# How can you justify listening to Beethoven's ninth for the fiftieth time when ...



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

you don't know a single Bruckner symphony - or maybe you only know Sibelius sy 1,2,5 and you haven't even dipped into avant garde to see if you like it?

I am guilty of this indeed but I'm going to change - and that doesn't mean getting through the 200-300 Mozart works I havn't heard yet - I'm going to start with Vaugahn Williams sy 4 and then the Antarctica symphony - then some Bartok - concerto for orchestra - it's about time I listened to these pieces. I'm going to shelve Mozart for now (Mozart - forgive me!)

I used to run a CD/LP classical only shop - in Nottingham UK.
I had customers who bought many versions of a work - like Dvorak 9 - or Mozart 41 - and I observed that they seemed to have very little breadth in their listening based on what they were buying from me. Each to their own I suppose but surely - life is short enough - and there is much fine music - too much. So why go over the same well known repertoire time and again? 

Do you ever feel that it's time to put away your favourite works and branch out? Or do you listen to your favourites time and again when you have maybe CDs you bought a while ago with good intentions?


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

People have budgets - both in time and money - they will choose how to allocate these to get the most enjoyment out of it. They might enjoy a Beethoven symphony or two, and that might well be good enough for them as far as classical music is concerned. Others of us might like to explore more, perhaps knowing that a 20th century set of 13 symphonies by Vagn Holmboe might not be as enjoyable as listening to yet another version of Ludvig's set of 9, but probably still worth exploring like I just did. So I think it's really driven by your explorative passion and of course how much resources you are willing to allocate to it.


----------



## Conor71 (Feb 19, 2009)

I get maximum enjoyment from Music when I know it well already so I dont think theres anything wrong with just listening to the same stuff over and over again.


----------



## Toddlertoddy (Sep 17, 2011)

Conor71 said:


> I get maximum enjoyment from Music when I know it well already so I dont think theres anything wrong with just listening to the same stuff over and over again.


At least until you get sick of it.

I listened to Tchaikovsky's Suite No. 1 too many times and now I haven't played it for a few months. I support exploring new music, but that only happens every month for me, or after I'm been through the previous new music.


----------



## Conor71 (Feb 19, 2009)

Toddlertoddy said:


> At least until you get sick of it.
> 
> I listened to Tchaikovsky's Suite No. 1 too many times and now I haven't played it for a few months. I support exploring new music, but that only happens every month for me, or after I'm been through the previous new music.


I dont fatigue through repeated listening but of course everyone is different


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

stomanek said:


> ...Do you ever feel that it's time to put away your favourite works and branch out? Or do you listen to your favourites time and again when you have maybe CDs you bought a while ago with good intentions?


I kind of do both. Since about joining this forum just over 3 years ago now, I have listened to more classical music - both new and also vaguely known to me, or not in recent memory - than I did the previous 10 or maybe even 20 years.

So now I am listening to less things new to me, and trying to go back to some of the many treasures I've collected over the past 3 years or so. I'm surprised how much it is, even though I'm not a big collector compared to some on this forum.

I go through phases, but I have my focus on music after 1800 and also strong preference for instrumental, esp. chamber musics.

Recently I have narrowed my focus onto mainly buying things I know but don't have on cd or things I have on eg. cassette tape which is ancient and needs replacing pronto. My aim is to eventually buy on cd eg. all Bruckner, Mahler, Beethoven, Schubert (etc.) symphonies. Quite a few gaps there, but I'm not too fussed, this is a long term goal, could take like a year or two.


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

Easy: I like it.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I think most people on this forum tend to explore quite a bit. New or almost new works have dominated my listening over the past year or so (probably at least 80% of my listening). For the moment I'm more interested in finding new works that I like rather than listening to works that I _love_.

BUT... when I do listen to those wonderful works, I realize why they hold a special place for me. Several months ago I listened to Beethoven's 9th (i.e. the greatest work ever written), and as always I was struck by the beauty, power, and perfection. I am always amazed by how magnificent that work is. Today I listened to Schumann's piano chamber works and remembered how sublimely beautiful they are. There's a reason why I adore the great works. But maybe one can have too much of a great thing, and we need variety to keep those works forever special to us.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

I think it's worth taking the trouble to find out waht are generally considered to be the best works of each of the main composers and setting realistic targets to achieve wide coverage (across time periods and genres) as quickly as possible within your budget and within your scope to digest new material. 

The alternative procedure of buying "safe" only what you know you like or may like is an easier route but carries a much a bigger risk of finiishing with up with screwed-up tastes and ill-informed prejudices, and once realised a regret that you didn't pursue a more orderly, disciplined path in the earlier stages.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Amateur music lovers and consumers -- or 'just fans' -- do not have to justify their personal tastes in any way to anyone.

It is the professionals only who might want or have to qualify / justify why they care for Beethoven but perhaps have no interest or care one whit when it comes to 'a Bruckner' (or vice verso) -- even then, perhaps with more technical 'qualifications' as point of argument, or articulate debates over the general aesthetic of one composer compared to another -- this still boils down to a matter of personal tastes and preferences, requiring no 'justification' of any sort.

If one is earnest about having an in depth general sense of all classical music, then by all means survey all eras and works -- even those one does not care for. Fact is, none of it is 'necessary.'

Your question, other than for yourself, is very much one of those luxurious 'first world' problems; it is neither a real dilemma or an existential one - of any sort.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

I don't think one needs any justification to listen to one's favourites. If one goes back again and again, there must be a pretty good reason for that. Other people might be more curious by nature and enjoy checking out new things. Of course broadening one's horizon, so to speak, is great, but one shouldn't do it simply because one feels obliged to.

All branching-out I've done so far came about more or less by accident. I don't seek out new composers, I don't keep a to-do list. I just happen to stumble across composers, and if I feel intruiged I given them a try.

Also, even if one has certain favourites, one can still kind of branch out just by listening to different recordings of that piece. Especially with the Beethoven Ninth, there are so many, totally different recordings out there that it's very often like listening to an entirely new piece altogether.


----------



## Guest (Jul 21, 2012)

* How can you justify listening to Beethoven's ninth for the fiftieth time when ...*

Why should anyone have to justify listening to anything?? it depends what mood you are in sometimes you feel like a bit of LvB other times perhaps R Strauss and even a bit of Wagner if you so inclined


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

It;s too bad that some people have such narrow tastes in classical music, especially when there's 
such a sstageringly wide variety of repertoire available on CD . There's absolutely no need to have
20 different sets of the Beethoven symphonies or those of Brahms, Tchaikovsky etc unless you have the time to listen, the money, and the space to put all the CDs .
My own CD collection is highly eclectic, and includes symphonies by Rooussel, Honegger, Martinu,
Korngold, Balakirev, Glazunov, Zdenek Fibich (a fine and unjustly neglected Czech composer and contemporary of Dvorak), Enescu, Szymanowski, Berwald, Gliere, Arnold Bax, Myaskovsky, John Alden Carpenter,
Paul Creston, Ned Rorem, Havergal Brian, E.J. Moeran, Anton Rubinstein , Ernst Toch,
Dutilleaux, Carlos Chavez , Arthur Bliss , Robert Simpson, Rimsky-Korsakov, and others .
And many,many other obscure but interesting works by Charles Koechlin, Unno Klami, Rautavaara,
Busoni , Dvorak, and others. Plus numerous not very well known operas by th elikes of 
Franz Schreker, Hans Pfitzner, Antonio Carlos Gomes, Zemlinsky, Heinrich Marschner, Franz Schmidt,
Walter Braunfels, Pavel Haas, Chabrier, Rimsky-Korsakov , Rued Langaard and others .And this is just the tip of th eiceberg .
Nobody oculd ever accuse me of having an uninteresting CD collection !


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

It's all about motives.

Both examples of thought are wrong to me:
True Narrow-mindedness:
"I justify my listening to this Beethoven Symphony only because it's the only good piece there is. Everything else is terrible, or not worth it."
True Snobbishness:
"I justify my _not _listening to the Top 40 because those are for ignorant peoples. _I'm_ not a narrow person and listen to _everything_, well, except that Top 40."

Better examples of thought:
True Enthusiasm:
"I've only been listening to this Beethoven Symphony because it's the only work I truly like right now. I understand this may change though, and I'll probably move on eventually, but not yet."
True Curiosity:
"I don't listen to the Top 40 anymore, because I've _already _had my share of enjoyment from them! Can't listen to single pieces of music _too _much, you know. I may go back to a Beethoven Symphony once in a while, but I want to explore and widen my perspective, and that's where I am today."


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

How does one justify such a thread? That is my question.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

stomanek said:


> Do you ever feel that it's time to put away your favourite works and branch out? Or do you listen to your favourites time and again when you have maybe CDs you bought a while ago with good intentions?


"Branching out" is probably a good term for me; my exposure has been kind of organic. It starts out with something like, "Wow, I like Beethoven." Then I find out who influenced him, so I listen to that composer. Or one commentator pointed out one of his string quartet passages that could have been written by Obrecht, so I got into Obrecht. Then I saw that Obrecht/Isaac/Josquin influenced Webern, so I got into Webern. From Webern came Schubert(yeah, there's an influence) , and from Schubert came Bruckner, and so on.

It seem that if you're curious, you'll be led to other composers as a matter of course. Then you'll return to, say, Beethoven's 9th and agree with what T.S. Eliot said:

We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.


----------



## StevenOBrien (Jun 27, 2011)

I really dislike this anti-genre attitude within classical music. To make an analogy to popular music; feeling guilty about only listening to Beethoven symphonies and not listening to enough late romantic or 20th century symphonies in my opinion is like feeling guilty about only listening to metal and feeling guilty about not paying enough attention to what's going on in dubstep and trance these days.

You love Beethoven, great! If you want to explore Brucker, be my guest, but don't just do it out of guilt for "neglecting" him >_>. You don't HAVE to like all classical music (or any for that matter) just as you don't have to like every genre of popular music.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

StevenOBrien said:


> I really dislike this anti-genre attitude within classical music. To make an analogy to popular music; feeling guilty about only listening to Beethoven symphonies and not listening to enough late romantic or 20th century symphonies in my opinion is like feeling guilty about only listening to metal and feeling guilty about not paying enough attention to what's going on in dubstep and trance these days.
> 
> You love Beethoven, great! If you want to explore Brucker, be my guest, but don't just do it out of guilt for "neglecting" him >_>. You don't HAVE to like all classical music (or any for that matter) just as you don't have to like every genre of popular music.


Some of you have taken my thread the wrong way - maybe because of the language I chose. My fault.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2012)

You could be right there stomanek perhaps if you tried it in say double dutch the message would get across


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2012)

Good question stomanek. I've asked it of myself, as I begin the long process of exploring the vast world of classical.

Speaking as a teacher (by trade, not by current job) and as a male, I recognise that I like the notion of 'mastery'. That is, I want to gain control over something that I've taken an interest in. The trouble is that with so many composers in so many sub-genres over so many centuries, it's difficult to achieve mastery in depth _and _in breadth. At the moment, I'm working on getting to know Beethoven's symphonies. I want to be able to recognise them all (so that requires several listens to each to begin with) and then I can begin to decide for myself why he is such an acclaimed master. I also want to buy versions that are both renowned and well-recorded (I've got three Chorals at the moment) but also be able to learn how to make my own mind up ("If this version is too slow/fast, why?")

So, whilst I can easily justify why I have more than one version of pieces by my favourite three composers (Beethoven, Debussy and Satie) I think I can also justify why it'll take me a long time to get to Furtwangler's Choral (or any more Boulez) - there's so much out there that I can't spend the rest of my life listening to things that don't immediately appeal.


----------



## powerbooks (Jun 30, 2012)

kv466 said:


> How does one justify such a thread? That is my question.


I agree the title of the thread sounds silly and redundant (did we just have a discussion about getting tired of a particular piece)?

Yes, I believe it is justifiable to listen to a piece many many time. As I said, I have done it many times myself. I have been collecting some favorite pieces for long time. (B9 used to be one of them and reached around 30 versions before I started unloading them). I am not saying I listen to the same performance all the time, but different performances by different conductors and groups. I have over 20 versions of "Four Last Songs" in my iDevices (which is not my primary listening device), and about dozen of Mahler 2 right now. All of them are different of course!

My greatest passion so far is Goldberg Variations. last time I counted it was approaching 80 versions. Once you get into Bach's music, you will never feel tired of listening to them!!!


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

powerbooks said:


> My greatest passion so far is Goldberg Variations. last time I counted it was approaching 80 versions. Once you get into Bach's music, you will never feel tired of listening to them!!!


Wow,...you're a very patient person...80 versions of Goldbergs? It didn't take me but my first listen to Gould's to realize it couldn't be done better...and, every time I've tried to disprove that it has only been reaffirmed that much more!


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Sid James- My aim is to eventually buy on cd eg. all Bruckner, Mahler, Beethoven, Schubert (etc.) symphonies.

Depending upon the number of gaps, you may be far better off simply purchasing any number of box sets. Quite often they end up being far more economical. For Bruckner I'd recommend:



















Karajan's set is marvelous as well... but I know that you are no fan.

Mahler:

Being a Walter fan you might consider this:










Of course Walter didn't record all of Mahler's symphonies:










You'd still need to pick up a few others.

Schubert? I have the Karajan set which is fine for collecting everything by Schubert... but seriously you really only need:



















*****


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

But if you really want everything, you might like the Bohm set:










Beethoven? I would still highly recommend Karajan's 1963 recordings:










Gardiner's muscular HIP recordings:










Consider also the Krips and Cluytens box sets... both of which are quite fine.

And this is a great recording... and a great buy now... having originally sold for over $100 US:










And of course you either have... or must get:


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> - there's so much out there that I can't spend the rest of my life listening to things that don't immediately appeal.


One drawback to that approach is that some of the music you may come to love the most may not appeal on one listening.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

Sid James said:


> Quite a few gaps there, but I'm not too fussed, this is a long term goal, could take like a year or two.


Or a lifetime.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2012)

Petwhac said:


> One drawback to that approach is that some of the music you may come to love the most may not appeal on one listening.


Quite right. Which is why I'm persevering with Beethoven's less well known symphonies, and I've two CDs of Jean Efflam Bavouzet's Debussy piano works, not just Clair de Lune.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jean-Efflam-Bavouzet/e/B00465HQ7A/ref=ntt_art_dp_pel_1

As classical is my second love, I've still got plenty of rock/pop to try too!


----------



## powerbooks (Jun 30, 2012)

kv466 said:


> Wow,...you're a very patient person...80 versions of Goldbergs? It didn't take me but my first listen to Gould's to realize it couldn't be done better...and, every time I've tried to disprove that it has only been reaffirmed that much more!


What do you mean "patient"? Are you implicating that you don't have patience for Goldberg? Gosh, this got to be anther example of total difference between the music taste among the readers here! 

Or are you saying Gould "owns" Goldberg? Which version do you think is the most convincing among the four "official" release? Why do you want to disapprove your own feeling? Listening to different versions is not meant to find the best (that is the least concern for most of the time), but try to get some different prospects from different performers, and find some interesting varieties, and to be enlightened and much more......

Have you tried harpsichord, which is the intended instrument of this work?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Thanks for all the replies.
I happened to hear 4 new works today - all car listening - Mordkovitch playing schubert's violin sonata - and the later violin fantasy - which I thought a masterwork - fabulous discovery - should have checked it out years ago. And the same violinist playing prokofiev violin concertos 1 and 2 - very glad to have heard them and glad i did not listen today to Mozart 40 and 41 for the 100th time which I had in the car. I will go back to the fantasy, and the two prokofiev concertos for sure.


----------



## powerbooks (Jun 30, 2012)

Let's all sit back and relax. Listening classical music is a precious gift for life-long enjoyment. Please just feel lucky and grateful that we can enjoy whatever we can appreciate by our own capability.

Yes, I like the majority of the classical music, but I do aware there are much more music I have not listened, and they might have touched someone else deeply. To those someone else, I say "lucky for you, too"! I am sure you may have also missed some of the excitement I have with some of "my" music.

Why do I have to concern about other people who may not like Wagner, for example? If they like Beethoven, good enough already!


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2012)

powerbooks said:


> What do you mean "patient"? Are you implicating that you don't have patience for Goldberg? Gosh, this got to be anther example of total difference between the music taste among the readers here!
> 
> Have you tried harpsichord, which is the intended instrument of this work?


I think what KV was implying is that you must be a rare breed to have and listen to 80 versions of the Goldbergs I have a few but in single figures, Gould, Tureck, Hewitt to name three individual interpretations and Pinnock on Harpsichord which I do not like. 80 versions boggles the mind


----------

