# I feel like I'm missing a lot!



## nicolaxao (Sep 25, 2018)

So, I've recently started getting into classical music and I adore it. But I feel as though I can only get a distant understanding of what I'm listening to.
When listening to pieces like Beethoven's String Q 14, Bach's Cello Suites and Partitas, Mahler's Symphonies, etc. I can appreciate the emotion and strutture, but I feel dumb about not identifying any counterpoints, dissonances, modulations, etc. 
I dont know any theory or play any instrument.
Is it just I'm not talented enough to appreciate it? Will learning musica theory help (I mean, does studying scales and so on give you any appreciation if you just want to listen, not play?). Any advice, book, etc. will ne appreciated.
Btw, I'm still 16 so I definitely have time to get deeper, if I'm not just naturally unable to, and even if so, needless to say I'll keep listening to classical, I just hope I can understand it (maybe even feel it) more.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

You can take music in school if you are able -- learn to play an instrument, if you or your parents can afford one, or take piano lessons from a local teacher -- or take school chorus or choir. Or take music appreciation at your school or community college. Or sing in a church choir. 

Most church choristers don't read music and many have little understanding of musical markings -- key signatures, sharps, flats, naturals, speed and volume markings -- and rely on their directors. But looking at and performing music is a problem-solving function that increases mental capacity. It would also help you better understand some of what you're listening to. You pick up more about music by performing it than by reading about it, in my opinion.

Or just go to church and sing hymns out of the hymnal. That would do some of the same.

You can download scores from websites if you like but that's probably going to confuse you if you have no musical background, especially orchestral scores. It would be much easier to begin looking at an individual score, maybe a sonata for an instrument.

One thing that helped me a lot (I perform music vocally but don't read music) was buying a pitch pipe, downloading a sheet with musical keys on it, and knowing how certain music begins by reading the key signature, then playing it on the pitch pipe, then singing it. I still do this if I am learning something new for solo performance.

But that was years after I took high school choir and sang in church, my first access to looking at music.

Finally, and though this may seem extremely old-fashioned, you can read books about musicians and their music. Perhaps there are blogs that do the same but I haven't found them. When I started collecting classical music I was already a singer but only 5 years older than you. I read lots of books on composers, their compositions, and recordings of them. If you understand any composer a little better his/her music is sure to make more sense to you.


----------



## Judas Priest Fan (Apr 27, 2018)

Great to see a 16 year old liking classical music!

I am 53, a life long Metal and Rock fan, who discovered classical music. 

I also know nothing of music theory or such things, and music just moves me to tears. Maybe you can get even more enjoyment out of it if you dive into music theory, but I would recommend you just enjoy it!


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Since you're not a musician, and you don't have to be, I would suggest picking up a few old books that really do a great job of introducing neophytes to the genre:

1. Aaron Copland: What to Listen for in Music. The 80-year old book, revised 60 years ago, has lost nothing in its eloquence.

2. Leonard Bernstein: The Joy of Music and The Infinite Variety of Music. Taken from his TV scripts, both of these are fascinating and well worth reading by anyone: beginner and more experienced alike.

If you have the time and interest, there's an offering from The Great Courses: How to Listen to and Understand Great Music by Robert Greenberg. You can get it in DVD, online, or CD format.

I envy you. The thrill and awe of discovering great music anew is 60 years in my past. Have great time!


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2018)

I think we're all missing a lot. That's why we keep listening over and over. 

You can certainly enjoy music without having any technical knowledge, and I don't think you should worry about what you are missing, as long as it is giving you pleasure. But I think any level of understanding can enhance enjoyment. I took a class in high school that combined music history and theory. We did things like study modulations, voice leading, etc. I have a lot less knowledge and skill in music than many, but what little I have is an asset. Reading music and playing an instrument, especially keyboard, would also be a help, since you can things out and experiment. Even a rinky-dink electronic keyboard would be fine.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

nicolaxao said:


> So, I've recently started getting into classical music and I adore it. But I feel as though I can only get a distant understanding of what I'm listening to.
> When listening to pieces like Beethoven's String Q 14, Bach's Cello Suites and Partitas, Mahler's Symphonies, etc. I can appreciate the emotion and strutture, but I feel dumb about not identifying any counterpoints, dissonances, modulations, etc.
> I dont know any theory or play any instrument.
> Is it just I'm not talented enough to appreciate it? Will learning musica theory help (I mean, does studying scales and so on give you any appreciation if you just want to listen, not play?). Any advice, book, etc. will ne appreciated.
> Btw, I'm still 16 so I definitely have time to get deeper, if I'm not just naturally unable to, and even if so, needless to say I'll keep listening to classical, I just hope I can understand it (maybe even feel it) more.


I know little technically about music . When the musical terms are used on the forum I am usually lost. I'm totally ignorant and that isn't like to change. That said I have enjoyed classical and jazz for quite a few decades. I believe my ignorance aids my enjoyment. I don't know when a piece is not supposed to be top notch. I recently saw on a thread that a favorite symphony was best forgotten, sounds great to me however.
Study music if it turns you on to do so. But it isn't necessary to your enjoying.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

If you are looking to build a classical music library on the cheap, go to classicsselect.com and look at their downloads. For $25 you can cover most major works plus a whole lot more.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Keep listening and broadening your horizons, eventually you'll get a road map of different styles and stuff. If you know how to follow a score it can help appreciate the music more. Start with baroque and classical periods and branch out to Romanticism and 20th C as your curiosity takes you. You can hear counterpoint, dissonance and modulations by its effect without getting into technicalities.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Oldhoosierdude said:


> I know little technically about music . When the musical terms are used on the forum I am usually lost. I'm totally ignorant and that isn't like to change. That said I have enjoyed classical and jazz for quite a few decades. I believe my ignorance aids my enjoyment. I don't know when a piece is not supposed to be top notch. I recently saw on a thread that a favorite symphony was best forgotten, sounds great to me however.
> Study music if it turns you on to do so. But it isn't necessary to your enjoying.


I don't see how being unable to tell a superb performance from a routine one, or a great symphony from a commonplace one, makes life more enjoyable. There are plenty of superb performances and great symphonies to give your time to, and no one has unlimited time for listening to everything. It's also possible to recognize when something is inferior but enjoy it anyway, as long as you don't think that you're "not supposed to." That fallacious notion has nothing to do with musical knowledge.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> I don't see how being unable to tell a superb performance from a routine one, or a great symphony from a commonplace one, makes life more enjoyable...


Ah, but it's wonderful to be able to say, "That sounds like the Von Lipperschmacker performance in Prague in '67, the one where the balcony collapsed and 80 patrons perished. It was a sad occasion, because the orchestra had to start the third movement over…"


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

To nicolaxao --

Just keep listening ... keep exploring. You need know nothing if you simply have working ears and listen and like what you hear and move on to hear more and more. Chances are you will begin to find pieces especially intriguing and will start to look up information about composers and orchestras and conductors and instruments and musical forms ... etc. Eventually you will come to realize you know a hell of a lot, and with classical music (especially) there is a hell of a lot to know. But, again, it isn't necessary to know any of it if you simply enjoy a work. 

Listen, for instance, to Tchaikovsky's 6th Symphony. There is much there to hear, much to hold one spellbound, much to enjoy, and much to question about. Nobody really knows what Tchaikovsky was attempting to say, but that is rather meaningless in comparison to the power that particular piece has over its listeners. In the end we may all well say "Who cares what Tchaikovsky was trying to say! This piece is simply wonderful to hear, and well worth hearing again and again, whatever it means."

So ... go on. You will find your way, believe me.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2018)

It's possible to get some music theory work books and go through them if you like. Reading Schoenberg will provide some excellent foundational knowledge in harmony and tonal language that might be interesting to you.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

I think what you are missing is really not that important.

If you want to put a label on the technical features of music that you hear - by all means educate yourself in theory a bit.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

mbhaub said:


> Since you're not a musician, and you don't have to be, I would suggest picking up a few old books that really do a great job of introducing neophytes to the genre:
> 
> 1. Aaron Copland: What to Listen for in Music. The 80-year old book, revised 60 years ago, has lost nothing in its eloquence.
> 
> ...


The Great Courses web site looks very interesting I shall explore this, given my lack of musical knowledge 
Thanks


----------



## BabyGiraffe (Feb 24, 2017)

Try ear training software or site, or mobile app. There are some for free. You need to develop your listening skills. Sing along with the exercises. Learning music theory by itself won't help you to hear anything (you may become proficient in analysing scores and that's it).


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I have practically no technical knowledge of music other than being able to knock out all the major chords on a guitar. Keep listening, enjoying and reading. You really will pick a lot up from reading. I tell my class the same thing.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2018)

nicolaxao said:


> So, I've recently started getting into classical music and I adore it. But I feel as though I can only get a distant understanding of what I'm listening to.
> When listening to pieces like Beethoven's String Q 14, Bach's Cello Suites and Partitas, Mahler's Symphonies, etc. I can appreciate the emotion and strutture, but I feel dumb about not identifying any counterpoints, dissonances, modulations, etc.
> I dont know any theory or play any instrument.
> Is it just I'm not talented enough to appreciate it? Will learning musica theory help (I mean, does studying scales and so on give you any appreciation if you just want to listen, not play?). Any advice, book, etc. will ne appreciated.
> Btw, I'm still 16 so I definitely have time to get deeper, if I'm not just naturally unable to, and even if so, needless to say I'll keep listening to classical, I just hope I can understand it (maybe even feel it) more.


Here's a nicely structured way for you to approach your studies in a self-paced manner that will allow you acquire the level of understanding and expertise that you are seeking. Work your way through the sections of each module and use YouTube to supplement and expand upon your studies.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/musicapp-medieval-modern/

It begins with "Medieval & Renaissance" and ends with "20th Century: Aleatoric, Electronic, and Minimalist Music" and there are sections on "Baroque", "Classical Genres", "Classical Forms", "Classical Composers", "Early and Late Romantic", etc.

Take your time, work through each section, learn the terminology, listen to the examples, return to this thread, and ask for recommendations for reaching deeper into whichever subject you find interesting.

It's also vitally important that you understand the classic "ad hominem attack' which can often be the most useful weapon in your arsenal once you feel confident enough to join in the various discussions which are being held within the forum.

This is a really first-rate definition -

"Ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself."


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_The Great Courses web site looks very interesting I shall explore this, given my lack of musical knowledge. Thanks _

I had this once upon a time. I was fairly sophisticated about classical music by that time but it still helped in several ways. I think it would probably do much to help you better understand classical music.


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Hi and welcome to TC. I'm not a musician either so not familiar with some of the technical terms, which you don't have to to enjoy classical music. Through this site, have learnt so much and made friends too. As for a book, there is a wonderful one called "Classical Music for Dummies" which explains everything in easy terms. That was how I found this site too. Well, looking forward to your posts


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

It has also helps to explore what sort of music bothers you and try to find out why it does compared to music that you like. That was one way I grew to appreciate the less accessible music.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

If you "like" it, you "appreciate" it. Don't sweat the details until yoiur curiosity absolutely impells you to learn more. There are a lot of good general histories of music. Read liner notews. If you have a general (grade school) notion of how notation works, get and browse throughh a paperback copy of the shorter verson of the Harvard Dictonary of Music (I did it at your age) and that will help with terms and nomenclature. Take your time.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> It has also helps to explore what sort of music bothers you and try to find out why it does compared to music that you like. That was one way I grew to appreciate the less accessible music.


With all due respect to Phil, I am going to suggest you put off exploring music that bothers you at this point in your journey. I have a feeling that there will be plenty of music you will find accessible and enjoy and you should concentrate on that. Sample music from all eras: Medieval, Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic and some of the more conservative and accessible music from the 20th century. If you hear a piece of post-nineteenth century music (or music from any era for that matter) that bothers you, don't feel an obligation to like/understand it. Possibly make a note of it for future exploration and just move on to find pieces you enjoy. After you have a certain amount of music under your belt, so to speak, and your understanding has increased, you can always return to those pieces that gave you a problem. But for now immerse yourself in music you find attractive.

mbhaub suggested Aaron Copland's "What to Listen for in Music". An excellent suggestion...I too definitely recommend it. Two more books I would recommend: "The Lives of the Great Composers" by Harold C. Schonberg and "Classical Music, The 50 Greatest Composers and Their 1,000 Greatest Works" by Phil G. Goulding.


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

Many of the major pieces of classical music repertoire have some nice technical analysis of the structure and composition on wikipedia. I find that reading sites like this and listening to radio stations that tell nuggets of information about pieces have helped my appreciation of the music considerably.

On the book front, I found the books Who Knew?: Answers to Questions About Classical Music You Never Thought to Ask by Robert A. Cutietta and Absolutely on Music: Conversations by Marukami and Ozawa to be fascinating reading.


----------



## fliege (Nov 7, 2017)

I'm in a similar position to you, nicolaxao, regarding musical background. I can't therefore speak to how much more I would pick up if I were musically trained, but I can tell you that I notice more as I listen more. Initially I also was bothered about the stuff I felt I was missing, but over time I've realised that I can learn to pick up enough details to keep me happy. I think a key thing to develop is the ability to recognise themes and their development.

One thing I found helpful was the Yale open course on music appreciation. It's free on YouTube and is excellent: 



The other thing I found helpful was to have someone point out features in a piece of music. Usually most things are obvious when someone who knows more points them out. After that you hear them without any training and begin looking for similar things elsewhere. One book I have that does this very well for Shostakovich is this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Shostakovich-Symphonies-Concertos-Unlocking-Masters/dp/1574671316 Maybe the author's other books are similar, but I've not read them. Asking specific questions about pieces of music on this forum is also educational.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2018)

To come back, a little knowledge goes a long way. You can gain a lot of insight just by knowing the sorts of things you might be listening to. Probably some of the books and videos mentioned above can be a big help.

But just a few bullet points.

* A classical piece is typically not a "song." It is a drama, in which themes, melodies, harmonies battle with each other.

* A lot of the interest in classical music is based on how a theme or melody can be transformed or presented in different ways. For instance, Beethoven's fifth symphony opens with the famous "fate" theme. If you pay attention you will notice is that the rhythm of that theme (three shorts and a long, da da da daaaa) crops up in ever part of the symphony. Beethoven uses it as a building block as he puts the music together. Also, after the loud opening of the first movement, there is a gentle lyrical melody. You may notice that at the very end of the first movement that theme is played, very loud and very dramatically, right up to the closing cadence. The lyrical melody becomes a thundering, overwrought melody. That is a big part of classical music, presenting a theme or melody in a new way.

* A lot of classical music, particularly from the era of Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, has a general form, 1) present some musical ideas (exposition) 2) play with the musical ideas (development) 3) restate the original musical ideas (recapitulation). If you are aware of this general scheme it can be easier to grasp where the composer is going at any given moment.

Anyway, maybe this is already familiar to you, but I find that this level of "analysis" can be very satisfying even if you can't recognized specific aspects of musical theory by ear.


----------



## JeffD (May 8, 2017)

Haydn man said:


> The Great Courses web site looks very interesting I shall explore this, given my lack of musical knowledge
> Thanks


I am a big fan of The Great Courses as regards music. Really very helpful. Not as good as a live course because i would love to be able to raise my hand with a question. But courses that good are hard to get not to mention expensive.

I think with listening to The Great Courses carefully, listening to as much music as you can, you will discover all kinds of insights.

The good news is that it is addicting. More knowledge and experience makes listening more fun, with which you gain more knowledge and experience and so on.

The cool thing is a theoretical knowledge does not get in the way of an emotional appreciation. One can enjoy both levels of the music without conflict.

Another level you can enjoy is outside the music itself. What is the music about? What is the plot of the opera or what is the story told by the words if any.

Its a life long adventure in which everyone an embryo, no matter how much experience we gain.


----------



## Machiavel (Apr 12, 2010)

To the OP: You can train yourself if you want to but it's not a necessity. You still listen to the same music as the experts listen to.

NOthing new and the more you know the more you will listen and analyse but stop listening just for the pleasure. You cannot enjoy a piece 100% if you are trying to analyse it. 1 or the other. You gain nothing for loving a piece by analysing it. Its the academic portion of it.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2018)

Machiavel said:


> NOthing new and the more you know the more you will listen and analyse but stop listening just for the pleasure. You cannot enjoy a piece 100% if you are trying to analyse it. 1 or the other. You gain nothing for loving a piece by analysing it. Its the academic portion of it.


Speaking only for myself, I don't find any understanding I attain of a piece interferes with the pure pleasure of it. If I am eating a dish and I think, "oh, I taste cilantro," it doesn't interfere with my appreciation of the taste of the dish. I find it is the same with the meagre understanding I have of music theory.


----------



## Hermastersvoice (Oct 15, 2018)

Don’t worry nicolaxao, the only thing you need to appreciate music is a pair of ears. And perhaps some patience. I know, because I’m a philistine too.


----------



## fliege (Nov 7, 2017)

I thought I'd mention that since my previous post I bought Hurwitz's books on Mozart and Haydn and very much recommend them also. I think they are both very good reading for someone who is concerned they are missing stuff in the music they hear.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I have very little technical knowledge about music. I can't read music and have never cared to work out what is happening at a technical level in a piece. I simply do not care about how results are achieved by composers or performers. What matters to me is what the results are! I am encouraged in my pride in my ignorance by how common it is to see people who dislike a certain composer or piece (usually something that is almost universally praised as wonderful!) justifying their dislike with a technical argument. But I am a very experienced and skilled listener. I believe I can discriminate between good performances and bad ones and great works and works that I like but are less great. And I certainly know what I like and have a good sense, I think, for the difference between subjective judgement (my favourite, my least favourite ... etc) and the more controversial objective value (this is great and this is less great) even when I find myself loving a piece more than a piece that I know to be the greater.

If you want to get "good at listening to music", keep listening. There was a time when I really wasn't sure if I could discriminate between the good and the less good ... but these days I know I can.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Being that you're only 16 and having no musical training, I wouldn't burden yourself with studying music theory. Try to read music scores as a novice? I wouldn't think so. But I would focus on reading about the lives of the composers and how their music differs, so you can explore it with your own listening experience.

One of the great pleasures in life is listening to any great composer's music while reading about his or her life. It can be illuminating and is foundational to appreciate the breadth of the music, nor does it require any technical background whatsoever at this stage in your development. You 'll gradually begin to hear about certain musical terms that you can investigate later after you've become more familiar with the uniqueness and greatness of the music.

I highly recommend Harold C. Schonberg's _The Lives of the Great Composers_ that gives an excellent overview of the music's history. I wore out my copy and it hasn't been mentioned yet. It's also highly likely that your local library has it, but I would recommend having your own copy to have as a basic reference. It's wonderful and accessible. I believe the initial exposure to the music should exist as pure self-discovery, pure fun and enjoyment by starting out and getting a broad overview of the musical landscape.

https://www.amazon.com/Lives-Great-Composers-Harold-Schonberg/dp/0393038572/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1544915392&sr=8-1&keywords=lives+of+the+great+composers


----------



## JeffD (May 8, 2017)

Here is the thing. You, or anyone, can enjoy music in any way that is legal and non fattening. Least important is whether others approve or not of your way of enjoying music.

If you feel you are missing something, by all means go after it, pull it open, pull it apart, dig deep, sort it out. It is kind of fun in itself.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

It is not necessary to "know" about the music you are about to hear. It can be very helpful, and it can increase your enjoyment [or detract from it if the performance is poor].
A composer's music takes you on a journey....with more tonal music, the journey is often quite clear, the melodic and harmonic progressions and development will guide you along the way....the nature of tonal music establishes a tonality, progresses from that, often going far afield, then brings you back home...just listening, you will latch on to this "guided tour", so to speak, and hopefully, you will find the trip most fulfilling....It can be very helpful if you already know the trip to be taken....this will allow you to catch new things, and various details that might be missed first few times thru...that is the beauty, the great "art" of serious music...it can be enjoyed on many levels...
first off, you may have a "gut" or emotional reaction to the music - it is exciting, fiery, angry, gentle, soothing, sad, melancholy, etc, etc...but with great music, there will be more, a challenge to hear, how does the composer make this work?? how does he/she make it happen??...there is a depth of expression that goes beyond the initial emotional impact...
for me, great music, the works I like best, impact me on at least 2 levels - the gut reaction - emotional response, and the "intellectual" - the craft, the technique - the "what's happening in the score" that generates my response to it...for me, it's why great music doesn't "wear out" - it keeps being interesting, challenging....and of course, different performances will reveal different aspects of that music....


----------



## Hermastersvoice (Oct 15, 2018)

Even trained musicians never stop learning. An easy and enjoyable way of getting some understanding of music is to listen to rehearsals by famous conductors of the standard repertoire. A lot of it available on Spotify and Youtube. Start with music which is familiar to you already; Günter Wand and Beethoven 5/6, Bruno Walter and Mozart ‘Linz’, Furtwängler and Schubert 8.


----------



## juliante (Jun 7, 2013)

nicolaxao said:


> So, I've recently started getting into classical music and I adore it. But I feel as though I can only get a distant understanding of what I'm listening to.
> When listening to pieces like Beethoven's String Q 14, Bach's Cello Suites and Partitas, Mahler's Symphonies, etc. I can appreciate the emotion and strutture, but I feel dumb about not identifying any counterpoints, dissonances, modulations, etc.
> I dont know any theory or play any instrument.
> Is it just I'm not talented enough to appreciate it? Will learning musica theory help (I mean, does studying scales and so on give you any appreciation if you just want to listen, not play?). Any advice, book, etc. will ne appreciated.
> Btw, I'm still 16 so I definitely have time to get deeper, if I'm not just naturally unable to, and even if so, needless to say I'll keep listening to classical, I just hope I can understand it (maybe even feel it) more.


An appreciation of emotion and structure but without any understanding beyond that is all I've ever needed. Moreover, I personally feel ignorance is bliss - who wants to know how the magician does his or her tricks? p.s. now for the patronising lecture: I hope you are finding time for some punk rock


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

Of course, I am just going to reiterate much of what is already been said.

Besides some rudimentary percussion skills from years ago, I have little knowledge of musical theory. Yet I love classical music. There is no need to understand it on a technical level, to appreciate it on every other level.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> I have very little technical knowledge about music. I can't read music and have never cared to work out what is happening at a technical level in a piece. I simply do not care about how results are achieved by composers or performers. What matters to me is what the results are! ....I believe I can discriminate between good performances and bad ones and great works and works that I like but are less great. And I certainly know what I like.....


That's great. and it obviously works for you...but, how do you determine what you like?? or decide that one work is better, or more enjoyable than another??....not trying to be a PITA, but clearly you have developed some sort of technique, or system for evaluating that which you hear, and making comparisons....??


----------



## Tallisman (May 7, 2017)

Don't try to 'understand'. You don't need to _know_ that you're experiencing a 13th chord in order to experience a 13th chord. You don't need to understand _why_ something is dissonant to realise _that_ it is dissonant. Heck, you don't even need to associate the impression you get from a dissonant chord with the concept of 'dissonance' for it to have its unique effect upon your ear.

I love sitting down at the piano, picking out bits of symphonies and sonatas and have got a good grasp of relationships of chords, but I'm not classically trained. My love of the music preceded my 'understanding', limited as it remains, of the music.

I know of people who have no knowledge of musical theory and are significantly more in touch with the meaning or the sheer unique quality of a piece of music than those who can tell you in technical terms the techniques being used.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

A teacher spending time with this young man would be able to tell what kind of a learner he is. What intrigues him and what keeps his attention.

I'm afraid he's getting very bad advice in here.

Since when is learning ever something to be spurned or eschewed? That's crazy advice. If learning music theory causes you to lose some of the joy you remember, then you need to take control and compartmentalize what you're learning so that you can become a better music enthusiast. Why would you blame learning theory?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> That's great. and it obviously works for you...but, how do you determine what you like?? or decide that one work is better, or more enjoyable than another??....not trying to be a PITA, but clearly you have developed some sort of technique, or system for evaluating that which you hear, and making comparisons....??


I never saw this post so forgive my failure to reply. I like what I like. Some of I get bored with and some grows on me more slowly. I listen to a lot of music without getting to know it properly but then I know when I want to listen to it properly. I don't have a system except following my taste. And my taste changes - it changes with my mood and it changes over longer time-spans. So long as I enjoy it at the time that's good. I have been doing this for 60 years so I do have a bedrock of taste, a lot of which is fairly closely aligned to the critical consensus that I never really bothered to study.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I find watching performances on DVD (or YouTube I suppose) to really help with understanding a piece. To see which instruments are going at a particular time really helps to pick them out.

Of course going to a live performance can have the same effect, depending on your seats. I went to a performance of Brahms 1 at my local university that really opened my eyes to aspects of the orchestration.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

I was told of an interesting game, find a pleasing chord progression in a Lennon McCartney song and see what Beethoven does with that progression.

Or Cole Porter and Chopin.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> .....I don't have a system except following my taste. And my taste changes - it changes with my mood and it changes over longer time-spans. So long as I enjoy it at the time that's good.


I wasn't trying to be a PITA, or to subject you to some sort of prosecutorial grilling....I was just wondering how you determine if you like something, or don't like it...for me, there are many criteria upon which I judge music, or a performance of music - 
is the tempo in the right ballpark?? is there momentum?? energy?? clarity, appropriate style, instrumental balance, execution, solo work, recorded sound, etc, etc?? 
If you just like it "because you like it" that's fine....and that weighs in big-time for me, too - but as a professional performer, I have to be analytical - how else can you improve your own performance...as a judge or adjudicator for auditions, you have to be ultra-analytical...perhaps that is a hazard of the trade....we [performers] are naturally analytical, and critical, but hopefully, this does not impede or suppress our basic "gut" reaction to the music we are hearing...


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Heck148 said:


> I wasn't trying to be a PITA, or to subject you to some sort of prosecutorial grilling....I was just wondering how you determine if you like something, or don't like it...for me, there are many criteria upon which I judge music, or a performance of music -
> is the tempo in the right ballpark?? is there momentum?? energy?? clarity, appropriate style, instrumental balance, execution, solo work, recorded sound, etc, etc??
> If you just like it "because you like it" that's fine....and that weighs in big-time for me, too - but as a professional performer, I have to be analytical - how else can you improve your own performance...as a judge or adjudicator for auditions, you have to be ultra-analytical...perhaps that is a hazard of the trade....we [performers] are naturally analytical, and critical, but hopefully, this does not impede or suppress our basic "gut" reaction to the music we are hearing...


Watch a championship chess match not knowing the names of the pieces or the rules or the openings or the strategies or the position by position development of the games down through the centuries. Just watch the accomplished players make moves.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> I wasn't trying to be a PITA, or to subject you to some sort of prosecutorial grilling....I was just wondering how you determine if you like something, or don't like it...for me, there are many criteria upon which I judge music, or a performance of music -
> is the tempo in the right ballpark?? is there momentum?? energy?? clarity, appropriate style, instrumental balance, execution, solo work, recorded sound, etc, etc??
> If you just like it "because you like it" that's fine....and that weighs in big-time for me, too - but as a professional performer, I have to be analytical - how else can you improve your own performance...as a judge or adjudicator for auditions, you have to be ultra-analytical...perhaps that is a hazard of the trade....we [performers] are naturally analytical, and critical, but hopefully, this does not impede or suppress our basic "gut" reaction to the music we are hearing...


OK but I wasn't reacting against your post. I genuinely am not very conscious about how I arrive at a "decision" that I like or dislike a piece of music or a performance.

I do know that I do not have ideal speeds. I used to - it would be the speed I first got to know and like the work - but these days I know many performances of favourite pieces that are unusually slow or fast and it doesn't bother me on its own so long as the result reflects something that seems to belong ... or, better, tell me something new. An unusual speed can give the interpreter new opportunities - Celibidache's Munich recordings show this again and again (you feel "ooh, this is slow" but then he shows you the benefit he gets from his slow speeds, perhaps a devastating if slow climax later on) - but there are plenty of performances where slowness does "kill the music" (some late Klemperer does this for me). I am not a big fan of messing around with speeds - Furtwangler could do it without disturbing the underlying pulse but many others just sound indulgent when they do it. Momentum and energy might be much more important than speed. I like the Krips Mozart symphonies recordings, which are quite old fashioned and middle of the road: they seem filled with life.

I am not a believer that there is one way, a right way, with a piece of music - not even when it is backed up by solid research - and tend to avoid critics who say things like "this piece is supposed to be about x so it should be y". If it works it works.

I agree that as a performer you have to think of these things. As a listener I owe players an open mind and open ears! I say to them - see if you can move me, transport me, fill me with joy (or whatever).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Music is to be enjoyed - whatever level you are at!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> I agree that as a performer you have to think of these things. As a listener I owe players an open mind and open ears! I say to them - see if you can move me, transport me, fill me with joy (or whatever).


Yes, I completely agree with this...


----------



## RockyIII (Jan 21, 2019)

I'm not on the same level as many of the members here, but I can live with that. I played cello for nine years as a child and took one music course in college. Now I really just enjoy listening to music without worrying too much about the structural details. I mean, I guess I can detect the standard sonata form sections, but I don't try to think about it and analyze it while I'm listening. I know what i like and don't like subjectively, but I doubt that I could give you a very educated sounding reason.

Years ago, I used to sit and listen to operas while following along with the libretto translations, but that became a distraction and diminished the enjoyment for me. I don't even like to read the supertitles when I attend a live opera, but I do find my eyes going there almost involuntarily at times. As long as I have a basic understanding of the synopsis, I am generally happy to sit back and go with the flow.


----------

