# Do you "ignore" certain movements of works?



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

I don't know about you, but there are certain movements of symphonies that I don't pay as much attention to when I'm listening to it as others. One example I can think of is the 2nd movement of Mahler's 2nd Symphony. It kind of feels like an intermezzo between the more dramatic first and third movements, so I kind of drift away in the music, not really paying a lot of attention to what's going on.

Are there examples of this for you?


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

possibly controversial but the second movement of Beethoven's 3rd passes me by (come to think of it so does the final movement of the 9th!)


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

When I was a kid, I was taught to swallow the medicine whether I liked it or not, so I tend to take everything as it comes.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Those who only hear classical music from Classic FM do.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

maestro267 said:


> I don't know about you, but there are certain movements of symphonies that I don't pay as much attention to when I'm listening to it as others. Are there examples of this for you?


yes, occasionally.


----------



## Vronsky (Jan 5, 2015)

Sloe said:


> Those who only hear classical music from Classic FM do.


Or YouTube recommendations with 20 million views.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Although it happens to me too, I'm pretty much of the school of thought of everything or nothing. Just like I can't block out from viewing a quarter of a painting, I tend to think best to appreciate or reject as a whole as was intended.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yes. In the Bruckner 9th, I ignore movements 1-3.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Sometimes I will play the Bach Chaconne and Fuga from solo violin Partita No. 2 and Sonata No. 3 respectively, out of context, but I am always more satisfied by playing the entire partita and sonata.

I really am not much for playing isolated movements.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Any thing by Zozart or Mach is ignored by me............


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Richard8655 said:


> Although it happens to me too, I'm pretty much of the school of thought of everything or nothing. Just like I can't block out viewing a quarter of a painting, I tend to think best to appreciate or reject as a whole as was intended.


Well said. My approach is the same as yours. When I listen to a musical work, I want to have the experience that the composer intended. I'm not interested in designing my own aesthetic experience. My goal is to follow and understand the journey that the composer is offering. For that to happen, I need to let the composer take the lead!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

hpowders said:


> Yes. In the Bruckner 9th, I ignore movements 1-3.


Perhaps you jest, Sir, but I say with perfect solemnity that I listen with great enjoyment to the first movement of the Bruckner 9th as a free-standing orchestral work and do not involve myself with the two following movements. Luckily rumor has reached me of Bruckner's death, and he had a reputation of being a mild and gentle soul, so I do not fear any reprisal at his hands.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

No i don't skip any movements ever. If i dont get a movement it means i need to hear it more


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Perhaps you jest, Sir, but I say with perfect solemnity that I listen with great enjoyment to the first movement of the Bruckner 9th as a free-standing orchestral work and do not involve myself with the two following movements. Luckily rumor has reached me of Bruckner's death, and he had a reputation of being a mild and gentle soul, so I do not fear any reprisal at his hands.


We are all different.


----------



## Rhinotop (Jul 8, 2016)

At first listen of the work, I listen to it all. It is normal that everyone has a favorite movement or fragment of the work in question, but when one revisits a work seriously it is always better to listen to it all... and finally, I like a lot the Bruckner's 9th symphony. That work can't be ignored, it would be a sacrilege!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Bettina said:


> Well said. My approach is the same as yours. When I listen to a musical work, I want to have the experience that the composer intended. I'm not interested in designing my own aesthetic experience. My goal is to follow and understand the journey that the composer is offering. For that to happen, I need to let the composer take the lead!


This is an excellent presentation of a particular point of view. I completely agree with part of it: "to follow and understand the journey that the composer is offering". But having followed the composer's lead over X number of hearings, I am then "interested in designing my own aesthetic experience." There are very few pieces that I can think of where I will truncate my listening--the Bruckner 9th, by happenstance is one of those--but I find being master of my experience of music and art after wide exposure is my preferred attitude. People are indeed different.


----------



## Marinera (May 13, 2016)

I find out occasionally that I ignored unknowingly some movement, like when i put a playlist on shuffle and suddenly I hear the most gorgeous music ever, I have no idea what that piece is and it turns out to be one or the other movement of some concerto that I thought I knew well.
This happened quite a few times, and not only with movements, but also with whole works, but I have a bad audial recall and memory, so this occurs more often than I would like.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

It reminds me of a cinematic analogy to a point made by Martin Scorsese. Wide screen films, especially in the US., were often shown on television in pan and scan mode where portions of the original frame were lopped off to fit older generation screen dimensions. It didn't matter that letter box format could be used, preserving the film maker's intent. But many viewers wanted their own aesthetic experience in only seeing parts of the image as close up or where the action is. The film maker's intended artistic experience, of course, was often lost.


----------



## MadMusicist (Jan 14, 2017)

If I pay less attention to certain movements, it is almost always because the other movements are too attention-grabbing, not because those movements are too boring.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I find the middle movements of Classical symphonies something of a snooze between the stimulating sonata-form first movements and the rollicking finales. I think I would listen more often to Mozart symphonies if they didn't contain andantes and minuets. I fear that even in the great last symphonies these movements can test my attention, which tends to wander (What for dinner? Chicken or fish?).


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Rhinotop said:


> At first listen of the work, I listen to it all. It is normal that everyone has a favorite movement or fragment of the work in question, but when one revisits a work seriously it is always better to listen to it all... and finally, I like a lot the Bruckner's 9th symphony. That work can't be ignored, it would be a sacrilege!


In that case, I'm going to hell.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

I ignore most movements by Xenakis altogether.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Glad to read that most posters agree that a multi-movement work should be listened to as the composer intended; that is, complete and unabridged.

The few times I've listened to Bach's Chaconne for unaccompanied violin, isolated from the rest of the Partita, it always sounds so much better after the movements of the Partita that are supposed to preceed it.


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

ArtMusic said:


> I ignore most movements by Xenakis altogether.


I'm sure that helps you develop informed opinions,


----------



## Vox Gabrieli (Jan 9, 2017)

I find myself thumbing through Shostakovich: Symphony No. 10 for the good bits. Listening to the first movement that many times can do a real number on someone. Still getting over a hangover from the last time... That was 12 years ago.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

the 3rd movement of sibelius' 5th symphony doesn't make me tear up if i hear it by itself, it does if its in context

the form is important in conveying meaning for a lot of pieces. many others come to mind immediately (beethoven's 5th, tristan und isolde, etc)


----------



## Biwa (Aug 3, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> I find the middle movements of Classical symphonies something of a snooze between the stimulating sonata-form first movements and the rollicking finales. I think I would listen more often to Mozart symphonies if they didn't contain andantes and minuets. I fear that even in the great last symphonies these movements can test my attention, which tends to wander (What for dinner? Chicken or fish?).


Alas...the galant age of dances, ballroom gowns, and masquerades is fading into the past... 

Perhaps I'm getting old but...
more and more I find myself attracted to these delicate, graceful movements. :angel:


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

Yes, I always skip movements 1, 2 and 3 of 4'33''.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I sometimes skip all the movements of certain works. They will not be named here.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I wonder ... those who feel that they should listen to an entire work as the composer intended ... does that extend to listening to the 4th movement of the Bruckner 9th or the 2nd-5th movements of the Mahler 10th?


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

i think its reasonable to have a listen to both recordings that are only what the composer completed himself, and versions that were finished by someone else based on the intentions of the composer. No reason not to hear someone try


----------



## Antiquarian (Apr 29, 2014)

It depends on how I listen. There are two ways that I approach listening to music. If I take the route of pure enjoyment, then very often when I am working, painting, writing, ect., I tend to find that even though my subconscious has very probably received the music, my conscious mind has not. I sometimes wonder whether the music has influenced whatever I was doing at the time. The other route is listening critically. When I listen to new music (for me), I strive to follow every note. Not only is this the case with new music, but new interpretations of music that I am familiar with. Every new recording of Beethoven's 5th, for example, demands that I take in the idiosyncrasies of the conductor, orchestra, and audio engineer, and judge whether the performance meets expectations. This way of listening does not preclude pleasure. If I have to be completely truthful, my listening really is a combination of the two ways at once, but focused by my initial intention. Sometimes I start out listening to works critically, but become so emotionally involved that it ends up being for pleasure. Yeah, I'm a strange fellow all right...


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Sloe said:


> Those who only hear classical music from Classic FM do.


Best answer on this thread.


----------



## pokeefe0001 (Jan 15, 2017)

Becca said:


> I wonder ... those who feel that they should listen to an entire work as the composer intended ... does that extend to listening to the 4th movement of the Bruckner 9th or the 2nd-5th movements of the Mahler 10th?


Actually, I think the various reconstructions of 2nd-5th movements of Mahler's 10th very much worth listening to.

There have been attempts at reconstructing the 4th movement of the Bruckner 9th, but the Bruckner sketches were apparently much "sketchier" than in the case of the Mahler 10. There are some recordings of the reconstructions on the web. From what I've heard, the symphony (and listener) gains nothing from listening.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Becca said:


> I wonder ... those who feel that they should listen to an entire work as the composer intended ... does that extend to listening to the 4th movement of the Bruckner 9th or the 2nd-5th movements of the Mahler 10th?


My position only applies to completed works. Unfinished works are a different matter, because it's often impossible to know what the composer intended for the overall structure. For example, Bruckner's instructions regarding the finale of the 9th are vague and contradictory. In such cases, the composer's intentions are less relevant to my experience of the work.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

pokeefe0001 said:


> There have been attempts at reconstructing the 4th movement of the Bruckner 9th, but the Bruckner sketches were apparently much "sketchier" than in the case of the Mahler 10. There are some recordings of the reconstructions on the web. From what I've heard, the symphony (and listener) gains nothing from listening.


That is not at all true. While Mahler had completed all of the symphony in short score, only the first movement and parts of the third had been scored. In contrast, Bruckner had planned out the entire movement and even scored quite a bit of it. In the case of the SMPC completion, there were only 28 bars for which they had no information. I recommend that you watch this 7 minute video...


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Sometimes I only listen to the 1st mvmt of Rachmaninoff's Symphony No. 2. I really can just listen to that as a stand-alone piece, and ignore the other mvmts.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

For me it's like reading a book ... I would not skip chapters between the beginning and ending as I would miss the rest of the story. Same is true for music, at least for me. I've never skipped over movements when listening.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Chorus.
What, never?

Captain.
No, never!

Chorus.
What, never?

Captain.
Hardly ever!


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

The last two movements of Schubert's 9th.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I don't like listening to isolated movements of larger works in general*, and if my mind wanders off a bit at certain places, so be it. It's not on purpose though. 

* An exception would be Mahler's Adagietto from the 5th, which works so well on its own.

Wrt completions by others, it depends on whether I like it or not, and whether I have come to know the work first in its completed or uncompleted version. For example: Mozart's Requiem is fine with me in the completed version. Schubert's 8th and Bruckner''s 9th I got to know and adore in their 2, resp. 3 movement versions, and I don't like the attempted completions at all, so those I skip. Mahler's 10th I fist heard in the completed version, which I love. But I respect the conductors who go for the Adagio only.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

I think the first and third movements in Bach's B.C. No. 3 are really quite superfluous, so I'll generally skip immediately to the second movement. I'm hard pressed to think of other pieces where I skip though.


----------



## jailhouse (Sep 2, 2016)

yeah mahler's adagietto does work exceptionally well on its own.

The important parts of Mahler's 10th were almost entirely written. a Short score has all of the most important elements of the symphony (the vast majority of the notes are written, the structure is there...if i remember wikipedia correctly he wrote it for 4 staves, probably was playable as a 2 piano reduction) 

Orchestration is obviously a big part of writing a symphony, but its much less important than the work mahler did. Imitating mahler's orchestration style for the full score is definitely somewhat possible and I'm sure he would have been pleased.


----------



## Marinera (May 13, 2016)

Becca said:


> Chorus.
> What, never?
> 
> Captain.
> ...


General public member. 
eh?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Marinera said:


> General public member.
> eh?


HMS Pinafore G&S.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

The fourth movement of Mahler's Fourth Symphony. I find it musically unsatisfying.


----------



## Templeton (Dec 20, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Yes. In the Bruckner 9th, I ignore movements 1-3.


I don't agree HP but you made me laugh, so for that you deserve a rec.

I skip bits all the time, usually when I am driving and just want to listen to something that lifts me and keeps me going. At home though, I tend to listen to the whole piece, although I do lapse occasionally with certain choral movements...


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Templeton said:


> I don't agree HP but you made me laugh, so for that you deserve a rec.
> 
> I skip bits all the time, usually when I am driving and just want to listen to something that lifts me and keeps me going. At home though, I tend to listen to the whole piece, although I do lapse occasionally with certain choral movements...


Okay. You're excused. But only if you give up driving.


----------



## Templeton (Dec 20, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Okay. You're excused. But only if you give up driving.


Haha, I happily would if I could afford to give up work and therefore no longer needed to drive. Unfortunately, I still have a few years to go, to reach the financial independence that I require to live my dreams.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Templeton said:


> Haha, I happily would if I could afford to give up work and therefore no longer needed to drive. Unfortunately, I still have a few years to go, to reach the financial independence that I require to live my dreams.


Take the tube. Listen to complete works. Look to your left, right, behind and in front for terrorist activities. Emerge from tube. Say a prayer that you are grateful to be alive.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Liking one movement of a work unfortunately doesn't compel me to like the others. And, since I aspire to some amount of rationality in behaviour, when I want to enjoy my time, I skip listening to music that I don't enjoy.


----------



## Schumanniac (Dec 11, 2016)

It depends on the purpose of the session, so to speak. 

If at home relaxing, sitting in the infernal bus, cooking or whatever i listen to the whole piece. With the exception of most choral movements, that is. Not to mention Shostakovich's manic torture of the violin as he sometimes seem to enjoy.

However the greatest reward music gives me is not the evoking of feelings, but the channeling of it. In my frequent bouts of anger, melancholy or the rarer peaceful serenity, i listen to specific movements alone, that best suit my mood. In the channeling sessions anything that doesnt correspond with the inner is completely impossible to enjoy or maintaining focus on, even when its movements i love. Its in these sessions i gain the most insight into certain movements as well. Even out of context it touches me far deeper than the entire journey usually does. 

Either way is fine really, i benefit from both approaches


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

hpowders said:


> Take the tube. Listen to complete works. Look to your left, right, behind and in front for terrorist activities. Emerge from tube. Say a prayer that you are grateful to be alive.


No Tubes in Lancashire


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Haydn67 said:


> The fourth movement of Mahler's Fourth Symphony. I find it musically unsatisfying.


Very strange, most people like this part the most.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Haydn67 said:


> The fourth movement of Mahler's Fourth Symphony. I find it musically unsatisfying.


Too bad Mahler no longer empties his suggestion box.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Chordalrock said:


> Liking one movement of a work unfortunately doesn't compel me to like the others. And, since I aspire to some amount of rationality in behaviour, when I want to enjoy my time, I skip listening to music that I don't enjoy.


Everyone has him / hers listing habit, s long as your happy, that's all that counts.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I ignore both of Schubert's movements for the Unfinished Symphony, preferring to consider it the Unstarted Symphony.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

There are moivements I listen to on auto-pilot without really taking them in. The inner movements of Brahms' Second do that to me.


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

Not exactly that I ignore some movements, rather I can repeat several times the listening of certain movements. Example: the adagio of Ravel's piano concerto in G.


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

maestro267 said:


> I don't know about you, but there are certain movements of symphonies that I don't pay as much attention to when I'm listening to it as others. One example I can think of is the 2nd movement of Mahler's 2nd Symphony. It kind of feels like an intermezzo between the more dramatic first and third movements, so I kind of drift away in the music, not really paying a lot of attention to what's going on.
> 
> Are there examples of this for you?


I would not 'ignore' them, but may not listen to them as often. This happen more often in symphonies and concertos. The perfect example are the slower movements for Tchaikovsky's symphonies. Symphonic poems are like stories that you want to listen to the whole thing.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

hpowders said:


> Too bad Mahler no longer empties his suggestion box.


I can be very sympathetic with and accepting of so much of Gustav's music, but there's something about those hurried passages following each of the child's verses that reminds me of a mad(as in gone nuts)peasant dance.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Haydn67 said:


> I can be very sympathetic with and accepting of so much of Gustav's music, but there's something about those hurried passages following each of the child's verses that reminds me of a mad(as in gone nuts)peasant dance.


I guess he may have wanted to emphasize the poignancy of the child's verses. What better way than the manic music in between those poignant verses as a stark contrast?


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Pugg said:


> Very strange, most people like this part the most.


Actually, there are only two performances of that final movement I can fairly decently tolerate. One of them is Bernstein's early New York Philharmonic reading with Reri Grist, whose vocal portions sound more like that of the innocent child Mahler seems to have had in mind, and Georg Solti's with the Amsterdam Concertgebouw, accompanied by Sylvia Stahlman, whose voice I find very satisfying, probably because of the sense of ease she displays.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

hpowders said:


> I guess he may have wanted to emphasize the poignancy of the child's verses. What better way, then the manic music in between those poignant verses as a stark contrast?


Maybe, but it's just unappealingly too frenetic for me. I actually enjoy the other three movements very much, even the "death fiddler" second one, with what I hear as fascinating contrasts in sound and emotion.


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2017)

I often skip the minuet movement in Mozart and Haydn works. They nearly always strike me as rather uninspired and insipid.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

The big finale to Beethoven's 9th. The Hallelujah chorus from Messiah.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I believe the original question is about one's attention drifting away. While I never skip anything during serious listening (as opposed to wallpaper listening at work), there are some movements during which my attention wanders, depending on how tired I am. Of course there are entire works that hold my attention less than others. This is natural. Good thing we have recordings to try again next time.


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

Weston said:


> I believe the original question is about one's attention drifting away. While I never skip anything during serious listening (as opposed to wallpaper listening at work), there are some movements during which my attention wanders, depending on how tired I am. Of course there are entire works that hold my attention less than others. This is natural. Good thing we have recordings to try again next time.


This guy gets it. I'm not talking at all about skipping movements of works. What's the point of even listening if you're going to just skip past a vital part of it? Even with the best intentions, it's impossible to maintain 100% total attention on every single note of a lengthy work.


----------



## pokeefe0001 (Jan 15, 2017)

Haydn67 said:


> Maybe, but it's just unappealingly too frenetic for me. I actually enjoy the other three movements very much, even the "death fiddler" second one, with what I hear as fascinating contrasts in sound and emotion.


It might be worth remembering that this song, outside of the symphony, is not just a simple pastoral scene. It is half of a pair of songs (never published together, if I recall correctly) - Das irdische Leben & Das himmlische Leben (Earthly Life and Heavenly Life). In Das irdische Leben a child dies of starvation. A bleak image of the present and a hopeful image of an afterlife. It's not surprising that the "Fishfry in Heaven" (as I've seen it called) is not completely convincing.

Mahler's 4th symphony may be his most lightly orchestrated, but it is no less complicated than his other works. And the 4th movement is no exception to this.


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2017)

starthrower said:


> The big finale to Beethoven's 9th. The Hallelujah chorus from Messiah.


I play it until the vocal part begins!


----------



## Rhinotop (Jul 8, 2016)

hpowders said:


> In that case, I'm going to hell.


That's right, you must repent of your sins :devil: :lol:


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

I often listen to just one or two movements at a given time....each movement is really a complete statement in itself - very much like reading one chapter or section of a book at one sitting.
I see no requirement whatsoever that one must listen to an entire symphony, if one is so moved to just hear one or two particular movements.
Listening is for enjoyment....do as you choose....
I often listen to opera the same way - one act, or maybe even or or two scenes at a time....Why must I listen to the entire opera "Die Walkure" if I just want to hear the Magic Fire Music and Wotan's Farewell??
I do as I want.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> I often listen to just one or two movements at a given time....each movement is really a complete statement in itself - very much like reading one chapter or section of a book at one sitting.
> I see no requirement whatsoever that one must listen to an entire symphony, if one is so moved to just hear one or two particular movements.
> Listening is for enjoyment....do as you choose....
> I often listen to opera the same way - one act, or maybe even or or two scenes at a time....Why must I listen to the entire opera "Die Walkure" if I just want to hear the Magic Fire Music and Wotan's Farewell??
> I do as I want.


Couldn't agree more :tiphat:


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

pokeefe0001 said:


> It might be worth remembering that this song, outside of the symphony, is not just a simple pastoral scene. It is half of a pair of songs (never published together, if I recall correctly) - Das irdische Leben & Das himmlische Leben (Earthly Life and Heavenly Life). In Das irdische Leben a child dies of starvation. A bleak image of the present and a hopeful image of an afterlife. It's not surprising that the "Fishfry in Heaven" (as I've seen it called) is not completely convincing.
> 
> Mahler's 4th symphony may be his most lightly orchestrated, but it is no less complicated than his other works. And the 4th movement is no exception to this.


Thanks very much for this information. I vaguely remember seeing it before, but I consider it helpful as a reminder. :tiphat:


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

maestro267 said:


> This guy gets it. I'm not talking at all about skipping movements of works.


Why not? The issue seems mighty related.



maestro267 said:


> What's the point of even listening if you're going to just skip past a vital part of it?


Oh, that's why: you think we need a 1984-style thought police that will punish anyone who dares to listen to movements rather than whole opuses? :lol:

On a more serious note... There are people who read books so that they can say they have read that book. Apparently there are also people who listen to music so they can say they have listened to that piece of music. Me, I don't care about the social aspect of listening to music. I listen to music and I read books because I enjoy doing so - when I no longer enjoy it, I stop, or I skip, or whatever else is rational given the situation.

So, to answer your question: the point is enjoying your time. From this perspective, there's no point at all to listening to movements that you don't enjoy.

(Now, I also explore a lot of music and try to improve myself as a listener, and that involves listening to a lot of music I find less than enjoyable, but that is entirely different than what I do when I'm just trying to enjoy my time.)


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

The final movement of Beethovens' 9th symphony. His ugliest piece of music imo


----------



## GodotsArrived (Jan 12, 2017)

Isn't this like asking "do you ever ignore certain chapters of books?" I mean, whether or not you like a particular movement, how can the (symphonic) story remain coherent if you just remove a chunk? As I understand it, composition is largely about thematic development so to remove any segment would be to disrupt the composer's intentions. Surely as a music lover understanding comes from engagement and understanding, not refusing to listen to what doesn't suit your own ears?


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

GodotsArrived said:


> Isn't this like asking "do you ever ignore certain chapters of books?"


No it isn't.

But ok if you want to make a comparison with literature, here we go. Not every work of music is like a novel, some works are more like some bundle of short stories, some stories you like better and read them again, some stories are weak, so why read them again.

The comparison with literature isn't really useful I think because both arts are "consumed" differently. Franz Kafka's Amerika I read 2 times with 10 years in between, Beethovens' 3th piano sonata I heard more like 40 times over and over so I don't think I do that work wrong by only listening to its 2nd movement now and then.

By the way, there's a whole chunk of Amerika gone lost, only makes the book better and more mysterious :lol:


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

GodotsArrived said:


> Isn't this like asking "do you ever ignore certain chapters of books?" I mean, whether or not you like a particular movement, how can the (symphonic) story remain coherent if you just remove a chunk? As I understand it, composition is largely about thematic development so to remove any segment would be to disrupt the composer's intentions. Surely as a music lover understanding comes from engagement and understanding, not refusing to listen to what doesn't suit your own ears?


Hear hear. :tiphat:


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Not often, but there are a few cases:

The finale of Beethoven's Ninth (much respect as the first choral opera, it paved the way to some of my favorites), but the particular vocals just don't work for me in this case.

Movement 1 from Mahler's Third. I don't ignore it but I listen to it as a separate symphonic fragment. It works better as a standalone than as a part of that symphony for me.


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

I have to listen to a piece from start to finish! I know this sounds mad but if I have to turn off the music, I silently apologise to the performers and composers because I feel so guilty!!


----------



## GodotsArrived (Jan 12, 2017)

I would reply to two points you make:



Razumovskymas said:


> Not every work of music is like a novel, some works are more like some bundle of short stories, some stories you like better and read them again, some stories are weak, so why read them again.


Up to a point I think that's a good analogy and I suppose I was instinctively thinking of the symphonic literature when I made my reply. And I really don't think you can take movements out of symphonies though I say that with asterisk (see my comment below). I agree that pieces like, for instance, Smetana's "Má vlast" clearly lend themselves to a separation of the sections of the piece.



Razumovskymas said:


> Beethovens' 3th piano sonata I heard more like 40 times over and over so I don't think I do that work wrong by only listening to its 2nd movement now and then.


This I understand and agree with BUT (my asterisk and your qualifier) is your saying having heard it "more than 40 times". Yes, when you know a piece and you know the story, you CAN go back and read your favourite chapter in isolation. My issue is that if you listen to a piece once and then just go back to the chapter/movement that immediately struck you without making the effort to work through the rest, you're missing something. For instance, can people who've seen "Death in Venice" make any useful contribution to a discussion on Mahler 5?


----------



## BoggyB (May 6, 2016)

hpowders said:


> Yes. In the Bruckner 9th, I ignore movements 1-3.


Haha. I will interpret this as OTT promotion of the finale rather than a put-down of the rest. I too am overjoyed to have in my possession such good recent completions. The only movement I would consider "ignoring" here is the adagio.

With Haydn symphonies one need only listen to movements 1 and 2.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

GodotsArrived said:


> Isn't this like asking "do you ever ignore certain chapters of books?" I mean, whether or not you like a particular movement, how can the (symphonic) story remain coherent if you just remove a chunk? As I understand it, composition is largely about thematic development so to remove any segment would be to disrupt the composer's intentions. Surely as a music lover understanding comes from engagement and understanding, not refusing to listen to what doesn't suit your own ears?


You say, "as I understand it" - are you speculating? Then you say, "thematic development", but surely you mean motivic development? I take it you are writing about something that you have heard about rather than something you have studied deeply and experienced a lot yourself. Which kind of makes your argument seem hollow.

As a hobbyist composer, I need to be aware of motives when I'm composing. As a listener, I mostly don't bother paying attention to motives. Motivic development is not even present in all classical music, so you can't say that it's somehow fundamental to it. In composers and eras where it is more often present, the purpose of a motive is usually to make a melody - not a whole movement, let alone a work - sound coherent. Such a melody sounds coherent whether you are aware of the motive or not. Motivic development is not something you need to be aware of for it to be working as intended. You don't take an X-ray machine with you when you go to the beach to gaze at babes.

As for thematic development, works where different movements employ the same themes are probably a rarity.

Classical music culture is perceived as snobbish by a lot of people, especially in the English speaking world. There's no need to prove their case by talking rubbish about how symphonies are "like novels" and how you "shouldn't listen to movements in isolation".


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

starthrower said:


> The big finale to Beethoven's 9th. The Hallelujah chorus from Messiah.


Although Händel and Beethoven are my two favorite composers I get a bit sick in the stomach when hearing these two pieces of music.

So I couldn't agree more with you.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Razumovskymas said:


> The final movement of Beethovens' 9th symphony. His ugliest piece of music imo


Even "uglier" than the Grosse Fuge?

Someone much wiser than I, penned that Beethoven's music was not pretty; simply sublime.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Chordalrock said:


> Apparently there are also people who listen to music so they can say they have listened to that piece of music. Me, I don't care about the social aspect of listening to music.


What are you doing on a classical music forum then?

Isn't TC basically about saying: hey, I've listened to this or that piece of music, what do you think about that. Or I've listened to a lot of that composer's music and I like it a lot and all who says something else is a bit silly in the head. :lol:

That's one of the fun parts in my opinion.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

hpowders said:


> Even "uglier" than the Grosse Fuge?
> 
> Someone much wiser than I, penned that Beethoven's music was not pretty; simply sublime.


It's a different kind of ugly. The Grosse Fuge-ugly I can enjoy, Ode to joy I can not (ironically)

I agree with the simply sublime except for the 9th's finale


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Razumovskymas said:


> What are you doing on a classical music forum then?


That's the social aspect of my life (sad to say), not the "social aspect of listening to music". :lol:


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Chordalrock said:


> That's the social aspect of my life (sad to say), not the "social aspect of listening to music". :lol:


in that case your total absence of snobbery is completely forgiven! :tiphat:


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

I think we all have favourite movements of works across the musical spectrum and do ignore certain parts of a lengthy or demanding piece. I certainly find this in many works where the pay-off as it were is a favourite moment or one-off passage which makes the segment worth listening to. However, someone a long time ago explained to me that a symphony, concerto, sonata etc. is intended as a whole structure by the composer and by just listening to bleeding chunks completely unbalances the work. In other words each movement gives meaning to the next and Mahler, Bruckner and all the others probably didn't envisage their works listened to in segments (or plainly ignored) rather than a whole. Obviously for the modern listener time is always a problem and there are times when we just want to put on a favourite track rather than concentrate on a massive 2 CD symphony.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

I think we should reach some consensus here in stating that it is only allowed to skip movements of a work when one is able to hum a considerable part of each movement of that work on demand. That should be doable for every listener.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Alydon said:


> However, someone a long time ago explained to me that a symphony, concerto, sonata etc. is intended as a whole structure by the composer


My guess is they enjoyed playing single movements in the comfort of their homes, just like normal people today. But even if what you say is true and somehow very significant, you have to ask:

Did these composers compose multi-movement works because they thought that was the best way to present their musical ideas - or did they rather compose multi-movement works because there was an established tradition that demanded it, and the composers wanted to rise up to the challenge etc etc.?

In other words, just because that is how it was done doesn't mean that that is the ideal way to do it. Now with recordings, we thankfully get to perpetrate upon ourselves the ideal instead of the conformist compromise.


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

Chordalrock said:


> Oh, that's why: you think we need a 1984-style thought police that will punish anyone who dares to listen to movements rather than whole opuses? :lol:


I'm just staring at this trying to think what thought process led you to that ridiculous conclusion. And I'm coming up with absolutely nothing.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

maestro267 said:


> I'm just staring at this trying to think what thought process led you to that ridiculous conclusion. And I'm coming up with absolutely nothing.


Well, your desire to suppress even conversation about such a topic as "unthinkable" or some such did partially inspire my little bit of satire. You needn't take it too seriously, but we do here at talkclassical talk about topics that are relevant even if the thread originator disapproves.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Alydon said:


> I think we all have favourite movements of works across the musical spectrum and do ignore certain parts of a lengthy or demanding piece. I certainly find this in many works where the pay-off as it were is a favourite moment or one-off passage which makes the segment worth listening to. However, someone a long time ago explained to me that *a symphony, concerto, sonata etc. is intended as a whole structure by the composer and by just listening to bleeding chunks completely unbalances the work. In other words each movement gives meaning to the next and Mahler, Bruckner and all the others probably didn't envisage their works listened to in segments (or plainly ignored) rather than a whole.* Obviously for the modern listener time is always a problem and there are times when we just want to put on a favourite track rather than concentrate on a massive 2 CD symphony.


This is not so true of most multi-movement works before Beethoven, and not always true of works since. With regard to Baroque suites and Classical sonatas, symphonies and concertos, I'd bet that if we didn't already know the complete works as we have them, we would be unable to guess which movements belonged to which works, and any number of combinations would seem equally pleasing. The main principle governing the succession of movements was variety and contrast, with unity often residing in nothing more than key relationships.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I think I mentioned this before. There used to be an all-night classical DJ who would mix and match Haydn symphony movements to make synthetic symphonies, which he would then announce as symphony number such-and-such. He did this for years and nobody ever called him on it.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

Skipping movements? That's too easy. I skip all the C major notes when listening to Beethoven's 5th.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

I listen to single movements of works very often. In fact when it comes to very long symphonies I prefer to focus on individual movements first. I slowly get to know each movement, maybe I listen to the entire work one or two times in between... but only after getting to know each movement individually I feel like I'm truly ready to expierence an entire 1,5 hour symphony and get the most out of it. You bet I will know the piece very well by then. And after going through this entire process, I will mostly listen to my favorite movement(s) whenever I feel like it and there's nothing you compulsive "must listen to the entire work each time" weirdos can do about it.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

DeepR said:


> I listen to single movements of works very often.........I will mostly listen to my favorite movement(s) whenever I feel like it and there's nothing you compulsive "must listen to the entire work each time" weirdos can do about it.


concur completely...each individual movement is a complete unit of itself...same with a scene, or act from an opera. I don't even understand what the issue is here....listening is for enjoyment....do whatever pleases you, whatever floats your boat.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Bizarre how a friendly discussion of listening habits quickly turned confrontational for no reason. What is it with we primates? I think I'd rather just listen now -- to a piece in its entirety or not as the case may be.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I haven't followed this thread. My answer to the original question:

No I do not skip movements from a piece of music. In fact, I will listen to the entire CD with all the other pieces too.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Weston said:


> .....I think I'd rather just listen now -- to a piece in its entirety or not as the case may be.


Exactly...why would anyone take issue with that??


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

*Do you "ignore" certain movements of works?*

Not really but I have trouble with Symphonie Fantastique I just cannot get past the first movement so I ignore the whole symphony.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Dan Ante said:


> *Do you "ignore" certain movements of works?*
> Not really but I have trouble with Symphonie Fantastique I just cannot get past the first movement so I ignore the whole symphony.


I go straight for mvts IV and V....they're dynamite, far superior to the preceding, IMO...


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> I go straight for mvts IV and V....they're dynamite, far superior to the preceding, IMO...


Thank goodness I am not the only one, he must have got the order mixed up :lol:


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Dan Ante said:


> *Do you "ignore" certain movements of works?*
> 
> Not really but I have trouble with Symphonie Fantastique I just cannot get past the first movement so I ignore the whole symphony.


Have you tried Liszt's piano transcription of the Symphonie Fantastique? In my opinion, the first movement actually works better on the piano than in the original orchestral version. Some of the musical ideas seem to come through more clearly with the thinner textures of solo piano. (I apologize to everybody for going WAY off-topic in this comment!! )


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Chronochromie said:


> I'm sure that helps you develop informed opinions,


It sure does. Fact.


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

ArtMusic said:


> It sure does. Fact.


So let me get this straight: you are saying that not listening to music helps you develop informed opinions on such music. Brilliant!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Chronochromie said:


> So let me get this straight: you are saying that not listening to music helps you develop informed opinions on such music. Brilliant!


I certainly find that not hearing the music helps me form far more objective views on it. No silly prejudices from actually listening to it!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

ArtMusic said:


> Fact.


You keep on using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Heck148 said:


> Exactly...why would anyone take issue with that??


I didn't think anyone _was_ taking issue. The thread got weirdly confrontational when people misread others' explanations for their listening habits. This communication thing is so imprecise.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

The last sentence of my previous post was silly; I shouldn't have posted that, although the smiley implies it's not so serious.
I did get some negative vibes from the first page of this topic, as if listening to single movements is frowned and looked down upon and something only "casual" classical listeners would do.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

DeepR said:


> The last sentence of my previous post was silly; I shouldn't have posted that, although the smiley implies it's not so serious.
> I did get some negative vibes from the first page of this topic, as if listening to single movements is frowned and looked down upon and something only "casual" classical listeners would do.


Don't you worry about any negative vibes--they're often a sign to me that I'm on the correct path. Music, art: strictly personal. We need please and answer to and satisfy only ourselves.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

Chordalrock said:


> My guess is they enjoyed playing single movements in the comfort of their homes, just like normal people today. But even if what you say is true and somehow very significant, you have to ask:
> 
> Did these composers compose multi-movement works because they thought that was the best way to present their musical ideas - or did they rather compose multi-movement works because there was an established tradition that demanded it, and the composers wanted to rise up to the challenge etc etc.?
> 
> In other words, just because that is how it was done doesn't mean that that is the ideal way to do it. Now with recordings, we thankfully get to perpetrate upon ourselves the ideal instead of the conformist compromise.


I still don't regard cherry picking certain movements or sections of musical works does justice to the originally intended structure the composer envisaged, and in many cases the intended work becomes illogical without it being played in full. The same could be said of watching King Lear and missing out several acts in the middle of the play, or ignoring them, or just watching the chariot race in Ben Hur and then turning off the rest of the film.
I would be kidding myself it I were to pretend to listen to every work in its entirety and certainly enjoy picking out a certain favourite movement, but my overall listening experience has been enhanced not ignoring certain movements in a work.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

Dan Ante said:


> Thank goodness I am not the only one, he must have got the order mixed up :lol:


I like those 2 movements the best too but I love all 5 movements so I never skip any. Sometimes I only listen to the 4th or 5th movement, if in a hurry or have too many pieces that I want to listen to, which to me does not qualify as "ignoring".


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

Art Rock said:


> You keep on using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.


And that's a fact.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Alydon said:


> I still don't regard cherry picking certain movements or sections of musical works does justice to the originally intended structure the composer envisaged


Well, I listen to whole works often enough that I know I'm not missing much...


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Alydon said:


> or just watching the chariot race in Ben Hur and then turning off the rest of the film.


Isn't that the sensible thing to do concerning Ben Hur? :lol:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Razumovskymas said:


> Isn't that the sensible thing to do concerning Ben Hur? :lol:


No, the galley scene, where Jack Hawkins puts Charlton Heston and the rest of the galley slaves through their paces is a wonderful standalone sequence and a must-see.


----------



## Schumanniac (Dec 11, 2016)

Alydon said:


> I still don't regard cherry picking certain movements or sections of musical works does justice to the originally intended structure the composer envisaged, and in many cases the intended work becomes illogical without it being played in full.


I cannot truly disagree as i think your perfectly right in this regard, so i'll simply defend the other side of the argument, but frankly to hell with whats intended by composers(forgive me, my dear Ludwig), critics and other fans. I love and adore the slow, lyrical movements of Faure's cello sonatas but regarding the rest, exquisite creations that i objectively recognize them to be, i do not relish a stoic and grimly determined enduring of it just for his sake, i chose his works purely for myself. Faure would probably have sadly shaken his head in despair of me, but in a world of ultimatums, surely the better choice is to take joy in parts of it than never listening at all?

Think litterature and cinema is a poor comparison to music, stories told in a manner without the structure of words and images, but trough a more intuitive method of comprehension. In classical music a single movements IS usually a story on its own, at least in my oppinion, even while i listen to many works in their entirety. Trough several movements the different stories and themes are connected, weaved and merged to a cohesive whole, essentially changing the individual movements, when putting them all into context. Without the entire work one indeed does not reach the intended, or even "correct" conclusion, but does that truly devalue the perception one aqcuires trough a selective listening? Mispercieved as it is, what a profoundly uplifting story the 3rd movement of beethoven 15th quartet or the tragic finale of Tchaikovskys 6th is even on its own, just to name the first works that sprung to mind. I personally love the complete version of them but some might find it differently.

What a composer intends and what a listener derive the greatest satisfaction from is not necessarily the same. I deeply love and admire many composers with a passion, often saying a silent, grateful prayer when listening to their works, but i feel no guilt doing so if its a work i prefer incompleted  Sometimes an artist must learn to find peace with people not appreciating your vision, but them finding their own unique love for what he does, as it was never a lack of respect or reverence that caused it.

Forgive the potentially odd structure of my sentences by the way, i hope its not too difficult to understand the general message.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Bettina said:


> Have you tried Liszt's piano transcription of the Symphonie Fantastique? In my opinion, the first movement actually works better on the piano than in the original orchestral version. Some of the musical ideas seem to come through more clearly with the thinner textures of solo piano. (I apologize to everybody for going WAY off-topic in this comment!! )


I have not heard it but will look out for it, and I well believe it I have "Pictures at an Exhibition" performed by Yefim Bronfman (Piano) and this beats all the orchestral versions that I have heard.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

An artist has no control over his audience's responses to his work, and he shouldn't expect to. At the very first performance of Beethoven's 7th symphony, the audience demanded an immediate encore of the second movement. Was Beethoven annoyed? I doubt it. But even if he had been miffed at having the work's intended structure distorted, he learned something from the experience: his second movement was a big hit, people would want to hear it again, and the popularity of the symphony was likely to endure. Meanwhile, his thoughts were assuredly on his future work. Once a work is completed, most artists are happy to leave it behind, let posterity dispose of it as it will, and move on to new challenges. 

If I happen to like a movement especially well and want to hear it in isolation (or twice over), or if I find a movement uninteresting and want to skip it, there is nothing illegitimate about any of those choices. And if any composer wants to object, I'll be happy to tell him why I find some parts of his work more engaging than others. Maybe he'll learn something.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

Razumovskymas said:


> Isn't that the sensible thing to do concerning Ben Hur? :lol:


OK, I admit I've only seen the chariot scene in that film & the rest of the time was in a deep sleep.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Alydon said:


> OK, I admit I've only seen the chariot scene in that film & the rest of the time was in a deep sleep.


You missed the best part of the whole film: 




Hard to sleep through that!


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

I will sometimes listen to a movement by itself, but if I'm going to listen to the work, I won't listen to 3/4 movements or anything like that. It's basically 1 movement by itself or the entire work.


----------



## geralmar (Feb 15, 2013)

So... If I'm in the mood for Ride of the Valkyries, I'm supposed to feel guilty for not listening to the entire Ring Cycle?


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

I wonder if concerts should start performing only select movements in order to skip the "uninteresting" ones.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Richard8655 said:


> I wonder if concerts should start performing only select movements in order to skip the "uninteresting" ones.


Historically, there may be precedent. They used to do all sorts of things. For instance, Beethoven's 2nd Symphony was sometimes performed with the slow movement from Beethoven's 7th instead of its own.

"In Paris they had - so Berlioz tells us - to substitute the Allegretto from the Seventh Symphony to make the No. 2 go down at all." (Grove, Beethoven's Symphonies, 1898)


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

Richard8655 said:


> I wonder if concerts should start performing only select movements in order to skip the "uninteresting" ones.


Concerts are mass events, there are more people than one and thus it's impossible to cater to everyone's preferences. It is assumed that the people who buy the ticket are willing to listen to the entire program. Home listening is obviously entirely different, there is one person, and this one person should have the right to skip movements without some narcissistic tyrant staring at him disapprovingly from a screen on the wall.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

Strange Magic said:


> You missed the best part of the whole film:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, I remember that scene so must have been awake then.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

KenOC said:


> Historically, there may be precedent. They used to do all sorts of things. For instance, Beethoven's 2nd Symphony was sometimes performed with the slow movement from Beethoven's 7th instead of its own.
> 
> "In Paris they had - so Berlioz tells us - to substitute the Allegretto from the Seventh Symphony to make the No. 2 go down at all." (Grove, Beethoven's Symphonies, 1898)


Some pops concerts also do some slicing and dicing of works to please their audience.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Strange Magic said:


> You missed the best part of the whole film:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Best comment: "Excuse me, but this EXTREME workout was NOT in the cruise brochure."


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

KenOC said:


> Best comment: "Excuse me, but this EXTREME workout was NOT in the cruise brochure."


Galley-slave master to slaves, toiling away at the oars: Good News!! Extra rations for everyone, extra water, half an hour on deck in the sun, rest period for all....Oh, the Bad News?? after lunch the Admiral wants to go water-skiing!! :devil::lol:


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

as someone mentioned before : it's the same as reading a book and here I'd adhere that it's the same like rereading a book. one sometimes wants to reread only some chapters, sometimes even ponder upon some sentences - in case of music sentences are very short compositions or musical phrases, etc. If I know music and I feel like listening to only this or that particular movement today, then I'll do it, why not?


----------

