# How much classical music do you not like?



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

I thought this would be interesting to see amongst the biggest classical music nuts on the Internet. 

My girlfriend and I had a conversation about music recently, and classical music in particular. So far there is yet to be a composer or a piece of music she doesn't like. She listens to everything, medieval plainchant to the latest electroacoustic music and everything in between not to mention all the non classical genres.

At the moment it's pretty hard for me to find classical music I don't like even though there are a few non classical genres I avoid like the plague (country music, most rock, pop music) but at the moment there are a few pieces I am not keen on by composers I DO like (Rachmaninov's second symphony to be precise). My goal from here is to work out how these pieces work and how I can enjoy them. It's just some kind of weird personality thing I have developed recently to appreciate compositions like the souls of individual human beings, to appreciate all of classical music for what it is whilst still having a sense of my own favourite works and composers. 

One thing I get fussy about is interpretations.....and there ARE interpretation of works which I can be certain that I do not like. Generally they tend to be music from the 18th century and earlier played on 20th century instruments in a 20th century non-HIP style. This is the main chunk of stuff in classical music that I can put in a box labelled 'I don't like.'

My reason for starting this thread now is because of the recent poll asking if anyone gives up on a composer. I was fascinated by how many answered in the affirmative....so now I suppose I am curious about how MUCH of classical music in general you have given up on or just plain old do not like. This includes....

• Recordings
• Pieces of music
• Composers
• Musicians
• Genres/subgenres
• Historical periods in music
• Music from certain countries in particular
• Anything you can think if in the huge world of classical music


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Not Like can also encompass Can't be Bothered With, or Just Don't Have Time For, I should think. If so, on a purely statistical basis, anywhere from 50% to 95% of what I have listened to or started to listen to, I "don't like". More specifically, I don't enjoy overlong pieces, holding that it is a better sign of genius and skill if a classical composer can make a cogent and compelling musical point in a relatively short period of time. To be sure, there are many, many exceptions to this.


----------



## LHB (Nov 1, 2015)

I haven't found anything I've particularily liked by Terry Riley, John Adams, Louis Andriessen, or Nico Muhly.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

It would be very hard to come up with a percentage amount if that's what you're seeking. Even if I could estimate after a lot of research it would be a moving target because my tastes seem to change rapidly.

There are a few things I'll likely never be very interested in however. *Minimalism* is the first to come to mind. What percentage of classical music is minimalism? *Solo mono-voiced instruments* such as violin (double-stops notwithstanding), cello, flute, clarinet or whatever. Those just hold no interest for me.

*Solo acoustic guitar* gets old very quickly also, but I love it in context with an ensemble. However solo piano or other keyboard is great! I'm not sure why there is a difference.

*Percussion ensemble music* such as those by Verese or Cage hold little interest unless there are a lot of pitched percussion such as marimba, vibes or xylophone.

*Overblown rubato or dramatic pauses* come across as mere hesitation that disrupts the flow for me. This rules out a great deal of Chopin and Scriabin and a lot of mid-romantic parlor or salon music, although I do listen occasionally.

Music that is melodic but uses what I deem to be *"wimpy" voice leading*, in other words the melodies comes across as meandering, not going anywhere in particular nor being very bold and adventurous. This rules out Delius, Bridge, and - sorry to say -- a lot of Takemitsu, though again I do listen to these occasionally.

I am usually tepid toward *opera*, though again I have enjoyed the few I have made it through, so this last may be only ignorance, not outright dislike.

That's all I can think of at the moment. What percentage of the entire classical output would would all this total? I have no idea.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I like just about everything, but some more. 

There is, however, a recording of Mozart's Requiem by Gardiner that I don't like.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Well, to take just one genre -- opera -- its has been estimated that roughly 30,000 have been written since 1600, of which I have heard far fewer than 300 (1%), of which there are many I don't care for. So to answer your question, there's more than 99% I either don't like, can't access, or have no opinion about.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> My girlfriend and I had a conversation about music recently, and classical music in particular. So far there is yet to be a composer or a piece of music she doesn't like. She listens to everything, medieval plainchant to the latest electroacoustic music and everything in between not to mention all the non classical genres.


Your girlfriend loves all things aural. Consider yourself a lucky man.


----------



## Guest (Nov 14, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> Not Like can also encompass Can't be Bothered With, or Just Don't Have Time For, I should think.


I would think that these are quite different categories. Maybe related. But the middle one seems a consequence of pure prejudice. The first one might also be, but not like can be fairly neutral as well. Can't be Bothered With sounds solely negative to me.

Just Don't Have Time For is an odd one, so far as I'm concerned. If it's something you know, then sure, but then wouldn't you then just say "Not Like"? Seems to me that Just Don't Have Time For points to things that are not yet known but that you don't want to know. Again, the prejudice idea. So there's the whole business of How Do You Know? That is, how do you know what you don't like about things that you don't know? First you have to get to know them, no? And only then can you say with any confidence "Not Like."

Just Don't Have Time For is also odd because it often points to things that have been deemed second rate or worse. It's often expressed like the wine cliche, there's not enough time for something something and bad wine. But how do you know? A wine that a connoisseur has deemed unworthy might turn out to be the very wine you like very much indeed. And if you get the right connoisseur, that personage will tell you to taste for yourself, thus developing your own tastes.

Just think if I had advised member arpeggio to avoid the music of Bax. Why, I would have steered him away from someone who is in fact one of his favorites. And for why would I want to have done such a thing? I can't imagine anyone liking the music of Herbert Howe. But I have in fact talked to people who assured me that they did. To advise someone to avoid anything is to substitute your tastes for theirs--or, to put it more personally, if you listen to anyone who advises you to avoid anything, you run the risk of avoiding something you might quite like. And for why would you want to do that?


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> II am curious about how MUCH of classical music in general you have given up on or just plain old do not like.


• Recordings

I was about to answer: Nothing! Then, I recalled those switched on and moog albums from the '70s :lol:

• Pieces of music

I'll give pretty much anything another try. If it comes up in discussion and I have the time and I haven't tried for a while, I'm always game for another listen.

• Composers

I've got my favourites, of course, and there are ones I've not been so excited about, but how many works of the latter ones have I really heard? Not many. I made up my mind based on one or a few works that might or might not be representative. Again, given the time and inclination, I'm always open to a reappraisal.

• Musicians

Not being a musician myself, I am not qualified to criticize the playing and performance of musicians. Sure, I have heard of Karajan's 'muddiness' and sometimes I felt that it was bothersome, but I also enjoy his work immensely. Others? Not sure.

• Genres/subgenres

I'll listen to anything and I have had short-lived passions for some unlikely things, like ancient music. I've famously decried minimalism, plainchant and perhaps other genres/subgenres, but just wait until I find something that captivates me. I have my tastes and some of these areas are less on my horizon, but that doesn't exclude them entirely.

My primary passion has been for instrumental music, but I have spent a significant amount of time in the past 12 months listening to and acquiring vocal and opera recordings :lol:

• Historical periods in music

Obviously, Baroque to the present is my main focus, but I have dappled in earlier music and had some major flirtations (Minnesänger, Troubadours).

• Music from certain countries in particular

I'm a little weak on British and American composers, but I am at this very point in time focussing my explorations on some composers from exactly those countries. American, more general survey; British, Elgar and Vaughan Williams specifically.

• Anything you can think if in the huge world of classical music

I'll give it a try, and, if it doesn't work for me right away, I'll try it again sometime. Just to scan my posts here on TC for the past three or so years, you'll find me lambasting something only to end up buying it and praising it to the Heavens (Rachmaninov, Karl Amadeus Hartmann).


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Among others,

minimalism, 
most countertenors & many opera soloists, 
cross-over in the most pop-like style, 
pure gregorian chant, 
some Italian, French & R. Strauss operas,
double bass solo pieces, 
a lot of HIP performances,
some 20-21st Century avant-garde,
period-typical pieces that are too predictable & kitschy in general, especially of the 18-19th centuries sort.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> • Recordings
> • Pieces of music
> • Composers
> • Musicians
> ...


I had broken mine down into vague genres and composers, but let me talk about musicians performers.

I think there is a spectrum of classical music fans between the extremes of those who admire only performers and those who admire only composers. I fall closer to the latter, though there have been some performers who've engaged me above others, and some who are quite the opposite:

Glenn Glould. Too idiosyncratic and downright noisy. I prefer him as a composer actually. He was a fairly good one.

Martha Argerich. Early on I was taken in by her physical beauty and by her Prokofiev interpretations, but I was so disappointed with her rushed blurry Schumann piano concerto I usually avoid any of her work now. I'll stick with Uchida.

Itzhak Perlman. Why is it the most famous of the violinists often have the scratchiest most annoying intonation? I admit to having poor taste if their performances are considered beautiful. (I understand not all performances are striving for beauty, but sometimes the piece seems to call for it.)

There are probably many others. I'm not sure the performer dislikes mean as much toward the percentage of "don't likes" because there will usually be a more acceptable interpretation to replace them for all but the most recent or non-mainstream works.


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

Interesting approach to what can be a contentious topic. I try and give everything at least a chance. If you had asked me a few years ago I would have said I don’t like Bruckner. But now I am starting to understand what he’s doing, at least a little, so I’m working through all the symphonies again and enjoying them quite a bit. So tastes change with time. To answer your list in order:
• Recordings -there are plenty of recordings I can’t stand of works I like. For instance, Colin Davis’ live recording of Belshazzar’s Feast I thought was just dreadful, for both the acoustics and performance, but I love the piece.
• Pieces of music - Wellington’s Victory comes to mind.
• Composers - Plenty. I’ve tried and tried with Webern but his music just grates and I don’t get it.
• Musicians - Lots on certain recordings. But if you mean on everything I’ve ever heard of theirs, probably not.
• Genres/subgenres - There is some modern classical music I don’t care for but I’m not conversant enough to categorize it by genre
• Historical periods in music - There is great music to be found in all periods, including right now.
• Music from certain countries in particular - No
• Anything you can think if in the huge world of classical music -I’ll have to get back to you on that one after I’ve experienced it all (i.e. that will never happen!)


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

A good deal I criticise, although often (in the case of 'great' composers) the balance with other elements overcomes any of the following vulgarities:



Chord banging
High incisive piccolo (or very high ff instruments in general) for the sake of effect, most likely out of tune anyways
Senseless repetition of a banal or dull motif/melody/chord
Pretending you are being contrapuntal when you are actually just writing fugal entries without following them up 
Overblowing a simple melody by dressing it up with all the arsenal at your disposal, not even mentioning adding elements completely strange to it cus that goes under the inconsistency label and that is a capital sin.
Overdoubling and other hallmarks of bad orchestration

I don't like Shostakovich or Schnittke, to name two prominent figures.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Most baroque and earlier composers (notable exceptions Bach, Vivaldi, Victoria) don't really appeal to me - OK to listen to, but not my choice.

There are famous composers that I am ambivalent about. Take Beethoven: plenty of things I love (like symphonies 3-7, violin concerto, string quartets, piano sonatas), but plenty others that I can do without (like symphony 9, Cello sonatas, Triple concerto).

A composer that I should love, but don't is Hugo Wolf (I love the romantic era, and I love Lieder, but Wolf fails to make an impression on me).


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Minimalism like everyone else it feels like, music that have lots of pauses and is just slow I want the sound to continue. That is why I am not so fond of most piano music it feels like the music dies with every hit on the keys when it is too slow.


----------



## Guest (Nov 15, 2015)

Weston said:


> *Percussion ensemble music* such as those by Verese or Cage hold little interest unless there are a lot of pitched percussion such as marimba, vibes or xylophone.


I can honestly only name a tiny handful of percussion pieces that are NOT dominated by pitched percussion. James Dillon wrote a fine piece for a solo drummer, I suppose. John Luther Adams has a couple of percussion cycles in which a couple of the pieces are for drums.

Whereas there is a wealth of fine music for ensembles of primarily pitched percussion. I'll give you the fact that it does seem to be fairly common practice for these pieces to "change color" with time; Dufourt's _Erewhon_, for instance, begins with a focus on timpani and other "skins" but quickly progresses to a brilliantly colorful movement for mallets and chimes.


----------



## Guest (Nov 15, 2015)

joen_cph said:


> double bass solo pieces


Xenakis. Scelsi. Dumitrescu. Listen and repent.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

I like most classical music. The ones I dislike are the extreme forms of modernism verging on experimentalism and serialism music that are more interesting to read/study on score.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

@some guy:

"Can't be Bothered With"--aleatoric music: heard a little, but don't want to chance it. Serial music: heard a little, prefer my serial in a bowl, clearly defined, with milk, sugar or honey, maybe some fruit.

"Don't Have Time For"--long-winded symphonies that strain my patience waiting for the composer to make a point. And sometimes the point never comes.

These are all subjective impressions, to be sure. To each his/her own. You go your way; I'll go mine. De gustibus, etc........


----------



## Antiquarian (Apr 29, 2014)

I like nearly all classical music, but there was a stage of my life when I chiefly listened to Baroque, and didn't listen to modern. This lasted for a few years, until one of my friends loaned me a copy of Magnus Lindberg's Clarinet Concerto, with an urgent plea to give it a try. So I did. Now I listen to a great deal of modernist music, but Bach will always have a special place in my heart. As to actively disliking a composers work, I really can't say there is one, other than Terry Riley' s music.


----------



## Guest (Nov 15, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> @some guy:
> 
> "Can't be Bothered With"--aleatoric music: heard a little, but don't want to chance it. Serial music: heard a little, prefer my serial in a bowl, clearly defined, with milk, sugar or honey, maybe some fruit.
> 
> ...


I wasn't talking about you and your tastes, however, or about me and my tastes. I was talking about the categories. I see the three you mentioned as being synonymous as being quite different and distinct, that's all.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

some guy said:


> I see the three you mentioned as being synonymous as being quite different and distinct, that's all.


How's this: I did not post that my two proposed categories were synonymous (your term) with Do Not Like, but were, rather, subcategories within Do Not Like, as Canada and Mexico are subcategories within and members of the larger category of North America. Perhaps a fine point either way. I thought I'd use my own examples of aleatoric and serial as aids to distinguishing the subcategories.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Weston said:


> Martha Argerich. Early on I was taken in by her physical beauty and by her Prokofiev interpretations, but I was so disappointed with her rushed blurry Schumann piano concerto I usually avoid any of her work now. I'll stick with Uchida.


it's strange, recently I watched the movie about her made by her daughter, and at one point she says that without a doubt Schumann is her favorite composer and the one for whom she feels the deepest affinity.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

norman bates said:


> it's strange, recently I watched the movie about her made by her daughter, and at one point she says that without a doubt Schumann is her favorite composer and the one for whom she feels the deepest affinity.


Then if her affinity is fact based, perhaps Schumann himself was unaware of what qualities make his music appealing, at least to me. I find this often to be the case with non-classical musicians too in interviews wherein it seems their own perceived failures are cooler to me than their perceived successes.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

nathanb said:


> I can honestly only name a tiny handful of percussion pieces that are NOT dominated by pitched percussion. James Dillon wrote a fine piece for a solo drummer, I suppose. John Luther Adams has a couple of percussion cycles in which a couple of the pieces are for drums.
> 
> Whereas there is a wealth of fine music for ensembles of primarily pitched percussion. I'll give you the fact that it does seem to be fairly common practice for these pieces to "change color" with time; Dufourt's _Erewhon_, for instance, begins with a focus on timpani and other "skins" but quickly progresses to a brilliantly colorful movement for mallets and chimes.


I was thinking of Varese's Ionization and Cage's Water Walk. While both of these pieces use a piano and somewhat tuned percussion or percussive sounds, they are not works I can enjoy on a regular basis. I greatly enjoy other pieces by these composers however. I suppose that is indeed less than a handful.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Never say never! Tastes and attitudes change over time. I'll be damned if the Calidore Quartet hasn't gotten me into Mendelssohn. I'm heading to the library this afternoon to pick up the Pacifica, and Emerson recordings of the quartets. I'm hooked on the A Minor, Op. 13 quartet. Such a brilliant piece of music written at age 18.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Throwing my own two cents into the pile:

• Recordings: I'm not big on "historic" recordings. Even if the performance is great, I can't help but be distracted by the hissing. And listening to it off my laptop or iPod just sounds out of place
• Pieces of music: There are so many that it would be tedious to list them. But I guess a better way of describing this would be music I'm indifferent to, instead of just 'not liking". Out of major works, if I had to choose the ones I've listened to and kind of shrugged off, I would say Orff's Carmina Burana, Holst's The Planets, Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition, and Beethoven's 4th symphony
• Composers: Same as above, there are many composers that I'm more indifferent to. 
• Musicians: None that come to mind. I guess I tend to be more biased against newer musicians, just because I tend to judge them based off of what I already know; the performances of yesterday
• Genres/subgenres: I'm not that big on opera. Not that i don't like opera, I just don't have the patience for it. The operas that I do listen to are either short [i.e. Strauss' Salome] or has catchy melodies [i.e. Mozart's Magic Flute]. Same goes for ballet; my favorite ballets are either short [Stravinsky Rite of Spring] or have great memorable melodies [Ravel's Daphnis et Chloe; Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet]
• Historical periods in music: I guess I'm not much a fan of anything before the Baroque era. From the Baroque era I only really pay attention to Bach and Vivaldi, then from the Classical era, I focus on late period composers. From the 20th century I don't listen to much serialism
• Music from certain countries in particular: Don't really like much English music, aside from Vaughan Williams, Britten, or Elgar. But I'm rarely in the mood for them.
• Anything you can think if in the huge world of classical music: I think that's enough from me


----------



## Autocrat (Nov 14, 2014)

*Recordings*: those damned "Hits of the Classics" types, with snippets of popular classics filling both sides of the cassette. Or Chopin piano tunes arranged for orchestra. Or a not-actually-by-Bach Toccata & Fugue arranged for orchestra.

*Composers*: I can't come at

J. Strauss 1 or 2
Franz Lehar
Erik Satie
Rossini
Obscure baroque composers. There's a reason why the only people who have heard of them are obsessives.

*Genre*: I will not waste my time with

Operetta
Opera
Anything written to dance to. Except for _Le Sacre du printemps_, to which it is very difficult to dance.
American military music. Seriously grinds my goat.
French parlour music.
Bombasticism. Not technically a genre, or even a real word, but whatever. 

In addition, if it features a piano accordion it is not allowed into my life. Same with out of tune tubular bells (ie. all of them).


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

> Obscure baroque composers. There's a reason why the only people who have heard of them are obsessives.


This I agree on :clap:


----------



## Guest (Nov 16, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> Not Like can also encompass Can't be Bothered With, or Just Don't Have Time For, I should think. If so, on a purely statistical basis, anywhere from 50% to 95% of what I have listened to or started to listen to, I "don't like". More specifically, I don't enjoy overlong pieces, holding that it is a better sign of genius and skill if a classical composer can make a cogent and compelling musical point in a relatively short period of time. To be sure, there are many, many exceptions to this.


Life's Too Short? (a variation on JDHTF)

As for my own response to the OP, "How much....?" Very little, if I'm to be fair to that which I've never heard or heard only a little. Take Brahms. I've listened to one symphony, twice. Did it make an impression of any sort? Not really, though obviously not an instant favourable one. Can/Should I say I don't like it? Yes/No.

Satie and Debussy aside, I favour symphonies, and there are so many symphonists that they're going to keep me pretty busy for a while, so I don't have the inclination to explore the as-yet unexplored. Why waste time 'not liking' anything, when there's still so much to spend time liking?


----------



## Chris (Jun 1, 2010)

I can suggest a remedy for dislike of particular composers. I have found this effective in most cases. Don't make a judgment on music you have heard for free. Buy a CD or download, or pay for a concert ticket. I have found that when something has cost me money I have an incentive to enjoy it, otherwise I will be left with the horrible feeling of being had for a mug. I have learned to enjoy nearly all the CDs I have bought. Off the top of my head the only CDs I can think that still bore me are both organ music by Jehan Alain.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

MacLeod said:


> Take Brahms. I've listened to one symphony, twice. Did it make an impression of any sort? Not really, though obviously not an instant favourable one. Can/Should I say I don't like it? Yes/No.


I think one's answer would depend on whether one considers dislike an active state, comparable to like, or rather merely what the residue is when like is absent. Under the first condition, perhaps indifference can occupy a legitimate middle place separating like from dislike. Under the second, indifference becomes the earliest manifestation of dislike, and so one could say that you dislike the Brahms symphony, as you have listened to it twice and it made no impression on you. A contrary viewpoint was held by Diaghilev, who counseled Prokofiev, "in matters of art, you have to learn to hate, otherwise your own music will lose all its personality." It may be that Diaghilev eliminated indifference entirely from the spectrum; one was to either to love or hate, actively.


----------



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

Composers: Sullivan (although there are a couple of non-stage works I liked).

Timeline: I know it's probably nonsense to have a Year Zero as one era tends to have some kind of connective tissue to the one which precedes it but I'm not interested in anything that came before the early 1700s.

Instruments: guitar/lute, especially baroque/classical-era and earlier.

Solo voices: countertenor (I can just about put up with it in certain works of Handel)/falsetto.

Recordings: mono, unless it's for small forces.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Some posts were removed due to inappropriate content and others were deleted because they quoted deleted posts.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Richannes Wrahms said:


> A good deal I criticise, although often (in the case of 'great' composers) the balance with other elements overcomes any of the following vulgarities:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dude, your posts are awesome. I don't think Stravinsky is overblowing simple melodies with pointless arsenal, however...

Also didn't Mozart often write fugatos? What's wrong with fugatos?


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Dude, your posts are awesome. I don't think Stravinsky is overblowing simple melodies with pointless arsenal, however...
> 
> Also didn't Mozart often write fugatos? What's wrong with fugatos?


Gotta give Richannes ample credit for having incredibly specific and consistent ideas about what he considers good musics.

Because I am afraid of running out of good music to enjoy, I happily take in some of the faults he's mentioned and overlook them for the positive qualities. If you are to be a reliable critic, it's good to keep sight of those positive qualities and not mistake the negative qualities as being being good when they are thrown in with the package.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

As far as dislikes...

• Recordings - The only thing I could answer on this is that after years of listening and pondering I generally avoid any HIP style performances with period instruments. I still don't believe that if any composer from the 18th century popped into the modern era and heard a modern sized orchestra with modern instruments that they would choose to ever hear their compositions played any other way. Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, etc. were all far too visionary and far too forward thinking in pushing boundaries that I can't believe they would ever every want to go "backwards".

• Musicians - I avoid some, but it's because of artistic differences. Like Daniel Barenboim, he's an immensely talented pianist but many of his ideas and artistic vision of certain composers I just don't agree with. Doesn't mean I don't respect him, I just will avoid him and some others when it comes to certain composers.

• Anything you can think of in the huge world of classical music - I'll be the first to admit I'm somewhat conservative. I like melodies, I like tunes. I like everything from Gregorian Chant to Wagner. I also like some stuff that goes outside the box so to speak. The only thing I really don't like is when people try to be "weird" just to be "weird" for no other reason that to try to be "different" because they don't like what they think of as something more mainstream. If someone wants to write a sonata for a "rubber band" or a "cardboard box" go ahead and knock yourself out, it's your life, but it's not something I'm going to listen too. And I'm not talking about modern composers or what people sometimes call the "atonal" composers, etc. Webern proved he was great when I heard his Passacaglia, Schoenberg when I heard his Transfigured Night, Schnittke when I heard the beginning of his 2nd movement of his 1st Symphony, Bartok when I heard his Dance Suite, etc. They were great composers. I might not like everything they composed, but they were all great composers. Occasionally I've seen or heard things though where it was just someone going "hey listen to me, I'm great because I'm different" and there was no substance there and that's the kind of stuff I'm referring too.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

There's certainly plenty of music I don't like, but it's clustered in the category of "modern music I haven't yet learned to like." Maybe I never will, but additional listening seems to continually lower the number of works/composers in the category. 

There is a very specific feature of music that I dislike that is rather curious. High pitched, very dissonant music is extremely unpleasant to me. Ligeti's Atmospheres has a section where a long rising dissonant pitch eventually ends with a very low, almost cosmic sound. I can barely listen to the full rising pitch. It feels physically unpleasant. After listening to similar sounds, my ears seemingly need to rest. Gubaidulina has similar sounds in her works (e.g. violin concerto, I believe). When I hear music with those sounds, I turn it off and move on.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

mmsbls said:


> There's certainly plenty of music I don't like, but it's clustered in the category of "modern music I haven't yet learned to like." Maybe I never will, but additional listening seems to continually lower the number of works/composers in the category.
> 
> There is a very specific feature of music that I dislike that is rather curious. High pitched, very dissonant music is extremely unpleasant to me. Ligeti's Atmospheres has a section where a long rising dissonant pitch eventually ends with a very low, almost cosmic sound. I can barely listen to the full rising pitch. It feels physically unpleasant. After listening to similar sounds, my ears seemingly need to rest. Gubaidulina has similar sounds in her works (e.g. violin concerto, I believe). When I hear music with those sounds, I turn it off and move on.


Interestingly enough, my dad has that problem. He's fine with any level of dissonance and complexity (Ferneyhough) and even electronic or real life-ish sounds (Dhomont, Dufour) but any sort of high pitched sine wave or very harsh bowing (i.e. Crumb's Black Angels) is a real problem.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Interestingly enough, my dad has that problem. He's fine with any level of dissonance and complexity (Ferneyhough) and even electronic or real life-ish sounds (Dhomont, Dufour) but any sort of high pitched sine wave or very harsh bowing (i.e. Crumb's Black Angels) is a real problem.


Sid James told me that I might have something called hyperacusis, which covers a broader range of symptoms. Luckily relatively few works seem to bother me in that way so I don't have to set aside a large chunk of music. Certain composers seem to utilize such sounds more than others, and I tend to listen less to them.


----------

