concentric Paths_.
OP: *Bewildered look*


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

violadude said:


> You will be a good mom


I hope I will, even if the thought of being one sometimes scares me to death.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

MoonlightSonata said:


> Out of interest, may I ask why? I know it can be fun sometimes, but other times you hear this sort of thing:
> Other Person: What are you listening to?
> Me: Thomas Adès.
> OP: Who?
> ...


I think if you said "Moonlight Sonata", the look would not have been so bewildered.


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

MoonlightSonata said:


> Out of interest, may I ask why? I know it can be fun sometimes, but other times you hear this sort of thing:
> Other Person: What are you listening to?
> Me: Thomas Adès.
> OP: Who?
> ...


Certainly I do not enjoy exchanges like that (although for me, a friend saying "but classical music is _irrelevant_!" was the most annoying thing I've heard), I just mean that it's something that makes me unique among the people I know. People associate me with classical music and I like that association. It's "my thing". And not to sound petty and arrogant (although it kind of is), I know people associate my love of classical music with intelligence and I like that as well, not going to lie.


----------



## MoonlightSonata (Mar 29, 2014)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I think if you said "Moonlight Sonata", the look would not have been so bewildered.


Ah, that's very true.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

PetrB said:


> I have yet, with only two exceptions, one being the Concertgebouw Orchestra on tour in the U.S. -- that program devoted to Mahler's Seventh Symphony, the other a piano recital -- to attend any program of 'all classical music pre 1900.'


Mahler 7 is not pre-1900 either.


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

Tristan said:


> Certainly I do not enjoy exchanges like that (although for me, a friend saying "but classical music is _irrelevant_!" was the most annoying thing I've heard.) .


Aaargh! I hate when people say that! Things can't just be 'irrelevant'. Things are relevant or irrelevant TO something else- so what is this conveniently unspecified thing that CM is irrelevant to? The person speaking, in which case why don't they just say 'I don't like it'? Irrelevant to modern life and current concerns generally? They could argue that point if they wanted, though all it really amounts to is 'Classical music is unfashionable', to which the correct response is 'Yes I know, so what!'.

It is obnoxious to dismiss anything as simply 'irrelevant'. It's the misuse of the language combined with the attempt to obfuscate combined with smugness, that is absolutely horrible. I hope you de-friended that person


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I hope I will, even if the thought of being one sometimes scares me to death.


Being scared of parenthood is a good thing in my view, the hallmark of taking it with appropriate seriousness! BTW I always assumed you were a man- I was totally guilty of stereotyping you based on a love of Wagner and Star Wars! My bad!


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I hope I will, even if the thought of being one sometimes scares me to death.


I think you will make a super mother, Siegendeslicht - and I hope you get the chance to be, which alas I never did, though I do have lots of lovely nephews & nieces


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Figleaf said:


> BTW I always assumed you were a man- I was totally guilty of stereotyping you based on a love of Wagner and Star Wars!


Yes, and big trucks  But I don't mind that at all, it is quite understandable.


----------



## Guest (Oct 15, 2014)

I'm 54.
The last rock concert I went to I noticed how at the upper end of the age demographic I was (but then it was at a uni).

Just been to my first classical concert (ignoring one from a million years ago) and I noticed how at the bottom of the age demographic I was. Not sure that bodes well. Maybe there'll be younger folk at a more contemporary programme.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Figleaf said:


> Aaargh! I hate when people say that! Things can't just be 'irrelevant'. Things are relevant or irrelevant TO something else- so what is this conveniently unspecified thing that CM is irrelevant to? The person speaking, in which case why don't they just say 'I don't like it'? Irrelevant to modern life and current concerns generally? They could argue that point if they wanted, though all it really amounts to is 'Classical music is unfashionable', to which the correct response is 'Yes I know, so what!'.
> 
> It is obnoxious to dismiss anything as simply 'irrelevant'. It's the misuse of the language combined with the attempt to obfuscate combined with smugness, that is absolutely horrible. I hope you de-friended that person


Yes, the 'irrelevant' tag is ridiculous. I find it's most applied to classical era music which is just dumb. This is music that is well-structured, joyful and comforting (for the most part). Hell, that's the kind of life that most humans want to live.


----------



## MoonlightSonata (Mar 29, 2014)

Tristan said:


> Certainly I do not enjoy exchanges like that (although for me, a friend saying "but classical music is _irrelevant_!" was the most annoying thing I've heard), I just mean that it's something that makes me unique among the people I know. People associate me with classical music and I like that association. It's "my thing". And not to sound petty and arrogant (although it kind of is), I know people associate my love of classical music with intelligence and I like that as well, not going to lie.


I shall try to think of it like that in future. Maybe then I shall be less irritated when people ask what a viola is.


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

MoonlightSonata said:


> I shall try to think of it like that in future. Maybe then I shall be less irritated when people ask what a viola is.


It's a little purple flower, isn't it?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Figleaf said:


> It's a little purple flower, isn't it?


LOL. That, too, is true


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

hpowders said:


> All new rules must be cleared first with management. :tiphat:


Yes, unless I do my own thread, where I have to reiterate said rules to prevent World War 3! Or the online equivalent of it. Since I made this thread the ageism / reverse ageism issue isn't so prominent on our discussions now, as far as I can tell.


----------



## MoonlightSonata (Mar 29, 2014)

Figleaf said:


> It's a little purple flower, isn't it?





PetrB said:


> LOL. That, too, is true
> View attachment 53596


This is the perfect time for sarcastic applause.


----------

