What Music do you Not Listen to?

Fergus · Post by **Fergus** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:11 am

The following notable gaps that exist in my collection are as follows:

1. Organ music – despite the amount of music by JSB that I listen to I do not own one single disc containing organ works.

2. Opera – other than Puccini’s Madame Butterfly (which I would listen to on average once each year), a few Mozart operas and a number by Handel and Monteverdi works, I never venture into the world of “Romantic” opera.

3. “Modern” music – not necessarily of the atonal variety. I am trying to expand my horizons here but it is a slow (but interesting) exercise.

I would be interested to see what music is absent from members’ collections.

Donaldopato · Post by **Donaldopato** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:19 am

I have few, if any, piano/voice song recitals or cycles. Not that there are a lack of good ones, I just seem not to enjoy listening to recordings of them.

lmpower · Post by **lmpower** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:22 am

Contemporary music is the biggest gap in my collection. I still haven't gotten around to buying any Bach cantatas. That is on my to do list. Other than that I have a representative collection of classics from Gregorian chant through Shostakovich.

piston · Post by **piston** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:28 am

"Light" operas in general, but especially from the 19th century.

Concerning organ music, I recommend listening to Marie-Claire Alain, now 83 years of age and still performing. She rocks!

I'm not into electronic contemporary music.

THEHORN · Post by **THEHORN** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:42 am

I have very broad and eclectic tastes , and am willing to listen to just about any kind of classical music , so I don't conciously avoid any particular genre.
I'm not very fond of the mickey mouse music of some of the lesser-known Baroque and classical composers, and even well-known ones such as Vivaldi. It's too formulaic, trivial,
predictable and uninteresting for me. But I certainly do love the music of the greats of this time, such as Bach, Handel, Rameau, Gluck, Haydn and Mozart .

Fergus · Post by **Fergus** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 2:39 pm

Donaldopato wrote:I have few, if any, piano/voice song recitals or cycles. Not that there are a lack of good ones, I just seem not to enjoy listening to recordings of them.

That was a gap for me too but I have recently started to listen to Schubert's song cycles.

Fergus · Post by **Fergus** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 2:41 pm

piston wrote:Concerning organ music, I recommend listening to Marie-Claire Alain, now 83 years of age and still performing. She rocks!

Anyone who still performs (and rocks) at 83 deserves to be checked out

stenka razin · Post by **stenka razin** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:50 pm

I listen to anything that is loosely defined as 'Classical' and soundtracks for broadway and the movies, too. I try to avoid every other kind of music, but with TV that is impossible. So, I have too much knowledge about 'other' music that does not deserve attention, sadly.

Classical Review · Post by **Classical Review** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:19 pm

Like Fergus, I don't listen to much opera. Not because I'm deliberately avoiding it - simply because I find it daunting. Such a wealth of operas to get to know. I have no idea where to start.

Those I've heard and enjoyed, however, include Mozart's The Magic Flute (which I've also seen performed), Bartok's Duke Bluebeard's Castle (it works just as well in English as in Hungarian, IMO), and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas (which I really loved after just one hearing).

I probably should invest more time and energy in opera, but there's so much other orchestral and chamber music that I'd rather explore.

FK

absinthe · Post by **absinthe** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:11 pm

I don't have a big commercial CD collection a few 20th century from Britain, America, South America, Mexico and Australia; and a few Renaissance. Also many off-air CDrs of contemporary music and late 20th C symphonic music.
I listen to Radio 3 if at home that introduces me to a great span of music. I have my ¬favourite composers obviously in that I get restive listening to them. I do try. I've been criticised locally for not liking music too much though I get great satisfaction from almost any aspect of it. I tend to use it as a drug. It can soothe my savage beast - or is it breast? or get me into well....whatever; or get me out of the same.

So the main areas I'm least exposed to are from about 1650 to about 1730 when Beethoven came on the scene. I prefer his symphonies and string quartets, the only symphony to do nothing is the 6th. When a teenager I intensely disliked the 3rd but thankfully grew out of that when I happened on Klemperer, came to learn just what a masterpiece it is.

IcedNote · Post by **IcedNote** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:43 pm

1) Electronic "classical" music - far too often composers spend too much time making a handful of cool sounds without considering how they should be put together to form a "piece of music."

2) Most modern "classical" music - far too often composers spend too much time orchestrating a handful of not-so-cool sounds without considering how they should be put together to form a "piece of music."

3) Early, early music - this is a gap that I'd like to fill...because I like quite a bit of the stuff I'm familiar with.

4) Musicals - can't stand any of them.

-G

dulcinea · Post by **dulcinea** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:42 pm

Salsa. That bastard child of jazz and Latin sound is a bastard in the very worsest sense of the word.

Imperfect Pitch · Post by **Imperfect Pitch** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:06 pm

If we are talking categorically, as opposed to isolated works, and further focusing on music that is widely loved by others, Puccini operas and anything by Brahms come immediately to mind.

jbuck919 · Post by **jbuck919** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:54 pm

Fergus wrote:
piston wrote:Concerning organ music, I recommend listening to Marie-Claire Alain, now 83 years of age and still performing. She rocks!
Anyone who still performs (and rocks) at 83 deserves to be checked out

I believe her most recent Bach cycle is about 20 years old now, but yes, if one is only going to get one, that is the one to get.

As for what I don't listen to, there are a number of symphonists for whom I have little time, but I won't belabor the point because some of them seem to be among many posters' favorites.

Wallingford · Post by **Wallingford** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:20 pm

....12-tone, aleatory, electronic, minimalist;

....chamber music;

....the "masterpieces" of opera (for me, the more less-well-known, the better; & I'll hear any written by my big faves);

....early music.

***********************

I'm willing to clean up my act in the last three; the other?..........let's just say it's when I return in the afterlife as a wallabee, and you return as a puli.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:04 pm

Operetta is the only thing I don't listen to at all...there is music I don't like, but, I still listen to it...

Post by **Lance** » Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:49 pm

Do NOT listen to (much) mid-to-late 20th century- nor 21st century music. Try, just to keep up to date musically, but the personal interest nor magnetism is not there. Otherwise, I hear everything else from Baroque to about 1950, including occasional Broadway shows, Roy Orbison, Patsy Cline, and a few polkas (a la Yankovic) thrown in for good measure! [My sincere heart is particularly in the Romantic period.]

Bro · Post by **Bro** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 12:30 am

Gregorian Chant. It's boring.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 12:59 am

Bro wrote:Gregorian Chant. It's boring.

Try Palestrina instead, Gregorian Chant is a specific period, Palestrina and others produced some of the most beautiful Vocal Music ever written...

Bro · Post by **Bro** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:06 am

Chalkperson wrote:
Bro wrote:Gregorian Chant. It's boring.
Try Palestrina instead, Gregorian Chant is a specific period, Palestrina and others produced some of the most beautiful Vocal Music ever written...

Thanks, Chalkie. My comment was aimed at Corlyss.

John F · Post by **John F** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:53 am

Organ music, Italian baroque music (Vivaldi et al.), prebaroque music.

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:57 am

With rare exception, most everything I don't listen to falls between 1804-present. That for me is a vast wasteland.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:12 am

Corlyss_D wrote:With rare exception, most everything I don't listen to falls between 1804-present. That for me is a vast wasteland.

No Verdi, Strauss or Puccini then...

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:46 am

Chalkperson wrote:
Corlyss_D wrote:With rare exception, most everything I don't listen to falls between 1804-present. That for me is a vast wasteland.
No Verdi, Strauss or Puccini then...

It's not July. So, no, not deliberately, not anymore. XMRadio has gotten so bland I refuse to listen to anything after 1800 - I turn it off, which means I don't listen much any more. It's not worth the money I pay for it. And this after upgrading my equipment in April - I haven't even taken it out of the box. When they merged with Sirius, they ruined it IMO - the Vox channel is now the Metropolitan Opera channel, and they ain't kiddin'! Whereas I used to be able to get choral programming with a fair amount of Renaissance, I can't now. It's all opera all the time. With concertzender approaching the date when they said they were going to pull the plug, I listen exclusively to that all day, and the Gregorian chant station only, at that. We'll see what happens after their drop-dead date. Rolf said there was a faith promoting rumor that the Philistines might not go thru with the extinguishing after all. It would be a shame to lose all that fabulous Medieval programming - I've bought a ton of cds based on their programming, stuff I didn't even know was out there.

Classical Review · Post by **Classical Review** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:04 am

Chalkperson wrote:
Bro wrote:Gregorian chant. It's boring.
Try Palestrina instead. Gregorian chant is a specific period - Palestrina and others produced some of the most beautiful vocal music ever written.

Sorry to be the pedant at the party, but Gregorian chant and the polyphony of Palestrina and others are very different and shouldn't be bracketed together like this. Yes, one eventually led to the other - but their sound worlds are poles apart.

FK

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:16 am

Bro wrote:
Chalkperson wrote:
Bro wrote:Gregorian Chant. It's boring.
Try Palestrina instead, Gregorian Chant is a specific period, Palestrina and others produced some of the most beautiful Vocal Music ever written...

Thanks, Chalkie. My comment was aimed at Corlyss.

De gustibus non disputandum est. By all means, you shouldn't listen to it!

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:23 am

Chalkperson wrote:Gregorian Chant is a specific period,

Actually, it's a specific style, plainchant. There's several styles of plainchant, including Gregorian, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Gallican, Roman, all of which can be distinguished from each other. As John has reminded me on several occasions, Gregorian chant still being composed today.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:42 am

Corlyss_D wrote:
Chalkperson wrote:Gregorian Chant is a specific period,
Actually, it's a specific style, plainchant. There's several styles of plainchant, including Gregorian, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Gallican, Roman, all of which can be distinguished from each other. As John has reminded me on several occasions, Gregorian chant still being composed today.

Interesting,,,

jbuck919 · Post by **jbuck919** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:30 am

Corlyss_D wrote:
Chalkperson wrote:Gregorian Chant is a specific period,
Actually, it's a specific style, plainchant. There's several styles of plainchant, including Gregorian, Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Gallican, Roman, all of which can be distinguished from each other. As John has reminded me on several occasions, Gregorian chant still being composed today.

Well, since I've been invited to elaborate (ha!), I don't have any particular problem associating Gregorian with a period as well as a style, since IMO it is overwhelmingly THE artistic accomplishment of the period when there were various forms of plainchant. To the extent that the others survive at all with notation we can read, it becomes clear on listening (at least it is to me; maybe not to others) that the other forms are, in fact, rather boring, or at least very limited. In other forms of plainchant, the music carries the voice for the purpose of having the text sung, an obvious advantage when you consider the context in which it was performed. It is lovely in a limited sense. But with Gregorian, for the first time we have the case of music as art transcending its mundane purpose while at the same time inestimably enhancing it.

As for Gregorian being a going concern for a very limited body of composers, I would cite three cases.

(1) Artistically unsuccessful neo-Gregorian, the attempt by some folks writing later (usually much later) than the 12th or at the latest 13th century to add to the Gregorian repertory for what reason I cannot say (perhaps to have some "easier" music). These compositions, which include such favorites as the Missa de Angelis and the common setting of the Salve Regina, give themselves away by sounding suspiciously as though they are in a modern key.

(2) Very brief snatches of chant needed to accommodate changes in the liturgical ordinary, in particular the Missal of Paul VI. The "Protestant ending" of the Lord's Prayer would be an example of this.

(3) Artistic neo-Gregorian written for feasts that were introduced into the church calendar during the Renaissance and later. I have to admit that I have heard settings that are so carefully crafted that it is impossible for me to distinguish them from the old stuff. I don't recommend it as an exercise for everyone, though. It is unbelievably difficult to write a convincing Gregorian setting.

Bro · Post by **Bro** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:57 am

Corlyss_D wrote:With rare exception, most everything I don't listen to falls between 1804-present. That for me is a vast wasteland.

1804 ? Well, my goodness. What happened in 1804 ? Beethoven's Eroica ? It seems like such an arbitrary date. I mean, you couldn't have rounded off to 1800 ? Or simply said you don't care for the romantic period ?...

Just when music started to get interesting (for me)..

Bro

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:20 am

Bro wrote:1804 ? Well, my goodness. What happened in 1804 ?

I thought that was when Haydn died. I see I was off a few years. Next time I'll just say the death of Haydn.

Or simply said you don't care for the romantic period ?...

I've said that so many times I thought I'd strive for variety in expression . . . you know, to avoid boring the reader.

Just when music started to get interesting (for me)..

Alas, way way too true for way way too many. Thank God for cds.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:37 am

There isn't a particular form of music that I consciously choose not to listen to. That said, there are some regions of music that I haven't really given much attention to and that I don't have an especial desire to explore any time soon.

Considering western art music from the beginning of the Baroque era until the present as my range, the holes are in: pretty much all sacred choral music, Baroque, Classical, and Italian opera, the Tchaikovsky and Shostakovich Symphonies, and the works of Handel, Boccherini, Chopin, and Rachmaninov--famous composers whose music I'm not particularly compelled by.

Otherwise my tastes are very diverse and I'm always eager to hear new music.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:40 am

Oh, and I didn't even consider music from before 1600 since I see that as a completely different ballgame altogether. Perhaps I'll try to explore it once I've understood western classical music since the beginning of the Baroque era.

Post by **Lance** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:14 am

Bro, Your four words ... seem to apply to me, too. I cannot get interested in Gregorian chant no matter how hard I try.

Bro wrote:Gregorian Chant. It's boring.

Guitarist · Post by **Guitarist** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:51 pm

As far as classical music goes, I don't listen to much vocal music. (I don't hate it--I just find it less appealing.) I do intensely dislike musicals--I simply prefer more "serious" music! Otherwise, from Dowland to Xenakis I'm pretty much OK. Outside of classical, I can absolutely state that I hate rap. I just wish it would go away. Monotonously delivered lines that glorify crack-selling, women-beating, and cop-killing over a repetitive electronic beat is not my idea of music! (Yes. I know that all rap does not glorify these actions, but I find all rap equally reprehensible.)

IcedNote · Post by **IcedNote** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:13 pm

Lance wrote:Bro, Your four words ... seem to apply to me, too. I cannot get interested in Gregorian chant no matter how hard I try.
Bro wrote:Gregorian Chant. It's boring.

I'd agree...for the most part. But then I saw a concert of this music in Notre Dame in Paris. That was quite the experience. So yeah...I guess there are certain times when I like it.

-G

diegobueno · Post by **diegobueno** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:18 pm

There's not much music that I won't listen to, at least somewhat. I've heard enough rap music and Darmstadt music to know I don't care to hear these styles ever again. Same with 19th century French ballet music of the Delibes/Minkus variety. And pulic radio is getting me to the point where if I ever hear another baroque trumpet concerto again I'll scream.

Most types of music that I don't like I will make a point of listening to every now and then just to make sure I'm not missing something. Most every style has some examples of superior work which transcends the genre or style it falls into.

THEHORN · Post by **THEHORN** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:51 pm

I'm not sure that musicals are classical music in the strict sense of the word ,
but that doesn't matter . I enjoy some of them very much , and enjoyed playing them in the pit before I had to give up performming .
Possibly Sweeney Todd could be considered an opera ; it's a real masterpiece whatever you call it. I played a production of it some years in the Bronx at
believe it or not -a mental institution whose auditorium was open to the public for the performances !

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:38 am

^ I also enjoy some very much. I've a rather big soft spot for G&S. Pinafore is pure genius.

Fergus · Post by **Fergus** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:26 am

diegobueno wrote:....Most types of music that I don't like I will make a point of listening to every now and then just to make sure I'm not missing something. Most every style has some examples of superior work which transcends the genre or style it falls into.

That is a good point.....so maybe as I drift through my mellow, middle years I should revisit areas where I have not gone for some time

kombelpeter · Post by **kombelpeter** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:52 am

Fugues, I don't see the beauty. Of course, they require some craftwork in counterpoint to compose them, but they don't do anything to me.

Post by **Lance** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:31 am

Fugues can sometimes be challening. However, to have a different perspective on it, I implore you to find a copy of—and hear—pianist Glenn Gould's So You Want to Write a Fugue on Sony Classical [52679, or 60686, the latter 2 CDs]. This is performed by the Juilliard String Quartet and two singers conducted by Vladimir Golschmann. It's unforgettable, and quite a listening experience.

kombelpeter wrote:Fugues, I don't see the beauty. Of course, they require some craftwork in counterpoint to compose them, but they don't do anything to me.

Cyril Ignatius · Post by **Cyril Ignatius** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:32 am

I don't listen to the large swath of modern music that is atonal, or brash, or sounds like the composer is taking us on a journey into mental illness. I dislike music that sounds 'academic'.

My musical focus in Romantic era - very broadly conceived, in particular mid-to-late Mozart onwards until sometime early Twentieth Century - with the addition of the great "romantic" music written by Vaughan-Williams, Sibelius, Barber and others later on. I love Gregorian Chant and the music of Hildegaard von Bingen. And I like great movie/show music such as that of Rogers and Hammerstein and so forth. And I love great song more generally - Verdi, Puccini, Lehar and Foster.

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:11 pm

Ken wrote: Perhaps I'll try to explore it once I've understood western classical music since the beginning of the Baroque era.

No curiosity about what led to Baroque music????

karlhenning · Post by **karlhenning** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:40 pm

Cyril Ignatius wrote:I don't listen to the large swath of modern music that is atonal, or brash, or sounds like the composer is taking us on a journey into mental illness.

You really do not like any atonal music?

Cheers,
~Karl

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:18 pm

Corlyss_D wrote:
Ken wrote: Perhaps I'll try to explore it once I've understood western classical music since the beginning of the Baroque era.
No curiosity about what led to Baroque music????

At the moment I listen to so little Baroque to begin with that my curiosity for its predecessors is pretty weak. I'm not saying, though, that one day this won't change.

thisolehouse · Post by **thisolehouse** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:36 pm

I have many types of music outside the cover term of “Classical Music” or “Concert Music,” as some have called it, that I will NOT own or listen to.

As far as classical music is concerned there are some token early music (pre-Baroque), serial, atonal, minimalist, and electronically enhanced works that I have in my collection or listen to elsewhere. But they are listened to VERY rarely.

Bitter herbs make my meat and potatoes and ice cream listening more enjoyable.

Bill

jbuck919 · Post by **jbuck919** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:49 pm

Ken wrote:
Corlyss_D wrote:
Ken wrote: Perhaps I'll try to explore it once I've understood western classical music since the beginning of the Baroque era.
No curiosity about what led to Baroque music????
At the moment I listen to so little Baroque to begin with that my curiosity for its predecessors is pretty weak. I'm not saying, though, that one day this won't change.

I wonder if Corlyss isn't leading you down the garden path, Ken.

The Renaissance/Baroque border (1600) is such a clearly drawn line that there's no shading of one into the other. (Now early Baroque into later Baroque is another matter.)

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:02 am

^ So I shouldn't feel guilty about the number of Ockeghem discs in my collection?

nut-job · Post by **nut-job** » Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:21 am

Nothing before Bach and Albinoni, generally.

Who is online