# best resources for listeners at various stages of our exploration



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

For the first question, let's try to imagine the needs of someone who has not grown up in an environment that values the tradition of classical music, but who for some reason now wishes to learn about it. What resources do you imagine such a person would want? What resources would best serve him or her? 

For the second question, let's try to imagine the needs of that person when he or she has begun to enjoy classical music, but finds the abundance of recommendations overwhelming. Hundreds of composers, thousands of works, everything described as "great," "essential," and "underrated," and of course much of it also denigrated in various ways. What resources might best help them prioritize their self-education? What might help them decide which of, for example, Babbitt's All Set, Barber's First Essay for Orchestra, Bax's Winter Legends, Beach's piano concerto, Berio's Coro, Berlioz's Les Troyens, Bernstein's Serenade after Plato's Symposium, Biber's Harmonia artificiosa-ariosa, Billone's 1+1=1, Birtwistle's Earth Dances, Bizet's Pearl Fishers, Bliss's Color Symphony, Brahms's Tragic Overture, Bridge's piano quintet, Britten's Peter Grimes, Bruch's Kol Nidrei, Brumel's "earthquake" mass, Busoni's piano concerto, or Byrd's Infelix Ego--to mention a very small sample of the works that will be recommended to them with effusive superlatives--they should prioritize? 

For the third question, let's imagine that you're already familiar with the fifteen hundred or so most famous works -- of course most people here don't have to imagine this at all, but let's add the twist that 
you're wiling or perhaps even eager to try something new, something a little more obscure. What resources might help you choose between, or even just find out about, the thousands of works you don't already know?


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Here are some posts on this topic that might promote the discussion:



Larkenfield said:


> So many problems, so many controversies are the result of _rankings_, as if a survey of votes or numbers has anything to do with the enjoyment of a particular sonata or symphony or whatever. The work of a 1st tier or a 46th tier? As if any work could be rated with such certainty! I would think that most listeners do not listen to their favorites by any composer according to such a standard or rating system, except perhaps in an exceedingly general way. Voting games are only a pastime and I think that it should be pointed out every now and then that there is a downside, that the comparison of works can be false, an interference, can be an unnecessary distraction and interfere with the pure enjoyment of them as singular and unique. As much as I enjoy this Schubert sonata, rating it as one of the greatest ever on the basis of a handful of votes is not necessarily doing it any favors. But I do not go along with the critics who have no understanding of the pure spirituality and sincerity behind Schubert's music, because they don't seem to be aware of it and they never mentioned it because all they seem to be interested in is the technical side, though I've never heard Schubert make a bad harmonic progression in his life. (Watch the effort to find one while continuing to ignore the spirit behind his music-called missing the point.) Schubert's 21st Piano Sonata does not have to be rated #1 in order to be enjoyed or considered immortal without controversy.





eugeneonagain said:


> Let's be honest though, that is what this thread (and the previous one) is really about. Analyse the opening post and how it is predicated upon rankings and list placings.
> 
> After that comes a repetitious flurry of posts expressing the emotional response to having heard it umpteen times for the last twenty years. Of course that is what is asked for, and in bold type.
> 
> ...





ManateeFL said:


> Couldn't agree more. When I first became interested in classical music and was looking acquire some knowledge on the subject and some direction on what to listen to, I soon found that I got absolutely nothing out of lists of names of composers and works that I had no point of reference for. One of the first books I picked up on the subject was by Phil Goulding -- the 50 greatest composers and their 1,000 greatest works or something. I found the arbitrary rankings and his insistence on being _exclusive_ to be incredibly annoying. "Sorry, I can't discuss Schoenberg or Rachmaninoff because they don't make it onto my list". And most of the book seemed to be filled with rankings and rationalizations for those rankings, as if I cared. Realizing it's lack of substance, I quickly got rid fo it and I went on to pick up a book by David Dubal called The Essential Canon of Classical Music which I liked much more. It wasn't perfect, but I liked how _inclusive_ the book attempted to be; the author wanted to give as many great composers and great works as possible their due and celebrate their individuality without worrying about how they compared or ranked to other composers or works.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

To add to ManateeFL's point, here's a review I wrote back in 2005, when I was pretty new to classical music, about Goulding's book on Mr. Bezo's website:



> I'm hoping to learn to appreciate classical music, not merely to listen and nod, but to understand. As well as I can anyway!
> 
> I bought this book on accident. I researched books on classical music and decided to buy Jan Swafford's "Vintage Guide to Classical Music." Then I procrastinated for a few months, forgot which book I'd selected; when I came back to buy it I didn't look carefully and strangely I confused it with this book!
> 
> ...


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

And from only 7 years ago:



> I've been reflecting on this, on the basis of projects on this site and even more because of projects on other sites. There is one, for instance, that recently chose Poulenc as the third "greatest" French composer, and is about to put Ravel in first place. Another project is probably going to have both Firebird and Petrouchka beat out Rite of Spring. I've seen Lutoslawski's 3rd symphony recommended more strongly than Beethoven's 3rd. On a recent project here, a bunch of people were recommending Brahms' - was it Nanie? - above the German Requiem.
> 
> So what is going on in this process?
> 
> ...


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

science said:


> For the first question, let's try to imagine the needs of someone who has not grown up in an environment that values the tradition of classical music, but who for some reason now wishes to learn about it. What resources do you imagine such a person would want? What resources would best serve him or her?
> 
> For the second question, let's try to imagine the needs of that person when he or she has begun to enjoy classical music, but finds the abundance of recommendations overwhelming. Hundreds of composers, thousands of works, everything described as "great," "essential," and "underrated," and of course much of it also denigrated in various ways. What resources might best help them prioritize their self-education? What might help them decide which of, for example, Babbitt's All Set, Barber's First Essay for Orchestra, Bax's Winter Legends, Beach's piano concerto, Berio's Coro, Berlioz's Les Troyens, Bernstein's Serenade after Plato's Symposium, Biber's Harmonia artificiosa-ariosa, Billone's 1+1=1, Birtwistle's Earth Dances, Bizet's Pearl Fishers, Bliss's Color Symphony, Brahms's Tragic Overture, Bridge's piano quintet, Britten's Peter Grimes, Bruch's Kol Nidrei, Brumel's "earthquake" mass, Busoni's piano concerto, or Byrd's Infelix Ego--to mention a very small sample of the works that will be recommended to them with effusive superlatives--they should prioritize?
> 
> ...


As far as question 1 goes, I think Jan Swafford's Vintage Guide to Classical Music is a really useful resource. I also think a box set like Karajan 1960s (smirk all you like) is a great "starter" to a classical music deep dive, because it contains estimable (if not definitive, whether that can even be determined) recordings of most of the standard repertoire.

I can't speak to questions two and three, because I would not consider myself expert enough to offer a meaningful opinion on them, being intimately familiar with perhaps 10% of what you set forth as the typical level of familiarity here. About all I can say is that in my attempts to branch out of the repertoire, NPR's annual "best albums" lists have been a nice look into contemporary stuff.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

On the other hand, do we really, genuinely want to introduce people to our music?



> I've often heard classical music fans worry that not enough people like our music. Classical music is dying, only old people go to concerts, etc....
> 
> I've become convinced that at least some of this is wishful thinking. A lot of us wish to be the only people who like classical music. We hope to distinguish ourselves by our good taste from the rubes around us. We hope younger generations won't listen to the music so that we can be more elite, relative to them.
> 
> ...


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Perhaps worthy of consideration, though perhaps not:



> Again, I feel very strongly about this because of my own struggles in getting reliable ranked recommendations. There is certainly nothing at all wrong with voting for favorites, and calling the list something like "our favorite works," but if we call it "recommendations" then we take on a kind of pedagogical responsibility.
> 
> As a teacher, I face this kind of thing all the time. My favorite Shakespeare play is King Lear, but the first plays I read with my students are Romeo & Juliet (because it is dirty and funny and not at all the play my students expect it to be) and Julius Caesar, which I don't particularly like, but I read it for several reasons: it's good for students to read before they read Macbeth or the Henry IV plays, it's been a part of high school reading for so long and I want my students not to miss the classic experiences, and finally because several of the scenes and passages are so fundamental to an educated person, no one can consider themselves educated unless they know "Et tu Brute" and "I am armed so strong in honesty" and "Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears," and "The fault dear Brutus is not in our stars" etc....
> 
> ...


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

science said:


> For the first question, let's try to imagine the needs of someone who has not grown up in an environment that values the tradition of classical music, but who for some reason now wishes to learn about it. What resources do you imagine such a person would want? What resources would best serve him or her?


The best resource for me would be a book, that would introduce the whole classical music from medieval ages to modern, that would pick 10 most significant composers of each period, and 5 most significant works of each of them. Such a book would also introduce a little bit about each of the historical periods, political context, religious beliefs etc, that would introduce the composers and also the works. In total, it could be something like 300 works. It would avoid any rankings and comparisons.

The project that you are doing is too overwhelming. You have over 1000 works, each lasting 30 minutes on average, that is 500 hours = 20 day of pure listening time. The organization into tiers in not really that helpful, since I often feel that some works in higher tiers I do not like that much, and would push some works higher up. I think that after a certain exploratory period, each listeners finds what he likes and what he dislikes and will then gravitate towards the stuff that interests him. For some, it might be opera, for others Bartok or Beat Furrer.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Jacck said:


> The best resource for me would be a book, that would introduce the whole classical music from medieval ages to modern, that would pick 10 most significant composers of each period, and 5 most significant works of each of them. Such a book would also introduce a little bit about each of the historical periods, political context, religious beliefs etc, that would introduce the composers and also the works. In total, it could be something like 300 works. It would avoid any rankings and comparisons.
> 
> The project that you are doing is too overwhelming. You have over 1000 works, each lasting 30 minutes on average, that is 500 hours = 20 day of pure listening time. The organization into tiers in not really that helpful, since I often feel that some works in higher tiers I do not like that much, and would push some works higher up. I think that after a certain exploratory period, each listeners finds what he likes and what he dislikes and will then gravitate towards the stuff that interests him. For some, it might be opera, for others Bartok or Beat Furrer.


I think it's much more than 20 days....

What we are creating now is very similar to what I wish had existed for me 15 years ago. I mean, 5 works by 10 medieval composers is actually a pretty deep dive into the middle ages, whereas 5 works by 10 romantic composers is still almost complete ignorance of the romantic period. And what should the 51st work be? ... If it's a list of 500 works, what should the next 100 be?

I have problems with what we're making - particularly with how we're treating popular works and Renaissance works. However, I think it's helpful.

I have never found what I like or dislike. And more importantly, I'm not even nearly presumptuous enough to think that my tastes matter. I'm not trying to be entertained. I want to learn stuff.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Anything that helps rather than deters newbies will never be popular with established classical fans because it erodes our exclusivity.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

science said:


> Anything that helps rather than deters newbies will never be popular with established classical fans because it erodes our exclusivity.


I am not sure about the exclusitivity, but in your project, the WTC is the highest tier. Then the Ring, then Art of Fugue, Mass in B minor etc. While I have little doubt, that these are creations of the highest order, these are absolutely NOT the compositions I would recommend to a newbie. Things like the WTC are overwhelming and difficult to approach works. I would even say that it is only now (after hundreds of hours of listening to classical music) that I am starting to appreciate these works. For a newbie the Chaconne or the Italian concerto might be much more suitable points of entry. Your project might be more suitable for an intermediate/advanced classical music listener


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Jacck said:


> I am not sure about the exclusitivity, but in your project, the WTC is the highest tier. Then the Ring, then Art of Fugue, Mass in B minor etc. While I have little doubt, that these are creations of the highest order, these are absolutely NOT the compositions I would recommend to a newbie. Things like the WTC are overwhelming and difficult to approach works. I would even say that it is only now (after hundreds of hours of listening to classical music) that I am starting to appreciate these works. For a newbie the Chaconne or the Italian concerto might be much more suitable points of entry. Your project might be more suitable for an intermediate/advanced classical music listener


Of course the reason those works have been voted into those positions is to establish a high barrier to entry.

It's the same reason _Ulysses_ and Proust are "the greatest" fiction.



> New to classical music? Interested in exploring it?
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> ...


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Following this thread for the reason that I am a long-time music lover but a newcomer to the tradition of classical music, and becoming obsessed. Funny enough, I just received Jan Swafford's Vintage Guide in the mail just yesterday (after about a four-week wait). I'm excited to check it out. I've also somewhat recently read Copland's What To Listen For In Music and loved it. 

All that being said, I basically have examined most of the "big" composers at least on an entry level. Hopefully there is still some value to be obtained from Swafford's book. It would have surely been a lot more useful to me a month ago :lol:


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

flamencosketches said:


> Following this thread for the reason that I am a long-time music lover but a newcomer to the tradition of classical music, and becoming obsessed. Funny enough, I just received Jan Swafford's Vintage Guide in the mail just yesterday (after about a four-week wait). I'm excited to check it out. I've also somewhat recently read Copland's What To Listen For In Music and loved it.
> 
> All that being said, I basically have examined most of the "big" composers at least on an entry level. Hopefully there is still some value to be obtained from Swafford's book. It would have surely been a lot more useful to me a month ago :lol:


I still consult the book after 8 months of critical listening. It's like a really good Wikipedia that goes into artist history, significant works, and comments about style, substance and historical context.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I've found various online sellers' "people who bought this also bought..." feature to be a useful source of recommendations.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

This topic is somewhat complicated by the fact that there are different kinds of listeners (generally tastes vary) and that lists can order works based on different metrics. A list may simply offer the most liked works while another may offer the most liked works that also seem to offer the greatest satisfaction. I suspect that the average listener (probably a minority on TC) likes Eine kleine Nachtmusik more than Bach's Mass in B minor, Pachelbel's Canon more than The Ring, and The Blue Danube more than anything by Stravinsky. A seasoned listener may like all of those but many will prefer the latter choices to the former in overall musical satisfaction. 

My guiding principle has always been that while tastes differ, there is significant commonality in tastes - e.g. many more like some works than others. Given that, a listener picked at random will tend to have tastes similar to the "average classical music listener." That doesn't mean that that random listener will like everything others like, but knowing what others really like is a great place to start with suggestions. 

So I would basically answer science's 3 questions in a similar manner. Each listener should attempt to discover a list of either most liked works or most liked works that give great satisfaction. The difference is that new listeners (question 1) should look for the very most liked works (i.e. a smaller list), more seasoned listeners (question 2) should look for an expanded list, and those who have knowledge of > 1500 or more works should look for the most expansive list they can find. New listeners may wish to hear simply the most liked works while once they become more familiar with classical music they may wish to focus on most liked works that give great satisfaction.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

When I first started listening seriously, my bible was Goulding's book. After I became familiar with many works from Goulding's lists, I bought Dubal's Essential Canon, and found that book very useful. Once I felt I was familiar with much in Dubal's book, things got harder since there were not similar lists for those in my position. TC has been, for me, an essential source of recommendations. I still view recommendations from a group of people more useful than from a single person, but I also recognize that recommendations from someone whose taste is similar to mine are more useful than recommendations from someone who taste clearly differs.

Some posts above have found fault in Goulding's book. For someone past the beginner phase, I would agree there are more useful sources, but for beginners I simply can't recommend it strongly enough. I worked my way through the starter lists (5 works from each of the 50 composers) and could not believe how wonderful classical music was. Almost every work stunned me. It changed my view of classical music from modest interest to an obsession. I felt it was an almost perfect starter list to then move me onto further exploration.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

science said:


> For the first question, let's try to imagine the needs of someone who has not grown up in an environment that values the tradition of classical music, but who for some reason now wishes to learn about it. What resources do you imagine such a person would want? What resources would best serve him or her?
> 
> For the second question, let's try to imagine the needs of that person when he or she has begun to enjoy classical music, but finds the abundance of recommendations overwhelming. Hundreds of composers, thousands of works, everything described as "great," "essential," and "underrated," and of course much of it also denigrated in various ways. What resources might best help them prioritize their self-education? What might help them decide which of, for example, Babbitt's All Set, Barber's First Essay for Orchestra, Bax's Winter Legends, Beach's piano concerto, Berio's Coro, Berlioz's Les Troyens, Bernstein's Serenade after Plato's Symposium, Biber's Harmonia artificiosa-ariosa, Billone's 1+1=1, Birtwistle's Earth Dances, Bizet's Pearl Fishers, Bliss's Color Symphony, Brahms's Tragic Overture, Bridge's piano quintet, Britten's Peter Grimes, Bruch's Kol Nidrei, Brumel's "earthquake" mass, Busoni's piano concerto, or Byrd's Infelix Ego--to mention a very small sample of the works that will be recommended to them with effusive superlatives--they should prioritize?
> 
> ...


1. A variety of sources as have already been mentioned, especially books and also online. Websites like youtube have suggestions of similar music, and forums like TC are a good place to talk, ask questions, get recent news and so on.

2. With the internet there is instant (or near instant) access to music and information about it. More than ever before, with the amount of overwhelming choices, people have a need for tools to guide them. The nearest analogy I can think of is travel. It doesn't make sense to reinvent the wheel if, say, you are visiting a great city like New York, Paris or Rome. You consult a reputable tour book and/or website, perhaps book with a travel agent who is specialised for travel in that part of the world and who can link you up with resources on the ground such as local tour guides. Classical music is not different, it needs to have this sort of guide or gatekeeper type resource to point people in the right direction. In this respect, what you started as "The Classical Music Project," has vindicated all the naysayers, science. I think its one of the best things done so far on TC.

3. My personal slant on that is to dig deeper into composers which you enjoy. Others do the same with musical eras or performers. Some years ago I also began to borrow and in some cases purchase books on music, with a focus on composer biographies. They've added to my enjoyment of the music, even though I have in the past few years culling my collection.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

science said:


> Anything that helps rather than deters newbies will never be popular with established classical fans because it erodes our exclusivity.


I have seen quite a bit of that online, not so much on the ground among the few people I know whose musical diet includes classical. I used to take this seriously but now I think that if people do this, well there is a touch of Monty Python to it. Or perhaps Lady Bracknell:

_"I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. The whole theory of modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any rate, education produces no effect whatsoever. If it did, it would prove a serious danger to the upper classes, and probably lead to riots and acts of violence in Grosvenor Square."_

Let me cut to the chase, to an issue which has been discussed here but its a discomfiting issue: class. We've talked about Pierre Bourdieu and the concept of cultural capital. Honestly, I am at odds with defending classical music for any reason. I don't belong to the elite classes who have traditionally underpinned this music. In any case, whatever use it served for the Lady Bracknells of the past, their world is largely gone. Even in Oscar Wilde's time it was becoming a caricature. We are now in the age of digital revolution, globalisation. There's not much leisure time for music and reading as there where for ladies and gentlemen of the 19th century, or even the 20th. Even those of us in skilled jobs are invariably part of what has been called the educated precariat. Increasingly our leisure time is being in one way or another eaten up by work, and work-life balance is not much more than a slogan.

So in the most basic sense, I see classical is more like a consumer item than anything, shocking as this may seem. I don't think it has any function to morally or otherwise uplift the society, nor do I think that it makes individuals better. On my less cynical days, I do harbour a hope that it does what it always has - bring people together, help them share and relate aspects of the human condition, and to act like a rich soil in which to cultivate their own imagination and creativity. These are the things I see as positive, and in an online sense places like TC can be part of this.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I see the music as more:

"Is it not for this reason . . . that education in music is most sovereign, because more than anything else, rhythmia and harmonia find their way to the inmost soul and take strongest hold upon it, bringing with them and imparting grace, if one is rightly trained, and otherwise the contrary? And further, because omissions and the failure of beauty in things badly made or grown would be most quickly perceived by one who was properly educated in music, and so, feeling distaste rightly, he would praise beautiful things and take delight in them and receive them into his soul to foster its growth and become himself beautiful and good. The ugly he would rightly disapprove of and detest while still young and unable to grasp rational speech, but when reason came the man thus nurtured would be the first to give her welcome, for by this affinity he would know her." ―Socrates

"Music takes us out of the actual and whispers to us dim secrets that startle our wonder as to who we are, and for what, whence, and whereto." ―Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Men profess to be lovers of music, but for the most part they give no evidence in their opinions and lives that they have heard it." ―Henry David Thoreau


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Burn the lists.

As I have said many times to many a newbie: find a classical radio station, listen widely but randomly, take note of things that make your ears perk up, get them and listen again until you decide whether or not you really like the piece -- for the ones to which the answer is yes, try similar things. You'll either like them or dislike them. The ones you dislike, put aside and try again later (or not). You'll eventually build up a knowledge base from listening and reading liner notes. All the recommendations you need you will find without someone's "essential" list. CM and CM listeners are not monolithic.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Larkenfield said:


> "Men profess to be lovers of music, but for the most part they give no evidence in their opinions and lives that they have heard it." ―Henry David Thoreau


Of course, I have always considered Thoreau a dislikeable misanthrope.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I disagree with the emphasis on pleasure. I do not listen for pleasure. All music is pleasing; some, at worst, is an acquired taste, depending on the individual's openness to novelty. I don't believe we read books or websites about classical music because we are finding out what we enjoy: we can find that out with much less effort. We come here for knowledge, we come to find out what we are _supposed to_ enjoy.


----------



## Zofia (Jan 24, 2019)

Go to charity shops maybe this only apply to Berlin but I don’t think so...

I often get many many discs is good or great condition some time I will replace the box but otherwise it is very good. I think this will help more new listeners to find things they like for cheap but if you are like myself who like to listen to everything it is also good.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

_The first thing you need to do is prepare yourself for the scorn that you will receive from classical music fans. No matter what you do, they will look down on you relentlessly until you prove that you belong. It's a snob's version of hazing. Brace yourself for years of humiliation and scorn. _

https://www.talkclassical.com/59648-best-resources-listeners-various.html#post1581860

A further comment on the above post by science, and the quote in particular. There is a dichotomy at work online at least between two wholly contradictory notions:

1. Ignorance is bliss: you are new to classical music and therefore just jump right in, let it wash over you, no need to be systematic about anything.

2. The shoulds: you should know the core repertoire, you should know about different performance practices, you should know about the different eras of music, and so on.

These have often been advocated by the same people, invariably anti-list (or even anti-anything except the music) but at the same time looking down upon people who don't know the things they know. How are they supposed to know if there is no framework to get from being a beginner to an intermediate (let alone advanced) listener? Presumably we are born on this earth either knowing or not knowing. Despite being a member here for years, including some very tumultuous periods when there where escalations and charges of ignorance and so on happening on a daily basis, I've got absolutely no answer to this.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Sid James said:


> _The first thing you need to do is prepare yourself for the scorn that you will receive from classical music fans. No matter what you do, they will look down on you relentlessly until you prove that you belong. It's a snob's version of hazing. Brace yourself for years of humiliation and scorn. _
> 
> https://www.talkclassical.com/59648-best-resources-listeners-various.html#post1581860
> 
> ...


Yes, I think this is precisely the thing. No one is supposed to get from being a beginner to an intermediate unless they are born to it.

Anything framework that would help anyone make that climb is unwelcome; as is anyone who, despite the barriers, has made it.

Again, I've never encountered this attitude from professional musicians - even though most of them were truly born to it, at least in the sense of coming from families who understood the value of music lessons for their children. I believe that their status enables them to feel secure welcoming new people to the world of classical music. It is among the "mere listeners" that we find the exclusivity, elitism, hostility--however we want to label it. Edit: And to be fair to us, it is not an overwhelming majority of us who feel this way. Probably even a minority.

Talking about this "ism" is a little like a conspiracy theory in that we can't expect anyone in on the conspiracy to admit any of it. But it's even deeper, more like a religion, in that if you're in on it you can't even know it. As soon as you become conscious of it, the spell is broken.


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

1500 works sounds like an entire lifetime of listening, what sort of a standard would that be?! I would NEVER hear that much music in my life. I would have to sacrifice all my free time for the sake of music.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Hey, what about The Talk Classical Community’s Favorite and Most Highly Recommended Works? I've heard that's good


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Boychev said:


> 1500 works sounds like an entire lifetime of listening, what sort of a standard would that be?! I would NEVER hear that much music in my life. I would have to sacrifice all my free time for the sake of music.


Not at all; even if each work is, say, and hour on average (a HUUUGE overestimate), that's 1500 hours. If you spend an hour a day for two months, you'd be pretty much there.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

science said:


> Yes, I think this is precisely the thing. No one is supposed to get from being a beginner to an intermediate unless they are born to it.
> 
> Anything framework that would help anyone make that climb is unwelcome; as is anyone who, despite the barriers, has made it.
> 
> ...


there is no climb. The only difficulty is finding enough time to listen to all that music. How many works do you need to hear to be considered an intermediate or advanced? Hundreds? Thousands?


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Not at all; even if each work is, say, and hour on average (a HUUUGE overestimate), that's 1500 hours. If you spend an hour a day for two months, you'd be pretty much there.


It's at least five times that amount of time since I have no real musical training and cannot for the life of me follow the argument of a piece upon first listening, therefore rendering the first listen not much more than "I like it / I don't like it" sort of deal. Also factor in the time necessary to read on the composer and the work. Also, obviously, the best of those works would get at least ten or twenty re-listens simply for pleasure and for checking out different recordings. Also, if I get that much into classical music, obviously it would be necessary to learn more theory and train my ear, so there's that too.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Jacck said:


> there is no climb. The only difficulty is finding enough time to listen to all that music. How many works do you need to hear to be considered an intermediate or advanced? Hundreds? Thousands?


There's also the matter of learning what attitudes to adopt towards enough of those works that you can say the proper sort of thing about them in conversation.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

MarkW said:


> Of course, I have always considered Thoreau a dislikeable misanthrope.


Maybe so, heheh, but I've noticed the same thing. 

"Men profess to be lovers of music, but for the most part they give no evidence in their opinions and lives that they have heard it." ―Henry David Thoreau


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Boychev said:


> It's at least five times that amount of time since I have no real musical training and cannot for the life of me follow the argument of a piece upon first listening, therefore rendering the first listen not much more than "I like it / I don't like it" sort of deal. Also factor in the time necessary to read on the composer and the work. Also, obviously, the best of those works would get at least ten or twenty re-listens simply for pleasure and for checking out different recordings. Also, if I get that much into classical music, obviously it would be necessary to learn more theory and train my ear, so there's that too.


You definitely need to be driven to do it.

IMO, you can get away with a relatively small amount of reading if you do it right. You can get more than enough music theory from a "music theory for dummies" sort of book, especially if you have some kind of keyboard to putter around with (so you can play and hear things like major and minor chords). Once you have the main ideas - good enough. You could spend the rest of your life investigating harmony if it's fun, but for a "mere listener" it's just not necessary.

But if you already know what a chord and a key are, great introductions are The Vintage Guide and Classical Music 101, probably best done in that order. Next would be something like the Burkholder textbook, supplemented by Dubal's _Essential Canon_ - although Dubal's treatment of the Renaissance is criminal, that is a failure throughout our community, and his book is wonderful in almost every other way. The reading and listening there is probably a healthy year or two of leisure time, and if you can remember it, it would render you among the more knowledgeable people around.

After that, you can more than get by on liner notes and an occasional book.

In the past, the big barrier to this wasn't time but money. But now that we can steal everything via youtube....


----------



## Zofia (Jan 24, 2019)

Sid James said:


> _The first thing you need to do is prepare yourself for the scorn that you will receive from classical music fans. No matter what you do, they will look down on you relentlessly until you prove that you belong. It's a snob's version of hazing. Brace yourself for years of humiliation and scorn.._


_

So sad this true even if I hare what you like I would not wish for you to not enjoy it. People don't seem to do this with other music well actually I've seen it in Jazz and Heavy Metal fans to but far less._


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

@science: I have the main ideas due to playing an instrument, and it's not enough. I can't for the life of me follow everything that's going on in a symphony, identify all the key modulations, the way the structure of the thing unfolds, and so on. Right now I'm just wasting my time with this music since I don't really understand it, merely enjoy it. But there's way too much things to learn about rather than focusing on that much music. Taking the time to study hundreds and thousands of works sounds insane for anyone who isn't a musician or composer.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Boychev said:


> @science: I have the main ideas due to playing an instrument, and it's not enough. I can't for the life of me follow everything that's going on in a symphony, identify all the key modulations, the way the structure of the thing unfolds, and so on. Right now I'm just wasting my time with this music since I don't really understand it, merely enjoy it. But there's way too much things to learn about rather than focusing on that much music. Taking the time to study hundreds and thousands of works sounds insane for anyone who isn't a musician or composer.


Yes, that's true, and as a pianist/composer perhaps I'm not qualified to give this advice, but you don't need pressure yourself to "understand" music in a theoretical sense to enjoy it. In fact, if it makes you feel better, no one really "understands" music anyway, and, even for the most experienced music enthusiast, thoughts about it are constantly changing/evolving. I would recommend just listening to music when you get the chance (even if you're busy, just put something on in the background) and I'm sure you'll begin to develop your own (unique!) "understanding" of what music means to you. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with "just enjoying" music.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Boychev said:


> @science: I have the main ideas due to playing an instrument, and it's not enough. I can't for the life of me follow everything that's going on in a symphony, identify all the key modulations, the way the structure of the thing unfolds, and so on. Right now I'm just wasting my time with this music since I don't really understand it, merely enjoy it. But there's way too much things to learn about rather than focusing on that much music. Taking the time to study hundreds and thousands of works sounds insane for anyone who isn't a musician or composer.


It sounds like sonata form is particularly hanging you up. I'd say, first watch Craig Wright's video on that topic.






(I failed Professor Wright's course when I was in college! :lol

After that, you just need a few decent listening guides. Pick a really, really famous classical or early romantic work and find a guides to it like Hurwitz's "Owner's Manual" series or the "Classics Explained" series.

Eventually, IMO, you can stop worrying about "identifying all the modulations." You'll hear lots of them without trying, but the more important thing is just being "roughly aware" of what is going on!


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Jacck said:


> Things like the WTC are overwhelming and difficult to approach works.


People are different, and general rules can't be given. This is why threads like this are more or less useless. Actually WTC was one of the earliest Bach works I heard and began to listen to (aged 15), and it was probably first and foremost this work, which hooked me on Bach.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

science said:


> Yes, I think this is precisely the thing. No one is supposed to get from being a beginner to an intermediate unless they are born to it.
> 
> Anything framework that would help anyone make that climb is unwelcome; as is anyone who, despite the barriers, has made it.
> 
> ...


Unfortunately its easy to take on these attitudes (consciously or not). I've made the mistake here in the past, probably many times. Then when one enters into a heated debate, the line begins to blur between bully and victim. Its a total downer.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Sid James said:


> Unfortunately its easy to take on these attitudes (consciously or not). I've made the mistake here in the past, probably many times. Then when one enters into a heated debate, the line begins to blur between bully and victim. Its a total downer.


That's true. I know I'm susceptible to that. I don't think I ever feel like the victim in a particular sense, but I always identify with the victims in a general way, and victims always eventually react....

Back in the bad old days of the TC wars, both sides felt like victims, and both were, and both were also the bullies. It's just the inevitable dynamic when there is a zero-sum game.


----------



## haydnguy (Oct 13, 2008)

One thing I did was order the DVD's "How To Listen to and Understand Great Music" taught by Professor Robert Greenberg of the San Francisco Conservatory of Music. (From the Great Courses)

He makes the material interesting and he is easy to follow. However, as you keep watching, the material becomes more difficult. That's good though because as I grow in knowledge I can keep going back to it.


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Yes, that's true, and as a pianist/composer perhaps I'm not qualified to give this advice, but you don't need pressure yourself to "understand" music in a theoretical sense to enjoy it. In fact, if it makes you feel better, no one really "understands" music anyway, and, even for the most experienced music enthusiast, thoughts about it are constantly changing/evolving. I would recommend just listening to music when you get the chance (even if you're busy, just put something on in the background) and I'm sure you'll begin to develop your own (unique!) "understanding" of what music means to you. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with "just enjoying" music.


But then I'm just stuck in my own head, to me it seems narcissistic to assume that my perspective is the one that matters most or that my pleasure has higher value than the truth of the music (or the truth of anything for that matter); why care about feeling good when there's a huge world outside where my feelings are completely irrelevant, one that is richer and more profound than my own internal world could ever be? I don't want to be narcissistic or hedonistic or anything really, I want to know and understand.


----------



## Zofia (Jan 24, 2019)

Sorry if this has been said before. The internet is a wonderful tool you have more classical music available to you than ever in the past. Use streaming apps and youtube; If you don't like the music move on and maybe come back to it later...

There is no wrong choice only what you like.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

To me the best resource for getting to know classical music was advice and recommendation. I got to know a huge amount as a child following my dad's recommendations. I would say "OK I'm ready for something new" and he would say "try this". After a while I felt fine exploring myself, using reviews (some critics seemed to work for me and some didn't) and the local library. I was sometimes recommending music to him. Then, even after decades (when do we ever stop learning?), I would seek out advice for special areas that didn't immediately come to me. Again, I wanted advisers who seemed to have taste that worked for me. They might have been critics or friends (including forum members). 

But the best guide of all has been "my ear" - what I liked and didn't like - along with some humility: the knowledge that I might come to like something I don't like today and that if something that I don't like is widely admired or loved by people whose views I respect then the chances are that it is my bad for not getting it!

I was never interested in technical or historical knowledge about music until I had come to love it. For me, it is an emotional response that comes first.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

science said:


> It sounds like sonata form is particularly hanging you up. I'd say, first watch Craig Wright's video on that topic. . . .


This is my favorite explanation of sonata form.






Seriously.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Zofia said:


> Sorry if this has been said before. The internet is a wonderful tool you have more classical music available to you than ever in the past. Use streaming apps and youtube; If you don't like the music move on and maybe come back to it later...
> 
> There is no wrong choice only what you like.


 I've also found that to be true. It's a cornucopia of serendipity on YouTube to find unusual concerts, unusual composers, unusual or rare recordings, the traditional and the modern, the experimental, instructional videos. The only problem I see is that sometimes people don't know the right questions to ask to find something but it's probably already online. It's fun just to experiment and some of the videos are linked together that can open up further exploration. This is the golden age of availability until it's overrun with advertising. But I think it should be supplemented with a good book on the subject, such as my favorite by Harold C Schonberg, _The Lives of the Great Composers, _ full of references to their most famous works... Then one can buy or download recordings according to one's interests.


----------



## Boychev (Jul 21, 2014)

Honestly though, you know what I think the best resource for a complete newcomer would be? Spotify.

Make a Spotify playlist by adding one classical piece you already know and like that's 5 minutes long or less. The Rondo alla Turca, Clair de lune, Hungarian dance No. 5, whatever.

Below you'll see an automatically generated list of tracks. Go through them by skipping everything that's more than 5 minutes long, and add what you like to the playlist. The period or whether or not it's strictly classical are irrelevant (e. g. Yann Tiersen and Ludovico Einaudi would pop up for sure, but no matter - add them if you like them). Just listen to and learn about the tunes the same way you'd listen to pop music. Don't worry about the larger works the pieces come from. Don't pay much attention to who the performer is.

Repeat and relisten as many times as you feel like it. By the time you've heard a few hundred pieces you will have had lots of experience with a wide variety of styles, genres, and compositional approaches, you'd have got used to a different approach to music than the standard drums / bass / harmony / lead setup from pop, rock, and jazz music, and the desire might spark to listen to works in a longer form, to read more about the music, or to visit your local concert hall.

Either that or just listening to the radio of your favourite piece.

Or listening to FM classical radio, that works too.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Boychev said:


> Honestly though, you know what I think the best resource for a complete newcomer would be? Spotify.
> 
> Make a Spotify playlist by adding one classical piece you already know and like that's 5 minutes long or less. The Rondo alla Turca, Clair de lune, Hungarian dance No. 5, whatever.
> 
> ...


I agree that Spotify is a great gift for any newbee . Back when I started off as a highschool kid, I taped the weekly sunday afternoon concert on Dutch classical radio station, mostly aired from the Amsterdam concertgebouw . This is how I learned to know and grow into Mahler, Bruckner and Berlioz. Quite a trick to timely and quickly change the cassete-tape around:lol:

But apart from listening to radio broadcasts or spotify, I would highly recommend to go to live concerts. I must add that I am spoiled, as in the Netherlands there is a top notch offering of great live concerts and the country is so small that you are never far away. Two world class orchestras (Concertgebouw and Rotterdam Philharmonic) within an hour from my home and of course a rich baroque culture (Bach). All top soloists like to play in the Concertgebouw. If you look at it, The Netherlands is really incredible when it comes to enjoying classical music. But I am sure there are many places around the world where you can enjoy good music.

I think it was the conductor Celibidache who said that listening to recorded music was like making love to a postcard, no match for a live event.


----------

