# Have you Listened to Everything?



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

... of an individual composer or performer, that is.

Many of us have confessed obsessions and impassioned interests, but has anyone actually achieved the mammoth goal of listening to _everything_ a composer ever wrote, or all the recorded performances of a favourite performer?

In answer to both, I have not.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Responding to the thread title only...

Yes, and it is all good.

:tiphat:


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

No and it makes me very nihilistic. I don't think I could possibly get through everything I wanted and then there are things I do not know about yet! I have a dream that I'm on my death bed I hear something astounding on the radio I've never heard before. The presenter says that was "*X*" by "*X*" and I go "OH F*** and die in a very bad mood. 

It's the same with books...


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

I've just noticed that you can't type F followed by two ** then a K it gets censored. :lol:

Looks like I'll be cursing in *French* from here on.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Lenfer said:


> No and it makes me very nihilistic. I don't think I could possibly get through everything I wanted and then there are things I do not know about yet! I have a dream that I'm on my death bed I hear something astounding on the radio I've never heard before. The presenter says that was "*X*" by "*X*" and I go "OH F*** and die in a very bad mood.
> 
> It's the same with books...


I agree with almost everything you say here, but I have a different reaction. There is vastly too much music (and presumably good music) such that there will always be works or performances of great works I have not heard. There are absurdly too many fascinating books to read. There is so much more to know than I ever will know that my ignorance dwarfs my knowledge.

But what if that were not true? Then at some point in your life there would be no more books to read, no new music to hear, no new knowledge to learn. This Christmas I received roughly 10 classical music CDs that I very much want to hear and 4 or 5 books that I can't wait to start. I would never experience that joy again!

I think I understand your despair, but I think it would be worse the other way around.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

I have heard everything recorded from Bach, Beethoven and Mozart...getting there with Haydn and Rachmaninov. As far as by a performer,...I own and have heard everything Glenn Gould ever recorded in the studio but now I'm coming across more and more outtakes and live recordings I'd never heard. I am about three quarters of the way through hearing Earl Wild's entire recorded legacy although it only took me one listen to his Grieg concerto over twenty years ago to realize that he would be one of my all-time favorites; and he is, along with Glenn. Other than those, I hope to hear the entire recorded works of Neville Marriner one day and am on my way to completing everything Rubinstein ever put on tape.


----------



## Blue Hour (Jan 2, 2012)

mmsbls said:


> But what if that were not true? Then at some point in your life there would be no more books to read, no new music to hear, no new knowledge to learn.


At this point everything would turn black followed by an announcement that you had reached level 2.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

kv466 said:


> I have heard everything recorded from Bach, Beethoven and Mozart...getting there with Haydn and Rachmaninov. As far as by a performer,...I own and have heard everything Glenn Gould ever recorded in the studio but now I'm coming across more and more outtakes and live recordings I'd never heard. I am about three quarters of the way through hearing Earl Wild's entire recorded legacy although it only took me one listen to his Grieg concerto over twenty years ago to realize that he would be one of my all-time favorites; and he is, along with Glenn. Other than those, I hope to hear the entire recorded works of Neville Marriner one day and am on my way to completing everything Rubinstein ever put on tape.


You are superhuman!!


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

About 15 years ago, when I got back into classical music, I tried to hear every piece and recording of Erik Satie's music and even read all the books. It's a pretty small output, so it seemed doable. But the frustration was, there was always the obscure work nobody will record, then the discovery of a new piece somebody dug up in an attic, and then the announcement that another piece wasn't really by him after all. And then as soon as I got my collection up to date, some other guy put out a new one. I finally gave up. 

It may have been ultimately more of a beau geste, but in reflection, it was a good grounding for understanding how different performers can make the same piece sound very different, and it was a good exposure to the ins and outs of musicology.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

Polednice said:


> You are superhuman!!


You're funny...awww, Piggy's back!


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

kv466 said:


> You're funny...awww, Piggy's back!


He was yearning for you, kv. He always gets sad without you.


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

No, but I'm working on it. I'm well over 50% on Schumann.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Nope, seems like an awfully masochistic thing to do. 

I will probably never listen to Die Feen, ever. 

The marginal utility of art diminishes to a point where if you count the opportunity cost it becomes negative. why listen to third rate music just because it's Wagner when there are countless masterpieces in literature or film that I have yet to explore?


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

The day I've heard absolutely everything is the day I shoot myself. What else would there be to live for?

I doubt I will ever listen to any one major composer's works in their entirety, since there is inevitably a host of boring songs or student pieces to sit through.. just look up a composer on allmusic.com to see the many, many pieces by well-known composers that are virtually unknown.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

I'm very close with Glazunov. Going through a list of opuses, I can say I've heard almost every opus except for some chamber music, vocal/choral, and solo piano, which I don't know if it's all recorded even. All concertos, symphonies, ballets, orchestral abstract works and programmatic tone poems, I've heard.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I've heard the majority of Brahms' works; if I ever want to finish that I'll just have to sit down with the rest of his songs and his organ music. (Actually I've heard the organ music, but I wasn't paying attention.) I have also not heard the original version of the first piano trio.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I've heard every surviving work of Edgard Varese, except his _Poeme Electronique_, which isn't much of an achievement, it's 2 cd's worth!

I am the opposite of a completist. I even find it boring to hear say all of Shostakovich's symphonies, or all of Mahler's (or know them all in-depth). I've heard over half of the former's, and almost all of the latter's. Of course I've heard all of Beethoven's, Brahms', Schumann's and probably Sibelius' as well, goes without saying (they're always played on the radio). I find after getting to know to much of a composer's music, I "learn" their cliches or more nicely put, their "tools," and I end up getting bored.

This is what I had in issue in a recent conversation with a friend who's into literature. I asked her, does she want to say read these long books, by the end of her life. Eg. Marcel Proust's multi volume series of novels, or Tolstoy's _War and Peace_. & her answer was no, not really. I agreed that if I did that, it would become kind of like a chore. & I absolutely hate when appreciating any art becomes a chore and not something for a positive reason. Not the feeling of "oh, I have another novel or symphony to get through, again, then another, another, another ad nauseum..."


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Sid James' post reminded me, I think I've heard the complete Webern.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Sid James said:


> I've heard every surviving work of Edgard Varese, except his _Poeme Electronique_, which isn't much of an achievement, it's 2 cd's worth!
> 
> I am the opposite of a completist. I even find it boring to hear say all of Shostakovich's symphonies, or all of Mahler's (or know them all in-depth). I've heard over half of the former's, and almost all of the latter's. Of course I've heard all of Beethoven's, Brahms', Schumann's and probably Sibelius' as well, goes without saying (they're always played on the radio). I find after getting to know to much of a composer's music, I "learn" their cliches or more nicely put, their "tools," and I end up getting bored.
> 
> This is what I had in issue in a recent conversation with a friend who's into literature. I asked her, does she want to say read these long books, by the end of her life. Eg. Marcel Proust's multi volume series of novels, or Tolstoy's _War and Peace_. & her answer was no, not really. I agreed that if I did that, it would become kind of like a chore. & I absolutely hate when appreciating any art becomes a chore and not something for a positive reason. Not the feeling of "oh, I have another novel or symphony to get through, again, then another, another, another ad nauseum..."


That kind of is my attitude. It's like a race against time.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

science said:


> That kind of is my attitude. It's like a race against time.


I'd add that as a listener, that's where I stand, I'm not a completist.

But I do respect musicians who are completists. Eg. knowing the work of a composer back to front, in depth. Or even of a certain "school" or era, etc. Musicians, a lot of them, specialise in things. They have their orbits to revolve around. It's not rigid, but they have their areas of specialty.

I respect that and I also respect people's passions on this forum. It's just that I'm not like that, I am not very systematic, although in some things I do make an effort to get to know things more in-depth. So it depends I guess...


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

To me, the challenge is to know what I am supposed to know. I'm embarrassed that I don't know Schumann's music better, for instance. I just hope to get to the point that I can look without shame at the world. I'm getting there. Lot of progress in the past few years.


----------



## agoukass (Dec 1, 2008)

No. I haven't been able to and it has never been my intention to be a completist's completist. I listen to the things that I enjoy. If they lead me towards other works of the same composer, then so be it. If not, then I don't have to.


----------



## Conor71 (Feb 19, 2009)

My goal is to hear as many of the Warhorses as possible but I have reached the stage where Im not really interested in exploring new repertore anymore and just want to concentrate on building familiarity with what I've already heard!.
I guess I don't see the point in only having only an aquaintance with many works


----------



## Air (Jul 19, 2008)

Complete Telemann. I dare someone to try.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Surreal said:


> At this point everything would turn black followed by an announcement that you had reached level 2.


in level two you have to know every single piece of music previously listened by heart.


----------



## waldvogel (Jul 10, 2011)

Although I've tried, I haven't even managed to listen to the complete works of Henri Duparc or of Paul Dukas.


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

For me, one of the most wonderful things about classical music is that you can NEVER be sure to have heard everything by ANY composer. And if I live to 200 I know that there will still be more music that I have not heard than I have been fortunate enough to listen to.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I think I have heard all the works by Ravel... but not because I'm a great listener (although I'm a Ravel maniac), the simple reason is that Ravel's output is (relatively) very small... the good point is that all of his pieces are absolute masterpieces.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Delicious Manager said:


> For me, one of the most wonderful things about classical music is that you can NEVER be sure to have heard everything by ANY composer. And if I live to 200 I know that there will still be more music that I have not heard than I have been fortunate enough to listen to.


Isn't this true also about literature and painting and film and philosophy, etc? Partly about the "ANY" and partly about the "more than enough" until I live to 200.

I mean, I know people who have mastered 4 foreign languages, but they will still never read Sanskrit poetry in the original, etc, nor have they memorized any of Pindar or plumbed the depth of Horace, they've only gotten to Homer and Virgil and Tacitus. Very few people have read all of Henry James' novels and 112 short stories, or seen every painting by their favorite artist in real life, no doubt obstructed by the fact that many paintings are in private galleries (damn you Andrew Lloyld Webber). Few have seen all of Godard or Resnais or Bergman, most just watch the famous '60s ones.

The only composer whose entire oeuvre I would deign to explore is Ravel because it's so small.


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

I have three "complete sets" of a composer's music: Mahler, Beethoven, and Schubert.

I've heard all of Mahler's symphonies at least once, but I haven't listened to "Totenfeier," "Das Lied von der Erde," or any of the other songs. I'm still waiting for the right time to try listening to everything Mahler put out (~18.5 hours) in one sitting.

I've listened to a good variety of Beethoven (a few sonatas, a few quartets, a few symphonies, a few bagatelles, a few concerti, etc.), but as a result, I don't know any of them in-depth.

I've barely scratched the surface of Schubert.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I've pretty much covered all of Mahler with the exception of perhaps a few early lieder. The same holds true of Bruckner. I believe I have all of Debussy... including the songs, and I'm close with Ravel and Faure. I'm probably closer than nearly anyone else here (with the exception of jhar) when it comes to having amassed a complete Richard Strauss collection... and I'm currently picking up his lieder from the Hyperion Complete Songs set. As for Bach?!!? I have 200+ Bach discs and I still have some 60-80 cantatas to pick up as well as a few minor instrumental works. 

Complete works by a given performer: Andreas Scholl, Philippe Jaroussky, Magdalena Kozena, Anna Netrebko... close with Veronique Gens and Anne Sophie Mutter.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

science said:


> Sid James' post reminded me, I think I've heard the complete Webern.


I'd join that, but I'm still holding out on Im Sommerwind. You have to draw the line somewhere.


----------



## Oskaar (Mar 17, 2011)

I must be carefull not biting over to much. But with spotify I have some posibilities.


----------



## pluhagr (Jan 2, 2012)

Now I can't say that I've listened to everything by Philip Glass, some of his Operas are not on cd yet. But I have listened to almost all of his music.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Kopachris said:


> I'm still waiting for the right time to try listening to everything Mahler put out (~18.5 hours) in one sitting.


A very interesting idea! I might try it myself sometime. I think I'd need 2 days though.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Mahler is the only one I covered from A to Z I think, including rare versions (such as Schoenberg's reduced scores and Das Lied von der Erde in Cantonese).


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

One of my life goals is to sit down and listen to everything Telemann ever wrote in one go.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Ravel, but only because he's a perfectionist and his output is *incredibly small. 
*

There's no point listening to all of Mozart or anyone of the prolific greats - life's too short for that.

Do you think Mozart himself cares a **** for the music he wrote when he was 7? Do you think he would ever listen to it? He's probably be incredibly embarrassed. Why do so many writers burn their earlier works and refuse to show it to anyone?

Here's Zadie Smith on reading her own book.

I find it very hard to read my books after they're published. I've never read White Teeth. Five years ago I tried; I got about ten sentences in before I was overwhelmed with nausea. More recently, when people tell me they have just read that book, I do try to feel pleased, but it's a distant, disconnected sensation, like when someone tells you they met your second cousin in a bar in Goa. I suspect White Teeth and I may never be reconciled-I think that's simply what happens when you begin writing a book at the age of twenty-one. Then, a year ago, I was in an airport somewhere and I saw a copy of The Autograph Man, and on a whim, I bought it. On the plane I had to drink two of those mini bottles of wine before I had the stomach to begin. I didn't manage the whole thing, but I read about two-thirds, and at that incredible speed with which you can read a book if you happen to have written it. And it was actually not such a bad experience-I laughed a few times, groaned more than I laughed and gave up when the wine wore off-but for the first time, I felt something other than nausea. I felt surprise. The book was genuinely strange to me; there were whole pages I didn't recognize, didn't remember writing. And because it was so strange I didn't feel any particular animosity toward it. So that was that: between that book and me there now exists a sort of blank truce, neither pleasant nor unpleasant.

Finally, while writing this lecture, I up On Beauty. I read maybe a third of it, not consecutively, but chapters here and there. As usual, *the nausea; as usual, the feeling of fraudulence; and the too-late desire to wield the red pen all over the place*-but something else, too, something new. Here and there-in very isolated pockets-I had the sense that this line, that paragraph, these were exactly what I meant to write, and the fact was, I'd written them, and I felt okay about it, felt good, even. It's a feeling I recommend to all of you. That feeling feels okay.

Zadie Smith. Changing my mind: occasional essays (Kindle Locations 1709-1713). Penguin.


----------



## tgtr0660 (Jan 29, 2010)

First person to he has heard all Telemann wins the thread.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

I must admit I have not heard Die Feen or Liebesverbot yet. However, I have heard obscure pieces like the Columbus Overture, the symphony in C and the Großer Festmarsch Wagner composed for the 100th anniversary of the United States.


----------



## sah (Feb 28, 2012)

I think I have done it: Tárrega. But just because I have this:








Tarrega: Integral de Guitarra (Complete Works for Guitar)
http://www.amazon.com/Tarrega-Integral-Guitarra-Complete-Guitar/dp/B000003DIR

I am surprised by the CD's price. I bought the tapes many years ago, and they were much cheaper.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

I've listened to everything ever written by Mozart.

I am a masochist.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

Well, I've certainly heard everything Mahler wrote - but that's not difficult, as there are only 17 works.

Also Webern - or at least his opp1-31 ["The works with opus numbers are the ones that Webern saw fit to have published in his own lifetime, plus a few late works published after his death." - Wikipedia]


----------

