# Personal development as a listener



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

How much have you changed as a listener over time?
How did your tastes change or develop?
Are there certain ideas or opinions that you had in the past, but now find them cringeworthy?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I can certainly get a piece of music more quickly. I started as a child with a child's ability to absorb new things. It is strange but I don't think my basic taste has changed that much since then except that I am perhaps less snobbish about less profound music and my listening repertoire has extended to more contemporary music (as a child I didn't go much further than Bartok, Stravinsky, Prokofiev and Shostakovich - who I had doubts about back then). But mostly the change has been to become much quicker at getting to know music that is new to me. 

It is a little embarrassing that back then I would sometimes miss out slow movements, especially Mozart's (a composer I have always loved).


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

I am not too big fan of slow movements either... Actually depends on how easy they are to get. While I certainly enjoy Bach's "Air" from his 3rd Orchestral Suite, I sometimes have problems getting some slow movements in romantic symphonies.


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

I'm having problem with some of the slow movements in Haydn's symphonies. I'm finding 2/3 pf them beautiful, of Bach's "Air" standard, but the other 1/3 are a dull plod. Wigmore seems to like the plods, and suggests trying to appreciate that they are humorous or clever in some way. But, I'm sorry, I just don't find them funny or clever. I wish Haydn would just stick to writing beautiful melodies, oh well, 2/3 isn't a bad hit rate, I'll just learn to skip.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Mal said:


> I'm having problem with some of the slow movements in Haydn's symphonies. I'm finding 2/3 pf them beautiful, of Bach's "Air" standard, but the other 1/3 are a dull plod. Wigmore seems to like the plods, and suggests trying to appreciate that they are humorous or clever in some way. But, I'm sorry, I just don't find them funny or clever. I wish Haydn would just stick to writing beautiful melodies, oh well, 2/3 isn't a bad hit rate, I'll just learn to skip.


If you are thinking of the earlier symphonies (say, before the Paris set), you might experiment with different performances. I find some highly recommended recordings quite joyless but have learned that this is a feature of those performances rather than the music itself. I think critics can sometimes be a bit pedantic when it comes to Haydn. If you give an example or two of offending works and, ideally, the performances you have been listening to it would help me to see if my theory is correct.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_How much have you changed as a listener over time?_

After 45 years the most significant change is there is a lot of music I'll never buy nor listen to again. This would include most of Tchaikovsky, most of Brahms symphonic music and concertos, Beethoven's concertos save the triple, Mozart's and Haydn's late symphonies, Holst's The Planets, Elgar's symphonies and concertos, a lot of Shostakovich, Mendelssohn's 3rd & 4th symphonies & violin concerto, the Schumann symphonies, most romantic-era violin and piano concertos, most Mahler and Bruckner symphonies, and a lot of other stuff from biggest name composers.

My experience is that, after you hear these pieces the first 100 or 200 times, there isn't that much left to hear regardless of whom does the playing or conducting, how good the recording or style, or anything else. I marvel at the best professional critics who can listen to 500 recordings of something and still find difference and freshness.

I went from someone that listened mostly to symphonies, concertos and orchestral music when I began to someone that listens mostly to chamber and vocal music now with music by rarely heard composers like Miloslav Kabelac to spice it up. I still listen to the occasional warhorse but not often.


----------



## Flamme (Dec 30, 2012)

I did, but i was always ''special'' considering my taste in books, arts in general, so i was never ''chained'' to any convention or dogma in anything...


----------



## Robert Gamble (Dec 18, 2016)

My growth as a listener over the past year and a half or so of intensive classical music listening is primarily now I can certainly peg where in the continuum a piece is (Baroque, early classical symphonies, later classical symphonies, romantic) and often guess who may have composed a piece (all this in the case of pieces I don't know well). I can also pick out why I like one performance over another. But I still do most of my listening at work, so I really don't get to deep dives into the music as much as I would like.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Having listened to a vast amount of music for over 50 years, I agree with a lot that's been already said. I have less and less patience for works that are overly long. If it's an opera, La boheme or Rheingold are just about right. Those operas that go on for 2, 3, 4 hours? Forget it. Even Bruckner now tests me - at least in the slow and boring versions. I want energy and life - Solti hits it right. My tolerance of Baroque music is almost zero. Vivaldi, Teleman, Handel, even Bach...no interest at all. In my younger years I had little interest in chamber music, but that has really changed. Sometimes I think I have a perfect life: I pour a nice brandy, put on a quartet by Beethoven, a quintet by Schmidt, or some Schumann, turn off the lights and light a candle and everything is good. So much music, so little time.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

The only major change I've noticed over the years is a lower tolerance for what I will call syrupy music or music that oozes sentimentality.


----------



## ZJovicic (Feb 26, 2017)

Very interesting answers so far.
Regarding myself. I am still in early phase of exploration... so not much has changed still, I try to be open minded and to listen to many different composers and genres, and from different eras. The least explored area of classical music for me is still opera, after that religious works.


----------



## trazom (Apr 13, 2009)

I've noticed over the last 15 years my prejudices against music from certain eras slowly break down. Probably the biggest turn around I've had is with Brahms's music which used to strike me as bloated and overly thick in texture but after more exposure to his chamber music and certain performances of the symphonies and concertos, I grew to love it. Now I can't imagine how I ever disliked his music.

I used to dislike slow movements as well, but now they're often my favorite part, or the section I'll exclusively listen to in works that I otherwise don't care much for. The slow movements of Mozart's concerto #7 for three pianos k.242 or his horn quintet k.407, for example.



Bulldog said:


> The only major change I've noticed over the years is a lower tolerance for what I will call syrupy music or music that oozes sentimentality.


Not a fan of Rachmaninoff's second symphony then, eh?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

A lot of my feeling out in Classical was through piano lessons. I liked Telemann, Clementi, and Bach then, but now I just can't get into them. The only composer that's been with me all along from the beginning till now is Mozart. I had a big Opera and Beethoven supernova discovery, but they fizzled to nothing now. Modern Classical has been the mainstay for last while before I joined TC, extending also into Avant Garde Jazz. I listen to Renaissance still more regularly than Classical or Romantic, and who are mainly just Mozart and Berlioz from those categories.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

trazom said:


> Not a fan of Rachmaninoff's second symphony then, eh?


I try to avoid it.


----------



## leonsm (Jan 15, 2011)

I started to listen the compositions as a whole, instead of focusing only in parts (my weak was scherzo moviments), with the exception of operas (I still don't regularly listen them completely). 

Second, I started to listen to more modern and contemporary music, I think my gateway was Schnittke.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Bulldog said:


> The only major change I've noticed over the years is a lower tolerance for what I will call syrupy music or music that oozes sentimentality.


I have experienced similarly. Most romantic and late romantic music fits in with that, and this is why I avoid it and since long have preferred early music,


----------



## runssical (Jan 20, 2017)

I'm new to this forum. From what I see everyone here has fairly generic vannila tastes. Kabelac was the most exotic name mentioned. 

I am familiar with scores of lesser known composers and keep up with today's contemporary composers. I started off with an openness and desire to explore unfamiliar music. This was further buttressed by my disdain for herd mentality. I instinctively shunned Mozart and Haydn and don't care for their music till this day. 

There is so much great music out there that not even 1% of classicalmusic fans listen to. I checked, and one of my current favorites, an orchestral suite by a Japanese composer does not have a single YouTube video nor is it on any of the streaming services. And this music is fantastic!

Only the adventurous few get to enjoy these hidden jewels.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

I have always enjoyed music of all types but been keenest on folk music and song and baroque classics. 

That hasn't changed, but over the past five years, since I joined TC and began listening to classical music 'in earnest', I have deepened my experience of the baroque and find much more in it than I did; plus, I am constantly stimulated by reading about others' tastes and recommendations, not excluding the polls and games on TC, to sample things I wouldn't have tried before, such as American music, living composers, and long symphonies or concertos that would have bored me in the past. I have enjoyed very much many of these samplings. 

The consequence is that I've broadened my tastes and have a better knowledge than before, though since I started from such a low base, the results aren't all that impressive as far as other people are concerned. 

Thanks to all the TC members, including the many lovers of modern music on this forum as well as the ones who've gone more deeply into the music and composers of the past, for increasing my enjoyment of life. :tiphat:


----------



## Vronsky (Jan 5, 2015)

I remember the first composition that struck my attention was the Piano Trio No. 2 by Shostakovich. I quickly moved to Ligeti, Xenakis and Stockhausen. I listened Ligeti's Requiem, Lux Aeterna, Musica ricercata, then the percussion works by Xenakis and some orchestral, like Keqrops and Shaar. I liked Luzifers Abschied by Stockhausen, Triadic Memories by Feldman, Amériques, Ionisation, Poème électronique and Déserts by Varese. I listened the orchestral music by Witold Lutosławski, his fourth symphony is still my favourite. I liked Webern also. 20th century classical music was completely new experience for me at the time. Xenakis and Stockhausen were shock. 

After decent time of listening and discoveries, Schumann, Mozart, Stravinsky and Berlioz became my favourite composers. I loved Mozart's and Schumann's symphonies, orchestral and liturgical music by Berlioz and the ballets by Stravinsky.

It is worth noting that I come from country with zero amount of classical music tradition. Classical music fans who listen more than excerpts of classical music with 15 million views on YouTube are exceptionally rare. TC and its members were my main source of enlightenment.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

runssical said:


> I'm new to this forum. From what I see everyone here has fairly generic vannila tastes. Kabelac was the most exotic name mentioned.
> 
> I am familiar with scores of lesser known composers and keep up with today's contemporary composers. I started off with an openness and desire to explore unfamiliar music. This was further buttressed by my disdain for herd mentality.
> 
> ...


Welcome, runssical. But tell me, what are vanilla tastes in this context? And, if you started with exploring the unfamiliar, how can you know that it is superior to the tastes of "the herd"? Or how is it that you actually know that such a broad swathe of music that the herd graze on is _all _so unworthy? You have rejected the music that most classical music fans like, I get that, but so far all I can see as your reason for being adventurous is a desire to be different. As someone who likes a lot of different music I am wondering whether you have any reasons that are not the usual superficial reasons that are commonly aired for rejecting Mozart and Haydn? I guess what I ultimately want to know is whether your guiding hints as to new jewels (if you give any) are worthwhile for me. As it stands, your post reads as being a little egotistical. I mean no offense - I just want to get a better idea of where you are coming from.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

ZJovicic said:


> How much have you changed as a listener over time?
> How did your tastes change or develop?
> Are there certain ideas or opinions that you had in the past, but now find them cringeworthy?


As I've gotten older and more experienced, my emotional range has greatly expanded and I'm able to appreciate more complexity in musical textures at the same time that I can still appreciate its simplicity. Out of a growing curiosity over the years, I'm willing to hear anyone, and that means more openness to hearing new composers that I can quickly find the value in if I feel it's there.

I enjoy hearing the bottom range of the orchestra or group more--the lower mid-range and bass frequencies that can frequently sound muddy through poor equipment. So I upgraded my gear by moving into the warmth and musicality of tube gear and use audiophile headphones (GS-1000). The bass frequencies are the foundation of most works, so I'm listening more from the bottom up and want to hear clearly what's going on there. In jazz, that means hearing the string or electric bass without thickness or muddiness, and the middle to upper range seems to take care of itself. One might say that as I've gotten older I've sunk to the depths and prefer a different set of sound frequencies that used to be much higher in vibrations.

I no longer make sweeping judgments in advance about an orchestra, recording, conductor, soloist or composer, because I've found over the years that just about everyone who's devoted their life to the arts has done something worth hearing. So, it's one work, one performance, one composer at a time and giving it a fair hearing without overloading the musical journey of a lifetime with too much judgment and prejudice before the fact.

My most valuable experience has been by being fooled and proven wrong by a conductor, soloist, or orchestra without knowing who they were in advance of hearing the performance. It's good to be fooled and I like to see the critics and historians fooled too to keep everyone honest and to add a dose of humility. It's also good to hear a recording and imagine it from the composer's point of view rather than one's own. It can be a totally different listening experience because the mind can condition the hearing in a positive way.

I'm glad I have protected my hearing over the years by avoiding catastrophically loud groups and listening levels at home. If the music is too loud it can physically damage the sensitive mechanism of the ears and I would leave the venue. I also listen to music at moderate sound levels at home, which can still be satisfying if one's speakers or headphones can properly resolve the sound. If you can't enjoy the music at moderate listening levels, save up to upgrade your equipment when you can-it's an investment of a lifetime and it doesn't have to cost a fortune like some audiophiles spend on.

I encourage the younger generation to think about what they need to do to preserve their hearing, even if for some it may already be too late. If you do, the older you get the more you appreciate the healing and regenerative power of sound, including the voices of loved ones. There's nothing like hearing one's favorite symphony at 3 AM when everyone's asleep and the world belongs to you. But you have to plan ahead when you're young. Those up in years may not be able to say goodbye when their time comes, so enjoy them while they're around.


----------



## Clairvoyance Enough (Jul 25, 2014)

Lately I feel like one of those porn addicts who have to keep acquiring progressively stranger fetishes to experience any feeling whatsoever. 

My taste in classical music pretty much evolved chronologically. I loved the baroque era first, then Haydn, then Mozart/Beethoven, and so on all the way up to Stockhausen, other sound-art, and contemporary stuff. Then I gorged myself on pretty much every genre of jazz/progressive-rock/rock/pop/the-million-subgenres-of-these and then went back to classical and now I just feel numb to pretty much everything. 

I don't mean that in an arrogant way, like I've "understood" all of these complex masterpieces and finished with them. It's just that when you listen to music for several hours a day you can actually run through the eras relatively quickly (4 or 5 years for me), and while my detached aesthetic appreciation for all of this wonderful art hasn't diminished in the slightest, that physical dopamine/adrenaline rush effect seems to have worn off for want of novel sounds. 

I miss perceiving the rich orchestral textures of Mahler and Wagner as something so alien and novel compared to what I'd heard before them, and then feeling shocked/repulsed by the modernists, and so on. Before it seemed like every week I'd discover a magical new ear worm unlike anything I'd ever heard, even if it was just some weird electroacoustic noise. Now I'm lucky to feel that once every six months.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Clairvoyance Enough said:


> Lately I feel like one of those porn addicts who have to keep acquiring progressively stranger fetishes to experience any feeling whatsoever.
> 
> My taste in classical music pretty much evolved chronologically. I loved the baroque era first, then Haydn, then Mozart/Beethoven, and so on all the way up to Stockhausen, other sound-art, and contemporary stuff. Then I gorged myself on pretty much every genre of jazz/progressive-rock/rock/pop/the-million-subgenres-of-these and then went back to classical and now I just feel numb to pretty much everything.
> 
> ...


I know that feeling well (the musical newness one not the porn one!). I don't know if you have tried different performances of the same works - it can work quite well in bringing new novelty (as well as new insights) to familiar music - or a genre you have neglected up to now (opera? quartets? jazz?). Whatever, I guess you still have a lifetime of inspired music to be transported by again and again? I guess what I would want to say, though, is that I don't think the novelty - thrilling as it is - is the best bit.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I am pretty much all opera. When I got back into classical back in 2011 I first was listening to instrumental, but quickly moved to choral works. Then I got a but for Beethoven and that took me to the opera Fidelio. I got curious and picked up a DVD of Fidelio in 2014 and from that point on it has been about 95 percent opera for me with occasional excursions into symphony. Non classical is almost dropped out of the picture.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Fritz Kobus said:


> I am pretty much all opera. When I got back into classical back in 2011 I first was listening to instrumental, but quickly moved to choral works. Then I got a but for Beethoven and that took me to the opera Fidelio. I got curious and picked up a DVD of Fidelio in 2014 and from that point on it has been about 95 percent opera for me with occasional excursions into symphony. Non classical is almost dropped out of the picture.


Is it all DVDs or do you also listen to operas without seeing them? And if you do, is it only familiar ones and do you read the libretto while you listen? I ask because I listen to operas that I don't know as pure music and this works for me with some composers (Mozart, Handel, Wagner and Britten among them) but not with Verdi or Puccini or many other opera composers.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Enthusiast said:


> Is it all DVDs or do you also listen to operas without seeing them? And if you do, is it only familiar ones and do you read the libretto while you listen? I ask because I listen to operas that I don't know as pure music and this works for me with some composers (Mozart, Handel, Wagner and Britten among them) but not with Verdi or Puccini or many other opera composers.


Mostly I listen to CDs of opera. I love watching on DVD but just don't get a lot of time for it. I much prefer operas that I have watched enough DVDs to be able to more or less follow the action in my head. Otherwise one is listening mainly for pure musical enjoyment. I am not much for choral parts so in general I prefer opera and Handel's Messiah (the only oratorio I really listen to anymore) to religious choral works. I have never tried to follow the libretto while listening to CDs, though It would be fun to do for my sung-in-English Wagner Ring. I once watched a video (no subtitles) with English libretto in hand, and ultimately keyed in some 1250 subtitles to make that video subtitled.

I think you could do Verdi's Trovatore and maybe Aroldo for pure music. Trovatore is very dramatic. A lot of good parts in Aroldo too, some that sound Spanish to me.


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Clairvoyance Enough said:


> Lately I feel like one of those porn addicts who have to keep acquiring progressively stranger fetishes to experience any feeling whatsoever.
> 
> My taste in classical music pretty much evolved chronologically. I loved the baroque era first, then Haydn, then Mozart/Beethoven, and so on all the way up to Stockhausen, other sound-art, and contemporary stuff. Then I gorged myself on pretty much every genre of jazz/progressive-rock/rock/pop/the-million-subgenres-of-these and then went back to classical and now I just feel numb to pretty much everything.
> 
> ...


Why not try exploring medieval and renaissance music, Hindustani and Carnatic classical Indian music, Gamelan, classical Chinese music and so on?


----------



## Clairvoyance Enough (Jul 25, 2014)

Enthusiast said:


> I know that feeling well (the musical newness one not the porn one!). I don't know if you have tried different performances of the same works - it can work quite well in bringing new novelty (as well as new insights) to familiar music - or a genre you have neglected up to now (opera? quartets? jazz?). Whatever, I guess you still have a lifetime of inspired music to be transported by again and again? I guess what I would want to say, though, is that I don't think the novelty - thrilling as it is - is the best bit.


Unfortunately I feel like I've looked in every nook and cranny of classical and jazz that there is. The more I listen to the latter the more I start to understand why I don't like it quite as much as classical, but I do spend most of my time trying to hack into it. I honestly think I'm just frying my pleasure receptors; one time I didn't listen to anything for a week, just by circumstance, and when I resumed I suddenly found myself attracted to composers and pieces I had never really liked before. Naturally I got excited and fried them again within two days by overlistening. 



Gallus said:


> Why not try exploring medieval and renaissance music, Hindustani and Carnatic classical Indian music, Gamelan, classical Chinese music and so on?


I forgot to mention that I do like some medieval and renaissance music, though I probably could do some more exploration there. Most of the classical music outside of the western tradition that I've tried, while always entertaining, sounds pretty samey to me. I'm sure that's just my untrained ears though. I also always worry that what I usually find on youtube or spotify would be considered "fluffy" by true connoisseurs of those genres, but it's harder to find any sort of established canon for that stuff, if such a thing even exists.


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Clairvoyance Enough said:


> I forgot to mention that I do like some medieval and renaissance music, though I probably could do some more exploration there. Most of the classical music outside of the western tradition that I've tried, while always entertaining, sounds pretty samey to me. I'm sure that's just my untrained ears though. I also always worry that what I usually find on youtube or spotify would be considered "fluffy" by true connoisseurs of those genres, but it's harder to find any sort of established canon for that stuff, if such a thing even exists.


 A website with some articles and lists of recommended recordings which has been helpful for me in this regard: http://www.medieval.org


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

I can't imagine a more "established cannon" than the masses and motets of of Machaut, Du Fay, Ockeghem and Josquin. What you find on Spotify for these composers is far from "fluffy", at least in performances from the past 40 years or so. As with baroque music, the last two or three decades of the twentieth century saw important advances in understanding about how to turn medieval and renaissance scores into sound, so it's best to avoid earlier recordings.


----------



## juliante (Jun 7, 2013)

ZJovicic said:


> How much have you changed as a listener over time?
> How did your tastes change or develop?
> Are there certain ideas or opinions that you had in the past, but now find them cringeworthy?


Good questions. Hugely...and yes!

Started with steady diet of classical period - so much so that I struggled with anything else. Which seems like another me now. To the point that I rarely listen to classical period now (that said, I have been revelling in my recent discovery of Haydn's Cello Concerto 1 recently - how did that slip through my net first time!!?). Love of chamber exploded when I started listening on a decent stereo, where previously the bass notes were not coming through. That love of chamber music will never go.

What I have noticed is that my appreciation of the orchestra has grown commensurately with the amount and variety of orchestral music I have got to know, which is a joy.

Choral and vocal music has gradually but powerfully drawn me in, facilitated I think by an increasingly sophisticated ear… and I have feeling I am about to commence a Wagner obsession. Italian opera I fear I will never enjoy.

What I do wonder though is - will the thrill of my early days of discovering CM and listening to the likes of Beethoven's Piano Concerto 5 or Mozart's late piano concertos ever quite be replicated? I think perhaps not. But I am 100% confident of a lifetime's deepening enjoyment of the incredible genre that we on this forum are so fortunate to experience.

20 and 21C music came steadily and although tonal music is probably where my heart lies, my enjoyment of more dissonant sounds has gradually and satisfyingly developed.


----------



## Beet131 (Mar 24, 2018)

mbhaub said:


> Having listened to a vast amount of music for over 50 years, I agree with a lot that's been already said. I have less and less patience for works that are overly long. If it's an opera, La boheme or Rheingold are just about right. Those operas that go on for 2, 3, 4 hours? Forget it. Even Bruckner now tests me - at least in the slow and boring versions. I want energy and life - Solti hits it right. My tolerance of Baroque music is almost zero. Vivaldi, Teleman, Handel, even Bach...no interest at all. In my younger years I had little interest in chamber music, but that has really changed. *Sometimes I think I have a perfect life: I pour a nice brandy, put on a quartet by Beethoven, a quintet by Schmidt, or some Schumann, turn off the lights and light a candle and everything is good. So much music, so little time.*


I'm with you! Sounds like perfection to me.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I feel that any listener who reaches the point of saturation should be congratulated. The saturation point means that no music really is satisfying any more. But it can be one of the great landmarks in life to realize what art and music cannot do. It cannot make one whole. Even the greatest recording or performance in the world does not always work. It does not always have its effects. It does not always make one feel better. It does not always lift one's spirit. It can be a temporary or occasional companion and mirror to the real or deeper self. But it does not represent the wholeness of the person. That can only be found within the person, perhaps as part of a spiritual search or moving into a phase and appreciation of silence and stillness. But all art will lose its power at a certain point, at least temporarily, and that point of listening-saturation should not be ignored. It's very important and it may well set the person on a different course in the exploration of their own self-awareness or a new direction in life-needed change. The person stops expecting from art and music what it's unable to provide. Reaching that point can be tremendously liberating and one's life will come into balance again. Everything can be more satisfying, not just music.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

And sometimes it's just the little things. Take a little break from music. Listen to other genres. Listen at a different time of the day. Listen with different equipment and under different circumstances. For example, I often listen to classical music in the morning, while going to work by train and for some reason that works really well for me. Much better than listening at home after a long, tiring day.


----------



## agoukass (Dec 1, 2008)

I've found that I have a tendency to fixate on one composer for a long period of time. When I was in college, I went through a huge Brahms phase and made radio programs about all of his chamber music except for the sonatas. Then there was a Mahler phase and a Philip Glass phase that lasted for years until I heard the composer in concert. 

These days, I mainly listen to piano and chamber music. I studied the piano for twelve years from about the third grade through college and I have a large collection of scores. It's the music that I know best and it's fascinating to see how different people approach the same piece. I never really get tired of it. The same thing with chamber music. I don't listen to a lot of orchestral music, opera, art songs, or choral music. I'm sure that will change as time goes on, but that's where I am right now and I'm perfectly happy being there as long as it lasts.


----------



## BiscuityBoyle (Feb 5, 2018)

DeepR said:


> And sometimes it's just the little things. Take a little break from music. Listen to other genres. Listen at a different time of the day. Listen with different equipment and under different circumstances. For example, I often listen to classical music in the morning, while going to work by train and for some reason that works really well for me. Much better than listening at home after a long, tiring day.


Damn the trains in The Netherlands must be real quiet, you could never dream of doing it on the MTA, no matter what headphones you have.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Larkenfield said:


> ... it can be one of the great landmarks in life to realize what art and music cannot do. It cannot make one whole. Even the greatest recording or performance in the world does not always work. It does not always have its effects. It does not always make one feel better. It does not always lift one's spirit. It can be a temporary or occasional companion and mirror to the real or deeper self. ...


Without necessarily disagreeing with you in this I find that I can nearly always find something (it might not be classical) that lifts my spirits ... even if it doesn't last. Music can't cure, say, depression but it can make it more tolerable.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

My personal development over the past few years since returning back to classical music listening has been influenced by three main issues.
Firstly TC has opened me to much more music, my tastes are still towards the traditional but gradually I am spreading more beyond the classical/romantic 
Secondly music streaming has allowed me to listen to multiple interpretations of more or less anything I want. Boy, has that been illuminating and guided again by what I see on TC
Thirdly time, I do not have enough to push ahead into all the interesting music out there


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

When I came to TC (a mere 2 years ago) I had just jettisoned tons of Symphony recordings that I hadn't listened to properly. I dismissed recordings and deleted them or sold them on not realising I would one day come to appreciate them. In the big hard drive crash of 2015, I lost three quarters of my collection. Gradually I've built my collection back up and, with the help of a brilliant computer technician (who rescued all the data from two crashed HDs that everyone else had written off, I've now got all my previous files back (he even restored files I thought I'd deleted). Now I no longer delete or sell any account of a work I love just in case I will return to it. Unfortunately this means that I have scary numbers of multiple cycles. What I'm trying to say is I'm far more willing to give things multiple tries.
As far as music listening is concernedi used to listen to 50:50 orchestral music and rock but that ratio is more like 80:20 orchestral now. I've sold three quarters of my rock vinyl collection and with the mo ey purchased digital copies of the things I love (symphonies, string quartets, cello works, etc). Where I have expanded my listening it's been due to the help, support and advice of more knowledgeable members on here, especially with regard to chamber music and obscure symphonists. Thanks to this forum I've learned so much and come to appreciate accounts and works I wouldn't have touched with a bargepole even 2 years ago. We never stop learning. Thanks for being my educators. I hope you feel the same.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

larold said:


> _How much have you changed as a listener over time?_
> 
> After 45 years the most significant change is there is a lot of music I'll never buy nor listen to again....
> 
> My experience is that, after you hear these pieces the first 100 or 200 times, there isn't that much left to hear.


Same here.

My story is a bit different in that I spent 45 years in principally Pop/Rock and only the last 3 1/2 years has classical become my principle genre.

I just could not stand to hear Stairway to Heaven one more time!

My tastes always evolved as I embraced performance art, Broadway show tunes, avant garde, jazz... anything new and different.

Bad part is that Classical is so vast and I have so few years left to explore.


----------



## Dima (Oct 3, 2016)

I have migrated after 15 years of being a fan of Prokofiev's music (but still I'm proud that I know all his compositions) to the beautiful and more simple music of Anton Rubinstein. Tchaikovsky and his teacher Anton Rubinstein were the main composers in Russia in 18xx. I find that it is true and today, but most of Anton's music is unknown today. For me he is like Vivaldi, that was forgotten for some centuries and now I have an opportunity to rediscover him.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

ZJovicic said:


> How much have you changed as a listener over time?


Quite a bit, as I have gotten more specialized and able to focus on certain elements as I familiarize myself with a composer's body of work. Yet, the unchanging consistent principle of my listening is the key to my growth: always listen with awareness, with "faith" in the composer, and be receptive. Don't let your mind and its boxes of beliefs and biases and assumptions get in the way of truly hearing music freshly, without prejudice.



ZJovicic said:


> How did your tastes change or develop?


As I accumulated knowledge, I got to know what I'm most interested in, and tailored this to whatever music was being considered. A different set of criteria is required to appreciate Mozart, compared to Cage, and I don't let ridiculous expectations obstruct the art.



ZJovicic said:


> Are there certain ideas or opinions that you had in the past, but now find them cringeworthy?


Yes, I thought there was some kind of "knowledge barrier" to understanding modern music, especially 12-tone and serial; but this proved to be unfounded, as I was able to accumulate enough understanding to convince my mind that this was untrue; but the mind had to be assuaged, and it was necessary to learn, accumulate knowledge, and do much pondering, before it became possible to confidently 'jettison' all the knowledge of the music. It was a catch-22 situation. To ignore the rules, first you must know them.


----------

