# Unworthy!



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

The next concert that our 'home group' Norwich Baroque is performing is at Norwich Cathedral with the Cathedral singers & choirmaster. It is Bach's St Matthew Passion. And we are not going! Why, one may ask, when we are Christians, Bach fans, and paid up Friends of Norwich Baroque?

It's because - ahem -  - we think we would be bored!

No criticism of Bach intended. It's us - as listeners, we just aren't up to the job!

I'd be interested to know if there are any works which you sincerely admire but just can't sit through because you don't have the right knowledge, patience, concentration or mind-set. What music are you 'unworthy' of, and why? 

Note that this is not a thread for rubbishing the music - only for self-rubbishing the listener, if you feel inclined. Thanks in advance for any replies. :tiphat:

I feel a lot better now for owning up. It's a fair cop, guv!


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

Gluck's operas!
I'm sorry for Gluck's lovers, I sincerely admire his operas (being milestones in the history of this genre) but I find them very boring.


----------



## MrTortoise (Dec 25, 2008)

I walked out of a performance of "Der Rosenkavalier" once. The music was making me downright agitated. At the time I felt the music was so excessive. I have a feeling now my reaction would be very different, especially now that I have warmed up to opera in general and I love Strauss's orchestral music.

Ingélou: I recently listened to the entire b minor mass and felt going into the listening session that I would be bored but was instead surprised by how engaged I stayed through the listening session. There was such a variety of music there, so gloriously beautiful, I basked in the wondrous creatively. Are you so sure you are unworthy? ;-)


----------



## Guest (Jan 30, 2014)

I couldn't be bothered to attend concerts for any number of large scale works, from Beethoven's Symphonies all the way through to Handel, Mozart, Wagner, especially if they were put on by amateur groups. 

I rarely attend concerts of any description. Those days are long gone. I'm easily disturbed by some of the oinks that tend to turn up at these events (i.e. people who treat it mainly as social outing rather than for serious listening), with their last minute shuffling, loud whispering, stupid applause mid way through works etc. 

I can't stand any of that, which is why I acquired a decent hi-fi system so as to be able to enjoy it all at home, where the performances sound far better to me. Besides, I'm normally more happy listening to something like a Monteverdi madrigal or sacred motet, than any of these orchestral or choral magnum opuses that some people go into raptures about. If it was a major choral work, I would definitely prefer to listen at home, so that I could stop it when it suited me.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Different strokes for different folks. I think I remember you (ingelou) love Handel's Messiah - now that's a work I cannot stand listening to at all. Both major Bach passions are must-listens for me. And if there were a decent live performance near-by, I'd definitely go. Although frankly it may help that I speak German.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

There's a big difference between "important" and interesting at a personal level. I know there's a lot of important early music but I don't want to hear it. I'm getting Bach more and more so I'm wothying up in that department.

Important pre Mozart opera is really a blindspot for me as what I've heard doesn't do anything for me, and I even struggle with the da Ponte operas as I now they do musicologically important things and give many people delight but they don't seem as full of tunes and interest to me as Seraglio, Tito and Zauberflote. I'm not wholly convinced by Mahler and Shostakovich has largely passed me by. Minimalism may be important but really it seems to me more like a nominally non-pop genre to appeal to the "better sensibilities" of New York art-collecting stock-brokers

I am definitely not worthy of lieder - its simple and direct presentation cannot hold me. although I did have some joy with Hans Zender's composed interpretation which added the spice I needed to appreciated the ideas in the original Schubert:


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

The most tedious concert I've ever had to sit through was Verdi's Requiem, which, come to think of it I never do in one sitting on cd. I would have left half way through but I was on a date. With a deaf woman. True story.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

It could be more convenient for people just to listen at home to something. When you have a great orchestra/singers on cd it might seem not seem that encouraging to go out in the cold and rain to go to see local performers in an environment less comfy than your own home.

But with music which is more a challenge I don't think there has to be any rush. I haven't liked all of the Hammerklavier that much (love the first half), the Diabelli Variations, Wagner and opera in general I haven't loved that much yet. But I hardly worry about it. Why does there have to be an imperative to like something straight away when there's so many other things I can enjoy right now? This idea of having to like something now even if it isn't your preference is silly. Why should anyone have to force themselves to get to know something, it's better to explore what you enjoy not what others make you feel you should have to hear. 

Those who post threads saying they haven't liked something and need help aren't actually that interested in it otherwise they wouldn't have the need to ask advice, they'd just listen to more of a composer/style until they understood it. Better to keep to what you WANT to listen to, surely music is for enjoyment and not just to impress someone else.

edit: and I should hastily add lol that I am not looking for recommendations. I have already done my research on all that so I know the variety of things I can listen to. But I will do so when I am ready and not before.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Verdi*

As I have stated before in other threads, when the Verdi train left the station I was not on it.

There are a few exceptions, but it bothers me that I can not stand such a great composer. At time, for me, his music can be very silly.

The exceptions are the _Requiem_ and the _Overture to La forza del destino_ and a few isolated arias.

There are many operas that I love the music but can not stand live performances. For example, Wagner's _Tristan and Isolde_. I have seen two live performances and Yuck! Fifteen minutes of "I love you. Oh rapture. I love you. Oh rapture" was too much for me. Yeah I get. You have the hots for her. Just shut up and go ahead and ..... her. 

P. S. I learned a long time ago that just because I do not like something does it mean it is bad.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I become restless sitting through the Passions and most of the cantatas of Bach, but could listen to Handel's Messiah (historically informed, original instruments) all day.

However, my other qualities are good.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

There is a lot of music that makes me seem "unworthy". Most of what I listen to these days is background music. It's the only way I can get through things like the Goldberg Variations or Bach's solo violin music. If I had to sit and concentrate, I'm afraid I'd be bored.

I never listen to Wagner's operas in any kind of conditions because you can't have that as background music.

(some jesting here...read at your own risk)


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

I was worried I'd be bored at Parsifal - or if not bored, unable to keep my eyes from drooping into sleep.
You know what - the whole experience was so mesmerising and the music so powerful - the 5 hours flew by and I would have stayed for an Act III encore 

I think you should go and you may surprise yourself. You could always leave at the interval


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I couldn't sit through _Tristan und Isolde _. When I first dived into opera it was the complete ring cycle (not live but on DVD) roughly in one week, and I was riveted. But T&I did nothing whatsoever for me. Couldn't keep my eyes open.


----------



## howemj (Jan 30, 2014)

I don't know it if was a bad performance, but the one time I heard Brahms' German Requiem I thought it was as boring as could be. Slightly ashamed of myself, I am most definitely not worthy...


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

SimonNZ said:


> The most tedious concert I've ever had to sit through was Verdi's Requiem, which, come to think of it I never do in one sitting on cd. I would have left half way through but I was on a date. With a deaf woman. True story.


I sometimes wish, for certain entries, there was a sort of badge with a ribbon we could set by the post, like a minor award rating. These things that come up, like attending a concert of the Verdi Requiem with your date a deaf woman, need that little something more in the way of approval than a mere "like."

Of course, the hysterical conjecture / question is -- 
was the concert held in a late enough "modern" time that there was a signing translator standing to the side, signing away in Latin? and that projected onto a large screen(s) behind the chorus?
We need to know these things.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

MagneticGhost said:


> I was worried I'd be bored at Parsifal - or if not bored, unable to keep my eyes from drooping into sleep.
> You know what - the whole experience was so mesmerising and the music so powerful - the 5 hours flew by and I would have stayed for an Act III encore
> 
> I think you should go and you may surprise yourself. You could always leave at the interval


Words of wisdom. I'm with MG, I think you two should go! "We think we would be bored" does not qualify as a good excuse ~imo~.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I shouldn't admit this publicly. The Nashville Symphony did Mahler's 8th, and I didn't go. The second half doesn't grab me, and I would have left at the intermission. Considering the price, I didn't want to pay all that money for half a concert. 

One part of me is still kicking the other part for missing the experience.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Over two hours of dully protestant counterpoint with equally dull to dreary new testament texts set to that music as performed all on a cold winter day by a local group in a drafty cathedral with hard wooden benches as seating? 

I commend you on your sanity and staying away from any such illness


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

petrb said:


> over two hours of dully protestant counterpoint with equally dull to dreary new testament texts set to that music, as performed all on a cold winter day by a local group in a drafty cathedral with hard wooden benches as seating?
> 
> I commend you on your sanity and staying away from any such illness


lol!! ......................


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

The piece I feel this way about is Beethoven's _Missa Solemnis_. I have tried it many times, but it still remains something of a mystery to me. On the one hand I like the way it has a sort of through-composed feel to it, because it reminds me of the masses from the olden days. On the other hand, the piece sometimes seem to just wander around with no melodies or motifs holding it place.


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

I think that not much is to be gained from the cutting-off of one's experiences. Death, presumably, does that for us; why contribute to its grim mission? At the very least, Ingélou, if the performance is dreadful one way or another, you can always enjoy the sweet, self-congratulatory reflection (nothing like it, really) that you were indeed right in thinking you shouldn't go.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

I have to admit, I have a lot more patience for *unfamiliar long works* of modern and contemporary music than I do for those of previous periods. I suspect this is because I know that I don't know what I'm going to find, whereas time spent listening to a Bach keyboard cycle, for example, can be something of a bore as I can often tell where the music is going before it gets there, the same goes for a Mozart opera or one of Schubert's gargantuan song cycles. Of course, that doesn't stop me from listening to a Mahler symphony for the umpteenth time, I have found enough within the music over time that I feel I will be rewarded with yet more repeat listens, so I carry on.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Manxfeeder said:


> I shouldn't admit this publicly. The Nashville Symphony did Mahler's 8th, and I didn't go. The second half doesn't grab me, and I would have left at the intermission. Considering the price, I didn't want to pay all that money for half a concert.
> 
> One part of me is still kicking the other part for missing the experience.


I did attend a performance of the Mahler 8th, and my opinion / take on it was parallel to yours. I think I could have walked out after the first half 'happy,' but that is said easily, well after the fact, because I did 'sit through it.'*

I have done and do edit live concerts I attend, and am the happier for doing it. There is a tendency for many to sit there, thinking of what it cost to sit there, without realizing they are adding spent time (not 'a good time') on to money already less than perfectly spent, which only adds to the loss which will not be 'made up' by sitting there 

Other than it is spent time _(and, as Einstein proved, Time = Money _, then it is very near the same as "throwing good money after bad."

*ADD P.s. I did manage the 'whole thing' when listening to a recording of the LSO with a host of fine singer soloists under the direction of Giuseppe Sinopoli, though I still think, same as before, this work is highly imbalanced in quality from part I to part II.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> I think that not much is to be gained from the cutting-off of one's experiences. Death, presumably, does that for us; why contribute to its grim mission? At the very least, Ingélou, if the performance is dreadful one way or another, you can always enjoy the sweet, self-congratulatory reflection (nothing like it, really) that you were indeed right in thinking you shouldn't go.


One could better plan for a more optimum experience, wait and find a non-local performance (local is very 'handy' while, maybe in the light of the following proposal, a tad too passive), make a day trip of it, and go to what would be more promising in the way of each venue, performing ensemble and conductor. Then the whole might be especially memorable, and more worth the time.


----------



## Guest (Jan 30, 2014)

I see what you're saying Ingélou, but I think you should go, I mean come on, it's Bach, performed live in a great cathedral, with pro players on original instruments too, no? It would help if you could sit fairly close to the players, for the acoustics. And eat well beforehand. You can't beat great music played live, but on an empty stomach the finest harmonies and counterpoint don't cut it.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

...wrongly posted in this thread, meant for another thread / topic entirely. My apologies to all...


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Thanks for all the posts so far, everyone.
No problem, PetrB, by the way... :cheers:


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Ingélou said:


> (my italics)
> 
> Excuse me?  Which 'glaring missed take' is that? I was not aware that I turned the fact that I might be bored by St Matthew Passion into an attack on Bach's music. On the contrary, I made it clear a) that I like & admire Bach and b) that we all have our likes and dislikes, and it's interesting to look into ourselves and see why that should be.
> 
> ...


BEGGING YOUR PARDON, the post, triggered by a comment here, went tangentially to another thread completely. My major oversight. I've deleted this post above, as is non sequitur in this thread! My profuse apologies to you for the misunderstanding caused by my mistake!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I once went to hear with my wife the Bach cello suites (half of them in an evening) at the Wigmore Hall. I thought it might be a long evening but I was riveted!

One concert I watched and turned off was Mahler's Second. Bored stiff!


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Ye should always attend to the end, armed with overripe tomatoes, if need be.


----------



## Guest (Jan 30, 2014)

Vaneyes said:


> Ye should always attend to the end, armed with overripe tomatoes, if need be.


Good Lord, Vaneyes, you're _*so*_ 18th century!

[Add "smiling icon" indicating to trigger-happy moderators that this comment is intended as light-hearted repartée with Vaneyes.]


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

TalkingHead, I bow to your sensitivities. Prepare to e-device them instead.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Ingélou said:


> The next concert that our 'home group' Norwich Baroque is performing is at Norwich Cathedral with the Cathedral singers & choirmaster. It is Bach's St Matthew Passion. And we are not going! Why, one may ask, when we are Christians, Bach fans, and paid up Friends of Norwich Baroque?
> 
> It's because - ahem -  - we think we would be bored!


With the help of a friend on another forum, I now have on my iPod abbreviated versions of the St Matthew and St John Passions, each at about 55 minutes. They don't drag, don't bore! I'm sure Bach wouldn't be too happy, but he's not around from what I hear.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

There are three things putting me off. One is the element of *compulsion*, that I have to like St Matthew Passion because it's baroque and because it's religious, just like me; one is that it's *long*; and the third that it's in a Cathedral & not in summer, and I'm still *traumatised* from having to go with Granny to Freezing Ripon Cathedral & listen to Stainer's Crucifixion forty years ago! 

I know I should give it a go. 
But if I don't, I can enjoy feeling free, *free as a bird*.









Whereas if I go, and I am 'enduring' it, rather than enjoying it, I shall feel trapped, an 'oh no' moment, like the time I told Taggart, when we went up years later, how Mum & I had got lost coming down Kinnoull Hill near Perth when I was fourteen, and my husband nevertheless insisted on going down the less well-known way and there we were, lost again. *

Oh n-o-o-o-o!*


----------



## Guest (Jan 30, 2014)

I feel "unworthy" is the wrong word. I prefer "unfit for a full, continuous listen."


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

arcaneholocaust said:


> I feel "unworthy" is the wrong word. I prefer "unfit for a full, continuous listen."


More accurate - and more serious too; just not as snappy!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> I think that not much is to be gained from the cutting-off of one's experiences. Death, presumably, does that for us; why contribute to its grim mission? At the very least, Ingélou, if the performance is dreadful one way or another, you can always enjoy the sweet, self-congratulatory reflection (nothing like it, really) that you were indeed right in thinking you shouldn't go.


On the contrary, editing by choice some experiences which may for you resemble death (or a kind of hell in all but physical reality is part of staving off the grim reaper and making the best use of your time before death does take you!


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

"Unworthy" is OK with me.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Les Troyens, Grande messe des morts, Italian opera


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

I know I should give it a go. 
But if I don't, I can enjoy feeling free, *free as a bird*.

View attachment 33871


Whereas if I go, and I am 'enduring' it, rather than enjoying it, I shall feel trapped, an 'oh no' moment, like the time I told Taggart, when we went up years later, how Mum & I had got lost coming down Kinnoull Hill near Perth when I was fourteen, and my husband nevertheless insisted on going down the less well-known way and there we were, lost again. *

Oh n-o-o-o-o!* [/QUOTE]

OK - but also to be considered: won't it be the social _faux pas _of the season if you do not attend? (Oh! The obloquy!, The opprobrium! The barely audible whisperings..."philis...sshhhhh")


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

PetrB said:


> On the contrary, editing by choice some experiences which may for you resemble death (or a kind of hell in all but physical reality is part of staving off the grim reaper and making the best use of your time before death does take you!


I'd be inclined to agree but I have to say that more times than not - when faced with events I would have initially preferred not to go to and yet did - I found the experience to be well worth it, and that's even more true re: concerts. Perhaps I've been luckier than others or more open to the experience (or possibly easier to please!)


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

I've seen a couple of Saint Matthew Passions that were a struggle for most to get through, not least of all for the poor performers, who, unless they're the Monteverdi Choir, are going to be showing signs of serious fatigue, as they were at my concerts, as the two hour mark approaches, which will feed into audience fatigue.

Yeah, I like supporting concerts, but there have been plenty of occasions where I just couldn't face it for whatever reason.

Also at church concerts they don't sell champaigne at half time, so if your interest is waning you can spend the second half in a happy state of free-association.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bach took no prisoners.

Both he and Beethoven made some extremely cruel demands on performers.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> I'd be inclined to agree but I have to say that more times than not - when faced with events I would have initially preferred not to go to and yet did - I found the experience to be well worth it, and that's even more true re: concerts. Perhaps I've been luckier than others or more open to the experience (or possibly easier to please!)


I will generally advocate a live performance, barring not so great performers, most of the time. Getting out, dealing with all the transport, the audience is also part of being in the quick vs. not. But a 'dutiful' attendance because a work is revered? No, you are already burdened so you will not really hear or enjoy it. It is a pity we all don't have an option to spontaneously, near last minute, "just decide to go hear something."

But _*to go out and attend live*_ vs. sitting at home and listening to any of your collection of recorded "world-class" performances, as James Joyce has Molly Bloom more than affirming, 
*"...yes I said yes I will Yes,"*


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Just been to see Shakespeare's Coriolanus in a broadcast transmission at the cinema. I thought it was utterly gripping. Sadly my wife fell asleep and missed the ending!


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Bach took no prisoners.
> 
> Both he and Beethoven made some extremely cruel demands on performers.


But Berlioz was worse than both put together (he said, with a sick sense of pride).


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> But Berlioz was worse than both put together (he said, with a sick sense of pride).


"The worst musician among the musical geniuses." -- Maurice Ravel, on Hector Berlioz


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

re: the OP:

Lack of attendance at pretty much every passing opera production is probably my least defensible omission. I saw a Don Giovanni last year, but before that it was a Orfeo ed Euridice maybe ten years before.

In my mind I always have the idea of the acting, sets and effects being worse that amatuer dramatic and heading into "Panto" territory, and the "make it relevant" concept/setting completely at odds with the text, which is like a red rag to a bull for me.

Doubtless many would be much better than I expected if I bothered to show up, but the idea of sitting through just one of those..._shudder_


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

KenOC said:


> "The worst musician among the musical geniuses." -- Maurice Ravel, on Hector Berlioz


Sadly, true. To me, it makes his achievement all the more remarkable. Fantastic Symphony, indeed.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Les Troyens puts that ridiculous comment to bed in a hurry. Ravel wished he could do anything that great.


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Les Troyens puts that ridiculous comment to bed in a hurry. Ravel wished he could do anything that great.


The French love _bons mots _ and sometimes the truth bends a little to accommodate or even sharpen the witticism but it's true that Berlioz was no performing musician in the way say Beethoven or Brahms or in fact many composers were. Much as I love Ravel, you're right, there is no single Ravel work as great as _Les Troyens _ or five or six others of Berlioz's you can point out as being great. Biographer Hugh Macdonald is quite an advocate for his _L'enfance du Christ_ and I agree - though still underappreciated. Copland wrote a perceptive essay on Berlioz in 1960 in which he sees a Berlioz revival, I think it's still brewing, but I am heartened by the number of his fans in TC!


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> Much as I love Ravel, you're right, there is no single Ravel work as great as _Les Troyens _ or five or six others of Berlioz's you can point out as being great.


I'd have to disagree with you there, I don't think Berlioz composed anything as great as _Daphnis et Chloe_.

Berlioz was perhaps more innovative, but in all other applicable categories I think Ravel was clearly the better composer.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Shows you've never heard Les Troyens. Just the Trojan March by itself puts anything Ravel wrote to shame.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> The French love _bons mots _ and sometimes the truth bends a little to accommodate or even sharpen the witticism but it's true that Berlioz was no performing musician in the way say Beethoven or Brahms or in fact many composers were. Much as I love Ravel, *you're right, there is no single Ravel work as great as Les Troyens* or five or six others of Berlioz's you can point out as being great. Biographer Hugh Macdonald is quite an advocate for his _L'enfance du Christ_ and I agree - though still underappreciated. Copland wrote a perceptive essay on Berlioz in 1960 in which he sees a Berlioz revival, I think it's still brewing, but I am heartened by the number of his fans in TC!


Yes. Folks who put down Berlioz probably never even heard Les Troyens, a work comparable in greatness, length and melodic beauty to Wagner's Gotterdammerung.

To even suggest that the certainly pleasant enough Daphnis and Chloe should be mentioned in the same breath as one of the greatest operas ever written, Les Troyens.... Absolument absurde!!!!


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

hpowders said:


> To even suggest that the sleep-inducing Daphnis and Chloe should be mentioned in the same breath as one of the greatest operas ever written, Les Troyens.... Absolument absurde!!!!


Daphnis et Chloé is Beauty.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

hpowders said:


> To even suggest that the certainly _pleasant enough_ N.B originally "sleep inducing" Daphnis and Chloe should be mentioned in the same breath as one of the greatest operas ever written, Les Troyens.... Absolument absurde!!!!


It seems a lot of very great (French only?) music puts you to sleep, unless it is large, loud and near melodramatic 

_Daphnis et Chloe_ is a masterpiece, (that excludes any differential when it comes to the definition of masterpiece, _La nuit, tous les chats sont gris_) -- and so are the two _piano concerti_, and his opera _L'enfant et les sortileges_.

If tunesmithery was _the_ criterion for great, Paul McCartney might get that title over many a great classical composer.

More than any other work, I still thank Berlioz for _Les nuits d'été_ anytime I think of it or hear it, and to him and that piece, imo, all of music owes a tip of the hat. The rest of his works, kinda hit and miss and or downhill, imo, natch.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Can Paul McCartney read music? I've heard he cannot. If that's true, it must be terribly frustrating to depend so much on people to bring your work to life.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Can Paul McCartney read music? I've heard he cannot. If that's true, it must be terribly frustrating to depend so much on people to bring your work to life.


No, he can not, and is perhaps even a little proud of that, though that is hard for some to imagine.

BUT: if Stockhausen, the Darmstadt boys and girls, and the Columbia Princeton crowd which included Mario Davidovsky and Vladimir Ussachevksy had not lobbied to change copyright laws so that notation was no longer required, someone would have had to transcribe all the Beatles' material into notation for them to obtain copyright. (Pop record companies were used to having musicians and composers who could not read or notate; they kept a working list of free-lance musicians who could transcribe the music into notation.)

Recorded versions were accepted near the time the Beatles arrived on the scene (maybe that was later, but I'm too lazy to look it up.)

For his Cantata, McCartney sang, whistled and plucked or plunked out the tunes and maybe some other parts to a staff of hired composers, who transcribed and scored it.

If you have the wild luck to make a bundle as a pops composer / performer, you can afford to hire others to do this work for you.

Contrasting that, Peter Gabriel enrolled and went back to school well into the mid-point of his successful career. He earned a doctorate of music.


----------



## kangxi (Jan 24, 2014)

Ingélou said:


> *traumatised* from having to go with Granny to Freezing Ripon Cathedral & listen to Stainer's Crucifixion forty years ago!


I'm sure you all know this hoary old joke but I'll tell it anyway. A music student some time ago in the early 20C was asked in an exam: "What do you think of Stainer's Crucifixion? To which he replied: "It's a bloody good idea."


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Ingélou said:


> The next concert that our 'home group' Norwich Baroque is performing is at Norwich Cathedral with the Cathedral singers & choirmaster. It is Bach's St Matthew Passion. And we are not going! Why, one may ask, when we are Christians, Bach fans, and paid up Friends of Norwich Baroque?
> 
> It's because - ahem -  - we think we would be bored!
> 
> ...


Reading through this thread, its no surprising to me that vocal music of large scale (choral and opera) are often mentioned in relation to your question. I'm in the same boat, but I don't dislike all of that type of music. However, I do prefer instrumental to the vocal area.

In terms of live performance, as a 'one off' type thing I don't mind anything. Again, I prefer instrumental, however I have over the time I've been into classical attended choral concerts, also opera, also things like electroacoustic music. Its all part of the varied universe that is classical, and I don't see the harm of listening to things outside my comfort zone once in a while.

However I try broadening my horizons with opera or lieder, I don't get very far. In the end its not that important to me. That said, I got my favourite operas (as well as operettas and musicals), and also very much like art song Mahler and afterwards (before that, its largely not my cup of tea, although once in a while Schubert and Schumann goes down okay). With choral it is stronger, I do like quite a bit of that, and I aim to get into a sticking point for me, Bach, soon. But I will start with his Magnificat, not bite off more than I can chew with his mammoth works like the mass or passion.

But basically the answer is *opera*, I would vastly prefer anything but that. I mean in terms of repeated listening to operas in full, I don't mean one off type listenings or even attending opera. I have even done that with a number of Wagner's operas, watched them on DVD. The experience was good to do as a one off, to have a reference point, maybe for 'research' purposes, but nothing much more. Recently I have been trying to change, but I end up culling things I get in that area. I don't talk about it on this forum, I don't see any use to talk of it other than generally or to talk of operas that I do like (or even love, there are a few!).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I think you're one problem is that we are all children of the electronic age and have been conditioned to small soundbites. Hence even when you watch the news there are usually two newsreaders to stop you getting bored at there being just one. This translates into the realm of classical music as we now have recordings on CD. On a CD you can quite easily pick and choose the tracks, far better than on the old LP. So we tend to listen in shorters soundbites rather than taking the time to listen to (e.g.) a whole opera or oratorio in one sitting.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Yes. Folks who put down Berlioz probably never even heard Les Troyens, a work comparable in greatness, length and melodic beauty to Wagner's Gotterdammerung.
> 
> To even suggest that the certainly pleasant enough Daphnis and Chloe should be mentioned in the same breath as one of the greatest operas ever written, Les Troyens.... Absolument absurde!!!!





PetrB said:


> ...
> _Daphnis et Chloe_ is a masterpiece, (that excludes any differential when it comes to the definition of masterpiece, _La nuit, tous les chats sont gris_) -- and so are the two _piano concerti_, and his opera _L'enfant et les sortileges_.





hpowders said:


> Shows you've never heard Les Troyens. Just the Trojan March by itself puts anything Ravel wrote to shame.





Richannes Wrahms said:


> Daphnis et Chloé is Beauty.


Cor - that was exciting! If either of these works comes to Norfolk, I'll be there. Preferably both, and on succeeding evenings!


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Probably more recently, I would label Messiaen's Saint François d'Assise as one of these large scale tedious pieces. He seemed to have struggled with composing the piece and it's more a large scale oratorio-cantata than anything else.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I once had to go and hear Liszt's Via Crucis as my wife was singing in the choir and I wanted to give support. It was incredibly tedious and I was glad of the distraction of a sliding door in the organ which kept opening and shutting!


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

I've watched a recording of the entire Ring cycle once through. I like it overall, and some of the music is great, but I have a hard time imagining myself devoting that much time to it again. Sitting through it is a serious commitment! Maybe someday when I four or five hour gaps of free time suddenly open up in my life!


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

PetrB said:


> No, he can not, and is perhaps even a little proud of that, though that is hard for some to imagine.


That's nuts. What possible downside could the be for a professional musician in learning to read?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

PetrB said:


> No, he can not, and is perhaps even a little proud of that, though that is hard for some to imagine.
> 
> BUT: if Stockhausen, the Darmstadt boys and girls, and the Columbia Princeton crowd which included Mario Davidovsky and Vladimir Ussachevksy had not lobbied to change copyright laws so that notation was no longer required, someone would have had to transcribe all the Beatles' material into notation for them to obtain copyright. (Pop record companies were used to having musicians and composers who could not read or notate; they kept a working list of free-lance musicians who could transcribe the music into notation.)
> 
> ...


Yes, but how many more have heard of McCartney! It wasn't just luck. The thing is he wrote a good tune. I believe Irvin Berlin was the same. According to Andre Previn he could hardly play the piano. But he wrote some tremendous tunes. In fact I think there was discussion once on whether an Oscar could be awarded to someone who couldn't read music. Then someone mention Berlin!


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

Since I am neither a musician, much less a composer, nor in any way trained in music theory, I latently feel unworthy of any piece of classical music, since it transcends my ability to fully appreciate it (beyond superfical intuitive reactions).

I can live with that, however, by telling myself that no work was ever composed to be appreciated by me. Hence, I do not fail my duty.

The fact that I derive pleasure from things not intended for me would be problematic if I didn't feel that few works were ever truly written for the pleasure of others to begin with.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

ArtMusic said:


> Probably more recently, I would label Messiaen's Saint François d'Assise as one of these large scale tedious pieces. He seemed to have struggled with composing the piece and it's more a large scale oratorio-cantata than anything else.


Messiaen's opera is a great work of art. If one does not like it, one can at least be objective and acknowledge that it is a masterpiece.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

'Tunes'... After discovering art music years ago, 'tunes' don't do much for me anymore. It's akin to a Spielberg fan suddenly discovering Bergman and Tarkovsky.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Ingélou said:


> Cor - that was exciting! If either of these works comes to Norfolk, I'll be there. Preferably both, and on succeeding evenings!


Count me in for ONE of those nights!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

DavidA said:


> I think you're one problem is that we are all children of the electronic age and have been conditioned to small soundbites. Hence even when you watch the news there are usually two newsreaders to stop you getting bored at there being just one. This translates into the realm of classical music as we now have recordings on CD. On a CD you can quite easily pick and choose the tracks, far better than on the old LP. So we tend to listen in shorters soundbites rather than taking the time to listen to (e.g.) a whole opera or oratorio in one sitting.


I find that a good thing. The only movement of Schubert's Ninth Symphony I can take is the first movement. So glad I can easily do that at home.
If I simply want to play the peasant dance from Beethoven's Pastorale, I can. So easy.
If I want to isolate Wotan's farewell to Brünnhilde, at the end of Die Walküre, I can. No problem.
I'm glad that I am able to play "small soundbites" whenever I want to.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

kangxi said:


> I'm sure you all know this hoary old joke but I'll tell it anyway. A music student some time ago in the early 20C was asked in an exam: "What do you think of Stainer's Crucifixion? To which he replied: "It's a bloody good idea."


LOL. 
(This has to be an English thing. I learned of Stainer when thumbing through a Dutch hymnal (a little story there) looking for hymn tunes to re-harmonize -- _his one hit tune?_ -- that also known by some American churchgoers. I think he 'belongs' most to English.)


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

apricissimus said:


> That's nuts. What possible downside could the be for a professional musician in learning to read?


People rationalize that learning reading, or anything 'formal' about theory will limit their freedoms and their creativity, and that is a rationale altogether, plain 'n' simple.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

hpowders said:


> I find that a good thing. The only movement of Schubert's Ninth Symphony I can take is the first movement. So glad I can easily do that at home.
> If I simply want to play the peasant dance from Beethoven's Pastorale, I can. So easy.
> If I want to isolate Wotan's farewell to Brünnhilde, at the end of Die Walküre, I can. No problem.
> I'm glad that I am able to play "small soundbites" whenever I want to.


Especially when it comes to The Ring or Les Troyens!


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

PetrB said:


> People rationalize that learning reading, or anything 'formal' about theory will limit their freedoms and their creativity, and that is a rationale altogether, plain 'n' simple.


I saw a documentary once about the Beatles. I think what happened was that Paul McCartney asked George Martin to teach him about music. Martin tried, but found that Paul knew nothing much, and trying to impart theory to him was robbing him of his natural creativity and like flogging a dead horse, so he gave up. I've never listened to his classical music, but I like his pop songs. He has a gift, or luck, or both - his best song 'Yesterday' came to him in a dream. I imagine that, as you say, having failed to be able to learn music theory & having been told to nurture his creativity, he turned it into a badge of pride.

I don't like that sort of inverted snobbery either.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Just another example of how the Beatles were greater together than as individual musicians.


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2014)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> But Berlioz was worse than both put together (he said, with a sick sense of pride).


Just for you, Berlioz-n'est-pas-mort :


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

Andreas said:


> Since I am neither a musician, much less a composer, nor in any way trained in music theory, I latently feel unworthy of any piece of classical music, since it transcends my ability to fully appreciate it (beyond superfical intuitive reactions).
> 
> I can live with that, however, by telling myself that no work was ever composed to be appreciated by me. Hence, I do not fail my duty.
> 
> The fact that I derive pleasure from things not intended for me would be problematic if I didn't feel that few works were ever truly written for the pleasure of others to begin with.


I think you are being very unfair to yourself. My experience is that there are situations were non-musicians get something that a musician does not. For example, I will be at a live performance and hear a slight mistake and cringe and my wife will look at me with a what is wrong with you face.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

arpeggio said:


> I think you are being very unfair to yourself. My experience is that there are situations were non-musicians get something that a musician does not. For example, I will be at a live performance and hear a slight mistake and cringe and my wife will look at me with a what is wrong with you face.


I'm sure the musicians hear the mistakes too. Maybe they just worry about it less


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Sorry*



apricissimus said:


> I'm sure the musicians hear the mistakes too. Maybe they just worry about it less


Sorry. I did a bad job again. The point I was trying to make, but failed, was that many times musicians will hear mistakes that non-musicians miss.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Andreas said:


> Since I am neither a musician, much less a composer, nor in any way trained in music theory, I latently feel unworthy of any piece of classical music, since it transcends my ability to fully appreciate it (beyond superfical intuitive reactions).
> 
> I can live with that, however, by telling myself that no work was ever composed to be appreciated by me. Hence, I do not fail my duty.
> 
> The fact that I derive pleasure from things not intended for me would be problematic if I didn't feel that few works were ever truly written for the pleasure of others to begin with.


If even the deepest of compositions were written exclusively for an audience of musicians only, maybe three percent of all the music we do have would be gone, held in sacred store in some secret societies' archives 

All the remainder, oceans of it, _was written for the general listener much like yourself._

[No matter how 'intellectual' the composer and the score, they are hoping for and depending upon your listening to it with pleasure. Sure, it is not anywhere near a democracy, i.e. you don't get to elect who writes the pieces, nor so much who decides which pieces get performed, but somewhere, without any sort of governing sets of rules and regulations, those musicians, intellectual composers, write what they write, other musicians like it enough to play it, hoping you, we, will also like it.]

Without all those general listeners, there would be very little music for any of us.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

I am also a non musician (I am merely a graphic designer). When I first heard Beethoven, I immediately disliked his music. I eventually forced myself to like it (his music) because as an immensely naive teenager, I figured that I was an artist, and should therefore appreciate and enjoy great art. The funny thing is that it actually worked, and now I can't believe that there was a time when I couldn't stand classical, much less the avant garde. Presently I listen mostly to modern avant garde, but I cannot do without an indispensable classic: JS Bach.


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

TalkingHead said:


> Just for you, Berlioz-n'est-pas-mort :


Thank you, TalkingHead, that was delightful! And from a production standpoint, very interesting and effective with the white background.


----------



## Berlioznestpasmort (Jan 24, 2014)

This thread seems to have gone quite far afield. To bring it back around again I must ask: Ingélou, did you get your tickets, yet?  :lol:

(sorry, I'm incorrigible)


----------



## BillT (Nov 3, 2013)

Mozart's Horn Concerto - probably because I was expected to play it as a kid. It sounded horribly trite to me then, and still does now. This probably has a lot to do with why I often don't like Mozart (though I am beginning to get over that.

It's interesting to see the various responses -- Verdi's Requiem?!? REALLY?!?!? Seems to me an easy piece to like. Did you have to play it as a kid? 

- Bill


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Berlioznestpasmort said:


> This thread seems to have gone quite far afield. To bring it back around again I must ask: Ingélou, did you get your tickets, yet? :lol:
> 
> (sorry, I'm incorrigible)


Um - no... 

Far afield or not, though, there never was such a delightful, civilised, friendly thread as this, for which many thanks. :cheers:


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> When I first heard Beethoven, I immediately disliked his music.


Same here, I recognize his greatness (depth, lack of the superfluous, 'power'...) but I'm not fond of the "outer edges" of his style. Tchaikovsky, Debussy, Ravel and many other non-Germans thought similarly.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

TalkingHead said:


> Just for you, Berlioz-n'est-pas-mort :


Right. Bubbly enthusiastic talk from the players about their parts in a modern piece from 1830, 184 years after its premiere.

By that reckoning: Bubbly enthusiastic talk from the players about their parts in _Le Sacre du Printemps_, written in 1913 -- as floating about in a promotional music vid from one of the world's greater symphonic ensembles -- _is due in about 2097, nearly three generations from now... _don't hold your collective breaths, everyone 

Now, who is it that is so often saying that the public are always quick to pick the real winners and make those composers widely and wildly successful? :lol:...:lol:...:lol:...


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

hpowders said:


> Just another example of how the Beatles were greater together than as individual musicians.


Or merely how it takes four musically illiterate musicians to make even one thing vs. one musically literate musician to make....

Sorry, could not resist


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Bears our souls*

It appears to me that the spirit of this wonderful thread is to bear our souls and admit that there is some great music we just do not get. We are "Unworthy".

*MISSED TRAIN PART TWO*

Even though Beethoven is one of my favorites, I do not get the concertos (piano, violin and the triple). I have performed them all. Maybe it is because the bassoon parts are so BORING. Maybe it is because, since I play with an amateur community orchestra, our soloists were so uninspiring. We can not afford Joshua Bell.


----------



## Jos (Oct 14, 2013)

For some reason I can't get "into" the great symphonys of the romantic era. Love the concerto's , the chambermusic, love the symphonys from Mozart and Haydn, but those grand works by Beethoven, Tschaikowsky, Mendelssohn etc are just too euh,....grand, too much, dunno, it's me , certainly not them. 

Cheers,
Jos


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Not a crime. There's enough of a wide variety of music to please everybody. Something for everyone.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

arpeggio said:


> *BEARS OUR SOULS"*
> It appears to me that the spirit of this wonderful thread is to bear our souls and admit that there is some great music we just do not get. We are "Unworthy".[/B]


I don't at all care for the "unworthy" bit, since it implies a sort of groveling lowliness I think really not suited to just about anyone.

I do get music in general (I'd be far short shrift If I did not 'get it,' since I've been trained to a point of total immersion as well as it has been a prime occupation since early childhood.)

What I also get is that some music just does not speak to me, and my only appreciation of it is cerebral in that I recognize the craft and its 'greatness.' Reasons I think for not caring for a work or composer's work, again from the circumstance that music is my business, is that I've developed a personal aesthetic -- because I know what does and does not engage me -- and music not within that aesthetic (which has a lot of latitude of inclusiveness) I can only admire from a clinical and technical viewpoint. I hear and see it is great, good, etc. but it just does not reach me on some personal level. Some of what I wholly admire I find personally near repellent to listen to, while it is still fine music.

That has nothing to do with 'unworthy,' but more the simple fact that not everything, i.e. all of the classical repertoire, will interest one person.

There should be no opprobrium associated with knowing your own tastes, (though if really new to it all you might want to survey a lot, and repeatedly, and then think about what your tastes are) at least as long as you stay open to sampling things you thought you disliked once in a while, and give those things newer to you -- that could be Renaissance polyphonic choral music -- a fair chance, or several 

P.s. *"BEARS OUR SOULS"

.............Rowrrrr!*


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Messiaen's opera is a great work of art. If one does not like it, one can at least be objective and acknowledge that it is a masterpiece.


It's a relatively weak masterpiece.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

ArtMusic said:


> It's a relatively weak masterpiece.


"Battle of wits with the relatively weak and unarmed!" ~ Film At Eleven.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

DavidA said:


> I think you're one problem is that we are all children of the electronic age and have been conditioned to small soundbites. Hence even when you watch the news there are usually two newsreaders to stop you getting bored at there being just one. This translates into the realm of classical music as we now have recordings on CD. On a CD you can quite easily pick and choose the tracks, far better than on the old LP. So we tend to listen in shorters soundbites rather than taking the time to listen to (e.g.) a whole opera or oratorio in one sitting.


I think there's truth to that, the soundbyte thing, with opera I don't mind listening to excerpts - either orchestral or vocal/choral - but to listen to an opera in one go (esp. the mammoth ones) its pushing it. I just think this is a matter of preference, and related to this its wierd how most classical listeners prefer instrumental music, while most listeners of other genres (eg. rock, jazz, country, whatever) prefer vocal music. I did a thread on it ages back here (and understandably opera fans of the forum had their opinions on my 'thesis!'), http://www.talkclassical.com/15745-pop-classical-split-between.html



BillT said:


> Mozart's Horn Concerto - probably because I was expected to play it as a kid. It sounded horribly trite to me then, and still does now. This probably has a lot to do with why I often don't like Mozart (though I am beginning to get over that.
> 
> It's interesting to see the various responses -- Verdi's Requiem?!? REALLY?!?!? *Seems to me an easy piece to like. Did you have to play it as a kid? *
> 
> - Bill


Which reminds me of the Victor Borge skit where he's playing Liszt's Liebestraum, during which he kind of audibly mutters "I hate it!" after reminiscing how his father would watch him playing it as a kid and give him a thump with the newspaper if he got a note wrong!


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Ingelou: I know its not quite on topic but - do you like the St Matthew Passion on cd at home, as opposed to sitting still for two hours plus in a church ? If not can I ask which recordings you've heard?


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

PetrB said:


> I don't at all care for the "unworthy" bit, since it implies a sort of groveling lowliness I think really not suited to just about anyone....
> 
> There should be no opprobrium associated with knowing your own tastes, (though if really new to it all you might want to survey a lot, and repeatedly, and then think about what your tastes are) at least as long as you stay open to sampling things you thought you disliked once in a while, and give those things newer to you -- that could be Renaissance polyphonic choral music -- a fair chance, or several


Um - the title of this thread was meant as a joke - striking a mock pose... like someone with a cold ringing a pretend bell and calling, 'Unclean, unclean!'
Oh dear - excuse me now while I crawl under the table.* 

(*also meant as a joke; I am actually seated at my desk, typing.)


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

ingélou said:


> um - the title of this thread was meant as a joke - striking a mock pose... Like someone with a cold ringing a pretend bell and calling, 'unclean, unclean!'
> oh dear - excuse me now while i crawl under the table.*
> 
> (*also meant as a joke; i am actually seated at my desk, typing.)


provocateur!


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2014)

SimonNZ said:


> Ingelou: I know its not quite on topic but - do you like the St Matthew Passion on cd at home, as opposed to sitting still for two hours plus in a church ? If not can I ask which recordings you've heard?


Simon NZ, this is precisely the question I had in mind. But Norwich Cathedral ain't no common-or-garden church !! 
http://www.cathedral.org.uk/


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2014)

PetrB said:


> provocateur!


*Provocatrice*, surely.


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

Most instrumental jazz. I recognize there were great jazz composers and instrumentalists, but I have yet to find a way to enjoy it. 

Except maybe for "So What." 

And Gershwin if he counts. 

Coltrane, Davis, Monk, the jury's still out... I'm a philistine! 
Oh well at least there is more classical music available than I will ever be able to listen to in my life.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

SimonNZ said:


> Ingelou: I know its not quite on topic but - do you like the St Matthew Passion on cd at home, as opposed to sitting still for two hours plus in a church ? If not can I ask which recordings you've heard?


Oh sorry, Simon, I haven't heard the whole of St Matthew Passion. I had misgivings about it, and I knew Taggart did not want to get tickets for it, so I decided to check it out & downloaded a YouTube of the complete work. I began to listen to it, of necessity in chunks, but before I was one hour in, I decided that I would never be able to sit in the Cathedral for two or three hours without feeling a bit fed up; and when it is a work of devotion, that seems wrong. So I deleted it and just rubber-stamped Taggart's decision.

I cannot now remember which version I downloaded. There are about three possibilities. But I don't think it would make any difference as I am not sufficiently a connoisseur.

I started the thread because, though I am not a real connoisseur, I am an honest person, and I wondered if anyone else had the experience of knowing that something is a fine work, but not wanting to sit through it. And it seems that I am not alone.

To emphasise the fact that I was not criticising Bach, but rather my own capabilities, I called the thread 'Unworthy' as the snappiest title & a bit of a joke - hence the exclamation mark.

This is what one does in a light-hearted moment. Because nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! :lol:


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2014)

You callin' me Torquemada?


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

TalkingHead said:


> Simon NZ, this is precisely the question I had in mind. But Norwich Cathedral ain't no common-or-garden church !!
> http://www.cathedral.org.uk/


True. It's a lovely building, but we have our doubts - see http://www.talkclassical.com/27822-concert-hall-design.html for one of the times we went there.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

TalkingHead said:


> You callin' me Torquemada?


Only if, like me, you have the T Shirt:


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

SimonNZ said:


> Ingelou: I know its not quite on topic but - do you like the St Matthew Passion on cd at home, as opposed to sitting still for two hours plus in a church ? If not can I ask which recordings you've heard?


Although I still don't think we'll be going to the concert, I feel honour-bound now to give St Matthew Passion another chance in the future. Which recording would you recommend, Simon?


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2014)

SimonNZ said:


> Ingelou: I know its not quite on topic but - do you like the St Matthew Passion on cd at home, *as opposed to sitting still for two hours plus in a church ?* If not can I ask which recordings you've heard?


And, my dear SimonNZ, I would like to point out that one of your compatriots, composer Denis Smalley, had a piece of his performed at Norwich Cathedral (*O Vos Omnes*, for 3 soloists, 8 part choir and tape) with its acoustic firmly in mind. And this is the very same fellow who gave the New Zealand premier of Ligeti's _*Volumina*_ in a little, cold and damp local parish church ... known as Wellington Cathedral !!!!!!!
S'okay, I'm only gently ribbing you!


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Ingélou said:


> I started the thread because, though I am not a real connoisseur, I am an honest person, and I wondered if anyone else had the experience of knowing that something is a fine work, but not wanting to sit through it. And it seems that I am not alone.
> 
> To emphasise the fact that I was not criticising Bach, but rather my own capabilities, I called the thread 'Unworthy' as the snappiest title & a bit of a joke - hence the exclamation mark.


Oh I understand completely, and wouldn't judge. In fact the last time the St John Passion came along here I thought "I'd love to support this but I just can't face it tonight". The SMP will be there if and when you're ready for it - let me and everyone know if you want to be bombarded with recommendations. In the meantime I'm sure you've got plenty to go on with.


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Ingélou said:


> Although I still don't think we'll be going to the concert, I feel honour-bound now to give St Matthew Passion another chance in the future. Which recording would you recommend, Simon?


Ah! I spoke too soon!

There's many great recordings, but for me: Karl Richter's first recording for the large numbers with full drama, Philippe Herreweghe's second for the more HIP intimate reading.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Thank you, Simon. :tiphat: You are always very helpful & we love the medieval cd-set you recommended around Christmas time.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

I think I have a pretty good attention span for all kinds of classical, even stuff I don't like. It's not that I would get bored, I would just get _irritated_. When I watched both Mahler 2 and Mahler 7 live, they had their ups and downs for me, but I was never _bored_. Even music I don't like that much doesn't bore me. I always have more active emotion than that.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> It's not that I would get bored, I would just get _irritated_.


OK, here's the St. Matthew Passion for wusses (like me). 53 minutes -- no fat, no fuss, just the good stuff. Numbering from Herreweghe's version.

1.Chorus I & II, Kommt, ihr Töchter
6.Aria (Alt). Buß und Reu
8.Aria (Sopran), Blute nur, du liebes Herz
15.Choral , Erkenne mich, mein Hüter
27.Aria a doi Cori So ist mein Jesus
29.Choral, O Mensch, bewein' dein Sünde
30.Aria (Alt, Chorus I & II), Ach! Nun
39.Aria (Alt), Erbarme dich
49.Aria (Sopran), Aus Liebe will mein Heiland
65.Aria (Baß), Mache dich, mein Herze,rein
68.Chorus I & II, Wir setzen uns mit Tränen nieder


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

KenOC said:


> 65.Aria (Baß), Mache dich, mein Herze,rein


Hearing Fischer-Dieskau sing "Mache dich..." in the Karl Richter recording was the moment I went from like to love of SMP.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

TalkingHead said:


> *Provocatrice*, surely.


_Naturellement_... but since I was not sure without checking, and am an impulsive sort....
(So, what do you think that now in English all thespians are _Actors._ It seems _Actresses_ no longer exist! I mean, wassup wid dat?)


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

I have come to realise recently that if the whole opera 'thing' was going to open up for me it would have by now.....my loss, and perhaps I am unworthy but really I cannot be bothered......to listen and to devote the time to develop a greater understanding...I have a copy of the Magic Flute, Il Trovatore and so on but!......I get such a degree of pleasure from developing my knowledge of symphonies and chamber music....however I would find the prospect of a Bach choral work far more enticing than any opera.


----------



## Piwikiwi (Apr 1, 2011)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I think I have a pretty good attention span for all kinds of classical, even stuff I don't like. It's not that I would get bored, I would just get _irritated_. When I watched both Mahler 2 and Mahler 7 live, they had their ups and downs for me, but I was never _bored_. Even music I don't like that much doesn't bore me. I always have more active emotion than that.


I get that feeling about irritation. When I try to listen to Mahler I get angry a lot because it just takes so bloody long to do anything. I recognizer his greatness though.

The first opera that I saw live was Tristan and Isolde and while I liked it, I just felt sort bludgeoned when it was finished.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

SimonNZ said:


> Hearing Fischer-Dieskau sing "Mache dich..." in the Karl Richter recording was the moment I went from like to love of SMP.


I am listening to this as I type. It is beautiful, and the singer has a lovely voice, so gentle and manly at the same time. Maybe the key is getting to know the individual 'best songs' from the work. I think that's what made my first Messiah so wonderful, that I knew so many of the songs & had warm waves of recognition washing over me as I saw how they all fitted together.

Yes, that's what might be needed for this classical music babe-in-arms - mash it up, and add a little chopped banana. 

But Simon, you are right, this song by this singer is fabulous...


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I think I have a pretty good attention span for all kinds of classical, even stuff I don't like. It's not that I would get bored, I would just get _irritated_. When I watched both Mahler 2 and Mahler 7 live, they had their ups and downs for me, but I was never _bored_. Even music I don't like that much doesn't bore me. I always have more active emotion than that.


I'm afraid Mahler's second and seventh symphony have only one way for me - and that's down!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

SimonNZ said:


> Hearing Fischer-Dieskau sing "Mache dich..." in the Karl Richter recording was the moment I went from like to love of SMP.


Yes, I remember this recording well. I bought it for my wife together with the St John passion for her birthday round about 35 years ago. My wife has very fond recollections of this work as she once performed in it at the Royal Festival Hall as part of the choir. Also, having been brought up as an atheist, it was the St Matthew that made her first wonder whether there was a God! It was through the Richter recording I first became acquainted with this work. Sounds somewhat anachronistic now but still has a fervour that is rarely matched, with Richter's own Lutheran faith shining through. Interesting that Richter's Bach was itself considered revolutionary in his day! The SMP is one of the greatest works ever IMO. But I admit it does take some sitting through!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

SimonNZ said:


> The most tedious concert I've ever had to sit through was Verdi's Requiem, which, come to think of it I never do in one sitting on cd. I would have left half way through but I was on a date. With a deaf woman. True story.


I was thinking, "I would never do this; if I had the tickets, I'd go."

But then you mentioned Verdi's Requiem and I realized I totally would....


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

hreichgott said:


> Most instrumental jazz. I recognize there were great jazz composers and instrumentalists, but I have yet to find a way to enjoy it.
> 
> Except maybe for "So What."
> 
> ...


For me it's vocal jazz that I just have no taste for. (And I've given up bothering to try.)


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

this thread is interesting and arguably reassuring as far as I am concerned-it seems to contain some very honest comments and observations where people are more than willing to be quite open about their 'likes and dislikes'-for example my Mahler symphonies of choice are the 1st and 4th-possibly because they are the shorter;-to actually articulate any doubts about the man in certain circumstances would bring down a ****storm and yet here.....well....and someone has actually alluded to this!-this can only be a positive reflection of the tolerant and inclusive nature of many of the participants on this forum!-how self congratulatory can one be-then again I am seeing everything through rose tinted specs at the moment having just spent a particularly raucous lunchtime in the pub watching 'the lads' conclusively turn over our biggest rivals (again)


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

The other day, I was thinking about this, and I realized that there was not a single one of Mahler's symphonies that I appreciated on first hearing. They seemed bizarre and digressive. Now I don't find anything superfluous in any of them. It takes time for all great music to reveal its inner nature.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I could have written the same post substituting "Schuman" for "Mahler".
Glad I stuck it out. Repetition is one's friend.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Piwikiwi said:


> I get that feeling about irritation. When I try to listen to Mahler I get angry a lot because it just takes so bloody long to do anything. I recognizer his greatness though.


But that's just it, I wasn't _bored _by how long it was. I can take long music. In fact, I thought it went by pretty quickly because I was engaged. But what I was _irritated _about was what I considered was poor thematic material. Into the 2nd or 3rd movement, I couldn't stand anymore his _double-dotting_ all the rhythms! I'm soo sick of that march trope! According to Mahler, life is just one long funeral march to the grave, eh? Pthhhhhfffff


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> But that's just it, I wasn't _bored _by how long it was. I can take long music. In fact, I thought it went by pretty quickly because I was engaged. But what I was _irritated _about was what I considered was poor thematic material. Into the 2nd or 3rd movement, I couldn't stand anymore his _double-dotting_ all the rhythms! I'm soo sick of that march trope! According to Mahler, life is just one long funeral march to the grave, eh? Pthhhhhfffff


When I was younger I thought I was giving a considered, mature opinion when I decided that the theme of the finale of Brahms's first was "banal", and declared this openly.

I was wrong, and immature on every level.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Later music by Morton Feldman, one of my most favourite composers but I don't think I can take a six hour string quartet without needing to have a break to stretch my legs.


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

I really don't know if I can face the cinema screening of the recent Met Verdi Falstaff tomorrow, even after being told by a couple of TCers on another thread that it was unmissable. Tonight I'm sitting here like a high school student refusing to start a simple but unexciting essay thinking "fine, I'll take the F, see if I care."

I am unworthy. I wonder what it is about Verdi that has this effect on me.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Hate opera in general or just Verdi? Neither would be considered a crime in my book.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Met Fallstaff*



SimonNZ said:


> I really don't know if I can face the cinema screening of the recent Met Verdi Falstaff tomorrow, even after being told by a couple of TCers on another thread that it was unmissable. Tonight I'm sitting here like a high school student refusing to start a simple but unexciting essay thinking "fine, I'll take the F, see if I care."
> 
> I am unworthy. I wonder what it is about Verdi that has this effect on me.


For what it is worth give it a try. My wife and I are not Verdi fans. We saw the Met Production and it was the first Verdi Opera we have seen that we throughly enjoyed.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Mahlerian said:


> When I was younger I thought I was giving a considered, mature opinion when I decided that the theme of the finale of Brahms's first was "banal", and declared this openly.
> 
> I was wrong, and immature on every level.


Well, whatever you achieved, I wish the same on all critics of Glazunov.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

This is like the opposite to the guilty pleasures threads you see on forums, these are like guilty dislikes to people. But I just enjoy what I like, no point worrying what others think.


----------



## Donata (Dec 28, 2013)

Strauss' Capriccio. I fell asleep about thirty minutes in. I'm going to give it another shot though.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

Ingélou said:


> Bach's St Matthew Passion


it is long time due that this peice was staged as an opera at last.


----------

