# Composers we keep giving another chance



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Sometimes we don’t much care for a composer, but we keep going back and giving them another chance, and then another… Things may catch fire, but often they don’t.

Case in point for me: Myaskovsky. How about you?


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Debussy and Ravel. I always go back, but am always disappointed. 

V


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

For me Myaskovsky , if it had not be for realdealbleus and his wonderful threads I would completely forgot him.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bruckner and Liszt.

Currently giving Liszt another chance for Franzship.

Bruckner I've given up on.


----------



## Retrograde Inversion (Nov 27, 2016)

If, on my initial listening, I feel that a composer is doing the kinds of things that could interest me, then I'll at least want to give them a chance, even if I'm not initially overwhelmed. After all, it always takes several listenings to any complex music to become properly familiarized with it. But there are plenty of composers I've given plenty of chances to make an impression on me, without "things catching fire", as you put it.

A case in point would be Reger: after listening to his Piano Concerto about five times, and several other works several times each, I still find his sense of musical line quite unconvincing.

On the other hand, there are those who I quickly set aside, knowing that their particular aesthetic just wasn't for me.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

I need to give Vivaldi another go, I think over exposure to the Four Seasons has tainted my views


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Haydn man said:


> I need to give Vivaldi another go, I think over exposure to the Four Seasons has tainted my views


There are so much pieces beyond the Four Seasons, the double concertos are wonderful.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Sometimes we don't much care for a composer, but we keep going back and giving them another chance, and then another… Things may catch fire, but often they don't.
> 
> Case in point for me: Myaskovsky. How about you?


Haydn
Beethoven before op 109
Liszt (though he's running out of chances)
Brahms
Verdi 
Tchaikovsky 
Dvorak
CPE Bach
Handel
François Couperin (also running out of chances)
Buxtehude
Marin Marais (also running out)
Puccini
Scriabin
Babbitt (running out)
William Lawes
Willaert 
Jacquet de Mantua
Cabezon
Lebègue
Storace
Pasquini


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Messiaen's Quartet for the End of Time. I couldn't make any sense of it the first time I heard it. But I knew from experience that very frequently, repeated listening would do the trick. So I listened again and again, put it on as background music, read up on it, tried everything I could think of. And it still grates on me every bit as much as the first time. 

And then some of those other weird composers. Stockhausen comes to mind. No matter how much I listen, I hear incomprehensible noise. I once ran into someone on the web who told me there is far more there than the Helicopter Quartet. Listen to the Song of the Youths! It's so lyrical it will melt the sternest of hearts! So I gave it a try. Verdict? Incomprehensible noise. 

I suppose it's just me.


----------



## Francis Poulenc (Nov 6, 2016)

Stravinksy. Much of his music irritates me, but for some reason I keep going back.


----------



## Francis Poulenc (Nov 6, 2016)

brianvds said:


> Messiaen's Quartet for the End of Time. I couldn't make any sense of it the first time I heard it. But I knew from experience that very frequently, repeated listening would do the trick. So I listened again and again, put it on as background music, read up on it, tried everything I could think of. And it still grates on me every bit as much as the first time.
> 
> And then some of those other weird composers. Stockhausen comes to mind. No matter how much I listen, I hear incomprehensible noise. I once ran into someone on the web who told me there is far more there than the Helicopter Quartet. Listen to the Song of the Youths! It's so lyrical it will melt the sternest of hearts! So I gave it a try. Verdict? Incomprehensible noise.
> 
> I suppose it's just me.


I usually dislike music with so much dissonance, but I always loved that piece. It was one of the few exceptions.


----------



## Border Collie (Mar 9, 2016)

Mandryka said:


> Haydn
> Beethoven before op 109
> Liszt (though he's running out of chances)
> Brahms
> ...


Good grief! You forgot Wagner.


----------



## PeterFromLA (Jul 22, 2011)

Some composers you just can’t help returning to, despite a lack of immediate ardor for their compositional efforts. In my case, this tendency to return to composers for whom personal responses were (and in some cases remain) inauspicious is because I detect there is something in the music worth figuring out. It helps if they get major recordings, ensembles, and soloists interested in promoting their work, but more, it has to do with an intuition that aesthetic integrity is responsible for the impasse, and that you just haven’t tuned into it yet. 

So, for me, the composer who most occupies the position of being an aural sphinx is Wolfgang Rihm, probably the leading German composer of the day (along with Lachenmann). Some of his pieces have given me migraines, others have intrigued and excited me, but I can’t say I love him or hate him overall; on the other hand, I’m not indifferent either. Something about the music attracts me and makes me want to continue to return to the oeuvre, in search of that work that will make the Rihm aesthetic “click” for me and allow me to listen to his catalog with fresh and appreciative ears.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

hpowders said:


> Bruckner and Liszt.
> 
> Currently giving Liszt another chance for Franzship.
> 
> Bruckner I've given up on.


the same with me for Bruckner.

But with Liszt it should catch fire eventually!! What a man, the magic, the craftmanship, so many faces too.

Have you tried his piano concerto's? Totentanz? his sonata? Mephisto waltzes? His late works..........

Hang on there!


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Bax and Glazunov and I don't want to start any controversies, Schoenberg. The first two simply wrote a lot of twaddle that sounds like sonic wallpaper. Schoenberg just doesn't appeal to me on a visceral level. I like Webern and Berg and so I am 'supposed ' to like the Big Papa that mentored them but the only feeling his music produces in me is ennui


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Border Collie said:


> Good grief! You forgot Wagner.


Wagner before Walküre.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I must add Vivaldi and Scarlatti to my list.

I can listen to 2-3 Scarlatti Sonatas and they sound delightful, but a few sonatas later, and the "sameness" becomes tedious to me.

Same with Vivaldi. I can listen to a piccolo or violin concerto, but then I get bored from hearing similar ideas in concertos that follow.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

You give yourself another chance. The composer in question doesn't need one. After 30 + years I've come around to more Brahms, a Mozart piece here and there, but there's so much more to discover among so many composers.

I can't imagine not enjoying Debussy and Ravel, but we all have our struggles. The good news is that we change and listen differently over time.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

True confession time...I've never been able to get into Mahler.  I've tried again and again and it's not happening for me! 

His music strikes me as sounding pessimistic and gloomy, and that just doesn't appeal to me. I know that many listeners have had positive experiences with his works. I keep coming back to his music in hopes that I might someday have such an experience.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bettina said:


> True confession time...I've never been able to get into Mahler.  I've tried again and again and it's not happening for me!
> 
> His music strikes me as sounding pessimistic and gloomy, and that just doesn't appeal to me. I know that many listeners have had positive experiences with his works. I keep coming back to his music in hopes that I might someday have such an experience.


That's okay. Your other qualities are good.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I try to give everything that doesn't speak to me periodic chances. With music it's Bruckner and Vivaldi; literature Joyce's "Portrait of the artist . . ." and Faulkner's "The Sound and the Fury": pop music Hip-Hop; ballet almost anything Romantic; Opera bel canto; drama Moliere . . . I don't duck into doorways when I see them coming . . . but as I get older life is getting shorter.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Another vote for Stockhausen. I keep trying, but no spark. The latest attempt was the Helicopter Quartet. 

Xenakis keeps striking out also.

On a positive note, six months ago Vaughan Williams fanned into a flame. So I can still be persuaded.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

- Definitely Messaien.
- The Bax symphonies - and that one goes back a loooong time. However I might have had a recent breakthrough with two of the late ones.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Over time I've pretty much figured out which composers consistently do it for me (and which consistently don't). Of course I spend most of my time listening to the composers I like (even if I focused all my attention on just the composers I like it would be difficult to explore all of their music in one lifetime). That said I do try to occasionally give all composers more chances.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

Mendelssohn is one of the biggest ones for me. I enjoy some of his works - the violin concerto and the first piano trio, for example - but none of his music has truly grabbed a hold of my heart. I do keep returning to his work, though, as I can certainly see that it's often masterfully crafted and that it deserves further exploring.

But still, to this day he has never touched me the same way so many others have. All it takes is one piece that I can say I really _love_ - after that I feel a great need to explore _everything_ by that composer.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Janspe said:


> Mendelssohn is one of the biggest ones for me. I enjoy some of his works - the violin concerto and the first piano trio, for example - but none of his music has truly grabbed a hold of my heart. I do keep returning to his work, though, as I can certainly see that it's often masterfully crafted and that it deserves further exploring.
> 
> But still, to this day he has never touched me the same way so many others have. All it takes is one piece that I can say I really _love_ - after that I feel a great need to explore _everything_ by that composer.


I know what you mean about finding that one piece. For me (and it sounds like this is the case for you as well), the right piece can unlock the door to a composer's entire output.

With regard to Mendelssohn, have you tried his Piano Sonata Op. 6? I find it to be one of his most poetic and moving works. Parts of it sound more like Schumann or Schubert than Mendelssohn, which is probably why I like it so much!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

The 6 String Quartets are among Mendelssohn's greatest works.

I would say try the first Piano Trio. Very accessible over-flowing with youthful passion and fine melodies. Glad to hear Janspe has tried this one.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

Bettina said:


> I know what you mean about finding that one piece. For me (and it sounds like this is the case for you as well), the right piece can unlock the door to a composer's entire output.
> 
> With regard to Mendelssohn, have you tried his Piano Sonata Op. 6? I find it to be one of his most poetic and moving works. Parts of it sound more like Schumann or Schubert than Mendelssohn, which is probably why I like it so much!


Yes, it is definitely like that for me too - a single piece can open up a whole new world for me! I actually haven't heard the Op. 6 sonata yet (I think) so I will add it to my enormous "listen to this" pile. Thanks!


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I almost forgot - Charles Ives


----------



## Antiquarian (Apr 29, 2014)

For the longest time I could not really get into Saint-Saëns. I tended to think that perhaps if I found the perfect recording of _Le Carnaval des Animaux _ I could come to like his music. As an aside, when I was a young boy I made the unfortunate assumption that Camille was a girl, so perhaps there was some pre-adolescent chauvinism involved.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Ironical people, talking about second changes, they can not give another member the light of day by there own "high" standards I might add.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Bettina said:


> True confession time...I've never been able to get into Mahler.  I've tried again and again and it's not happening for me!
> 
> His music strikes me as sounding pessimistic and gloomy, and that just doesn't appeal to me. I know that many listeners have had positive experiences with his works. I keep coming back to his music in hopes that I might someday have such an experience.


Spot on... Pessimistic and gloomy, that's a fuel for me!

But wait... what about his 8th symphony? I remember it was said to be too optimistic? As much as I like pessimistic music, the 8th is one of my favourites.

For me the second chance composer has been for a long time Berlioz. Then maybe Webern. His machine-like crunching is otoh appealing, but then again I feel the urge to stop listening quite fast. It's just too much of it.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Lenny said:


> Spot on... Pessimistic and gloomy, that's a fuel for me!
> 
> But wait... what about his 8th symphony? I remember it was said to be too optimistic? As much as I like pessimistic music, the 8th is one of my favourites.
> 
> For me the second chance composer has been for a long time Berlioz. Then maybe Webern. His machine-like crunching is otoh appealing, but then again I feel the urge to stop listening quite fast. It's just too much of it.


Thanks for reminding me about Mahler's 8th symphony. I do enjoy it more than his other works and parts of it are quite uplifting. However, there are still some passages that feel too dark for my liking, such as some of the variations on "Infirma Nostri."

I should give the whole thing another chance, paying particular attention to the sections that I do like (especially the triumphant ending).


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

Every ten years or so, I go back to Bruckner and try to find something that catches me and takes me into his sound-world, but so far the magic has eluded me.
I would add a single work that I just can't get into no matter how often I return to it: Mahler's 5th. I know it's probably his most popular work, but aside from the opening and the adagietto, I find nothing in it whatsoever. I love all the others, but can't do the 5th.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bettina said:


> Thanks for reminding me about Mahler's 8th symphony. I do enjoy it more than his other works and parts of it are quite uplifting. However, there are still some passages that feel too dark for my liking, such as some of the variations on "Infirma Nostri."
> 
> I should give the whole thing another chance, paying particular attention to the sections that I do like (especially the triumphant ending).


The ending is magnificent. I enjoy the entire Part 2. Boulez is terrific in this!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Bettina said:


> True confession time...I've never been able to get into Mahler.  I've tried again and again and it's not happening for me!
> 
> His music strikes me as sounding pessimistic and gloomy, and that just doesn't appeal to me. I know that many listeners have had positive experiences with his works. I keep coming back to his music in hopes that I might someday have such an experience.


I had the same struggle for a couple of years, and one day the No. 10 Adagio hit me like a ton of bricks. I've been a fan ever since. I haven't had the same luck with Bruckner yet.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Becca said:


> I almost forgot - Charles Ives


Have you tried the 1st symphony? It's a lovely piece!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Over the (many) years I have learned to accept that some of the big names are simply not meant for me, no matter how often I've tried. Most notably Handel, Bartok, and post-sacre Stravinsky. No point in trying them for the umpteenth time when there is so many music that I do enjoy listening to.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

I have to qualify my following statement. There is Stravinsky that I absolutely love, but I would say there's more that leaves me cold. I go back thinking this is the time that I truly "get" it and it just hasn't happened yet. Like I said, though, there's quite a bit of Stravinsky that I enjoy, enough that I would still say he's one of my favorite composers.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

I keep giving the solo piano music of Brahms another chance - but still - I just dont get it.

As for pieces - I love Mozart opera but somehow cant figure out Idomeno. I listened to the 7 great operas one after the other recently and the only one that left me cold was Idomeneo - some good arias there but i just cant catch the mood of that piece.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

hpowders said:


> Bruckner and Liszt.
> 
> Currently giving Liszt another chance for Franzship.
> 
> Bruckner I've given up on.


Yes. These two are on my list, although I try Bruckner occasionally still. I almost want to like him but find it impossible. I keep thinking "elephantine gallumphing."


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Nielsen for me. Not that I disliked him, but never gave him a good hearing like Sibelius.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Hey Franz Liszt. I've been giving you another chance, yesterday and today.

Don't hurt or disappoint me.

If you do, you won't get another chance.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Richard8655 said:


> Neilsen for me. Not that I disliked him, but never gave him a good hearing like Sibelius.


If you want to try again, Robert Simpson's Carl Nielsen, Symphonist might help you on your journey.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

There are so many composers I have not enjoyed on my first, second, third, etc. listen only to find that eventually I'm able to enjoy their music. Schnittke and Hans Abrahamsen are two recent examples. For that reason I think I always feel I will continue to come back to composers giving their music another try. In general I find that after leaving a composer and listening to many others I have a better chance of enjoying the first composer.

The only work I listened to repeatedly in a specific attempt to enjoy that work was Berg's violin concerto. I listened many times only to find the work still sounded random and unpleasant. When I did have a breakthrough, it seemed almost miraculous. Hearing a work as beautiful after finding it distinctly unpleasant so often is an amazing and thrilling experience.

Anyway, all the composers I "struggle with" now are modern or contemporary, but given that I've been able to enjoy many I could not before gives me hope that future efforts will be rewarded.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Shostakovich, though I've finally come around to a few pieces.

Bruckner - not sure I'll ever come around, but I'll keep trying periodically.

Carter - I don't dislike his music, but have never been able to hear what it is that makes so many people consider him an all-time great.

Du Fay - A problematic admission for an early music buff. His music sounds same-y and bland to me, no matter how much I try.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

Manxfeeder said:


> If you want to try again, Robert Simpson's Carl Nielsen, Symphonist might help you on your journey.


And give _Aladdin_ a whirl, if you haven't already. Beautiful music, orchestrally brilliant and remarkably inventive in places. Gennady Rozhdestvensky's a no-brainer if you want a recording of the full set, but the suite is probably a safer bet. If so, then Herbert Blomstedt's Decca recording is great and, as an added bonus, it's paired with equally good performances of Grieg's _Peer Gynt_ suites. (Can't go far wrong with Blomstedt in any repertoire, if you ask me.)


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I will never give Vivaldi another chance.

I wonder if US Public Classical Radio would nail its doors permanently shut, if they misplaced their Vivaldi collection?


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

hpowders said:


> I will never give Vivaldi another chance.
> 
> I wonder if US Public Classical Radio would nail its doors permanently shut, if they misplaced their Vivaldi collection?


What is your problem with Vivaldi. You realize that after a 1 hour and 25 minute Bruckner symphony and a 25 minute Beethoven string quartet a ten minute Vivaldi concerto fits perfect with the schedule.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Bruckner without a doubt. I like the 4th and the 7th symphonies and the choral music generally. I just cannot get into the rest. I have two highly regarded cycles (Wand and Jochum) plus a number of individual recordings.


----------



## calvinpv (Apr 20, 2015)

For some reason, I just can't get into Ligeti. I like Lux Aeterna and Clocks and Clouds, but the rest leaves me wanting more. Problem is, I can't quite put my finger on what turns me off, which is why I'll occasionally return to his music. It might be that, at least for me, his music doesn't age well, but that wouldn't explain his popularity today. Surely, I'm missing something.


----------



## OldFashionedGirl (Jul 21, 2013)

Liszt and Chopin. Maybe someday I will enjoy their music. I'm very young.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

calvinpv said:


> For some reason, I just can't get into Ligeti. I like Lux Aeterna and Clocks and Clouds, but the rest leaves me wanting more. Problem is, I can't quite put my finger on what turns me off, which is why I'll occasionally return to his music. It might be that, at least for me, his music doesn't age well, but that wouldn't explain his popularity today. Surely, I'm missing something.


Have you heard his piano etudes? They're basically the only Ligeti pieces that appeal to me, although I'm going to keep on trying his other works until something clicks!


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

Tchaikovsky and Elgar......keep trying but!!!

Myaskovsky however, completely differing experience to some of the earlier posts on this thread!


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

Serial compositions, with the exception of (some) Alban Berg


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

All of the second Viennese school composers (except for some early Schoenberg I do enjoy), most of Berlioz, some of Bartok, and the odd minimalist like Reich (I've given up on the others). I might have to retry Ligeti in the new year but I've essentially given up on him for now.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Schoenberg and a lot of other atonal, experimentalism composers. The music may be interesting to study on score.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

PeterFromLA said:


> So, for me, the composer who most occupies the position of being an aural sphinx is Wolfgang Rihm, probably the leading German composer of the day (along with Lachenmann). Some of his pieces have given me migraines, others have intrigued and excited me, but I can't say I love him or hate him overall; on the other hand, I'm not indifferent either. Something about the music attracts me and makes me want to continue to return to the oeuvre, in search of that work that will make the Rihm aesthetic "click" for me and allow me to listen to his catalog with fresh and appreciative ears.


Try this if you haven't already. _Two Other Movements_ in particular is perhaps the single best large orchestral piece by Rihm to date, and I've got *lots* of his music in my collection.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Since Xenakis is mentioned so often here I from time to time try to see if there is something to like with Xenakis answer it have always failed. Other composers I don't like can have at least something I like and there can be something I like with works I don't like but I can't find anything I like with Xenakis.


----------



## S P Summers (Dec 23, 2016)

Bruckner I understand, but Liszt?! The first piece of classical music I remember hearing as a toddler was Liszt's Rhapsody #2 in C sharp minor; I may have never learned the piano had I not heard Liszt at such a young age.


----------



## S P Summers (Dec 23, 2016)

For Chopin start with Piano Concertos 1 and 2 in that order.


----------



## S P Summers (Dec 23, 2016)

For me, it's Wagner. I'm not *really* a big fan of opera and I haven't fallen in love with any of his orchestral works. I will listen to Missa Solemnis, the Choral symphony, or Mozart's Requiem if I want to hear vocals. I haven't really explored much of Bruckner; I know he's a tough one for many people. Ill get back to you on that.

The one that I couldn't get into for a while but ended up falling in love with later is Mahler. I remember *exactly* when I fell in love with his music- I can pinpoint the exact second in the 1st movement of the 9th symphony. You're put into a trance for the first 13 or 14 minutes of the piece without realizing it; and then when you're least expecting it a violin gently sings the most BEAUTIFUL little song- so simple, SO beautiful. I melted. That is the exact second I "got" Mahler.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Triplets said:


> Bax and Glazunov and I don't want to start any controversies, Schoenberg. The first two simply wrote a lot of twaddle that sounds like sonic wallpaper. Schoenberg just doesn't appeal to me on a visceral level. I like Webern and Berg and so I am 'supposed ' to like the Big Papa that mentored them but the only feeling his music produces in me is ennui


For me it is the oposite I prefer Schönberg over Webern an Berg. I find it a bit difficult to appreciate Webern since his works are so short. For Berg I just don't like him that much. But I have to admit that Arnold Schönberg made lots of really beautiful music that feel special to listen to.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Sometimes we don't much care for a composer, but we keep going back and giving them another chance, and then another… Things may catch fire, but often they don't.
> 
> Case in point for me: Myaskovsky. How about you?


Most Russian composers and Verdi.

In my history of listening to miles and miles and compositions this is a very relevant question and an honourable mention must go to Wagner. Over the years I have invested in many massive boxes of the Ring Cycle and other operas only to sell them again and later buy another by yet a further revered Wagner conductor. I suppose there has been so much written on Richard Wagner and he wrote gigantic operas which surely must be worth listening to and taking the time to get to know, but after many, many chances I'm slowly realising I'm never going to get on with this egomaniac of the opera house. The odd thing is I love some of the individual bits and pieces and especially the overtures, but as far as another complete Ring is concerned we are history.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Triplets said:


> Bax and Glazunov and I don't want to start any controversies, Schoenberg. The first two simply wrote a lot of twaddle that sounds like sonic wallpaper. Schoenberg just doesn't appeal to me on a visceral level. I like Webern and Berg and so I am 'supposed ' to like the Big Papa that mentored them but the only feeling his music produces in me is ennui


I agree, Schoenberg fails to appeal to me on many levels. I do like his arrangement of Handel's concerto grosso, which I think is Schoenberg's finest work.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I keep giving Cage's aleatoric music a chance--and, to its credit, it always takes it.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Blancrocher said:


> I keep giving Cage's aleatoric music a chance--and, to its credit, it always takes it.


That's how Cage's aleatoric music was intended to be listened. The random element in it.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

ArtMusic said:


> That's how Cage's aleatoric music was intended to be listened. The random element in it.


Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh.


----------

