# What conventional classics have you not yet listened to?



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

The majority of the people I know in a personal and professional context do not know of, or listen to as much classical music etc as I do; and to my embarrassment they consider me 'expert' on the subject (of which I am not and I always respond to their statements in that vain).

A lot of the people I would consider expert are here on this very forum, I have picked up so much from you all - both further insight to pieces I am already familiar with and an introduction into pieces previously not known to me.

..... to my point anyway.....

Classical music is as varied as varied can be, (there's no need for me to make that clear to your minds). I do feel though that there are composers who are considered to be the convention, or the norm - basically composers whom every classical music lover should have listened to at least once or at least be aware of (or maybe not, just floating an idea).

Well believe it or not - today I listened to something I have never heard before

Mendelssohn - Symphony no 4 (The Italian)   

So my question to you all is:

*What conventional classics have you not yet listened to?* _Is there a Tchaikovsky ignorer out there? A belated Beethovener. Obviously what you consider conventional is up to you and that in itself could make the point of this whole exercise mute, but...................... own up_ I did


----------



## beethovenian (May 2, 2011)

I barely listen to anything from the Russians except Shostakovich.

I find the russians always too bombastic and aggressive. Could listening to Shostakovich be the cause of my opinion of russian music?

Incidentally, the film Black Swan fire up a little interest in Tchaikovsky, but shame that interest didn't develop.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I don't know anything by Haydn or Schubert. I've only heard a few Mozart pieces. Same for Bach. I don't care for Mendelssohn either. I'm mainly a 20th century listener who started out with the Romantics. There's too much music to concentrate on everything.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

I seem to have largely ignored Brahms, but I liked what I've heard so I need to hear more.

And all opera but that's for practical reasons. 

I listen to far too much Bach.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

With one major exception, I'm not aware of major composers or major works that I have not heard. Actually I expect that there are works that I have managed to miss, but unfortunately it seems the only way to find them is by chance (i.e. usually something mentioned here on TC). A few months ago I did find two masterpieces that I had missed - Mahler's Das Lied von der Erde and Bruckner's 7th (thanks to TC). I knew of Bruckner's 7th but never heard it, and somehow I was unaware of Das Lied von der Erde.

The major exception is opera. I have heard many overtures and preludes, but I have listened to very few operas (3-4). For me the biggest omissions are Wagner's Ring Cycle and Mozart (any major opera). I will get to them, but there's a long waiting list of works.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I listen to a lot of my main guys - Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Bartok, Ravel, Mahler, etc and a lot of other stuff too, but I agree its near impossible to keep up with everything. I think you'll find even the 'experts' here will have many areas they haven't explored, and many people that are incredibly knowledgeable about classical music in general tend to focus on just a few composers. Some big holes for me off the top of my head - I still haven't heard Tchaikovsky's 1st 2nd or 3rd symphonies, (and I don't think I will for a while as I still don't think I 'get' his 4th 5th or 6th yet). I haven't heard Brahms 2nd symphony, or Rachmaninoff's 1st. I also haven't heard the 1st, 2nd or 5th of Mendelssohn. Again this is just a few examples off the top of my head.


----------



## Artemis (Dec 8, 2007)

mmsbls said:


> With one major exception, I'm not aware of major composers or major works that I have not heard.


Do you have: Schütz: "Musicalische Exequien"

It's a stunner and an absolute "must have". Any CD collection without this is seriously deficient.

My point is that there are often many significant works that sometimes get overlooked*. *The above work is truly excellent.


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

beethovenian said:


> I barely listen to anything from the Russians except Shostakovich.
> 
> I find the russians always too bombastic and aggressive. Could listening to Shostakovich be the cause of my opinion of russian music?
> 
> Incidentally, the film Black Swan fire up a little interest in Tchaikovsky, but shame that interest didn't develop.


Tchaikovsky isn't as bombastic as Shostakovich you're right - there are quite a lot of less agressive russians and russian pieces. Black Swan is mainly pieces from 'Swan Lake' - some of which are lovely.


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

Artemis said:


> Schütz: "Musicalische Exequien"


another piece to add to the list


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

starthrower said:


> There's too much music to concentrate on everything.


I know - it's maddening


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

jalex said:


> I listen to far too much Bach.


Never - not possible


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

mmsbls said:


> The major exception is opera. I have heard many overtures and preludes, but I have listened to very few operas (3-4). For me the biggest omissions are Wagner's Ring Cycle and Mozart (any major opera). I will get to them, but there's a long waiting list of works.


I love opera but in this category there are tons of them I haven't listened to - Wagner for me also.


----------



## FrankieP (Aug 24, 2011)

hmm I haven't listened to much Brahms - but then my orchestra played the Song of Destiny and First Symphony in the same concert and I was Brahms-ed out, and not in a good way! I found it the most heavy going week of rehearsals and the other piece on the programme, Berg's violin concerto, seemed like light relief (and that's saying something!).
I'm also seriously behind with Operas :S


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

FrankieP said:


> hmm I haven't listened to much Brahms - but then my orchestra played the Song of Destiny and First Symphony in the same concert and I was Brahms-ed out, and not in a good way! I found it the most heavy going week of rehearsals and the other piece on the programme, Berg's violin concerto, seemed like light relief (and that's saying something!).
> I'm also seriously behind with Operas :S


Brahms orchestral works are others I haven't listened to much of (Polednice might kill me for that). What instrument do you play (sorry if you have mentioned it elsewhere). 

Also.... Welcome to the forum FrankieP, I can't find an introduction from you so please accept my welcome here


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Artemis said:


> Do you have: Schütz: "Musicalische Exequien"
> 
> It's a stunner and an absolute "must have". Any CD collection without this is seriously deficient.


It is always fun to discover new treasures like this, even after 25 years of listening to classical music. Listening to it right now. Thanks!


----------



## Bix (Aug 12, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> It is always fun to discover new treasures like this, even after 25 years of listening to classical music. Listening to it right now. Thanks!


Ik ook! - Me too!


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

I've heard a lot of Bruckner on the radio but admit I only have a couple recordings and don't know many works of his off hand...one that I was especially taken aback by was kv608 from Mozart; Fantasy for Mechanical Organ in f-minor...I may have skimmed through this in the early nineties when I first got the complete Mozart works but totally forgot about it...so the other day I happened to read about it somewhere, immediately 'tubed it and I couldn't believe what I heard!...I knew the piece perfectly but was scratching my head thinking, "what is this doing being played on organ????"

Turns out, I'd known the piece for many years because it was my favorite in a disc I bought (and regretfully had it stolen so I have to re-order right away) also in the early nineties that contained the Concerto for two pianos and three pianos and a bunch of other stuff for four hands played by Murray and Radu...well, out of these works, my favorite was always this fantasy in f-minor...ahhhh, can't believe I let that slip all this time as it is pretty outstanding on the organ!

Still, if you like the organ version and have not heard these exact two guys playing the two piano version,...do it! "seriously, do it...do it...seriously, do it...Johnny Black, neat...do it"


----------



## Artemis (Dec 8, 2007)

Bix said:


> another piece to add to the list


I have dozens more like that. It's infuriating when you think you've got everything that matters in classical music and someone comes along (maybe on radio) and talks about a piece that you've never heard of and which you find out is a "classic". It's happened to me far too often in the past, but I think I'm there now ... almost.


----------



## Artemis (Dec 8, 2007)

Here's another "classic" that is a "must have". Don't delay, this will astonish you:

*Jean-Féry Rebel*: Les Elemens (my version is by L'Orfeo Barockorchester)


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Artemis said:


> Here's another "classic" that is a "must have". Don't delay, this will astonish you:
> 
> *Jean-Féry Rebel*: Les Elemens (my version is by L'Orfeo Barockorchester)


I listened to both Schütz: _Musicalische Exequien_ and Jean-Féry Rebel: _Les Elemens_ having heard neither. The Rebel was remarkable. I've heard a reasonable number of works of the early 1700's but nothing like the opening movement of _Les Elemens_. I plan on exploring Rebel further. Thanks for the suggestion!


----------



## waldvogel (Jul 10, 2011)

It's an old joke... but how many symphonies did Dvorak write?

Answer: Four - symphonies # 6, 7, 8, and 9.

And in my case it's true. I love Dvorak's music, but I'm caught in a bind - that I probably will never hear his early symphonies unless I go out and buy the CD's. And that I'm very reluctant to buy CD's of something that I've never heard.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

If I revealed all the major works I actually haven't heard, I would be quite embarrassed...


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I've never heard one of tchaikovskis ballets but can't remember the name off hand, isn't there one besides the nutcracker and swan lake? Composers I ignore include Wagner, with the exception of the odd overture or two. Can't think of anyone I avoid off hand. I do tend not to listen to composers I own what I'm listening to on the radio.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

There's quite a few things that I haven't heard & it gets worse for things before 1800 or so. J.S. Bach's _Mass in B minor _is probably the biggest omission I can think of. Although lately I've been exploring music of earlier periods and it has been great. This whole thing is a work in progress for me. I'm now buying less cd's and hoping to listen to all of my cd's, about 500 or so, before acquiring too much else. I'm not aiming to fill holes or gaps in what I own, nor do I do a similar thing with concerts I attend, it's all based on what I want to hear & get to know, I don't aim to make it a chore. Eg. Wagner doesn't interest me much at all, but I borrowed a DVD of _Gotterdamerung_ earlier this year, it was a good one-off but nothing much more. I'm not a masochist, I listen for engagement and enjoyment, not because I have to "get" something that is "obligatory" or something like that...


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Remarkably I found a long list of well known pieces I'm not familiar with, in spite of listening for over 40 years. I won't bore you with the entire list. It seems Tchaikovsky is the most glaring omission for me. I haven't heard either _Swan Lake_ or _Sleeping Beauty_ that I know of. Mostly I find him either too saccharine or too cheesily romantic and bombastic. I usually like the latter, but for some reason I don't in Tchaikovsky, or rarely do.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Manok said:


> I've never heard one of tchaikovskis ballets but can't remember the name off hand, isn't there one besides the nutcracker and swan lake? Composers I ignore include Wagner, with the exception of the odd overture or two. Can't think of anyone I avoid off hand. I do tend not to listen to composers I own what I'm listening to on the radio.


You are thinking of Sleeping Beauty. I highly recommend it!


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

I still have not paid much attention to Beethoven's 3rd symphony, I know the theme of the first movement and all, and I love the scherzo since I got to know it apart from the whole symphony, but I really just haven't taken the time to appreciate it yet. Some would think there is something seriously wrong with me. 

My J.S. Bach is quite sketchy. Don't know a think about his Masses. I do play six of his inventions though. I'm sure there are others, but these are perhaps the most notable.


----------



## beethovenian (May 2, 2011)

clavichorder said:


> My J.S. Bach is quite sketchy. Don't know a think about his Masses. I do play six of his inventions though. I'm sure there are others, but these are perhaps the most notable.


Just listen to his opening Kyrie Eleison from the Mass in B minor. It works on me and it's my favourite choral work now.


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

beethovenian said:


> Just listen to his opening Kyrie Eleison from the Mass in B minor. It works on me and it's my favourite choral work now.


Dunno if it's just me but as great as the B Minor Mass obviously is it has never hit me in the way the St Matthew Passion never fails to.


----------



## Air (Jul 19, 2008)

One thing I learned early on in my classical listening is not to hold myself accountable for "knowing it all", or even "knowing everything I _need_ to know". This sort of pressure to reach a certain standard simply sucks all the fun out of listening - like forcing yourself down a derived path that's end goal is ultimately pretention rather than blazing a trail for yourself that is unique and personal, and can most genuinely connect with you.

The preferable way I figured, was to simply enjoy myself.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Sid James said:


> There's quite a few things that I haven't heard & it gets worse for things before 1800 or so. J.S. Bach's _Mass in B minor _is probably the biggest omission I can think of. Although lately I've been exploring music of earlier periods and it has been great. This whole thing is a work in progress for me. I'm now buying less cd's and hoping to listen to all of my cd's, about 500 or so, before acquiring too much else. I'm not aiming to fill holes or gaps in what I own, nor do I do a similar thing with concerts I attend, it's all based on what I want to hear & get to know, I don't aim to make it a chore. Eg. Wagner doesn't interest me much at all, but I borrowed a DVD of _Gotterdamerung_ earlier this year, it was a good one-off but nothing much more. I'm not a masochist, I listen for engagement and enjoyment, not because I have to "get" something that is "obligatory" or something like that...


We listeners in 2011 are extremely fortunate to have the full "musical arsenal" of choice before us - both repertoire and recordings/concerts. It's not that surprising we might have pieces in our "listening wish list" that raise a few  , like Bach's _B Minor Mass_ in your case. But I honestly think it's not a case of "worse for things before 1800 or so" like you said; just take your own sweet time / pace at the end of the day. Some of us might never be ready to wholly embrace certain pieces/genres/periods - I doubt I ever will in the short horizon will when it comes to Xenakis' cacophonic pieces, which might raise a few  perhaps in your mind and admirers of extreme avant-garde.

But back to the OP's question. I think I might be "guilty" of some large scale ballet music by some of the Romantics, maybe a few piano/solo music of the same period, waltz music etc.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Some of mine (more surely to come):

Adams' Nixon in China 
some of Bach's famous cantatas - heard most but not all of them 
Bach's Orchestral suites
Bach's 2 & 3 Part inventions 
some of Bach's concertos 
Bax (except for a random thing or two) 
Beethoven's Fidelio 
Beethoven's string trios
Berlioz' Les Troyens 
Britten's operas 
several of Bruckner's symphonies 
Chopin's music for cello 
a lot of Dowland's lute music 
Dvorak's 6th symphony 
Gershwin's An American in Paris
Granados' goyescas
Handel's coronation anthems (except Zadok)
Haydn's op. 20 and op. 33 string quartets 
Haydn's Paris symphonies
Haydn's piano trios 
Ives' symphonies 
Ligeti's string quartets 
Martinu 
Mendelssohn's Elijah 
Mendelssohn's piano concertos and concertos for 2 pianos 
most of Mendelssohn's string quartets 
Mendelssohn's Walpurgis Night 
Mozart's string quartets other than the Haydn Quartets
Penderecki's St. Luke thing
Penderecki's Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima 
Prokofiev's violin concertos 
Schubert's Schwanengesang
quite a bit of Schumann's music for solo piano 
Schutz 
Shostakovich's Preludes & Fugues 
a lot of J. Strauss's music 
Tchaikovsky's operas 
Vaughan Williams' Sea Symphony
Weber's clarinet concertos 
Wolf's Italian songs 
Xenakis (don't even know what his main works are)
Zelenka's trio sonatas

That's enough for now...

What is really sad is how long this list would be if I had to list the things I don't know _well_.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Air said:


> One thing I learned early on in my classical listening is not to hold myself accountable for "knowing it all", or even "knowing everything I _need_ to know". This sort of pressure to reach a certain standard simply sucks all the fun out of listening - like forcing yourself down a derived path that's end goal is ultimately pretention rather than blazing a trail for yourself that is unique and personal, and can most genuinely connect with you.
> 
> The preferable way I figured, was to simply enjoy myself.


I disagree.

I don't mean that you have to do it my way - you do whatever you want - but personally my goal is to educate myself. The gaps in my knowledge are, to me, equivalent to moral shortcomings, and the sooner I make amends for them, the better. This applies to classical music, religion, economics, history, current events, geology, biology, food, astronomy, mathematics, whatever. If a well-educated person can be expected to know it, I expect myself to know it.

The flip side is that I give myself credit for knowing what I do know.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Apart from the 'famous bit' I haven't knowingly heard anything of Vivaldi's Four Seasons or any other of the concertos that make up his op. 8. Maybe that's strange seeing I do have a 5-disc collection of his other concertos but perhaps that's the crux of it - he was so prolific that sometimes I wonder if Vivaldi is as Vivaldi does. I would be grateful if others can either confirm my ignorance of the Four Seasons/op. 8 set as an unforgivable gaping hole or whether it's surplus to requirements on top of a 5-disc collection (two discs of which are made up of his op. 3 violin concertos anyway). 

Also, I can't remember hearing anything by the likes of Purcell or Monteverdi either but I'm not a fan of music pre-Late Baroque.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

elgars ghost said:


> Apart from the 'famous bit' I haven't knowingly heard anything of Vivaldi's Four Seasons or any other of the concertos that make up his op. 8. Maybe that's strange seeing I do have a 5-disc collection of his other concertos but perhaps that's the crux of it - he was so prolific that sometimes I wonder if Vivaldi is as Vivaldi does. I would be grateful if others can either confirm my ignorance of the Four Seasons/op. 8 set as an unforgivable gaping hole or whether it's surplus to requirements on top of a 5-disc collection (two discs of which are made up of his op. 3 violin concertos anyway).
> 
> Also, I can't remember hearing anything by the likes of Purcell or Monteverdi either but I'm not a fan of music pre-Late Baroque.


I recommend the L'Estro Armonico concertos as Vivaldi. They are top notch, generally speaking. Winter and Summer of the Four Seasons are especially intense. Vivaldi at his best had an intensity to him that no others of the time had except maybe D. Scarlatti on the keyboard.

This tune might sound familiar if you know your Bach keyboard transcriptions 




I really like this one





These are actually kind of limp recordings in my opinion, there are more exciting renditions out there. And the finale of this B minor one is terrific.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Also here is a really cool video of Winter, I have no idea what its from, but I was very pleased to discover it when I did


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Vivaldi was a brilliant composer that sometimes went on too long with his sequences. There is a reason Bach copied his works.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Berlioz Les Troyens is a major one that I haven't really listened to. Also Brahms 2nd piano concerto.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Seriously, the more I listen to music... and the more music I collect... the more great music I discover which I did not know about.

Recent discoveries that I have on my Amazon "wish list" include:


Stockhausen: Kontra-punkte, Refrain, Zeitmasze, Schlagrtrio

Hanspeter Kyburz: Malstrom; The Voynich Cipher Manuscript; Parts

John Harbison: Oboe Concerto, Symphony No. 2; Sessions: Symphony No. 2

Symphonies of Roger Sessions

Toshiro Mayuzumi: Mandala Symphony; Bugaku; Symphonic Mood; Rumba Rhapsody

Nunes- Quodlibet

Holmboe- Kairos (Time), Symphonies

Berlioz: Romeo & Juliette

Shostakovitch- Symphonies 4 and 13

Saint-Saëns- Chamber music

Balakirev: Symphonies Nos. 1 & 2; Piano Concerto, Op. 1

Salvatore Sciarrino: Luci mie traditrici

Picker: Piano Concerto No. 2 / And Suddenly It's Evening / Cello Concerto

Rubbra

Maurencio's Madrigals

d'India's Madrigals

Picker: Piano Concerto No. 2 / And Suddenly It's Evening / Cello Concerto

Andrea Gabrieli's Madrigals

Reinhold Gliere

Glazunov's symphonies

and many, many, many more................


----------



## haydnfan (Apr 13, 2011)

science said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I don't mean that you have to do it my way - you do whatever you want - but personally my goal is to educate myself. The gaps in my knowledge are, to me, equivalent to moral shortcomings, and the sooner I make amends for them, the better. This applies to classical music, religion, economics, history, current events, geology, biology, food, astronomy, mathematics, whatever. If a well-educated person can be expected to know it, I expect myself to know it.
> 
> The flip side is that I give myself credit for knowing what I do know.


This is what I don't like to see, people that take on listening as a tedious chore that has to be done and done right. It feels weird since my mentality is to listen for pleasure. Your post is rather 'me'-centric. It's about what "you" know, what "you" should know and "your" education. It's too much about you, and not enough about the music and the journey.

Listening to music should be an organic process and a journey that's not scheduled into the to do list of life. Live a little! How can you appreciate anything if it's just a tick mark on your long list?


----------



## haydnfan (Apr 13, 2011)

Anyway for me my weakness are operas because I really only enjoy them if (a) I watch them, (b) I have the free time, and (c) I'm in the mood. It will take me quite awhile to dig into 'em. I already love Mozart, Handel, Berlioz and Bartok though.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

haydnfan said:


> This is what I don't like to see, people that take on listening as a tedious chore that has to be done and done right. It feels weird since my mentality is to listen for pleasure. *Your post is rather 'me'-centric. It's about what "you" know, what "you" should know and "your" education. It's too much about you, and not enough about the music and the journey.*
> 
> Listening to music should be an organic process and a journey that's not scheduled into the to do list of life. Live a little! How can you appreciate anything if it's just a tick mark on your long list?


I only wanted to emphasize that I don't mean to be prescriptive. Like I said, I will do it my way, and I will let you do it your way without criticizing you, and I'd like you to give me the same respect and let me do it my way.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

science said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I don't mean that you have to do it my way - you do whatever you want - but personally my goal is to educate myself. The gaps in my knowledge are, to me, equivalent to moral shortcomings, and the sooner I make amends for them, the better. This applies to classical music, religion, economics, history, current events, geology, biology, food, astronomy, mathematics, whatever. If a well-educated person can be expected to know it, I expect myself to know it.
> 
> The flip side is that I give myself credit for knowing what I do know.


It looks like someone has taken the teachings of Socrates --> virtue = knowledge very literally...

But if this is the case, I would suggest that Socrates was referring to self-knowledge as being virtuous, not in literally learning or memorizing every fact that is to be known.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

tdc said:


> It looks like someone has taken the teachings of Socrates --> virtue = knowledge very literally...
> 
> But if this is the case, I would suggest that Socrates was referring to self-knowledge as being virtuous, not in literally learning or memorizing every fact that is to be known.


Why "someone?"

I don't really know what Socrates meant, but in my case it's a personality quirk. It's how I feel, not an objective truth that anyone else must recognize.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

science said:


> Why "someone?"
> 
> I don't really know what Socrates meant, but in my case it's a personality quirk. It's how I feel, not an objective truth that anyone else must recognize.


That is fine, I meant no offense. When you said you'd feel a moral shortcoming if you didn't correct the gaps in your knowledge, it seemed like you were being kind of hard on yourself there, it also seemed kind of related to the Socrates idea... But I agree to each their own! If you enjoy approaching things this way and it doesn't harm anyone, who are we to judge?


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

tdc said:


> That is fine, I meant no offense. When you said you'd feel a moral shortcoming if you didn't correct the gaps in your knowledge, it seemed like you were being kind of hard on yourself there, it also seemed kind of related to the Socrates idea... But I agree to each their own! If you enjoy approaching things this way and it doesn't harm anyone, who are we to judge?


Exactly!

I think we understand each other.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

science said:


> I don't mean that you have to do it my way - you do whatever you want - but personally my goal is to educate myself. The gaps in my knowledge are, to me, equivalent to moral shortcomings, and the sooner I make amends for them, the better. This applies to classical music, religion, economics, history, current events, geology, biology, food, astronomy, mathematics, whatever. If a well-educated person can be expected to know it, I expect myself to know it.


I certainly have no issue with this sentiment, but I do have a question. Do you push yourself to close these gaps in knowledge from a moral sense of "ought" or a strong desire to know? I've always wondered why you call yourself "science." As a scientist, I have an almost desperate curiosity that pushes me to ask questions about reality and learn about everything. So, moral sense or curiosity?


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

There will always be thousands of marvelous works out there that I will have never heard, even after I have been listening for 50 years. I try not to worry about it, and just enjoy what I happen to come across.

As far as "conventional" classics go, well... opera is still my biggest gap, though I have listened to a number of the most famous operas in the past year.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Ok, I'm coming out with it, these are all the major pieces of music that I have never heard *all the way through*. A lot of these I've heard bits and pieces of, and some I've even heard enough of it to form a general opinion about it. But none of these pieces I have actually sat down and listened to all the way through. This is going to hurt...

-Pretty much anything pre-vivaldi-ish I haven't heard much of
-Havent listened through any of Bach's choral works or organ works, mostly just his concertos and keyboard works (WTC)
-Havent listened through any pieces by Handel except for maybe Water Music...(ouch, this one is especially embarrassing. Sorry, HC)
-Almost nothing by Haydn...>.<
-only a couple Mozart string quartets (Dissonance, and something else), none of his Operas all the way through, only a couple piano concertos, only the really famous symphonies (prague, Haffner, 40, 41).
-I haven't heard Beethoven's 1st, 2nd, 7th or 8th symphonies all the way through, and only his 5th piano concerto. Most of my concentration on Beethoven's music has gone to his string quartets and piano sonatas.
-None of the early romantic Italian Operas
-None of Webern all the way through
-Never heard any of Schumann's symphonies and most of his famous piano music (save for Carnaval and children's album) I have never heard. (sorry Klavierspiel...)
-I've never heard any of Schubert's symphonies all the way through, just the first movement of the unfinished. Nor have I heard any of his string quartets except for death and the maiden, and none of his piano sonatas all the way through
-I've never heard any of Brahm's overtures, or his Haydn Variations, or his clarinet quintet or string sextets (Sorry Polednice)
-I've never listened to anything by Greig all the way through
-The only Wagner Opera I've heard all the way through was Tristan und Isolde.
-No Verdi operas
-I've heard Elektra but not Salome. I've not heard most of Strauss's major orchestral works actually
-I've not heard Mendelssohn's midsummer night dream, or his octet or any of his string quartets or any songs without words
-Haven't heard Gurrelieder by Schoenberg or Moses und Aron 
-Haven't heard any Puccini
-Haven't heard most of Sibelius' Tone poems (only Swan of Tuonela, Finlandia and Tapiola)
-Haven't heard Ravel's piano concertos

Ok, I better stop. I think I've insulted just about everybody by now with my ignorance


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

violadude said:


> -Pretty much anything pre-vivaldi-ish I haven't heard much of


Not to validate the embarrassment, but you should try Corelli for sure. Pre vivaldi and great in his own way, pretty much the pioneer of the concerto grosso.

My list ought to look something like that as well.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

clavichorder said:


> Not to validate the embarrassment, but you should try Corelli for sure. Pre vivaldi and great in his own way, pretty much the pioneer of the concerto grosso.
> 
> My list ought to look something like that as well.


Way ahead of you. I've had this on my wish list for quite some time.










http://www.amazon.com/Corelli-Compl...=sr_1_5?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1314941638&sr=1-5


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> We listeners in 2011 are extremely fortunate to have the full "musical arsenal" of choice before us - both repertoire and recordings/concerts. It's not that surprising we might have pieces in our "listening wish list" that raise a few...But I honestly think it's not a case of "worse for things before 1800 or so" like you said; just take your own sweet time / pace at the end of the day...


I agree & to give myself credit, eg. I've far overtaken my parents in exposure to a broad range of classical repertoire. Of course, this also speaks to what you're saying, people of my generation have more choice and variety than even those of a generation before. In talking to people into classical music, both here on TC and in "real life," I can comfortably hold a conversation about any era/area of classical music. Of course, my strong points are instrumental musics and esp. the times after about 1800. So it depends, but I can generally relate to what people are saying/thinking about most areas of the classical universe, and I tend to focus on the commonalities rather than the differences.



science said:


> ...personally my goal is to educate myself. The gaps in my knowledge are, to me, equivalent to moral shortcomings, and the sooner I make amends for them, the better...If a well-educated person can be expected to know it, I expect myself to know it.


I think this can be a good thing. Eg. a person I know is now studying Australian literature, which previously she had pre-judged as being not as good as European or USA literature. Maybe what little she read of our local writers was not that good. But now, doing the course, she says she has discovered some very good Aussie writers (& of course, she's fair to middling about others, or doesn't like them, like anything else).

In other words, it's good to cast one's net wide & understand, appreciate things in general, a variety of things. I see members on TC do this all the time & also people I know in real life. Myself also. Up until a few years back, I'd never heard Handel's_ Messiah_ in full. Then, thanks to a friend who has Gardiner's recording, I heard it fully for the first time. Not long after I experienced it live, loved it to the max. & with this friend, he hadn't heard many things I've known for ages, eg. Messiaen's _Quartet for the End of Time_. He loved it upon first listen, and we were able to hear it live last year. If we were all the same & didn't open up to learn from eachother's different experiences, the world would be a very boring place indeed (& as you say, Science, this applies to many other things, not only music).



> ...The flip side is that I give myself credit for knowing what I do know.


That's the point I was making in my reply to HC above...


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

mmsbls said:


> I certainly have no issue with this sentiment, but I do have a question. Do you push yourself to close these gaps in knowledge from a moral sense of "ought" or a strong desire to know? I've always wondered why you call yourself "science." As a scientist, I have an almost desperate curiosity that pushes me to ask questions about reality and learn about everything. So, moral sense or curiosity?


I don't have much confidence in the reliability of vocabulary about mental states, so we can call it "curiosity" if you'd like, but in a very strong form.

I think the key thing is the feeling of pride / shame that goes with knowledge / ignorance. People might wonder about guilt, but I don't feel guilt very powerfully (at least compared to how some other people seem to feel it).

To me, mortality is not too scary; the fact that I will die with so much ignorance is painful. But I thank whatever gods exist that I live now rather than in the early 20th century, or any time before it. How lucky we are!


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

By the same token, there's so much to listen to out there. I like the "less is more" approach. I like deep listening. If I don't have time to fully absorb a piece - eg. no headspace - I hardly bother to listen to it even once, until I'm ready. I got a recording of Elgar's _Dream of Gerontius_ months ago, but still haven't listened to it. I like to listen to things many times over to get the full payload. I don't see any use in just letting it pass me by. So I take things bit by bit, get more out of them in each listen. Sometimes I spend a while hovering around the same composer, or set of composers. Recently, I've been listening to various pieces on 2 disc sets I have of guys like Xenakis, Lutoslawski, Szymanowski, Australian composers, etc. I listen to a few pieces per night, or even only one piece from each. I've covered them slowly. If I listened to the both discs at once, I'd get nowhere, these are quite complex works. But this in-depth approach can also be a weakness, I tend to be an "all or nothing" kind of guy, either I'm engaged with something 110 per cent or just 5 or 10 per cent. I am in the middle ground in many ways, but when it comes to my music, I have to be "all ears" or it just doesn't work or gel with me...


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Thanks for the reply and the youtube vids, clavichorder - I will check them out later.


----------

