# Early and Late - What periods of Music do you like?



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Simple question:

How early do you go for music and then again how late can you stand it and finally what period is your spiritual home?

I find myself going from Gregorian Chant which goes back (reliably) to about the eleventh century right down to Greig both his folk music and his larger works such as the Holberg suite.

My spiritual home is Baroque - almost anything from 1600 through to about 1760 - all the way from Albinoni to Zipoli I do make exceptions for people like Dowland, Byrd, Gibbons and Tallis who are slightly earlier.

What about you?


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

As Taggart & I share the same cd player, we tend to listen to the same stuff, but he is more of a music wallah than I. 

Early: 14th & 15th century - I can't resist a stomping Estampie.
Late: Tchaikovsky especially his ballet music.
Spiritual home: Baroque but more especially La France & specifically the delectable Monsieur Jean-Baptiste Lully.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

I can listen to music as early as medieval chant or as late as today. If I had to pick a "spiritual home", it would be that wonderful century between 1850 and 1950, spanning from Wagner to Messiaen and Stravinsky, with Bruckner, Brahms, Debussy, Mahler, and Schoenberg along the way.


----------



## Cheyenne (Aug 6, 2012)

Continuously fluctuating. Haven't explored things before Monteverdi though.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

My CD collection ranges from Gregorian to contemporary, with emphasis on JS Bach, classical, romantic, late romantic, and 20th century. Late romantic would be my slightly preferred choice between these periods.


----------



## DrKilroy (Sep 29, 2012)

I listened to reconstructions of ancient music and I liked it quite much. I also like music that is composed today, when it comes to living composers: Adams, Dutilleux, Penderecki, Kapustin, Rautavaara.

Best regards, Dr


----------



## Feathers (Feb 18, 2013)

I normally listen to music from Early Baroque to around the time of Shostakovich's death with a slight (or maybe a bit more than slight) preference for the Romantic Era. Pretty average range. I do sometimes listen to music before/after this range, but the attitude I approach it with is more for curiosity and learning rather than "pleasure".


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2013)

In ten characters or more, "all."


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

So you honestly don't like one style of music better than another? Gosh!


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

I usually get up at half past six in the morning, I rarely listen to music earlier than that... 

My CD collection ranges from recreations of stone age music to pieces written and recorded in 2012, but my mainstay is music from 1890 and the next 100 years.

/ptr


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I'm kind of like those auto repair shops with signs that say, "We specialize in foreign and domestic."


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Renaissance-Now
And Baroque is probably my favorite.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I comfortably go back about as far as when modal music was evolving into the scales and tunings used in the common practice (about 500 years?) to the present day.

I am truly comfortable in all eras except possibly the galante/classical, in spite of being a huge Beethoven fan. As I get older I'm not as fond of Romantic excess as I used to be. I am probably most at home with baroque, post-romantic and some new music. That's kind of weird when I think about it.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

early late and late early - had to be said 

and kinda true.

the bit about spiritual home is interesting. I think it's not so much the period as the atmosphere - lyrical with a bit of humour (possibly bitter-sweet or slightly satirical) thrown in.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Weston said:


> I comfortably go back about as far as when modal music was evolving into the scales and tunings used in the common practice (about 500 years?) to the present day.
> 
> I am truly comfortable in all eras except possibly the galante/classical, in spite of being a huge Beethoven fan. As I get older I'm not as fond of Romantic excess as I used to be. I am probably most at home with baroque, post-romantic and some new music. That's kind of weird when I think about it.


Not really. The classical and romantic periods have in common their use of tonal modulation as a structural element, whereas this is not true of baroque (or before), because those pieces don't generally use modulation as a structural element, or post-romantic (by which I suppose you mean Impressionist/modern), because those pieces tend to just use a chromatic/diatonic/modal gamut without tonal structural implications.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

I go from the beginnings of polyphony (later 12th Century) to the present. My spiritual home varies from week to week but I tend to concentrate on the periods 1600-1810 and 1900-2013.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Later period 1900 on - will listen to earlier works but only in a dress on a Harley


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I like the baroque where composers had more polygamy and stuff...


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Let's see.......I begin in April of 1805 and end in July so my spiritual center would probably be a Tuesday in May.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

I hate it all, blasted infernal stuff so it is. And thunce I bequeath unto thee such knowledges as appear _post hoc_ but not necessarily _propter hoc_: that is it it is what it is what is it? Yes.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

I enjoy most Common Practice Tonal music, and the music of Polyphonic Modality. The old church modes have an interesting freshness to them inasmuch as they have completely non-uniform characteristics. The dominant, that is, the locus of tension, is not fixed upon the fifth scale degree uniformly--especially when contending with the plagal modes. But with the popularization of polyphony, the plagal modes were, for all intents and purposes, merged into the primary modes and the dominant was fixed on the fifth scale degree. The non-uniform aspect of the old church modes gives that music a certain freshness to it, although polyphonic music is more interesting to me. 

My favorite period is 1700 - 1855.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Your science eludes me, so I resorted to tranlation as per below:

Irish tried it but to no avail (look nice thou)
Is fuath liom é go léir, blasted stuif ifreanda mar sin tá sé. Agus thunce thiomnú mé riot feiceáil knowledges, mar shampla post hoc ach ní gá go propter hoc: go bhfuil sé go bhfuil sé ar a bhfuil sé cad é? Tá.

But after several attempts all became clear:
I hate that all, blasted infernal stuff so it.And will seen Riot I dedicate knowledges thunce, as such post hoc but not necessarily propter hoc: it is what? A.


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

Most of my music doesn't go much earlier than 1620 or so and not much newer than 1960. 

I do like some 16th century music, but I rarely find post-1960 music to be to my taste.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I like everything. Gregorian Chant to Nico Muhly, it's all good to me (for the most part).


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I have things from medieval (ars antiqua to nova) to 21th century. I like all periods except the Classical era, with the exception of Beethoven, which is one of my favorite composers. My favorite period is the 20th century, from the Impressionism, to Stravinsky, to Bartok, to Prokofiev, to Schoenberg, to Ginastera, to Messiaen, to Boulez, Maderna, Penderecki, Ligeti, Carter, Takemitsu, etc.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

The Classical Era is awesome. Galante with Harpsichord is very exciting music imo.


----------



## Kivimees (Feb 16, 2013)

Lean heavily on the 20th century, but expanding my horizons on this forum.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Anything but weird electronic farts and noise. And no conceptual stuff too. I'm too stupid and far too close-minded for conceptual stuff.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Concerning medieval times I prefer the troubadours/trouveres and the various codex-collections (Cantigas Santa Maria, Codex Calixtinus etc.), not Gregorian choirs, but I can switch to a bit of solemn Hildegardian sounds now and then. 

Should I choose a century, it would probably be 1890 - 1990, but the most recent works are relevant too.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Usually Classical and then Baroque and Romantic. The great composers.


----------



## Wood (Feb 21, 2013)

I like it all from millennialist (?) chanting to date. I can no more choose a favourite period than I could choose a favourite out of chalk and cheese.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

joen_cph said:


> Concerning medieval times I prefer the troubadours/trouveres and the various codex-collections (Cantigas Santa Maria, Codex Calixtinus etc.), not Gregorian choirs, but I can switch to a bit of solemn Hildegardian sounds now and then.
> 
> Should I choose a century, it would probably be 1890 - 1990, but the most recent works are relevant too.


The Codex Calixtinus is my favorite medieval music!: 



, 



.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

I can listen to and enjoy music from a lot of different time periods, but not all types of it. Still, my favourite period, which I enjoy most consistently (rather than being linked to a specific composer/composers), is easily Classical.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

I too contain multitudes, and will listen to at least one millennium's worth of music, in fact I need variety in my listening.

Spiritual home: "good music".


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Weston said:


> I am probably most at home with baroque, post-romantic and some new music. That's kind of weird when I think about it.


Not really, I have the same kind of feeling. I love baroque especially the early stuff. I find classical and romantic a bit dull but as music develops (?) some composers go back to their roots I'm thinking of Bartok, Greig, Vaughan Williams, Grainger and to some extent Copeland. I'm comfortable with that sort of music because it contains some of the folk elements that you also find in Baroque and late Renaissance music.

I find the atonal, serial, dissonant stuff a little like listening to sound effects rather than music.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

from Gregorian chant through to the very present day, with a glaring gap in the Romantics after Schumann, picking up again with Mahler. (the middle-late romantics after Schumann are an alien planet to me, they have never captivated me, and I can only admire the greater of them 'clinically,' -- they 'speak' to me not at all, or I find them mainly overblown and 'silly.' (As a pianist, I only like Chopin if I am playing it, i.e. much more interesting to play than to listen to 

Spiritual home -- again, all of it, the 'concentration' really depending upon where I've hung my hat at the moment, with certainly more 'residencies' or 'most frequent visits' in the 20th century modern and contemporary.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> The classical and romantic periods have in common their use of tonal modulation as a structural element, whereas this is not true of baroque (or before), because those pieces don't generally use modulation as a structural element, or post-romantic (by which I suppose you mean Impressionist/modern), because those pieces tend to just use a chromatic/diatonic/modal gamut without tonal structural implications.


That's mainly why I like Baroque (and earlier), folk music and the folk inspired moderns. I tend to agree with



HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Anything but weird electronic farts and noise. And no conceptual stuff too. I'm too stupid and far too close-minded for conceptual stuff.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Anything but weird electronic farts and noise. And no conceptual stuff too. I'm too stupid and far too close-minded for conceptual stuff.


Join the club!


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

hayd said:


> I like it all from millennialist (?) chanting to date. I can no more choose a favourite period than I could choose a favourite out of chalk and cheese.


You eat chalk? Awesome!


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Your science eludes me, so I resorted to tranlation as per below:
> 
> Irish tried it but to no avail (look nice thou)
> Is fuath liom é go léir, blasted stuif ifreanda mar sin tá sé. Agus thunce thiomnú mé riot feiceáil knowledges, mar shampla post hoc ach ní gá go propter hoc: go bhfuil sé go bhfuil sé ar a bhfuil sé cad é? Tá.
> ...


I am tempted to reply to this with a gaelic phrase that my mother was taught by her cousins as meaning "good day" but resulted in her getting a good skelping.

However I will say "go raibh maith agat" for taking the trouble.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Your science eludes me, so I resorted to tranlation as per below:
> 
> Irish tried it but to no avail (look nice thou)
> Is fuath liom é go léir, blasted stuif ifreanda mar sin tá sé. Agus thunce thiomnú mé riot feiceáil knowledges, mar shampla post hoc ach ní gá go propter hoc: go bhfuil sé go bhfuil sé ar a bhfuil sé cad é? Tá.
> ...


We have arrived at a new age of communication: ptaanptaanptaan, and wool.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Ingenue said:


> You eat chalk? Awesome!


So do I ,but only with Camembert.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Not before 0600 hrs and not after midnight.
My spiritual centre is any place they'll offer me spirits---I like vodka very much.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

From baroque onwards. I can't get into anything before Monteverdi.


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

I'm mostly attached to 19th century but I like most of other classic music eras and early music. Since Byzantine and Gregorian chants to Neo-Classic and some Minimal music (That means Everything except the innovations of Schoenberg, Cage and Stockhausen!).


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Crudblud said:


> We have arrived at a new age of communication: ptaanptaanptaan, and wool.


The medium is the message!

It's a zen thing - there is nothing to understand.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Taggart said:


> Not really, I have the same kind of feeling. I love baroque especially the early stuff. I find classical and romantic a bit dull but as music develops (?) some composers go back to their roots I'm thinking of Bartok, Greig, Vaughan Williams, Grainger and to some extent Copeland. I'm comfortable with that sort of music because it contains some of the folk elements that you also find in Baroque and late Renaissance music.
> 
> I find the atonal, serial, dissonant stuff a little like listening to sound effects rather than music.


You don't find Bartok dissonant? I do. A lot of the time he's more "in your face" dissonant than Schoenberg (lots of minor seconds etc.). However, Schoenberg depends on the late romantic style, which you have said you don't like. Have you considered that that is the reason you don't like his music, rather than his supposed level of dissonance or atonality?


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> You don't find Bartok dissonant? I do. A lot of the time he's more "in your face" dissonant than Schoenberg (lots of minor seconds etc.). However, Schoenberg depends on the late romantic style, which you have said you don't like. Have you considered that that is the reason you don't like his music, rather than his supposed level of dissonance or atonality?


Maybe I jumped too soon. I like the folk music side of Bartok rather than his more "classical" side. I'll give Schoenberg a second chance...


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Taggart said:


> Maybe I jumped too soon. I like the folk music side of Bartok rather than his more "classical" side. I'll give Schoenberg a second chance...


Well, listen to early Schoenberg. Op. 4 is one that everyone likes. You may still hate the later stuff, but at least you won't be able to call him a hack who wrote purposefully obtuse music so that he would be acclaimed as a genius (not that you specifically were saying this....).

As for Bartok, I love works like his Piano Concerto 1 and Miraculous Mandarin, but they really are quite thorny (I love the rest of Bartok too, of course).


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Taggart said:


> The medium is the message!
> 
> It's a zen thing - there is nothing to understand.


Damn it McLuhan, stop posting from the grave!


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Taggart said:


> Maybe I jumped too soon. I like the folk music side of Bartok rather than his more "classical" side. I'll give Schoenberg a second chance...


Bartók used folk music in modern ways, such as using the pentatonic scale as the "complement" to the other 7 notes, thus creating a very dissonant juxtaposition. Where did this idea that Bartók wrote "folk-sounding" music come from? I bet you can't name any "folk" pieces by Bartók, unless they are outright arrangements.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> Bartók used folk music in modern ways, such as using the pentatonic scale as the "complement" to the other 7 notes, thus creating a very dissonant juxtaposition. Where did this idea that Bartók wrote "folk-sounding" music come from? I bet you can't name any "folk" pieces by Bartók, unless they are outright arrangements.


OK so they are arrangements. The same applies to all the other composers that I named. I suppose the sort of thing I was thinking about was this:






What I was saying is that I like composers who use folk themes.

Folk music is \ can be very odd to listen to - try this from Scotland


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Crudblud said:


> Damn it McLuhan, stop posting from the grave!


A grave, wherever found, preaches a short and pithy sermon to the soul.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> Well, listen to early Schoenberg. Op. 4 is one that everyone likes. You may still hate the later stuff, but at least you won't be able to call him a hack who wrote purposefully obtuse music so that he would be acclaimed as a genius (not that you specifically were saying this....).
> 
> As for Bartok, I love works like his Piano Concerto 1 and Miraculous Mandarin, but they really are quite thorny (I love the rest of Bartok too, of course).


Thanks for the suggestion, I'll give it a try. It's always nice to find new music.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Taggart said:


> Folk music is \ can be very odd to listen to - try this from Scotland


Have you heard Japanese traditional music? Westerners tend to find it unpalatable. It took some getting used to for me personally.

(That said, even Japanese people seem to be divided as to whether the hichiriki sounds ethereal or like dying cicadas...)


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Taggart said:


> OK so they are arrangements. The same applies to all the other composers that I named. I suppose the sort of thing I was thinking about was this:


that's as folk sounding as it gets without plagiarising "anonymous"... of course it's not _folk_ music anymore than Grimm's tales are what grandpa Hansi used to tell his grandkids by the fireplace. However, the bit between 6:40 and 7:50 is the kind of stuff you can still hear at weddings in ye olde Transylvania.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I listen to music from Byzantine Chant through the present. This includes "Classical Music" mostly... but also jazz, blues, bluegrass, and other popular/folk genre. The music I listen to most probably dates from the Baroque and the Romantic/Post-Romantic (cut-off 1930/40) eras. Within all of this there are composers (and individual works) that I like more or less.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Taggart said:


> Simple question:
> 
> How early do you go for music and then again how late can you stand it and finally what period is your spiritual home?


I like many types of classical musics - particularly instrumental - but my favourite period is from roughly 1790's until today. So late Mozart, Haydn and the emerging Beethoven until now.

Spiritual home for me would be 19th and 20th centuries.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

deggial said:


> early late and late early - had to be said
> 
> and kinda true.
> 
> the bit about spiritual home is interesting. I think it's not so much the period as the atmosphere - lyrical with a bit of humour (possibly bitter-sweet or slightly satirical) thrown in.


I hope I'm understanding you that you mean the baroque era is 'lyrical with a bit of bittersweet humour thrown in'? Apologies if I'm wrong. But what you say applies so well to that style.

It's odd how we find our 'spiritual home', though. I grew up & spent most of my life with Celtic folk music so these tunes are in my bones and I feel very at home there. But a few months back I discovered Lully. I had no background in or knowledge of French Baroque at all, but today my violin teacher commented that I seem to have an instinct for how the tunes should be played (compared with my poor dynamics etc on other pieces). I feel that Lully is in my bones too - and yet, how can he be? 
I think it's the combination of spirit, elegance & awareness of time - the last is something I feel when I hear his 'falling trills'.

I'm not a believer in reincarnation but it somehow feels as if I may have met Jean-Baptiste in another life!


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Ingenue said:


> But a few months back I discovered Lully. I had no background in or knowledge of French Baroque at all, but today my violin teacher commented that I seem to have an instinct for how the tunes should be played (compared with my poor dynamics etc on other pieces). I feel that Lully is in my bones too - and yet, how can he be?


a few years ago I had a conversation about classical Indian subcontinent art with one of my old art teachers. I was surprised when he said it "frightened" him while I felt at home from day one. It's all mysterious.

and, yes, my comment can well relate to Baroque; it's definitely one of the rooms in my spiritual home


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

deggial said:


> that's as folk sounding as it gets without plagiarising "anonymous"... of course it's not _folk_ music anymore than Grimm's tales are what grandpa Hansi used to tell his grandkids by the fireplace. However, the bit between 6:40 and 7:50 is the kind of stuff you can still hear at weddings in ye olde Transylvania.


That dude who appears playing that flute is pretty damn folksy. I would have never guessed "Bartók." That's like saying "I like Schoenberg; I mean the Bach arrangements." Sheesh.


----------



## bejart (Nov 16, 2012)

For me ---
Late Baroque through early Romantic, roughly 1725-1850. 

Although I do go though periods where I spend much time among the 20th Century Russians.


----------

