# So much music!



## soni (Jul 3, 2018)

Life is too short for it all


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

One trick is to cut out all music between 1750 and 1950. And in fact with the exception of JS Bach you could probably start at 1700.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Or try listening to multiple pieces at the same time


----------



## soni (Jul 3, 2018)

Fabulin said:


> Or try listening to multiple pieces at the same time


Haha this was one of John Cage's ideas - you can combine some of his pieces together to make larger pieces


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

> So much music!
> 
> Life is too short for it all


What's your point? This makes about as much sense as walking into a library and saying "I'll never read all of these books because life is too short". If you develop a taste and passion for a slice that resonates with you the rest doesn't matter. When you go to a restaurant you don't order everything on the menu. You order what tastes delicious to you.


----------



## soni (Jul 3, 2018)

starthrower said:


> What's your point? This makes about as much sense as walking into a library and saying "I'll never read all of these books because life is too short". If you develop a taste and passion for a slice that resonates with you the rest doesn't matter. When you go to a restaurant you don't order everything on the menu. You order what tastes delicious to you.


The difference is that when I walk into a library, I have to put a lot of effort in if I want to find something that I really like. However, now that I've discovered what I like in music, I'm discovering incredible works all the time, and my to-listen list is growing unmanageably long


----------



## DBLee (Jan 8, 2018)

Better too much than not enough!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

soni said:


> The difference is that when I walk into a library, I have to put a lot of effort in if I want to find something that I really like. However, now that I've discovered what I like in music, I'm discovering incredible works all the time, and my to-listen list is growing unmanageably long


You can only listen to one piece at a time.


----------



## soni (Jul 3, 2018)

starthrower said:


> You can only listen to one piece at a time.


You make sound arguments :tiphat:


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

starthrower said:


> What's your point? This makes about as much sense as walking into a library and saying "I'll never read all of these books because life is too short".


Without knowing fully what soni may or may not think, I think the anxiety related to the amount of music (or any art) in this world is something a lot of us experience at some point in our lives. You mention that you don't order everything but that which tastes delicious to you - but what if so much tastes delicious that it simply feels like an impossible task to just go through it all? I certainly think about this a lot and find it quite an interesting topic.

I mean, just plodding through the works of Bach takes a _very long_ time, especially if one wants to relisten to things multiple times which most people will want to do. Add to that a few dozen other favourite composers and you're pretty much set for life - and what about all the stuff that gets left out still? Or all the wonderful new music that is constantly poured out into the world? It certainly can make one feel a bit existential. I definitely know a lot of people who feel like that when they walk into a library and to me the feeling makes perfect sense!


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

starthrower said:


> You can only listen to one piece at a time.


Data can listen to over 150 simultaneous compositions, but in order to analyze the æsthetics he tries to keep it to ten or less.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

In prior generations it must have been much simpler. The core repertoire was recorded repeatedly, and outside that there wasn't very much obscure music available. Then came the CD and the break-up of the Soviet Union. Record companies could go to eastern Europe and record tons of music for a fraction of what it could cost in the US. For people like me it was heaven: we could finally hear music that otherwise we could only read about. So yes, there's an enormous amount, and thank God for it! I know I will go to my grave never having heard everything written by Bach, Mozart, Haydn....I'm ok with that. I'll make the most of the time left on my hour clock.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> I know I will go to my grave never having heard everything written by Bach, Mozart, Haydn....I'm ok with that.


Me too. And in the case of Haydn from what I've heard I know I don't want to hear all of it. And what's the rush? Especially if you're a young person. To have anxiety about all the music in the world you might miss. It's really a waste of energy. I'm already 58 and just in the past ten years I've been exposed to a huge amount of classical music as a result of this forum and things like YouTube, and CDs. I know what I like and what I can take or leave. I don't need to hear 200 Bach Cantatas, or 104 Haydn symphonies, or 600 Schubert Lieder. But I'll be glad to listen to everything by Ravel, Debussy, or Varese. And everything by Schoenberg, Berg, and Lutoslaswki. And Janspe, I don't know anybody that desires to read every book in the library. I have no passion for knitting, stamp collecting, tennis, or a myriad of other subjects.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> One trick is to cut out all music between 1750 and 1950. And in fact with the exception of JS Bach you could probably start at 1700.


Is there something you particularly dislike about this two-century era of music history? Or is this just a decision you've made as a heuristic to make life/music navigation easier? You just might be onto something.


----------



## AeolianStrains (Apr 4, 2018)

I'm more into cutting out genres. I'll still return to rock and whatnot here and there, but it's chiefly classical and a little jazz these days for me. Gimme the classics and keep rest, for which I don't have time.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Ah, now that flamencosketches has entered the conversation I am reminded of a young person who will leave no stone unturned. He WILL listen to every thing ever written. He has the passion and the mental capacity to absorb it all. And he hasn't even started with opera yet.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

starthrower said:


> What's your point? This makes about as much sense as walking into a library and saying "I'll never read all of these books because life is too short". If you develop a taste and passion for a slice that resonates with you the rest doesn't matter. When you go to a restaurant you don't order everything on the menu. You order what tastes delicious to you.


I agree. In fact, I find myself listening to much of the same music. I hear about all these composers and wonderful music but I have no time to even try because I do have to live my life aside from music. I read posters comments about composers who I have never heard of stating they wrote wonderful music (one even stated there were thousands of excellent symphonies--something to that effect) yet, I find myself bored again and again. And this is with well known composers. So my game plan is to stick with the big names and eventually add little more as time goes on. One day I will listen to all my cds one at a time while I can....what is the point of buying if I do not listen to them.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

soni said:


> Life is too short for it all


Listen more and not so much moaning helps 
( This is a not an insult)


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> Is there something you particularly dislike about this two-century era of music history?


What I like is the sensation of travelling in _terra incognita. _

There's another thing. The music of Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms etc is the core of the classical music industry. There are stars and promotions and launches and Public Relations campagnes etc. There's an "establishment." I find all of that antipathetic. I just don't want anything to do with it.

And there's a third thing, though I can't explain it properly. There's something strangely avant garde about medieval music; some music between 1750 and 1950 is sweet enough, but it's for grandad, middle class grandad to boot - it's old fashioned, and it's bourgeois.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Mandryka said:


> What I like is the sensation of travelling in _terra incognita. _
> 
> There's another thing. The music of Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms etc is the core of the classical music industry. There are stars and promotions and launches and Public Relations campagnes etc. There's an "establishment." I find all of that antipathetic. I just don't want anything to do with it.
> 
> And there's a third thing, though I can't explain it properly. There's something strangely modern about medieval music; some music between 1750 and 1950 is sweet enough, but it's for grandad - it's old fashioned.


This is the proper way to deal with the abundance. Restrict yourself by means of some irrational and highly subjective criteria, create a corpus of works that is manageable in a lifetime. In my case I decided that the 20-something composers I prefer are the only ones who are capable of creating real art.

In fact, I think this is a good way in general to look at modern life. It's the opposite of "fear of missing out".


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

One reason I am drawn to much early music is that initially it seemed like composers were mostly into creating music about something greater than themselves. There is something very beautiful about this concept. At its roots classical music is about spirituality. I think this is what makes the tradition of classical music so sacred. 

For a time I do think there was a change and perhaps some composers particularly towards the end of the classical era and in the romantic era seemed to become a little more concerned with glorifying themselves. Of the romantics I find Brahms the most humble musical personality, his music is not about glorifying himself, but in a sense it is about glorifying a sacred past.

The reason I like a lot of modern music is that I think it became a time when many composers began reaching into the distant past again for inspiration.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> What I like is the sensation of travelling in _terra incognita. _
> 
> There's another thing. The music of Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms etc is the core of the classical music industry. There are stars and promotions and launches and Public Relations campagnes etc. There's an "establishment." I find all of that antipathetic. I just don't want anything to do with it.
> 
> And there's a third thing, though I can't explain it properly. There's something strangely modern about medieval music; some music between 1750 and 1950 is sweet enough, but it's for grandad, middle class grandad to boot - it's old fashioned, and it's bourgeois.


This has to be one of the dumbest posts I've read on TC. Sorry mate.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Mandryka said:


> What I like is the sensation of travelling in _terra incognita. _
> 
> There's another thing. The music of Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms etc is the core of the classical music industry. There are stars and promotions and launches and Public Relations campagnes etc. There's an "establishment." I find all of that antipathetic. I just don't want anything to do with it.
> 
> And there's a third thing, though I can't explain it properly. There's something strangely avant garde about medieval music; some music between 1750 and 1950 is sweet enough, but it's for grandad, middle class grandad to boot - it's old fashioned, and it's bourgeois.


There's a ton of good music written in 1750~1950 that is not Beethoven, Mozart, Brahms etc.
I personally find these excellent:


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2020)

starthrower said:


> What's your point? This makes about as much sense as walking into a library and saying "I'll never read all of these books because life is too short".


The point is that...life is too short. Seems pretty clear and makes sense to me: I agree, though when senility sets in, I might take a different view (my wife already thinks it has, though to be fair, she's not yet plotting to my end...AFAIK!)

Anxiety in and about about life is not something that can just be dismissed by saying, "Stop worrying and get on with it." When I was a teacher, I spent much of my time stressing that whatever I was doing with the children, there was something else I ought to be doing instead. Absurd, yes, but it seemed to go with the territory.

As for music...shall I try to find other symphonists who sound like Sibelius? Or explore his non-symphonic output? I love Debussy's piano music, so should I go for Pelléas and Mélisande next, or delve further into other piano compositions by Schumann and Chopin, or Alkan?

I'm with you soni.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I took early retirement almost 8 years ago, and the only obligation (besides doing things together with my wife) I have is that we run our gallery on Friday and Saturday afternoon. I have more time to listen to music than most people here, on top of almost 35 years of listening under my belt. And even so, I feel time is too short. Lots of people here like to listen to many versions of a work - except for a handful of exceptions, I'm not even making time for that. I love to explore new composers, and although they are not always rewarding, I do discover real gems that I would not want to have missed. 

Just enjoy every second that you can spend listening to music, and accept the fact of life that you can't hear everything in the less than 100 years you will likely get.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Definitely do not impoverish yourself by cutting out periods or genres. For one thing they enrich each other and for another it would defeat the purpose stated in the OP. Of course, no-one will go to their grave having heard "all the music" but the good news is that the more you know the easier it is to hear and enjoy more (as you "learn the language"). I have found that my capacity to "hear" music has greatly increased as I have aged! I guess it is like gluttony - the more (and more richly) you eat the more you can eat! But, like gluttony, wolfing down huge volumes of music may not be entirely healthy. 

Also, don't plan. Be like an explorer who only has the vaguest of maps.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> Definitely do not impoverish yourself by cutting out periods or genres. For one thing they enrich each other and for another it would defeat the purpose stated in the OP. Of course, no-one will go to their grave having heard "all the music" but the good news is that the more you know the easier it is to hear and enjoy more (as you "learn the language"). I have found that my capacity to "hear" music has greatly increased as I have aged! I guess it is like gluttony - the more (and more richly) you eat the more you can eat! But, like gluttony, wolfing down huge volumes of music may not be entirely healthy.


if you consume too much CM, you might get musical indigestion. And like you said, musical gluttony is not healty. There is not need to collect or to listen to all the music in the world.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Yes, that's right. But for as long as discovering something new is rewarding the desire to do so will be present.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

No sense in bemoaning the fact that life is too short. It is what it is. If you're fortunate enough to be born in a country where you have the luxury of pleasures and music listening, it is a precious gift. So many others must endure a life of hardship and misery.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

starthrower said:


> Ah, now that flamencosketches has entered the conversation I am reminded of a young person who will leave no stone unturned. He WILL listen to every thing ever written. He has the passion and the mental capacity to absorb it all. And he hasn't even started with opera yet.


:lol: I wish. I'm just like you, I find what I like and listen to it. But I do have and totally understand that death anxiety of not being able to hear all the music I want to hear during my lifetime, so I see where OP is coming from. Obviously, life is too short to hear everything. All we can do is spend as much time as possible with music we love and always keep an open mind. It can be counterproductive, being anxious about not getting to hear everything you want to hear, you will find yourself listening to great music and thinking of something else you think you might prefer to be listening to, or thinking about something you've never heard before, or whatever the case may be. So in a sense it is good to limit yourself, but keep a voracious appetite for discovering new things. I'm not able to focus on one thing at a time, but I do think limiting oneself is a good strategy to not becoming overwhelmed; for example I spent a few days listening to no German music whatsoever, and it gave me an excuse to listen to a lot of great French, Russian etc music that I had been neglecting.

@Mandryka, I see, I see. You may have found the secret, and I suppose a quasi-political motivation doesn't hurt.  I will have to jump on that train some day. But until then, the vast majority of the music I love was written in that chunk of time that you neglect. "Grandad" music or not, some of this music really speaks to me. And I don't think all of that music is part of the bourgeois machine.

--



tdc said:


> One reason I am drawn to much early music is that initially it seemed like composers were mostly into creating music about something greater than themselves. There is something very beautiful about this concept. At its roots classical music is about spirituality. I think this is what makes the tradition of classical music so sacred.
> 
> For a time I do think there was a change and perhaps some composers particularly towards the end of the classical era and in the romantic era seemed to become a little more concerned with glorifying themselves. Of the romantics I find Brahms the most humble musical personality, his music is not about glorifying himself, but in a sense it is about glorifying a sacred past.
> 
> The reason I like a lot of modern music is that I think it became a time when many composers began reaching into the distant past again for inspiration.


Excellent post. I agree wholeheartedly. In a sense that world of the past that some of this music was birthed into, a Dufay mass for example, seems so much more "real" to me than whatever we are living in today. And through just listening to some of that music (let alone performing it-I have been considering joining a Renaissance polyphonic choir this year for this reason) that past seems so close that you can almost reach out and touch it. It is a reminder that on some level we are part of something bigger than ourselves, and that it was as much of a mystery to people then as it is now. Anyway, you do lose some of that as you go on through time, though even the classical and romantic composers would touch on it at times. Brahms as you say is a good example.


----------



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

I'm grateful for what I've acquired and the time I've had to savour it. Had I got into CM now with the same degree of enthusiasm as I did 20-odd years ago then maybe it would be at the back of my mind that I might be entering into a grim battle with the hourglass. However, if soni is a young person then he/she has little to worry about - the only potential pitfall of being daunted by how much there is to listen to is the risk of the novelty wearing off by plunging in too deeply too quickly.


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2020)

starthrower said:


> No sense in bemoaning the fact that life is too short. It is what it is. If you're fortunate enough to be born in a country where you have the luxury of pleasures and music listening, it is a precious gift. So many others must endure a life of hardship and misery.


That's right...we should be grateful for our anxieties.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> That's right...we should be grateful for our anxieties.


You said it, not me. But it's clearly a first world problem if it exists. I don't have anxieties over music listening choices. It's a labor of love and enjoyment.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Mandryka said:


> One trick is to cut out all music between 1750 and 1950. And in fact with the exception of JS Bach you could probably start at 1700.


Whoa, whoa, whoa, there!

You've got to cut out all music between 17_*30*_ and 19_*70*_.

What kind of philistine listens to the music of the 1730s, 1740s, 1950s, and 1960s?


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

starthrower said:


> What's your point? This makes about as much sense as walking into a library and saying "I'll never read all of these books because life is too short". If you develop a taste and passion for a slice that resonates with you the rest doesn't matter. When you go to a restaurant you don't order everything on the menu. You order what tastes delicious to you.


But life is also too short to read all those books, to travel to all the places I'd like to visit, and worst of all to seduce all the beautiful women I'd like to, well, seduce.

Finitude is the nastiest thing. I really hate it. If I ever meet it in a dark alley, it better have mortality with it for protection, or else I'm going to kick the crap out of it, on behalf of all of us.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> I know I will go to my grave never having heard everything written by Bach, Mozart, Haydn....I'm ok with that.


Well I'm not ok that that. I just can't do a damn thing about it.



mbhaub said:


> I'll make the most of the time left on my hour clock.


Except this. Which is a little bit of something at least.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> I took early retirement almost 8 years ago, and the only obligation (besides doing things together with my wife) I have is that we run our gallery on Friday and Saturday afternoon. I have more time to listen to music than most people here, on top of almost 35 years of listening under my belt. And even so, I feel time is too short. Lots of people here like to listen to many versions of a work - except for a handful of exceptions, I'm not even making time for that. I love to explore new composers, and although they are not always rewarding, I do discover real gems that I would not want to have missed.
> 
> Just enjoy every second that you can spend listening to music, and accept the fact of life that you can't hear everything in the less than 100 years you will likely get.


Well then, my friend, please get more into Medieval and Renaissance music! You've gone very deep into classical, romantic and 20th-century music. How about the great Franco-Flemish composers?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Without mortality and all that it entails, we wouldn't have art. Pain, death and loss is what gives life meaning. This is why I don't believe in the pie in the sky promise of religion. Everybody smiling and singing hymns for ever and ever with no pain, loss, challenges or adversity. I just don't believe it. I'll take this cruel, crazy world as it is "the best of all possible worlds."


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

flamencosketches said:


> And I don't think all of that music is part of the bourgeois machine.


In fact, a lot of it is much worse than bourgeois - and this goes for the Medieval, Renaissance, and modern periods as well....


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

post deleted....


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I wonder whether there's a life-cycle element to this. Perhaps... 

When we're young, we tend to want to acquire a fund of knowledge and experience. 

When we're old, we tend to be less interested in acquisition and more in sharing what we've found.

Edit: And when we're right in the middle, we struggle to accept how little we've acquired!


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2020)

starthrower said:


> You said it, not me. But it's clearly a first world problem if it exists. I don't have anxieties over music listening choices. It's a labor of love and enjoyment.


I had thought that with the joke about senility, the tone of my first post might have come across as a lighthearted acknowledgement of soni's 'point' - not as a gloomy and selfish first-world concern causing me to bemoan my lot, which was far from my intent.

If soni wants to come back and confirm how significant their axiety is, we can respond accordingly. But telling people not to be anxious and to count their blessings strikes me as...can't think of the right word.


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

science said:


> In fact, a lot of it is much worse than bourgeois - and this goes for the Medieval, Renaissance, and modern periods as well....


Your avatar says it all.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_So much music! Life is too short for it all_

After listening, playing and discovering for about 60 years I'd have to disagree. Life gives plenty of time to find what you're after.

If you mean it's all too big for you then approach it one composer or one piece at a time. It's a lot less monumental that way.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

I've gone through this with literature and am reminded of something many writers tend to do when they get older; they just re-read their favourites over and over. A little sad perhaps but I find it comforting.

In any case it doesn't matter how much there is to enjoy if there is not the ability or capacity to enjoy. So for me it's no less important to cultivate that ability than it is to hear everything ever recorded. 

At least it's something I try to keep in mind now that I've finally found my way into classical music and have access to – it seems – everything ever recorded.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Bourdon said:


> Your avatar says it all.


I suspect this was a sick burn.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

I love new artistic experiences- my main pursuits being music and literature. I try to read and listen to as much as I can simply because I love discovering and appreciating the meaningful qualities that art gives to my life. That being said, I also believe that just trying to experience as much as possible because life is too short or just to say "you did it" is highly self-defeating. I would rather pick one area and spend my life getting to know all there is to know about it than say I skimmed the surface of a huge field but didn't really comprehend any of it. I like to linger over great art- War and Peace was not meant to be read quickly and shoved off, Bach's music is not meant to just be heard and forgotten. Art is about contemplation, consideration, and application. I've found out that if it makes you shed a tear or ponder how to live better in the process, it's all the better. I'm not even 20 years old yet and have been listening to classical music for under 3 years. But I've discovered so much beautiful and meaningful music that I honestly feel has changed my life to a huge extent. There is joy in revisiting your favorite music and seeing how it speaks to you anew. There is also joy in expanding your horizons and giving other things a shot. And if you can't get into something? Then leave it be and come back to it down the road. You never know how your circumstances may have changed so as to allow you to appreciate the next time around. After all, _experiencing_ something is not the same as _understanding_ it. I'd rather devote my endeavors towards the latter. And, to bring it back to the main thread idea... life is too short to try to understand everything. This is an impossible task anyway. Just thought the opinions of another relative classical newcomer might be an interesting addition to this thread


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

A friend of mine and I recently discussed this and we felt that part of the challenge is to find your own personal blend of breadth and depth. 

Obviously it's somewhat disappointing, and perhaps in some sense blameworthy, not to know everything and not to know it all very thoroughly, but given the limitations of our time and ability, we just have to find a personally-satisfying balance between knowing a little about many things and knowing a lot about some few things. It's the balance between roots and wings. 

And it seems to be quite personal. An individual's own correct balance will not be right for everyone else. 

I'm personally much more of a butterfly than a mole. I really no longer know anything very well, but I know a little about lots of things, and I feel pretty good like that. I'm still going for more breadth rather than depth....


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

science said:


> I suspect this was a sick burn.


I had to look that up,no harm was intended,just joking

:tiphat:


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

science said:


> I suspect this was a sick burn.


I had to look that up,no harm was intended,just joking

:tiphat:

In fact, I agree with you and therefore referred to your avatar which has an expression that expresses that it is all too bad


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Certain composers really 'speak to me' and I consistently get more out of their music than the music of other composers. Focusing mostly on these provides me with vast amounts of music to listen to and get to know yet drastically reduces my feelings of needing to hear everything. I've given all the big names a chance and I know which ones deliver what I'm looking for. Of course I'm open to new discoveries and I love when that happens, which is why I also spend a certain percentage of my listening dedicated to hearing new things. But the majority of the time I focus on the composers/works I enjoy most and I'm happy with this.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I'm an omnivore when it comes to music. But I'm to the point to where some composers/genres just don't connect with me, and I'm comfortable saying life's too short for _that_.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Helgi said:


> I've gone through this with literature and am reminded of something many writers tend to do when they get older; they just re-read their favourites over and over. A little sad perhaps but I find it comforting.


Rewriting? Could you give some examples. It doesn't ring a bell with me.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> Rewriting? Could you give some examples. It doesn't ring a bell with me.


Re-_reading_ their favourite books, instead of keeping up with the new stuff. Can't recall any examples from off the top of my head, but I seem to remember this being a recurring theme in the Paris Review interviews.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Helgi said:


> Re-_reading_ their favourite books, instead of keeping up with the new stuff. Can't recall any examples from off the top of my head, but I seem to remember this being a recurring theme in the Paris Review interviews.


I think it is a natural thing. At some point you have as much as you want to have, and you want to enjoy it.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

starthrower said:


> No sense in bemoaning the fact that life is too short. It is what it is. If you're fortunate enough to be born in a country where you have the luxury of pleasures and music listening, it is a precious gift. So many others must endure a life of hardship and misery.





starthrower said:


> You said it, not me. But it's clearly a first world problem if it exists. I don't have anxieties over music listening choices. It's a labor of love and enjoyment.


I find this a little bit patronizing and don't see how it really contributes to the conversation. Ok, sure, it's a first world problem; but so are probably _most of all the little annoyances_ that we encounter in our first world lives. There's always someone who doesn't have access to the things some of us do, in a lot of different ways; it doesn't mean that our experiences are invalid. I'm definitely rooting for an attitude that promotes being grateful for the things we have - it's actually something I think about every time I attend a concert or something similar: what a privilege it is to be able to experence all of this great art in our lives!

But this is a classical music forum, and there is _a lot_ of classical music out there - and curious minds who are interested in exploring _do often_ feel that there way too much interesting stuff out there, that there simply _isn't_ time to explore it all. Yes, of course it's a labour of love and enjoyment, but even positive things in life can have subtle nuances and clearly this is a common feeling amongst listeners (and readers etc) and I really think just saying that there is "no sense in bemoaning" undermines the issue - isn't this an _interesting_ topic for discussion?

I'd also like to point out that pretty much all of the little debates and conversations on TC could be thrown aside by just saying that everything you talk about is a first world problem! It is how it is! Just be happy that you can listen to the music! But I don't think that's a very fertile ground for an art-related internet forum.

You said in an earlier post that you don't need to explore all 200 Bach cantatas, 600 Schubert songs and 104 Haydn symphonies. What about those of us who want to? I've always felt an intense need to explore all of the aforementioned repertoire - and it does indeed make me think about life and the time I have available to spend with art in its different forms. I think this is an existential experience that shouldn't just be dismissed because you feel that there's no point to it.

For me, personally, trying to branch out more and slightly organizing my listening habits around different projects has helped with the feeling that I'm not exploring things widely enough. The feeling never goes away completely, but in some ways it also functions as a driving force in my life; I certainly wouldn't have discovered a lot of my absolute favourite pieces had I not forced myself to explore music more systematically.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

tdc said:


> Certain composers really 'speak to me' and I consistently get more out of their music than the music of other composers. Focusing mostly on these provides me with vast amounts of music to listen to and get to know yet drastically reduces my feelings of needing to hear everything. I've given all the big names a chance and I know which ones deliver what I'm looking for. Of course I'm open to new discoveries and I love when that happens, which is why I also spend a certain percentage of my listening dedicated to hearing new things. But the majority of the time I focus on the composers/works I enjoy most and I'm happy with this.


And fair enough. I'm sure no-one could say you were wrong in doing that. I do have some experiences, though, of discovering and coming to love composers who for a long time left me cold. It wasn't that I struggled but I did try them out occasionally to see if I could hear what made so many others think them so great. And then for some of them the day came when I actually wanted to listen to them. There are many composers that this has happened for me yet but I have come to love, for example, Messiaen - a composer I actively disliked for much of my listening life - very much. Vaughan Williams is another composer who I now enjoy a lot (I listened to his Sir John in Love yesterday and still have its sound going around in my head) but found dull for decades. So I guess I would say carry on but don't close any doors.


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> And fair enough. I'm sure no-one could say you were wrong in doing that. I do have some experiences, though, of discovering and coming to love composers who for a long time left me cold. It wasn't that I struggled but I did try them out occasionally to see if I could hear what made so many others think them so great. And then for some of them the day came when I actually wanted to listen to them. There are many composers that this has happened for me yet but I have come to love, for example, Messiaen - a composer I actively disliked for much of my listening life - very much. Vaughan Williams is another composer who I now enjoy a lot (I listened to his Sir John in Love yesterday and still have its sound going around in my head) but found dull for decades. So I guess I would say carry on *but don't close any door*s.


Remove that door


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Maybe keep one of those bead curtains that help keep flies out?


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ Maybe keep one of those bead curtains that help keep flies out?


I am sorry to see that you remain cautious but I have to admit that there is progress.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Trust me, you don't want flies in your kitchen.


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ Trust me, you don't want flies in your kitchen.


especially if you like soup, although, these small setbacks can restore our contact with nature.:lol:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Having travelled a lot to hot and dirty places I have found that there are some "contacts with nature" that are best avoided.


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> Having travelled a lot to hot and dirty places I have found that there are some "contacts with nature" that are best avoided.


Let's leave it to that.:tiphat:


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

The good news is that there is no final exam in terms of what art and experiences a person has had. All you can do is try to make each choice a good one.


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Fabulin said:


> Or try listening to multiple pieces at the same time


There are people who can actually do this. And not just the way you or I can do it. They can actually "keep track" of what the separate pieces are doing. There was a study done, fairly recently, testing this ability.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

soni said:


> Life is too short for it all


In four years I think I've listened to just about everything of stature, save your money, use it wisely, if you're young and don't have a family you can manufacture all the time in the world.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

1996D said:


> In four years I think I've listened to just about everything of stature, save your money, use it wisely, if you're young and don't have a family you can manufacture all the time in the world.


Everything about this post is hilarious, especially given some of your other recent utterances on this board. :lol:


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

flamencosketches said:


> Everything about this post is hilarious, especially given some of your other recent utterances on this board. :lol:


Different people process pieces at different rates, you might need many more listens to comprehend and digest. I'm basically letting the OP know that everything is possible, even if the example is perhaps quite unique.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ But then you have given the impression in the past (maybe wrongly, who can say?) that your assessment of what belongs in the category "music of stature" is rather limited.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ But then you have given the impression in the past (maybe wrongly, who can say?) that your assessment of what belongs in the category "music of stature" is rather limited.


I didn't make that conclusion blindly, I've listened to almost everything. In all their arrogance making their music inaccessible to the public, contemporary composers make music that is musically simple and easy to break down. No complex counterpoint that requires several listens or careful analysis, no greater structure.

It's ironic that they think their music is inaccessible because of its complexity, when it fact it's that because of its pure ugliness.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ OK. We'll leave aside the 20th century. Are you saying that you know every piece of music written by Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Brahms, Schubert, Schumann, Wagner, Mahler and all their contemporaries and all the music composed before Bach? Probably you are not?


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ OK. We'll leave aside the 20th century. Are you saying that you know every piece of music written by Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Brahms, Schubert, Schumann, Wagner, Mahler and all their contemporaries and all the music composed before Bach? Probably you are not?


Yes, minus the repetition of Haydn's symphonies. But yes at least one listen to all the pieces that have some complexity, before Bach only some, Monteverdi, Tinctoris, Victoria, Schutz. Mainly just for analysis, to understand the progression of music.

Remember, this is my job.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

That still sounds impressive - do you remember it all?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

1996D said:


> Yes, minus the repetition of Haydn's symphonies. But yes at least one listen to all the pieces that have some complexity, before Bach only some, Monteverdi, Tinctoris, Victoria, Schutz. Mainly just for analysis, to understand the progression of music.
> 
> Remember, this is my job.


I didn't know you were employed. By the way, have you offered TC any samples of your music?


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Being a devotee of classical music today is like being the proverbial kid in a candy store ! So much to try the mind boggles . Everything from medieval l and renaissance music to recent works by contemporary composers . 
Certainly, there's infinitely greater variety than when I first became a classical music nerd as a teenager in the late 1960s ( I feel like such a dinosaur because most of the people on this forum are so much younger than I am ! ).
I remember the Schwann catalogue of classical music from about 50 years ago . This was in the dark age of the LP . There was a fairly wide variety of classical music available, but nothing remotely close to the variety we have today . The Schwann catalogue continued into the CD era but want under some years ago . By that time it was like the New York phone book , not the slim volume it was when I first got to know it . 
There were about 100 recordings of the Mahler symphonies listed in Schwann 50 years ago with such notable Mahler conductors as Walter, Bernstein, Klemperer, Solti, Haitink, Abravanel, Scherchen, Kletzki, Kondrashin, Leinsdorf , et al. But now there are X number of recordings of them , plus numerous live performances on DVD . 
There is no way to count today . The same with the symphonies of Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, Schubert, Schumann, Mendelssohn , Brahms, Dvorak, Sibelius , Tchaikovsky , et al .
Now you can hear symphonies by composers you've never heard of before even if you're a veteran listener . Plus concertos, orchestral works, you name it . 
Since the dawn of the digital era , countless operas have been recorded for the first time ,ranging from contemporaries of Monteverdi to recent operas by Adams, Glass, Tan Dun, Bolcom, Henze, and so many other composers . Studio opera recordings of complete operas are unfortunately rare because of the costs , but there are countless live performances of countless different operas available on DVD .
You can get sets of the complete works of Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms and other great composers on humongous sets drawn from a variety of sources at a ridiculously cheap price . 
The internet has made the complete works of everybody available . Youtube has countless audio and video performances of more music than the mind can imagine - for free . 
AS a teenager, I could never have imagined things would be like this for the music I love .


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

superhorn said:


> Youtube has countless audio and video performances of more music than the mind can imagine - for free .
> AS a teenager, I could never have imagined things would be like this for the music I love .


Spotify is even better, also free, it has every top recording and much better sound quality than Youtube.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> I didn't know you were employed. By the way, have you offered TC any samples of your music?


I'm employed by God to make him good music.



Enthusiast said:


> That still sounds impressive - do you remember it all?


Yes, I get bored if I listen to it again. Even Mahler is getting boring, such a shame. That's the main reason I became a composer, this love for music needs to be satisfied and there is no one left to do it.


----------

