# Recent additions to standard repertoire



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Note: This is NOT a discussion about how horrible contemporary/atonal/serial/minimal/you-name-it music is.

When I was growing up in the '50s and '60s, although I never thought about it, there seemed to be a lot of works that had entered or were about to enter the standard repertoire that weren't more than 20-25 years old. Admittedly, they weren't particularly far out -- Prokofiev's and Shostakovich's Fifth symphonies, Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra, various works by Britten, Menotti, Poulenc, Stravinsky, Messiaen, etc. Even some new works by Crumb and Maxwell Davies gained traction. 

I don't listen as widely as I used to, and don't attend concerts as much -- but, are there works or composers from the last quarter century that are similarly widely heard and "accepted," and who are they?

Just curious.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

Jennifer Higdon's Blue Cathedral (2000) is being performed by orchestras in Houston, Baltimore and Philadelphia this year according to the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra's web-site. I'm not sure if that means anything.

The same site says the most-frequently performed modern composers are John Adams, Mason Bates, Jennifer Higdon, Christopher Rouse, Esa-Pekka Salonen and Thomas Ades.

They list eleven other works composed since 1977 that are being performed by at least two major American orchestras this year.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

FWIW, the most popular works of the last 25 years on my A la carte polls are:

Takemitsu: From Me Flows What You Call Time
Ligeti: Études, book 2
Ligeti: Violin concerto
Penderecki: Symphony no.3
Saariaho: L'amour de loin
Chin: Violin concerto
Adams: Violin concerto

Whether these show up often in performance I don't know, but I suspect that over the last several decades the idea of "repertoire" has come to mean something different to people who predominantly listen to recordings vs those who attend a lot of concerts.


----------



## Guest (Oct 8, 2015)

Nereffid said:


> Whether these show up often in performance I don't know, but I suspect that over the last several decades the idea of "repertoire" has come to mean something different to people who predominantly listen to recordings vs those who attend a lot of concerts.


Or we could determine contemporary standard repertoire by only sampling from ensembles/orchestras that play at least a certain percentage of contemporary music.

There are trends. There are lots of trends. Take a peak at all the various Col Legno/NEOS boxes and count the names that appear 3+ times, for instance. You'll learn a lot more than you'd learn by our shallow American "standard repertoire".


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I think John Adams is pretty popular with local symphonies in small towns, which seems to be the operative standard here. Something like Takemitsu is going to be beyond their resources. 

It seems to me, although this is based on a pretty small sample size of personal experience in another country (South Korea), that Dutilleux is becoming accepted as one of the great composers, and his works are performed fairly often.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

science said:


> It seems to me, although this is based on a pretty small sample size of personal experience in another country (South Korea), that Dutilleux is becoming accepted as one of the great composers, and his works are performed fairly often.


There are several Dutilleux works on the Boston Symphony's programs for this upcoming season.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

I thought it was just that Dutilleux was ambushing everyone.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

I know of some contemporary concert band works that have become part of the standard repertoire in that genre.


----------



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

How about Arvo Pärt, especially his Fratres and Cantus in memoriam Benjamin Britten, and Schnittke, his Concerti grossi?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Dim7 said:


> I thought it was just that Dutilleux was ambushing everyone.


It does happen. There was an entire topic about just such a traumatic incident.

http://www.talkclassical.com/18533-post-ww2-composers-who.html


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Does Gorecki's 3rd count as Standard Repertoire yet?

Persnally, I think it takes a bit of time to make theat judgment. Too soon for Higdon, for example (and my prediction is, no, it won't ever be part o fit). 

No shame in not being part of the SR.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I'd say the major late works Ligeti and Messiaen for sure. Anything that can get played in the ultraconservative world of uptown NYC must be standard repertoire.

Possibly also Magnus Lindberg? I'm not a fan personally but orchestras do play his stuff.

Agree about Dutilleux.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

GreenMamba said:


> Does Gorecki's 3rd count as Standard Repertoire yet?


My impression is that the sales of the Nonesuch album didn't translate very well into increased sales of other performances or a massive uptick in attendance at performances, which are not all that common. I may be wrong, though. There are two upcoming performances of the work listed at Bachtrack.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

GreenMamba said:


> Does Gorecki's 3rd count as Standard Repertoire yet?
> 
> .


It's almost 40 years old, which disqualifies it given the terms of the OP.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> My impression is that the sales of the Nonesuch album didn't translate very well into increased sales of other performances or a massive uptick in attendance at performances, which are not all that common. I may be wrong, though. There are two upcoming performances of the work listed at Bachtrack.


It's long, which reduces the number of performances.



Art Rock said:


> It's almost 40 years old, which disqualifies it given the terms of the OP.


I play by my own rules.

But seriously, I'd almost say it's difficult to judge within a quarter century. Dutilleux is mentioned above, but most of his works are outside quarter of a century.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> My impression is that the sales of the Nonesuch album didn't translate very well into increased sales of other performances or a massive uptick in attendance at performances, which are not all that common. I may be wrong, though. There are two upcoming performances of the work listed at Bachtrack.


This comes back to what I was saying about the "repertoire" differences between recordings and performances. On my polls, the Górecki's popularity is in the same ballpark as, say, Brahms 2 or Dvorak 7. Obviously whether one can extrapolate that fact any further into the real world is arguable, but it does at least point to the possibility that a work can become popular without appearing much in concert.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Probably most of the things which have won a grawemeyer award I would say is becoming more standard repertoire stuff now. Composers like John Adams, Thomas Adès as well.


----------



## Guest (Oct 9, 2015)

When you say things like "standard repertoire," you are referencing a concept that is somewhat out of date.

And therefore, if you ask for additions to the "standard repertoire" from the past twenty five years, you are putting two things together that simply do not go together.

The most likely things to enter such a thing as the "standard repertoire"--to the extent to which such a thing still carries any weight with anyone--from the past twenty five years are very unlikely to be anything representative of current trends. Unless your current trend is the one that indulges in making music that reminds everyone, detractors and supporters alike, of music of a past much much older than twenty five years ago. And a current trend that promotes the notion that trends from the distant past are the only ones worth emulating has very little of currency to recommend it.

Otherwise, why want something that's been "widely accepted"? Anything any individual person is likely to like is going to be just as likely an unpopular piece as a popular one. And the notes you hear in any piece will be just exactly what they are whether anyone else but you likes the piece or not.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I fear orchestral works accepted into the standard repertoire are going to be by John Williams and Howard Shore in order for the orchestras to keep afloat. I have nothing against these composers. I'm just pointing out that economics drives the trends. 

Or what some guy says above.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

some guy said:


> When you say things like "standard repertoire," you are referencing a concept that is somewhat out of date.
> 
> And therefore, if you ask for additions to the "standard repertoire" from the past twenty five years, you are putting two things together that simply do not go together.
> 
> ...


Translation: the standard repertoire is for plebian conservatives. Real men and women don't listen to symphonies and concertos. Real men and women listen to crickets, leaves, wind, car engines, amplified circuits, white noise, and running water. Anything widely accepted sucks. In fact, any piece premiered at the BBC proms sucks. Too conservative.

If a piece _does_, in fact, have a melody, it must be done ironically. No exceptions. For example, eRikm's Steme has ironic snippets of Beethoven's 5th repeated over and over, and Cage's Roaratorio has ironic snippets of Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue and Beethoven's Grosse Fugue. Ironic melody is visionary genius. Unironic melody, however, is for plebian conservatives.

If a piece utilizes violins (so conservative!) it must not utilize standard arco. Ponticello, playing behind the bridge, Bartok pizz, knocking on the wood, or utilizing an amplifier are all fair game. But standard arco is only for plebian conservative music.


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

Arturo Márquez´s Danzón No. 2 has become standard repertoire I think.






Composed in 1994.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Translation: the standard repertoire is for plebian conservatives. Real men and women don't listen to symphonies and concertos. Real men and women listen to crickets, leaves, wind, car engines, amplified circuits, white noise, and running water. Anything widely accepted sucks. In fact, any piece premiered at the BBC proms sucks. Too conservative.
> 
> If a piece _does_, in fact, have a melody, it must be done ironically. No exceptions. For example, eRikm's Steme has ironic snippets of Beethoven's 5th repeated over and over, and Cage's Roaratorio has ironic snippets of Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue and Beethoven's Grosse Fugue. Ironic melody is visionary genius. Unironic melody, however, is for plebian conservatives.
> 
> If a piece utilizes violins (so conservative!) it must not utilize standard arco. Ponticello, playing behind the bridge, Bartok pizz, knocking on the wood, or utilizing an amplifier are all fair game. But standard arco is only for plebian conservative music.


lol 

lolololololololol


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

some guy said:


> Otherwise, why want something that's been "widely accepted"? Anything any individual person is likely to like is going to be just as likely an unpopular piece as a popular one. And the notes you hear in any piece will be just exactly what they are whether anyone else but you likes the piece or not.


If a piece has been "widely accepted", by definition it's because there's a whole bunch of people who like it. And humans have similar brains and cultures to each other, so if a whole bunch of people like it, there's a greater chance that any other individual will like it too.


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2015)

some guy said:


> When you say things like "standard repertoire," you are referencing a concept that is somewhat out of date.
> 
> And therefore, if you ask for additions to the "standard repertoire" from the past twenty five years, you are putting two things together that simply do not go together.
> 
> ...


I'm reading this post while I'm higher than I've ever been in my life.

NP: Francisco Lopez _Untitled #274_


----------



## Guest (Oct 10, 2015)

So what I was really saying was more along the lines of the interpretation that Septimal provided?

Nope.

I do wish we could have a conversation about music without these distractions. Of course, I also wish that countries could settle their differences without violence, that people could be treated with respect no matter what their gender or color or nationality, and that our home here on this tiny globe could be taken care of instead of raped over and over again, so my wishes are obviously very unrealistic.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

some guy said:


> So what I was really saying was more along the lines of the interpretation that Septimal provided?
> 
> Nope.
> 
> I do wish we could have a conversation about music without these distractions. Of course, I also wish that countries could settle their differences without violence, that people could be treated with respect no matter what their gender or color or nationality, and that our home here on this tiny globe could be taken care of instead of raped over and over again, so my wishes are obviously very unrealistic.


You wrote your comment without even acknowledging that the rest of us had in fact proposed composers and works. Why? Do you disagree that they've entered the standard repertoire? Do you think they are uninteresting because they're too conservative? What are the current trends to which you allude? You don't say, so we can only guess.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

Heliogabo said:


> Arturo Márquez´s Danzón No. 2 has become standard repertoire I think.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's actually a good one, kind of generic at first but energetic and stimulating. Gustavo dudamels is pretty good:


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Note from OP: All I meant by "standard repertoire" was that organizations like the BSO could program them on subscription series and they were readily accepted, no one looked askance, and audiences members didn't flee in droves.


----------

