# Anyone split Long Symphonies like I do?



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

By splitting I mean listen to half of a work one day and the other half the next day. I recently did this with Mahler 6,7 and 8. Since they are long works and I may not have the time or even patience for the whole thing in one sitting I split them. It worked out well. I dont think i lost much continuity since i finished the next day. I know its not ideal but it works well for me occasionally. Thoughts?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Symphonies, never. None are that long. Operas on the other hand...I split all the time.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Just do what works for you. I hardly even listen to symphonies anymore.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

golfer72 said:


> By splitting I mean listen to half of a work one day and the other half the next day. I recently did this with Mahler 6,7 and 8.....Thoughts?


I do it all the time...I want to listen to certain movements, not the whole piece...do whatever you want....there's no law that says you must listen an entire symphony or opera at one sitting....


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Is this basically how you do it? Or do you have other ways to split?:

0:00 Vorspiel
3:10 Winterstürme wichen dem Wonnemond
6:54 Siegmund! Sieh auf mich.
19:13 Ride - Hojotoho!
35:40 Weis' Ich dir mehr Helden zur Wal
42:20 Der diese Liebe
57:15 Leb wohl


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

golfer72 said:


> By splitting I mean listen to half of a work one day and the other half the next day. I recently did this with Mahler 6,7 and 8. Since they are long works and I may not have the time or even patience for the whole thing in one sitting I split them. It worked out well. I dont think i lost much continuity since i finished the next day. I know its not ideal but it works well for me occasionally. Thoughts?


Never, I hardly split a cd, once a month if I not in the mood from two different composer. 
Opera only on DVD , push play and go where you stopped


----------



## verandai (Dec 10, 2021)

When I want to hear a complete symphony, I hear it in one go. But it often happens, that I'm in the mood for hearing one specific movement of a symphony. Then I just do it and don't bother if that's "good listening behaviour"


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

verandai said:


> When I want to hear a complete symphony, I hear it in one go. But it often happens, that I'm in the mood for hearing one specific movement of a symphony. Then I just do it and don't bother if that's "good listening behaviour"


Absolutely!! :tiphat: listen to what you want to listen to....listening is for enjoyment...do whatever pleases you...why is this even a question??


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Only when I'm playing it in my head, or am interrupted.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

Do this on occasion.
Notice no problems with it.
Has even been enjoyable and more than once.


----------



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

I try to avoid doing this with orchestral, chamber and instrumental works as I need to satisfy that sense of beginning, continuity and conclusion with one hit. No such problems with (longer) operas, though - if I break off for the night I just imagine myself as having a longer drink than usual in between acts.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Listen to what you want when you want. Music is for enjoyment. It's not a test of endurance. When you don't want to listen to all of a specific work there's nothing saying you have to. Although I usually listen to full orchestral or chamber works I haven't always got the time (or the inclination) to play the lot so I throw on the odd movement here and there. The other day I didn't have time for all of Janacek's 2nd quartet so I played the first and and 4th movements only. I would have preferred to play the lot but when you've got to go to Dunfermline for the afternoon you don't always get the chance. Lol.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Heck148 said:


> Absolutely!! :tiphat: listen to what you want to listen to....listening is for enjoyment...do whatever pleases you...why is this even a question??


Its a question because i was curious if other people do the same thing. I wasnt asking for permission. I thought my original post was clear


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Thanks for responses. Again I wasnt looking for approval but merely interested in whether or not others do this


----------



## christomacin (Oct 21, 2017)

First of all, what do you consider a "long" symphony? 40 minutes? 50 minutes? Over an hour? Over 90 minutes? Over two hours? If the music isn't compelling enough to sit through from start to finish it is probably a reflection of the music, not you. In the case of Havergal Brian's Gothic Symphony, my advice would be to skip all together. Mahler's 3rd isn't quite that long, but the music is a whole lot better, so there's that. If you are talking about Bruckner's symphonies, the Mahler Symphonies, or the 9ths of Schubert or Beethoven, then no way. Well, I gotta admit I have a hard time getting through Mahler's 8th, but then I don't like it much anyway. then no, I'd say either listen to it for real or don't bother. Length is often a subjective thing. I could sit through a really good symphony and not even realize the time it takes to do so. On other hand, for some composers ten minutes is too long.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I try not to (for instance I just finished the Shosty cycle, one per night), but some stuff is just so long that frequently I don't have that amount of time available to me in one sitting.

Ultimately I don't think either way really impacts enjoyment, I can just be a pedantic stickler about things.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Yes, sometimes listening to long works in parts helps your brain process it once you revisit the whole thing at once.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

"First of all, what do you consider a "long" symphony? 40 minutes? 50 minutes? Over an hour? Over 90 minutes? Over two hours?" Uh i gave three examples in my original post. Mahler 6,7 and 8. I guess that means over an hour or so. Right?


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

My attention-span is diminishing as I get older. Yesterday I had to have a tea-break halfway through Webern's "6 Bagatelles for String Quartet"


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> My attention-span is diminishing as I get older. Yesterday I had to have a tea-break halfway through Webern's "6 Bagatelles for String Quartet"


Right!! I had to take a break from Cage's "4'33"!! :lol::lol::devil:


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I normally play symphonies completely, even beasts like Mahler 3 and Brian 1. Once in a while though, life intervenes (like my wife needing help or wanting to go out) and I have to hit the pause button.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

I'm pretty flexible in how I listen to symphonies. Sometimes I listen to a single movement because I'm in the mood for it and sometimes i even listen to parts of a movement because I don't like the other parts.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Emotionally, I agree that you should do what works for you. But a symphony is a whole and I feel something of what it is will be missed when splitting it over days. But splitting in this way is something I have done when getting to know a long symphony with a complicated structure - Mahler 2 and 3 are the main examples of such in my mind - but once the parts are a little familiar to me I do find my experience becomes more powerful by "putting it all together" ... sometimes almost to the extent of revelation.


----------



## Trollcannon (11 mo ago)

I split symphonies, operas, concerti etc. all the time!

Not everyone has the luxury to sit around for hours at a time fully absorbing and appreciating great music. I will often play Classical music in the background (particularly when doing work). Some will decry me for heresy insisting that art of such substance ought not be delegated to the background. I, however, am merely content with the knowledge that I live in an age, the only one in human history, where this music is so freely available -- anywhere, at any time. 

In short, do whatever floats your boat! There are no rules when it comes to listening habits.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

When I discovered the music of Mahler and Bruckner, I generally would play one side of an lp, usually 1-2 movements, a day until the music started to grow on me.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

My current position is to avoid not listening to a piece in it's entirety, even if it's an hour long symphony. The reason for this is that I want to follow the macro structure of the said piece. The exception to this is if it's an opera/oratorio, and in this case I'll try to hear entire acts but not necessarily the whole thing. Nonetheless, I see no problem in sometimes listening to highlights or, in the case of symphonies, specific movements separately, for whatever reason.


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

christomacin said:


> In the case of Havergal Brian's Gothic Symphony, my advice would be to skip all together. .


My advice would be to ignore this and immerse yourself in the most epic symphony of all time.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Thanks everyone for their input. I agree splitting is not ideal. If i didnt split though some works I may never listen to. As far as classical as background music thats a non starter for me. I like to concentrate on the piece. For other types of music its ok.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

Only with Mahler. The fact that I enjoy only some movements of some of his symphonies, combined with the massive length of most of his symphonies is the reason I do it. I listen to the entirety of the symphony with other composers.


----------



## timh (Nov 14, 2014)

I split Sorabji Symphony No 2 'Jami'. It is over 4 hours long.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

timh said:


> I split Sorabji Symphony No 2 'Jami'. It is over 4 hours long.


I've never listened to this. Was it worth your time?


----------



## timh (Nov 14, 2014)

Xisten267 said:


> I've never listened to this. Was it worth your time?


Yes I thought so. I started listening to Sorabji shorter piano pieces before I attempted the Symphony.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Usually I listen to the entire work, that's means all movements in the right order. But sometimes I only listen to individual movements, and I don't feel guilty for that reason.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

golfer72 said:


> By splitting I mean listen to half of a work one day and the other half the next day. I recently did this with Mahler 6,7 and 8. Since they are long works and I may not have the time or even patience for the whole thing in one sitting I split them. It worked out well. I dont think i lost much continuity since i finished the next day. I know its not ideal but it works well for me occasionally. Thoughts?


I split movies not music.

I think it is perfectly fine to split whatever you like.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

golfer72 said:


> By splitting I mean listen to half of a work one day and the other half the next day. I recently did this with Mahler 6,7 and 8. Since they are long works and I may not have the time or even patience for the whole thing in one sitting I split them. It worked out well. I dont think i lost much continuity since i finished the next day. I know its not ideal but it works well for me occasionally. Thoughts?





mbhaub said:


> Symphonies, never. None are that long. Operas on the other hand...I split all the time.





elgars ghost said:


> I try to avoid doing this with orchestral, chamber and instrumental works as I need to satisfy that sense of beginning, continuity and conclusion with one hit.


Like EG, I prefer to listen to symphonies whole for exactly the same reason. I can't imagine listening to Sibelius 6, but stopping after the third movement. Having said that, I have, on occasion, listened to a largo or andante (Mahler 6) or scherzo (Eroica) on its own.

However, unlike mbhaub, I think some symphonies are 'that long' to the extent that the unfamiliar can _seem _long, and the concentration required to get your head round it (say Mahler 3 or 9) is quite demanding. Recently, with both VW and Schubert, I've broken them up in pieces and it's helped my comprehension.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I do it frequently with opera and oratorios if such works are on my agenda, but rarely with symphonies. Unfortunately this means that in practice I rarely listen to any of the (very) long symphonies (Mahler 2,3,6,8,9, Bruckner, esp. 8, Beethoven 9) at all... The borderline in length is Schubert's 9th; I would split this only if I wanted to systematically compare movements.


----------



## Judas Priest Fan (Apr 27, 2018)

I don´t like to split symphonies, but sometimes I just don´t have the time to listen to the whole piece, especially if it is over an hour.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> I do it frequently with opera and oratorios if such works are on my agenda, but rarely with symphonies. Unfortunately this means that in practice I rarely listen to any of the (very) long symphonies (Mahler 2,3,6,8,9, Bruckner, esp. 8, Beethoven 9) at all... The borderline in length is Schubert's 9th; I would split this only if I wanted to systematically compare movements.


Thats exactly why i do it. I would hate to miss out on Mahler because his Symphonies are long


----------

