# What classical pieces have been the most challenging for you to get into?



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

This is probably the hardest time trying to understand and make sense of:






Morton Feldman was easier for me to listen and comprehend.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

I'm sure that if I thought about it long enough, I could fill pages, but one group of composers I had a lot of difficulty with were French composers, such as Ravel and Debussy. I had a lot of trouble getting over the fact that all of those short little pieces that were not fully developed into big concert pieces sounded like cancan, fairground and circus music.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

brotagonist said:


> I'm sure that if I thought about it long enough, I could fill pages, but one group of composers I had a lot of difficulty with were French composers, such as Ravel and Debussy. I had a lot of trouble getting over the fact that all of those short little pieces that were not fully developed into big concert pieces sounded like cancan, fairground and circus music.


You must be attending a higher class of circus than me 

Mahler 7 has long been a mystery to me. A mystery wrapped in a riddle wrapped in an enigma. Wrapped in bacon.

_Die Kunst der Fuge_ sounded like random noises to me when I was younger.


----------



## drth15 (Dec 12, 2007)

Scriabin' s Prometheus Symphony. Always seemed formless & overwrought


----------



## GhenghisKhan (Dec 25, 2014)

I can't think of any particular pieces that are so difficult that I am not able to get into them.

But then I don't make particular effort to like or dislike pieces.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Schoenberg's Pelleas Und Melisande and first string quartet. I found them pretty much immediately intriguing and appealing but also quite formless.

There's also a lot more "challenging" pieces that I simply haven't learned to like at all of course...


----------



## aajj (Dec 28, 2014)

Prokofiev's 2nd Symphony and his 2nd Piano Concerto immediately come to mind. The symphony is kind of a kitchen sink work, as he seems to have thrown everything into the mish-mash. Perhaps if i was on LSD while listening... The concerto is a whirlwind and i eventually took to it more than the symphony.


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2015)

Monteverdi _Vespers_
Beethoven symphony no. 4
Berlioz _Romeo et Juliette_ symphony
Schumann symphony no. 2
Bruckner symphony no. 3
Mahler symphony no. 4
Scriabin _Poeme d'extase_
anything by Sibelius other than Valse Triste (which I didn't like but intrigued me)
Schoenberg Verklärte Nacht
a Scelsi piano piece I heard once in a concert
Ellliott Carter Double concerto
Xenakis _Bohor_
Behrens _Final Ballet_

And for a long time, any piece of Prokofiev seemed flat and empty. I learned to love every piece, but the first hearings were almost always stale, flat, and unprofitable. I had become thoroughly familiar with most of his work before I ever got to the point of having a positive first hearing of anything.* Very strange. Some oddly shaped groove in my brain, most likely.

*I think it was _Divertimento_ that was the first. So we have left the world of the big, famous pieces far behind. But I liked _Divertimento_ instantly. And from then on, each minor, obscure piece by Prokofiev presented itself as being perfectly fine and enjoyable. No process of getting to know after _Divertimento._


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Dim7 said:


> Schoenberg's Pelleas Und Melisande and first string quartet. I found them pretty much immediately intriguing and appealing but also quite formless.
> 
> There's also a lot more "challenging" pieces that I simply haven't learned to like at all of course...


They're anything but formless. They're more like large-scale multi-movement works with the movements combined into one.

Still, it's definitely more positive than the premiere critic's "a 45-minute long wrong note" criticism of Pelleas...


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

Mahlerian said:


> They're anything but formless. They're more like large-scale multi-movement works with the movements combined into one.
> 
> Still, it's definitely more positive than the premiere critic's "a 45-minute long wrong note" criticism of Pelleas...


Emphasis on the _I found_, the subjectivity and the past tense.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

brotagonist said:


> I'm sure that if I thought about it long enough, I could fill pages, but one group of composers I had a lot of difficulty with were French composers, such as Ravel and Debussy. I had a lot of trouble getting over the fact that all of those short little pieces that were not fully developed into big concert pieces sounded like cancan, fairground and circus music.


Somehow I see where you're coming from. But then again, that was part of the plan, as musical forms and attitudes underwent (radical) changes at the time. John Ireland, one of my favorites, comes to mind. His piano pieces are lovely, but I sometimes wish that he expanded his ideas further. Cyril Scott likewise (and even Rebikov and the Russian avan-garde composers like Roslavets, Mossolov, Lourie).


----------



## Fagotterdammerung (Jan 15, 2015)

Any major work from Stravinsky's Neoclassical period. It just sounded _lazy_ by comparison to his earlier works; compositional finger-twiddling.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Most classical era symphonies that I've heard. The last one was Hadyn's no. 73. I suppose many of these pieces are challenging and interesting for the musicians to play, but for me as a listener, I'm not engaged at all. Can't get into Beethoven's violin or piano concertos either.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Fagotterdammerung said:


> Any major work from Stravinsky's Neoclassical period. It just sounded _lazy_ by comparison to his earlier works; compositional finger-twiddling.


Any examples? Some of Stravinsky's works from the 1920s are starting to click for me now. Les Noce; Pulcinella. Not sure what you mean by "compositional finger twiddling"? Are you implying they are just clever, but uninspired works? And lazy? I think not.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

starthrower said:


> Any examples? Some of Stravinsky's works from the 1920s are starting to click for me now. Les Noce; Pulcinella. Not sure what you mean by "compositional finger twiddling"? Are you implying they are just clever, but uninspired works? And lazy? I think not.


Both of those predate his true Neoclassical style. Les Noces is firmly in his "Russian" style, while Pulcinella is more or less unique in his output.

His first big Neoclassical work is the Octet.


----------



## Fagotterdammerung (Jan 15, 2015)

starthrower said:


> Any examples? Some of Stravinsky's works from the 1920s are starting to click for me now. Les Noce; Pulcinella. Not sure what you mean by "compositional finger twiddling"? Are you implying they are just clever, but uninspired works? And lazy? I think not.


I love Les Noces. His Russian period up to about the _Symphonies of Wind Instruments_ ( still my favorite Stravinsky work ) was easy to love for the most part.

But coming off the fireworks of _Rite_ and then listening to this:






It seemed like all the color and energy had leaked out of his music.

This is unfair, and I have slowly grown to appreciate these works, but it took some time. I realized a large part of it was expectation. If I expected "Stravinsky music" as I'd known it, I'd be disappointed. If I listened to them independent of that notion, they had a lot of charm and interest.

( But... I still don't like _The Rake's Progress_ except for one brief chorus. )


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

I understand that. Some have trouble going beyond his Neoclassical works as well. Stravinsky's style may have changed over the years, but the quality of the music remained high throughout.


----------



## shadowdancer (Mar 31, 2014)

I follow the Stravinsky line. First time that I heard The Rite I thought: "This guy forgot his pills..."


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

The hardest piece for me to get into I ever heard was Boulez's 2nd Piano Sonata. Now listening to it is like running a hot knife through butter! And I still love it!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I'm listening to that YouTube upload of Apollo. It sounds good! Although if it was played for me blindfolded, I'd be stumped as far as the composer.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

For me, it's most Weber. I'll listen, but I can't follow along with any of the musical ideas. The only plus side is that everything's reletivly short


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Cosmos said:


> For me, it's most Weber. I'll listen, but I can't follow along with any of the musical ideas. The only plus side is that everything's reletivly short


Assuming you mean Webern rather than Carl Maria von Weber, I think certain pieces are not too hard to follow.















The first four notes are the "subject" of the piece, and everything that follows is a transformation of them (the middle four notes of the row put the relations between them in a different order, and the last four are the same in reverse order and transposed). They may end up broken across registers, instruments, or made into chords, and so forth, but if you can just hear those four notes, realize that they are the only material for the entire work.


----------



## FPwtc (Dec 3, 2014)

George Crumb "Black Angels...I find this quite hard work...


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Mahler's symphonies. When I first tried to listen to them, as a teenager, I couldn't make any sense of them - even though they contained beautiful moments, they just seemed so enormous and sprawling, with no logic. I can't point to a time when they "clicked." It was just a gradual process of familiarization.


----------



## Jos (Oct 14, 2013)

I've been listening on and of to the Bartok stringquartets since teenage years and they are tough to crack for me. Got the Juilliani rendition. 
Pretty soon there will be a silly catholic festivity, carnaval, that my wife and daughters will attend, so my son and me will have "gents club". Not sure if he is ready for Bartok.........or if I am..... I'll play them again, it's been a while.


----------



## musicrom (Dec 29, 2013)

brotagonist said:


> I'm sure that if I thought about it long enough, I could fill pages, but one group of composers I had a lot of difficulty with were French composers, such as Ravel and Debussy. I had a lot of trouble getting over the fact that all of those short little pieces that were not fully developed into big concert pieces sounded like cancan, fairground and circus music.


I'm not sure about the last part, but for some reason, I haven't been able to get into Ravel or Debussy either. I'm not sure that it's because "I don't get it" more than I just plain don't like the style, but their music has always remained a mystery to me as to why people like them so much. I appreciate the uniqueness of their compositions, but there are very few that I have actually enjoyed very much.

Besides them, a couple composers that I haven't really been able to crack yet (that I've at least given a legitimate effort at) are Penderecki, Messiaen, and Bartok to a lesser extent.

EDIT: Oh, and Takemitsu.


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

I like Bartok quite a lot - Cto for Orch, Bluebeard, Miraculous Mandarin but for some reason the string quartets are a tough nut for me to crack. Although, for some reason hearing No.4 live was fantastic.

I have also never been able to understand why Sibeilius Vn Cto is so popular. I love Symphonies 2 and 5 as much as anyone, but the Vn Cto has never done anything for me.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

drth15 said:


> Scriabin' s Prometheus Symphony. Always seemed formless & overwrought


Sometimes it's a matter of finding the right performance. Listening to Muti certainly worked for me.

Mahler & Bruckner symphonies, not only because of their length but it is a big factor. I still have to listen to half of them.
Sibelius symphonies - I'm in the process of getting them
Brahms - Besides some piano pieces I don't really get him yet.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> Assuming you mean Webern rather than Carl Maria von Weber, I think certain pieces are not too hard to follow.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lmfao, yeah whoops. And thanks for the commentary, I'm kind of grasping this piece


----------



## Celloman (Sep 30, 2006)

Right now, I struggle with Morton Feldman because much of his music is so darned long. I have listened to some of his shorter works and enjoy those very much, but pieces such as his 2nd string quartet can seem a bit like a marathon. Oh well, just a little more patience...


----------



## OldFashionedGirl (Jul 21, 2013)

Bartók String quartets and Schoenberg String quartets and violin concerto.


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

albertfallickwang said:


> This is probably the hardest time trying to understand and make sense of:


I, too, have taken some time in understanding Carter. I will say, however, as I continue to listen to his quartets, the more I have come to appreciate the distinct voices, multiple rhythms, and melodic fragments that move throughout. A very unique style.


----------



## Guest (Feb 11, 2015)

What classical pieces have been most challenging to me?

Generally speaking: the most rewarding ones.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Celloman said:


> Right now, I struggle with Morton Feldman because much of his music is so darned long. I have listened to some of his shorter works and enjoy those very much, but pieces such as his 2nd string quartet can seem a bit like a marathon. Oh well, just a little more patience...


Don't worry. You can "get" Feldman without sitting there till you've peed your pants.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

I have mentioned this in other threads. I really did not understand or appreciate atonal or serial music until I was in my fifties.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I'll assume challenging means still within my grasp. So the composers I feel should be within reach for me but not quite yet are *Scriabin*, especially his solo piano. It simply eludes me. I also have a terrible time with *Delius* and *Bridge*. These three composers could not have written less memorable themes if they had used fish scales instead of major, minor, pentatonic, etc.

One I have very nearly grasped and still enjoy without fully grasping is *Takemitsu*. I feel I could understand his music better if it would just speed up a bit. My short term memory doesn't retain motivic development with all that adagio and andante, disrespectful as that may sound.

Composers I had a hard time grasping more because of their reputation than the actual difficulty: *Boulez, Messiaen and Schoenberg.* The latter I had a little trouble with because I found some of his romanticism over the top, not because of serialism. These composers were astonishingly easy once I had the right frame of mind and chose the right pieces, and now I am eager to absorb more of their output. I need to be really alert and receptive though so as not to spoil the mood, so it's still slow going.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Havergal Brian - I have tried but the only piece that I ever seem to return to his his Symphony #7.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Schubert's Ninth Symphony still eludes me. I love Schubert. I turn to his music often. I study his scores. I collect _Winterreise_ recordings. The Fifth Symphony remains one of my favorite classical music pieces, a work I've heard a hundred times at least. I recognize the magnificence of the _Unfinished_ Symphony, a number of the quartets and sonatas. The chamber music. The choral works and Masses. The songs.

And yet, though I turn to it on occasion with great expectation, I consistently come away from my listening sessions involving the Ninth with a deep sadness and puzzlement and the nagging question of "Why don't I like this piece?".

I have yet to provide for myself an adequate answer to the question above. I realize that Schubert is difficult. In my younger days I was generally confounded by so much of Schubert's music. I recall telling folks that Schubert escapes me because I don't feel I have the maturity to comprehend his vision. (And he died at what, age 32?) Now, in my older years, I have turned to the man's music often. I seemingly have acquired understandings that used to elude me. And I enjoy the music immensely. Yet -- that Ninth won't condescend to my tastes.

I have read and heard enough about the _Great_ Symphony that I am thoroughly convinced it is a masterpiece, but it is one that I never have enjoyed. I would almost rather listen to anything other than the Ninth.

And I suspect the fault lies with me.

Still, I will on occasion keep returning to the Ninth Symphony. Keep probing its mysteries. Perhaps one day something will click and I will not only understand the work with some sense of illumination, but I will enjoy the music as well. At least that is a hope.

I has not happened yet, however. And the loss is mine, I know.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

There are lots of composers I don't care for after years of exposure, but many of those seem like lesser talents and I don't worry about them, or they're just too alien. Que sera sera.

The first major hurdle for me was Brahms. He seemed brown and constipated. Then I heard the _Requiem_, then the piano quartets, I began to hear the inner passion, the superb craft, and the actual sensuous beauty, and he became a composer who rarely failed to satisfy. I'm still not entirely sold on the chamber works for strings alone or the organ music. He benefits from color contrast.

Bartok's quartets still afford little pleasure, though there's plenty of other Bartok I like. I keep meaning to really tackle them hard.

Strauss's tone poems strike me as much ado about little. I've actually liked them less as time has passed (except maybe the _Alpensinfonie_). Maybe I'll come back to them some day.

Carter is said to be great and makes complex sounds as if he should be, but for me he's like chewing on barbed wire. I don't find myself eager to work at it.

Satie is easy to grasp but bores me quickly, and the orchestral pieces seem shallow.

Stravinsky's _Les Noces_ does nothing for me. Neither does his _Oedipus Rex_.

Webern's music may be concise and jewel-like etc. but it leaves me cold. I dip into it occasionally to see if it leaves me less cold. Maybe a teensy weensy bit by now.

Mahler's symphonies have movements I like and movements I don't. After 50 years I still can't take the faux-naivete of #4, but the slow movement is beautiful (I like Alma's comment, even if it _is_ clueless: "In that sort of thing I prefer Haydn.") #7 is weird throughout and the finale is bombast. #8 begins and ends splendidly but a lot of what comes in between has me twiddling my thumbs. And so on.

Italian opera has been a slow sell; Bellini, Donizetti and early Verdi are interesting only for the opportunity they afford great singers and I just can't care without a Battistini or a Callas to give them depth.

A lot of Shostakovich seems vulgar or depressing, but I like the 1st, 4th and 5th symphonies, the violin concertos, and some other stuff. I really need to know him better, but there seems a lot of dreck to plow through (sorry, don't mean to reopen that can of worms!).

That will do. Don't want to bore you all.


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

Mahler's symphonies. But now I'm becoming A Mahler Addict


----------



## Smileydts (Feb 3, 2015)

For me it's Haydn's "Paris" symphonies, which puzzles me because I'm otherwise a big Haydn fan and I'm sure these symphonies deserve their fame. Any help appreciating them is welcome.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Stravinsky's _Les Noces_ does nothing for me. Neither does his _Oedipus Rex_.


I also seem to have been born with an ear which can't see the utmost beauty the many who have spoken so highly of those works refer to. Those (here referring purely to the listening experience) excite me at the level of the average folk song or arrangement of it by Beethoven. It's weird because I'm much fond of plenty of what Sibelius and Bartók did inspired by folk music. It feels strange to experience this kind of situation. Perhaps my brain will unlock someday.


----------



## Piwikiwi (Apr 1, 2011)

Mahler's symphonies, Schönberg's Piano and Violin Concerto, Debussy's etudes just to name a few.

The Brahms symphonies were by far the hardest for me, they were the first classical pieces I really listened to and I really needed to get used to the larger forms.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Weston said:


> One I have very nearly grasped and still enjoy without fully grasping is *Takemitsu*. I feel I could understand his music better if it would just speed up a bit. My short term memory doesn't retain motivic development with all that *adagio and andante*, disrespectful as that may sound.


You mean _Lento_ and _Largo_? :lol:

For me personally, I found that my expectations needed adjustment to really understand Sibelius. His Third and Sixth symphonies still feel somewhat elusive to me.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> For me personally, I found that my expectations needed adjustment to really understand Sibelius. His Third and Sixth symphonies still feel somewhat elusive to me.


Sibelius is a strange case. His third seems to me quite straightforward, but his 6th and 7th are still, as you say, "elusive." Oh well, time heals all.


----------



## Celloman (Sep 30, 2006)

I've started the Berlioz _Requiem_ a couple times, but for some reason haven't been able to finish it. Maybe I haven't been listening to the right recording?


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Celloman said:


> I've started the Berlioz _Requiem_ a couple times, but for some reason haven't been able to finish it. Maybe I haven't been listening to the right recording?


Your not alone.............


----------



## Fagotterdammerung (Jan 15, 2015)

I'm glad someone mentioned Carter up-thread. I feel some genuinely interesting things are going on there, I just can't quite get into it. Other modernists ( not necessarily linked in style ) I respect but can't quite get into are Lutosławski, Feldman, Wourinen, and Henze.


----------



## Vronsky (Jan 5, 2015)

The avant-garde (post-1945, the experimental stuff) music, because it lacks conventional harmony. It was a real challenge at the beginning, now I'm big fan.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Schoenberg Piano Concerto.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Fagotterdammerung said:


> I'm glad someone mentioned Carter up-thread. I feel some genuinely interesting things are going on there, I just can't quite get into it. Other modernists ( not necessarily linked in style ) I respect but can't quite get into are Lutosławski, Feldman, Wourinen, and Henze.


Interesting that you mention Wourinen. He's always struck me as fairly light listening as far as serialism goes.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Heliogabo said:


> Mahler's symphonies. But now I'm becoming A Mahler Addict


Welcome to the club!


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Re: Berlioz Requiem. I had the same problem until someone in another thread recommended Colin Davis's recording with the Staatskapelle Dresden. I previously had Previn's recording, which is very acclaimed. I didn't really like it, and had the somewhat odd experience of feeling there was something lacking even though I'd never heard any other recording of the piece. I now think I was right - since listening to Davis, I love this piece.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Vincent Persichetti, Piano Sonata No. 11.

The only one of the 12 that's atonal and a tough nut for me to crack. Still having trouble with it after around 6 months.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

What I want to avoid in future is forcing myself to 'get' pieces that go completely over my head simply by stubborn repeated listenings and rather go back to something simpler/more accessible and gradually listen to more complex stuff


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Ives Symphony No.4. Does nothing for me. Don't get it. Never will.


----------



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

Pleiades, a work for percussion by Xenakis. Can't crack it and not convinced I ever will.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

elgars ghost said:


> Pleiades, a work for percussion by Xenakis. Can't crack it and not convinced I ever will.


Stop trying to crack it, there's nothing to crack. Just crank it up and rock out. It's meant to be visceral.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Ferneyhough's music is quite a challenge but so fun! Need more time to digest


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Ives Symphony No.4. Does nothing for me. Don't get it. Never will.


Oh boo. You need some moral support.



hpowders said:


> Anyone who hates Ives but has never given the Concord Piano Sonata a chance for a couple of weeks, seriously needs to reevaluate, IMHO.





hpowders said:


> One either gets Ives or one doesn't....If you can't after spending the time of repeated listenings, no crime.
> 
> But before moving on, give the Concord Piano Sonata the time it deserves.


Listen to yourself, man. Listen to yourself!


----------



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

isorhythm said:


> Stop trying to crack it, there's nothing to crack. Just crank it up and rock out. It's meant to be visceral.


It has no desired effect on me however I approach it - that's how it goes sometimes. If I want to rock out then I'll stick to Grand Funk Railroad, thanks.


----------



## TradeMark (Mar 12, 2015)

Mozart's symphony 41 (yes, I'm not joking), but it took me a week and now I love it.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Scarlatti Keyboard Sonatas because many of them are surface-skimmers and boring as hell.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

I think I will listen to 12-tone music that I will understand it at least moderately well, whether I actually learn to like it or not. I don't want to think I'm just too stupid for it.



hpowders said:


> Scarlatti Keyboard Sonatas because many of them are surface-skimmers and boring as hell.


I think we are talking about actually challenging stuff and not simply stuff that you don't like.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Dim7 said:


> I think I will listen to 12-tone music that I will understand it at least moderately well, whether I actually learn to like it or not. I don't want to think I'm just too stupid for it.


I don't think you are too stupid (nor anyone else who struggles with or dislikes 20th century music of this or any other stripe), but why not just approach it as music rather than as 12-tone music? The method is really secondary in this as in all other cases.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Opera is and remains the most challenging for me to get into. I have acquired about 18, counting the Ring by Wagner as 4, in the past 4-5 months. Most of them range from 2-4 discs in length. That, in itself, is an obstacle to overcome, as far as cracking a piece goes. Then, there is the necessity (not everyone seems to feel this way, but I do) of reading and following with the libretto to know what is actually taking place. I have managed to make great inroads with the ones I have acquired, but it is only just a start.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yeah, but once you have a working knowledge of an opera and are prepared, you can go to the next step and actually see a live performance of the opera and not be bored, unlike the folks snoring to either side of you, who weren't prepared.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

For me it's the long symphonies or orchestral works by anyone - Bruckner, Mahler, Strauss are the hardest. So many times in the middle of, say, Mahler 6 I realize with a start that I have been daydreaming for an entire movement or something and have no idea what I've heard. With some other music - Feldman or Sorabji, let's say - I don't mind that because I figure it's approximately no less opaque or clear to me than it would've been, but with the late romantic guys I know I've probably missed something really important.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I had a rather hard time with Mahler's Seventh Symphony.

I still think it is his weakest, most unconvincing symphony structurally.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Ferneyhough's string quartets have been tough nuts to crack lately.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

hpowders said:


> I had a rather hard time with Mahler's Seventh Symphony.
> 
> I still think it is his weakest, most unconvincing symphony structurally.


It's not. The First is.


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

My first encounter with the Shostakovich's 4th Symphony -the Previn recording - after the 5th and the 10th had been on my shelves for a while, was one of sheer bafflement: it just seemed a totally formless work in contrast to these two more familiar symphonies. Repeated listening has made me change my mind, and I think the only solution in the case of major but baffling works is simply just to listen to them several times and perhaps consult some of the standard analytical texts rks to find where they are going and what they are about.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

science said:


> For me it's the long symphonies or orchestral works by anyone - Bruckner, Mahler, Strauss are the hardest. So many times in the middle of, say, Mahler 6 I realize with a start that I have been daydreaming for an entire movement or something and have no idea what I've heard.


This is a real problem. In the last couple years I've begun fighting it by having a strong cup of coffee right before concerts. It works for me, though perhaps is not ideal for sleeping later.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> It's not. The First is.


Yeah, the finale of the first kind of... meanders, if you know what I mean.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Yeah, the finale of the first kind of... meanders, if you know what I mean.


I hate to criticize it, because I truly do love it, as I do all of Mahler's other symphonies...but I feel that the finale of the First is the weakest movement in any of Mahler's symphonies (unless one counts the Blumine andante of the First) and also contains his worst theme (the second theme, in D-flat; not bad, just a bit uninspired for all of its earnestness).

He actually improved the structure a good bit with his revision. The original version was less effective.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Certainly the classical, operatic, or art song style of singing has remained a taste I have not fully acquired though I have been a fan of CM since the late 1960s. I love the sound of a full choir, and I love the sound of wordless voice used almost as a musical instrument, but as soon as words and soloists are combined I'm outta here. Why would this be? It makes no sense.

I'm making gradual inroads, appreciating some performances of Das Lied von der Erde and somewhat Strauss' Four Last Songs, and have of course been enjoying the finale of Beethoven's 9th for decades, but with most others it has been very slow going.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Weston said:


> I love the sound of a full choir, and I love the sound of wordless voice used almost as a musical instrument, but as soon as words and soloists are combined I'm outta here.


Same for me. When it comes to singing soloists I like just a handful of pieces. But what I find even more challenging, no, it's beyond a challenge, for I find it simply repulsive, is "sprechgesang".


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Agreed. No _Pierrot Lunaire_ for me. Never say never, but I'm going to need another half century or so for that.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

The Beethoven Grosse Fuge. After many years of listening, still not comfortable with it.


----------



## scratchgolf (Nov 15, 2013)

DeepR said:


> Same for me. When it comes to singing soloists I like just a handful of pieces. But what I find even more challenging, no, it's beyond a challenge, *for I find it simply repulsive, is "sprechgesang"*.


Agreed 100%. This was the topic of a recent discussion I had. It makes me want to dive, head first into a pool of razor blades and lemon juice.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Anything by Rimsky-Korsakov except for Scheherazade and Le Coq d'Or Suite.


----------

