# What is conventional for you personally?



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

I don't have a conventional quite as strong any more. I do believe in personal fixations, and in the value of sticking to them, but also the value of changing them(that can be hard for me). 

Possibly I'm most basically comfortable with fluffy romantic era music, preferably French, and fluffy baroque music. But I find the most comfort in English renaissance and early baroque music these days. The passion of Tchaikovsky gets me going naturally, as do Mozart and Vivaldi. I have tried with many composers and many but not all are like second nature now. Modernism presents many fun nuts to crack on an individual basis, but I suspect that if I let go more, I'd understand that bigger picture better.

I don't know if that sums it up. Just thought I'd post this thread not as a jest to KenOC's, but because I am personally curious about conventions or lack thereof in music.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

If your thread title were 'What does 'comfortable music' mean to you?' ... I could maybe figure out a way to answer. This is too whippersnapperish for me.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Hilltroll72 said:


> If your thread title were 'What does 'comfortable music' mean to you?' ... I could maybe figure out a way to answer. This is too whippersnapperish for me.


Okay, well, I don't know how to refine my thoughts so well...(deleted many things in this message already)

Comfortable music? Well, I was basing it on KenOC's thread and this one comment by science and PetrB.

Okay, what is comfortable music to you? Both "immediate comfort" and "long haul comfort," and is there a distinction?

What is music that isn't comfortable but is worth it to you?

And there's also mental comforts, emotional comforts, and different kinds of comforts. My mind has this all nuanced up...


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

OK, let's see if I can get the pump primed... . A few minutes mind-peering says the Dvorak composed a lot of comfortable music, in symphonies, 'poemes' and chamber music. I can kick back and 'follow it' without having to wiggle my ears, and yet it's not icky predictable. I have listened to the 9th symphony approximately once a year for half a century or so, and it still feels good; comfortable.

In contrast, Bartók's string quartets are _not_ comfortable. I love to listen to them, but my mind is always _reacting_ to the notes; the music doesn't allow passivity, it forces me to be part of the process.

Salud


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Hilltroll72 said:


> OK, let's see if I can get the pump primed... . A few minutes mind-peering says the Dvorak composed a lot of comfortable music, in symphonies, 'poemes' and chamber music. I can kick back and 'follow it' without having to wiggle my ears, and yet it's not icky predictable. I have listened to the 9th symphony approximately once a year for half a century or so, and it still feels good; comfortable.
> 
> In contrast, Bartók's string quartets are _not_ comfortable. I love to listen to them, but my mind is always _reacting_ to the notes; the music doesn't allow passivity, it forces me to be part of the process.
> 
> Salud


I am listening to Dvorak right now, 5th symphony. Funny coincidence! Except since I'm typing, I'm not really listening...

Personally, I also enjoy the humor of the French composers. I like the symphonies of Henri Joseph Rigel because they are wild. I like Rameau. And I really like that sly WF Bach, who isn't actually the person on my avatar...(and isn't French, so we don't have a mix up)

I like the "react to notes" line. And "forcing mind to be a part of the process." I feel similar about William Schuman and Medtner, but I have not branched as far into that territory of listening, so Bartok may be great to investigate. I tried Webern and Elliot Carter a while ago and made some headway.


----------



## Kivimees (Feb 16, 2013)

What does "whippersnapperish" mean?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Kivimees said:


> What does "whippersnapperish" mean?


Whippersnappers are the young gang who infest TC,the oldees are the Geezers-----which are you ?


----------



## Kivimees (Feb 16, 2013)

Somewhere in between (I guess).


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

moody said:


> Whippersnappers are the young gang who infest TC,the oldees are the Geezers-----which are you ?


I refuse to be a 'geezer'. Can't I be a 'biddy'?


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> I refuse to be a 'geezer'. Can't I be a 'biddy'?


That's barely possible. I think Natalie has charge of Mature Female Designations. Addressing someone as 'biddy' seems a bit risky to me.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Hilltroll72 said:


> That's barely possible. I think Natalie has charge of Mature Female Designations. Addressing someone as 'biddy' seems a bit risky to me.


You got me worried, Hilltroll, but when I googled it, it only said 'woman, especially an old garrulous one', which seems fair enough - certainly better than 'geezer'. But okay, I'll be a 'Melba' - moll enjoying late-blooming adventure. 

To answer the OP: comfort music is Lully, something serene and trilly, or Handel, the Harmonious Blacksmith. Or something groovy and medieval, like a saltarello.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> You got me worried, Hilltroll, but when I googled it, it only said 'woman, especially an old garrulous one', which seems fair enough - certainly better than 'geezer'. But okay, I'll be a 'Melba' - moll enjoying late-blooming adventure.


 "Late -blooming adventure"... maybe you ought to check in with your husband about that. The other thing is, I doubt if the Stone Tablets recommend - or even permit - the Krew to Google for assistance.


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

Well, generally nowadays I tend to listen mostly to early-to-mid 20th c. and renaissance music, a little bit of early baroque, too. Ives, Josquin, Isaac, Barber, and Purcell have been my mainstay lately.

This probably doesn't really answer the question....


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Hilltroll72 said:


> ..I doubt if the Stone Tablets recommend - or even permit - the Krew to Google for assistance.


No but the Q can!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Kivimees said:


> Somewhere in between (I guess).


Then you will have to wait until you're older--sorry!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Ingenue said:


> I refuse to be a 'geezer'. Can't I be a 'biddy'?


Well you'll have to ask Hilltroll,he's the Geezer Grand Master.
I now see that he's cast his decision.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

I can see this thread went there...


----------



## Klavierspieler (Jul 16, 2011)

clavichorder said:


> I can see this thread went there...


I think that may be a record. Only six posts to totally off-topic discussion taking over.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Can't we wrench it back? Moody, why don't you tell us what's comfortable music for you - what puts you in a *good* mood? Be a sport!


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

I have a range of tastes: when it comes to Baroque, I prefer the German to the French - Teleman, Bach, Buxtehude (OK I know he's Danish, but he lived and worked in Germany). I like Renaissance and earlier especially plain chant. I can cope with early Romantic stuff - especially Liszt and Chopin. After that I really like Folk Music and the 19th and 20th Century folk inspired composers.

I suppose what I'm saying is that I don't like "fluffy", I like a nice clean melodic line or if you're going to complicate it - use counterpoint or polyphony. I don't like mid romantic chromaticism and intricate modulations and am quite happy with modal music (as you might expect from a taste for folk and plainchant).


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Yes - obviously I know your taste, Taggart, but I too like a plainer melodic line. Also, I don't like too much depth or smoothness. Full orchestras, really smooth violins, drooling over nineteenth century music - they ought to be soothing, but I find them really irritating. Shades of my youth when I'd turn on the TV & find Mantovani instead of the Beatles! No, I like a certain amount of 'twangle' - oboes, not flutes, fiddle-ish violins, harpsichords and so on. They're really 'easy listening' for me.

If you live in Britain, you'll know what I'm referring to when I say I hate Classic FM's 'Smooth Classics at Seven'.

Smooth - aaaaaaghh!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Klavierspieler said:


> I think that may be a record. Only six posts to totally off-topic discussion taking over.


This ought to be an easy thread to get back in the groove. Posts from _some guy_ and _Stlukes_ ought to do the trick. _moody_ could mention Caruso...


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I'm taking the question to mean what is our home turf in music.

I am lately feeling after spending several years exploring new music and broadening my horizons that something has gone astray. I'm a bit lost and overwhelmed, as if I don't even know what I like any more and so I am enjoying music less. It's the opposite of the "I don't know much about art but I know what I like" syndrome. The more I learn the less I know, and the less I enjoy, at least a the moment.

So I have taken just about all classical off of my iPod and only have my old stand-by favorite progressive rock or hard rock albums for the time being. Even though I was into classical long before rock, I just want to get back to being _me_ -- the geeky 17 year old currently trapped in this middle aged man's life and responsibilities. So 70's (mostly British) rock is really my home turf, the music I return to for comfort.

If I think about home turf in the classical realm, that would be anything with fairly lush orchestra in common practice era, usually in sonata allegro form (e.g. Beethoven) and mostly symphonies. Also baroque concertos or suites. Everything else is outside of home base for me.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Weston said:


> I am lately feeling after spending several years exploring new music and broadening my horizons that something has gone astray. I'm a bit lost and overwhelmed, as if I don't even know what I like any more and so I am enjoying music less. It's the opposite of the "I don't know much about art but I know what I like" syndrome. The more I learn the less I know, and the less I enjoy, at least a the moment.


This same thing has happened to me, and still happens off and on. I think it just comes from listening to too much music. Just like most things in life, too much of even a good thing can kill the joy in it. What I do when that feeling creeps in is take a nice long break from listening to any music at all. It seems to work for me.

My comfort zone in music is Baroque and early 20th century stuff. If I stick too much to my comfort zone I start to get bored so when that happens I like to branch out and explore other things from early music to Romantic to contemporary etc. I can find stuff I enjoy in all eras.


----------



## hello (Apr 5, 2013)

Having rhythm & melody.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

For me, conventional is anything that is unsurprising. 

The first movement of Rebel's "The Elements" is unconventional - the first time I heard it, I was astounded. I would never have expected Baroque music to sound like that. I can't think of anything in Vivaldi, Handel, or Bach that shocked me like that. But probably there are people more familiar with Baroque music who find passage in Rebel to be ordinary, unsurprising Baroque music. 

The passages in Beethoven's 32nd piano sonata that sound a lot like ragtime are unconventional to me. 

But if the question means, what is relatively less familiar-seeming to me, then it's mostly stuff before about 1650. Composers like Ives, Varese, Stockhausen, Ligeti, Lutoslawski or whoever, which evidently bother quite a few listeners, rarely surprise me, because I have a sense for what's coming. Some of it strikes me as more musical, some of it as more opaque, and most of as very stimulating, but it doesn't often surprise me. But the old, old guys, Machaut and Gombert and Gesualdo and so on, when I listen to them I usually feel a little bit of, "What the heck were they thinking?" Their senses of harmony are foreign to me. 

And if we mean comfortable, then I'd say anything that has a clear beat and obvious unanimity is comfortable for me. Almost everything. The hardest of all music for me to get comfortable with is free or avant-garde jazz - late Coltrane, Dave Holland, Joe Lovano, and so on. I don't mean I don't like it, in a sense I love it, but I mean I don't like it easily. It demands a lot of me, and sometimes I don't have that much to give! But when I do get it, I really enjoy it. In fact some of my favorite music is actually the more accessible avant-garde jazz, like Freddie Hubbard's CTI recordings or Ornette Coleman.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

I'm more for the going with the wisdom in what makes one comfortable with music and am less so for the need for aquiring knowledge about everything about it, these days. Must be the fact that the weather is getting better, makes me want to enjoy myself.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Ingenue said:


> Can't we wrench it back? Moody, why don't you tell us what's comfortable music for you - what puts you in a *good* mood? Be a sport!


First of all I'm never in a good mood,everybody knows that --don't they?
Secondly,fancy admitting you listen to Classic FM's "The Usual Slush At Seven" !
I wasn't going to answer this thread because ,as much as I like Clavichorder, I'm not sure exactly what he's aiming for.
And by the number of replies maybe I'm not alone .
I'm really not interested in being comfortable on the whole but being stimulated and made to think.
Although I suppose that operetta might be within a comfort and amusement zone and I enjoy that,the operetta that is.
But with 7,000 records (or whatever) and being so ancient I've long ago experimented and decided what I WANT to listen to.
However,i don't like much early music with some exceptions like Soler and Scarlatti (harpsichord stuff) but then I'm not interested in highly dissonant music either--so where does this leave me?
If I was banished to the famous desert island (I wonder if there's a dessert island ?) I would take Beethoven and Verdi, but I wouldn't describe them as "comfortable"--not to mention "fluffy" which I don't do!
I think that it would be a good idea to check on the exact meaning of "conventional" by the way,because I don't think it means what good old Clavie thinks it means.
Reading this mess I can see why I was not intending to reply to the thread.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Slush at Seven. No way! We're driving along, listening to something passable on the car radio, & suddenly it becomes 'Smooth Classics at Seven'. The hand hits the off button pdq.


Never in a good mood; don't like to be comfortable? I think you ought to adopt Eddie Varese's middle name! Come on, Moody, you're just thinking of your public image. 

Anyhow, you answered.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Ingenue said:


> Slush at Seven. No way! We're driving along, listening to something passable on the car radio, & suddenly it becomes 'Smooth Classics at Seven'. The hand hits the off button pdq.
> 
> Never in a good mood; don't like to be comfortable? I think you ought to adopt Eddie Varese's middle name! Come on, Moody, you're just thinking of your public image.
> 
> Anyhow, you answered.


Not me Mrs. it's the image this lot like to have of me and who am I to disappoint them ?


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

moody said:


> Not me Mrs. it's the image this lot like to have of me and who am I to disappoint them ?


They formed the image from the name you chose, Moody. Take responsibility!


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

moody said:


> Not me Mrs. it's the image this lot like to have of me and who am I to disappoint them ?


Go on be unconventional - disappoint - change your avatar to something like








You may even enjoy it!


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

moody said:


> (I wonder if there's a dessert island ?)


there is, but you can only take ear candy there... and maybe Rossini (which is kinda the same thing, come to think of it).


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

For me anything goes, I've kind of tried a bit of everything, or many things, and now am settling into certain composers in a more in depth way. So moving away a bit from the jack of all trades type attitude. In recent months, I've been going thru all of Bruckner's symphonies one by one. In the past I've rarely if ever been that systematic. I've also been branching out in my listening of things like Mahler, Shostakovich and Rachmaninov. & for me this type of focussed or systematic approach is working, I am less erratic. The downside in terms of classical is that I'm listening to less stuff new to me in that area, and also moving in other directions entirely (eg. Soul, R&B, jazz which has also been an on and off again passion for me).

I like how Hilltroll compared the way he listens to and what he gets from the musics of Dvorak and Bartok. That makes sense to me. Its why I've been so eclectic, taking in a lot and rarely settling down to one thing. I like that contrast.

But overall my comfort zone is instrumental music from late 18th century to today. My bias in classical is towards instrumental music, but in terms of non classical, these days I'm more inclined to music with vocals (eg. been getting into a good deal of things like Ray Charles, Nina Simone, James Brown in recent months). But I also like the non classical instrumental stuff - as with classical I like a mix of things.


----------

