# Why Don't I Like This Piece?



## toshiromifune (May 24, 2019)

Hi all, this is my first post here. I have been reading this forum for over a year with great pleasure, ever since I started listening to classical 'more serously' and I had no reason to participate...until now.

I just can't 'understand' the 7th symphony by Sibelius and it really bothers me for some reason. I usually listen to music while doing something else and when I don't get some piece I just tell myself that I'm not focused enough, or that I need to listen to it again and again (because I have a really bad ear), or that the piece is average or bad...

Yes, I know that listening to classical this way is a really bad habit and that's why I'm now trying to focus more on music, to listen without distractions. That's exactly what I did with this symphony, but after listening to it attentively 4 times I still don't know what to make of it. Of course, not all pieces of music are good (on the contrary), but the general consensus among the classical music lovers is that this is the best symphony by Sibelius and one of the greatest symphonies ever written. I've seen only positive reactions to this work (here, on youtube...) so it seems like I'm the only one who can't like it.

That's why I need your 'professional' help to tell me why this might be the case . I've come up with a few possible explanations for this problem:

1) This symphony is much more complex than symphonies I have no troble with (by Beethoven, Mozart, Mendelssohn, Brahms...) and you need too have a really good ear or some sort of musical training to be able to follow it.

2) This symphony is completely different than symphonies by composers mentioned above, so I need to listen to it without expecting the same kind of beauty, or should I say - to appreciate it for different reasons.

3) This symphony is just bad and you are all wrong  (the least likely option).

Also, does anyone else have the same problem with some other universally appreciated works?


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Hello, welcome to TC.

Have you heard other symphonies by Sibelius? The 7th is not one that I would recommend starting with. A better entry point would be the 5th, the 2nd (despite its length) or the 3rd. But especially the 5th. I think you will find something to like in the 5th, and if you don't, Sibelius may not be for you. 

Sometimes it's also good to take a break from a piece and come back with a fresh set of ears. 

Speaking personally, the 7th is not my favorite of Sibelius' symphonies, but I'm also not as big of a Sibelius fan as some here.

Good luck!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

First of all, it is wrong to assume that every classical music lover must like all the master pieces. A lot will work for you, but some not. Sibelius 7 may be in the latter category. Don't force it, switch to other works and try again in a month or so. You never know. By the way, Sibelius is one of my favourite composers, but his 7th is not one of my favourite pieces either.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I do love Sibelius's music, and I do love his 7th symphony. I would not have thought that the 7th was considered the best of his symphonies, but it doesn't really matter. It's always difficult to determine why some might not like a particular work. I loved the 7th from the first time I heard it, and I have no special musical training. 

If you read enough threads on TalkClasical, you'll see that a large number of members dislike at least some composers or works that are generally considered highly appreciated works. That phenomenon by no means separates you from others. I would second flamencosketches's question about whether you have heard and enjoyed other Sibelius symphonies.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

One book that helped me with Sibelius was David Hurwitz's Sibelius, The Orchestral Works, An Owner's Manual. He writes in a nontechnical manner, giving a blow-by-blow account of what's happening, and he clearly loves this music, reflecting his enthusiasm for it throughout. The 7th comes on a CD included with the book, and he gives time stamps on what is happening.

Timed to the Siegerson/Helsinki recording, it starts out with an introduction. Theme: 4:57. Development (breakdown) is at 7:04. Theme: 10:11. Development 2 (buildup), 11:45. Theme, 16:47. Coda, 19:30.

I can't guarantee you will like it after all that explanation. But it's like the story about a famous lawyer: When a judge said, "Mr. Smith, I have read your case, and I am no wiser then when I began it," F.E. Smith replied, "Perhaps not, but you are better informed."


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

toshiromifune said:


> Hi all, this is my first post here. I have been reading this forum for over a year with great pleasure, ever since I started listening to classical 'more serously' and I had no reason to participate...until now.
> 
> I just can't 'understand' the 7th symphony by Sibelius..................


Have you been listening to a single version? - if so, could you say which one? Perhaps it's on youtube? I've heard versions that really don't work for me at all - and others that leave me humbled and astonished that such music could be composed.


----------



## Guest (May 25, 2019)

toshiromifune said:


> 2) This symphony is completely different than symphonies by composers mentioned above, so I need to listen to it without expecting the same kind of beauty, or should I say - to appreciate it for different reasons.


I'd go for this explanation out of your three options, though 'completely different' might be overstating. My favourite Sibelius symphonies are 4, 6, and 7 and each for different reasons. I like that the 7th explores the idea of packing its themes into one movement over several phases; the prominence of the trombones; the 'hymn' theme; the 'maelstrom' (9:53 onwards). I'm less keen on what sounds to me like a Spanish 'figure', from the middle onwards.

https://www.gramophone.co.uk/review/sibelius-symphonies-nos-1-7-2






You might not have seen this thread asking a similar question.

Can someone explain the Sibelius 7th symphony


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

toshiromifune said:


> Hi all, this is my first post here....


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

I agree with Art Rock. Just because a work is considered masterpiece, doesn't mean you are obligated to like it, or even appreciate it. (Conversely, just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's bad either). I love Sibelius, but I have to be in the mood for the 7th and listen to it infrequently. As others have suggested, try the 2nd or 5th, or an especial favourite of mine, the Violin Concerto.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I don't think there is anything wrong with your listening method. Focusing too much on the music can be counter-productive, too. Letting it sink in slowly might work best for you. But if you have heard it lots of times and are still getting stuck it might be best to leave it for a while. You will probably know when you are ready to give it another go.

I wonder what early 20th century music you do like and which Sibelius symphonies? Sibelius 7 is quite compact. It is held together partly by the repeating trombone motif, a tune which always makes me think of a drunk singing for some reason.

What recording are you listening to? There are many good/great ones. Barbirolli's is one favourite of mine. This one is also good:


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Sibelius’s 7th are the forces of nature communing and interacting among themselves, and no one is expected to understand this who is only about a year into classical music. An understand can’t be forced and must come naturally, but it’s considered to be a great symphony by many, and I think it is. If you’re still attracted to it, come back and visit it at another time after you have changed and not the symphony. The right timing with the right performance can make all the difference in the world. People evolve and so does their understanding, especially about something they might be greatly interested in.


----------



## toshiromifune (May 24, 2019)

Thank you all. Some of you would like to know whether I like his other works. I like the first movement of his 1st symphony, Valse triste and I love the finale of the 2nd symphony, I consider it one of the best symphonic movements I've ever heard. Others would like to know about the versions. I listened to Barbirolli, Bernstein, Beecham and I can't quite remember the last one.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

toshiromifune said:


> Thank you all. Some of you would like to know whether I like his other works. I like the first movent of his 1st symphony, Valse triste and I love the finale of the 2nd symphony, I consider it one of the best symphonic movements I've ever heard. Others would like to know about the versions. I listened to Barbirolli, Bernstein, Beecham and I can't quite remember the last one.


I started with the 5th one (the last movement is amazing!). Karajan also has many great recordings of Sibelius and his 4th is almost legendary. Have you listened to Finlandia and Karelian suite (both are quite easily approachable)?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Enthusiast said:


> Sibelius 7 is quite compact. It is held together partly by the repeating trombone motif, a tune which always makes me think of a drunk singing for some reason.


I'm not sure that that image will helptoshiromifune get into the symphony. The trombone theme always makes me think of a sunrise seen from a mountaintop.

I'd suggest, as some others have, that a Sibelius neonate listen to some of the earlier symphonies to see how his ideas of symphonic form developed.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

I read a review of the 4th in a book and I immediately had to listen to it; I was not disappointed! I much , much prefer Sibelius's bleak, emotionally drained pieces like the 4th and Tapiola. In fact the 4th is about the only symphony I can actually listen to.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

toshiromifune said:


> Hi all, this is my first post here. I have been reading this forum for over a year with great pleasure, ever since I started listening to classical 'more serously' and I had no reason to participate...until now.
> 
> I just can't 'understand' the 7th symphony by Sibelius and it really bothers me for some reason. I usually listen to music while doing something else and when I don't get some piece I just tell myself that I'm not focused enough, or that I need to listen to it again and again (because I have a really bad ear), or that the piece is average or bad...
> 
> ...


Option #3

I once ,,,long agom,,,wasa Sibelian,,,
Now his masterpiece , Kullervo, is the only work I like,,besides a few of his tone poens, 4 Legends,,which I like, but rarely ever listen to,,,His 1st sym, is his best,,of the 7, but even then , I rarely, if ever, listen to it,.,,No you are correct,,,The 7th is a odd/strange/unusual/weird,,and not worth bothering yourself over...

I had about 4+ recordings of the 7th,,all had issues and never could come around to that 
DUD


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

Art Rock said:


> , but his 7th is not one of my favourite pieces either.


I've yet to find any comment on the 7th,,like *WOW what a MASTERPIECE!!!*. 
Its a odd work.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I have made it a lifelong personal rule to never attempt to like or "understand" any musical piece through repeated consecutive listenings, whether as a discipline imposed either by me or by the suggestion of anyone else. Success--if it comes--in eventually liking a piece is a matter of the mind at some later time become receptive, giving the old Earth a couple of turns sometimes does the trick. Sometime also one falls out of love with a piece that absorbed for years. There is so much music--new and old--available that one can enjoy at given time that a drought is impossible to consider likely. So an appreciation/affection for the Seventh may come; it may never come; if come it may then go. And no one who counts is going to hold it against you.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

paulbest said:


> I've yet to find any comment on the 7th,,like *WOW what a MASTERPIECE!!!*.
> Its a odd work.


Here's one - it's my favourite piece of music.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

paulbest said:


> I've yet to find any comment on the 7th,,like *WOW what a MASTERPIECE!!!*.
> Its a odd work.


Then you haven't been looking.

"Sibelius's most remarkable compositional achievement" - The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians
"..the Seventh Symphony is one of the most ambitious and extraordinary symphonies in the repertoire." - Tom Service/Guardian
"Number seven is sacred music." - Osmo Vanska

...and many more.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

paulbest said:


> Option #3
> 
> I once ,,,long agom,,,wasa Sibelian,,,
> Now his masterpiece , Kullervo, is the only work I like,,besides a few of his tone poens, 4 Legends,,which I like, but rarely ever listen to,,,His 1st sym, is his best,,of the 7, but even then , I rarely, if ever, listen to it,.,,No you are correct,,,The 7th is a odd/strange/unusual/weird,,and not worth bothering yourself over...
> ...


Back in 2016 BBC Music Magazine surveyed 151 conductors for their top 20 great symphonies - Sibelius's 7th is 14th:

1.Beethoven 3
2.Beethoven 9
3.Mozart 41
4.Mahler 9
5.Mahler 2
6.Brahms 4
7.Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique
8.Brahms 1
9.Tchaikovsky 6
10.Mahler 3
11.Beethoven 5
12.Brahms 3
13.Bruckner 8
*14.Sibelius 7*
15.Mozart 40
16.Beethoven 7
17.Shostokovich 5
18.Brahms 2
19.Beethoven 6
20.Bruckner 7


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

Sibelius' symphonies don't blow me away, but I found Maazel's recording of the 7th to be pleasant.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

paulbest said:


> you are correct,,,The 7th is a odd/strange/unusual/weird,,and not worth bothering yourself over...


A person who says that he can't get into a piece of music is neither correct nor incorrect. The concept of correctness does not apply.

What's decidedly incorrect is to tell someone that a widely acclaimed masterpiece of music is not worth bothering with. Such advice is not worth bothering with.

The Sibelius 7th is indeed unusual. Weirdness is in the ear of the beholder, and I can't recall any other beholder using that particular term to describe it.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Woodduck said:


> I'm not sure that that image will helptoshiromifune get into the symphony. The trombone theme always makes me think of a sunrise seen from a mountaintop.
> 
> I'd suggest, as some others have, that a Sibelius neonate listen to some of the earlier symphonies to see how his ideas of symphonic form developed.


Perhaps not! I'm thinking "happy drunk" and also, come to think of it, I had in mind not so much _seeing or hearing _a drunk as _being _drunk. Of course he is "in nature" (it _is _Sibelius) while he sings. Sibelius was quite the drinker so my programme may be correct!

I agree that the earlier ones are better introductions. 2 is a common entry point and 5 is the most conventional (but is still a huge masterpiece). Tapiola and 7 are a bit more abstract.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

My entry compositions to the world of Sibelius (in the 80s) were Finlandia, The swan of Tuonela, Valse triste, symphonies 1,2 and 5 (and less expected, Pelleas et Melisande - because it was on a CD that I bought for Grieg's Peer Gynt suites). All of these are fairly easy to appreciate, and they made me explore him further. Now I've heard most of his work very often, and I consider Tapiola my favourite, just ahead of the violin concerto.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I’ve never gotten the impression that Sibelius was a happy drunk but that he was more of a miserable drunk, often suffering from isolation and depression. Much has been written about it and one can only feel sorry for him most of the time. When he portrays the forces of nature in his 7th observing nature without interfering with it, he’s standing off to the side and the music is not about him personally but about something outside of himself that has a life of its own. I consider it magical and magnificent with reference to the natural world. With the global environment under threat, I feel his music is more relevant than ever because it reflects something sacred in life worth preserving.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Doesn't alter the fact that he may have been happy some of the time while drunk. Not that I intended my "programme" that seriously or to be a literal picture of his life. As for his life, there were ups and downs. And then he went silent. I agree he doesn't place himself so much in the nature that he paints. But I don't find it hard to feel that he is telling us about his inner world within that nature - sometimes finding synchronicity but often with the two worlds separate.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

One of my favorite pieces of music and also the first Sibelius piece I heard.
When I first listened to this work, I couldn't make heads or tails of it either.
You already said it yourself: listen again, again and again.... and then some more. Try different recordings as well. 
If that doesn't work, move on and maybe return later.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Larkenfield said:


> I never gotten the impression that Sibelius was a happy drunk but that he was sometimes a miserable drunk in his personal life, often suffering from isolation and depression. Much has been written about it and one can only feel sorry for him most of the time. When he portrays the forces of nature in his 7th observing nature without interfering with it. He's standing off to the side and the music is not about him personally but about something outside of himself that has a life of its own. I consider it magical and magnificent with reference to the natural world. With the global environment under threat, I feel his music is more important than ever because it reflects something sacred in life worth preserving.


For a Finn, the national/patriotic themes of his music give a lot of additional value to his works and it really helps to understand the music. The very same understanding has made Sibelius emotionally heavy to me - I enjoy his music and find it immensely beautiful and moving, but it's not something I could listen to all the time.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Larkenfield said:


> When he portrays the forces of nature in his 7th observing nature without interfering with it, he's standing off to the side and the music is not about him personally but about something outside of himself that has a life of its own. I consider it magical and magnificent with reference to the natural world.


This sounds to me more like _Tapiola_ than like the 7th symphony. _Tapiola_ seems to me to depict a world remote from, and probably hostile to, to the human presence; I'm awed by its stillness and its storms, but warned to keep a safe distance until the very end, when the blizzard is over and I'm permitted to step outside for just a moment to take a breath of icy air and marvel at the beauty of freshly fallen snow. The 7th symphony, by contrast, invites me into nature - into the storm, up to the mountaintop - to experience it not only as my home, but as a metaphor of life: for struggle and tribulation, for exaltation and reverence, and finally for endurance and acceptance. What moves me in the 7th - and in much of his music, in fact - is Sibelius's success, not so much in imagining and projecting great forces external to himself (which he can certainly do), but in so fusing his spirit with nature that he makes it speak in its own language of what life has meant to him.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

O


Enthusiast said:


> ^ Doesn't alter the fact that he may have been happy some of the time while drunk. Not that I intended my "programme" that seriously or to be a literal picture of his life. As for his life, there were ups and downs. And then he went silent. I agree he doesn't place himself so much in the nature that he paints. But I don't find it hard to feel that he is telling us about his inner world within that nature - sometimes finding synchronicity but often with the two worlds separate.


 OK, but just a few words on the subject of drink... He wrote in 1927: "Isolation and loneliness are driving me to despair. . . . In order to survive, I have to have alcohol. . . . Am abused, alone, and all my real friends are dead. My prestige here at present is rock-bottom. Impossible to work. If only there were a way out."

He was mostly a troubled drinker and frequently had to dose himself in order to conduct. This is not the picture of a happy drunk or drinker. He frequently suffered from acute despondency and from his alcoholism, if one is familiar with his life:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/07/09/apparition-in-the-woods/amp

Alex Ross: "Many times in Sibelius's music, the exaltation of natural sublimity gives way to inchoate fear, which has less to do with the outer landscape than with the inner one: the forest of the mind."

I believe that's very true, but not about the magic and unity of the Sibelius 7th which has very little to do with his human presence and more likely far more representative of the forces of life present within the outer landscape that he so beautifully painted in sound and many consider a masterpiece.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I’d be a bit cautious when connecting music with a composer’s inner life. Beethoven wrote his Heiligenstadt Testament, close to a suicide note, while staying in Heiligenstadt and writing his 2nd Symphony. And of course the 2nd Symphony is quite merry and vigorous.

“Farewell and do not wholly forget me when I am dead; I deserve this from you, for during my lifetime I was thinking of you often and of ways to make you happy.”

Or, as Beethoven said at another time, “An artist must be able to assume many humors.”


----------



## 13hm13 (Oct 31, 2016)

A piece of music sometimes just mysteriously clicks in (or rarely, out). Indeed, there were a few CDs that sat on a shelf, mostly un-listened-to for years, until I (un)snapped! Now, they are among my favorite albums. Sometimes that (un)snapping takes an "external" event ... such as hearing the piece on the radio/podcast or in a movie ... or reading a review. Maybe even a topical forum post 
So, even if you don't like a certain piece of music TODAY or TOMORROW does not mean there's anything wrong with liking it more (or less) some time in the future.

"Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change."
-Stephen Hawking

"When the facts change, I change my mind."
John Maynard Keynes


----------



## 13hm13 (Oct 31, 2016)

KenOC said:


> close to a suicide note,


Suicide (or its attempt, e.g., Schumann) is something that causes me to listen more carefully ... but I don't know whether _that_ knowledge (and the pathos it generates) "gets in the way" from more analytical introspection. E.g., the conductor Herbert Kegel ... I've liked his style, but not sure whether its partly due to him taking his life in 1990.

An analogy from another art form:

Satire on Romantic Suicide (Leonardo Alenza, 1839)


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

^Damn! This raises a great idea for another thread... I'm not sure if I have the nerve to make it, though.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Indeed - Sibelius increasingly need a drink just to steady his hand in order to compose.


----------

