UKC

I know some people who believe this. I've just been renewing an acquaintance with Shostakovich's Third Symphony. I bought the CD a few years back but for some reason I haven't played it much. If you agree with the thread title, hear this. It's the very scary third movement; it only lasts about 6 minutes.

youtube.com/watch?v=Bhcw41fOdEY& 

What a clickbait question! No. Unless it's Mozart (and a whole host similar salon noodlers) in which case yes.

No.

Yes. Sometimes. Same as any other musical style.

I thought Max Richter's Sleep went on a bit.

Almost every symphonic work by Shostakovich is exciting, not to say transporting. The two cello concerti also. There are other composers whose work I am equally thrilled by.... eg Bruckner, Nielsen, Sibelius. I discovered them decades ago. Mind you, I had to plough through plenty of mind-numbingly tedious stuff to get there.

"Wagner has some wonderful moments but some awful quarter-hours."

Rossini (possibly.)

So I guess even he thinks the answer to your question is "sometimes."

Most are often dazzlingly exciting or beautiful. Even Wagner, for me by far the most boring, has his good moments.

Never got far with Bruckner but agree with the Scandis, especially Nielsen. Went to see a performance of Symphony 4 with the double timps and I love his Pan and Syrinx. A few years back we went to Finland (Lahti) for the Sibelius Festival, 150th Anniversary and attended a performance of the Kullervo Symphony op 7. Very little known outside Finland as it needs a  200 strong ( I may have got that wrong) male choir singing in Finnish of course! Deserves to be better known.

As for Shostakovich, at the last count I had CDs of 10 of his symphonies. Hard to pick a favourite - usually the one I'm playing at the moment.

And Philip Glass's 4 min 51 secs or whatever it's called.

Shostie's violin concerti also very wonderful.

I thought "classical" was Bach, Handel, Mozart, Haydn, early Beethoven maybe... 😉 I find listening to music, any music, very much depends on how I feel or how I want to feel. A boring piece can be vivid and refreshing at some other time.

4' 33" by John Cage?

No (apart from Bruckner) next question.

There you see the consequences of half (or less) thinking you've remembered something!

Mozart! A salon noodler!!  Wolfgang Amadeus?  That one??  Surely not 😂

The boring stuff's the best. I like an extremely long Schubert piano sonata played really slowly, and if the 20 minute long exposition isn't repeated, I feel ripped off.

I quite like some. I know it's  a bit 'popular' But Vivaldi's Four Seasons is fabulous and very pleasant when the kids are out and I'm just looking out of the window at nothing/anything.

I suppose your asking is the Classical Music Culture boring. Well there’s no crazy head the ball lead singers and I don’t think they show as much skin or take drugs like other musicians but it’s upto what you take pleasure in surely. It’s like saying is red your favourite colour?

if you think it’s boring that’s ok just understand why your saying that... I think. 

My introduction to the Four Seasons was Curved Air's "Vivaldi" with some ear wrenching fiddle playing from Darryl Way. Worth a listen if you weren't around in the loon pant era.

people only listen to classical music because its considered poor form to actually wear a hat that says 'I went to private school'

As said in another reply or two, it depends on circumstance, and pre-existing mood.

Yet it is so much more vital if you're actually in the presence of a performance.

I'm going to see some of the Aurora orchestra play a Mozart piano concerto, in cut-down form, with Steven Osborn, in 12 days' time. Really looking forward to it.

I got into seeing it live as a student, when I was staying in Glasgow between academic years, and doing virology research. So I was in place to go to the Scottish Proms, done by the SNO. Brilliant.

I totally agree with you re Schubert's sonatas, and I even try to play bits of some of them. I don't find them the least bit boring. Schubert's harmonies are far too subtle and ever-shifting for that. One case in point, which you probably know, is the Andante from his Piano Trio Op. 100 no.2 in E flat. There is superb version by the Trio Wanderer on Youtube.

One of the first bits of schubert I got to know, and one of my favourite clips on YouTube. There's a good Bruce adolphe lecture just on that movement if you haven't seen it. 

Best thread title of this magnificent year. 

Of course it's boring. Just like all world class literature, dance, poetry, painting, film, theatre, architecture. Also everything ever produced by George Martin or Quincy Jones. Forget it all, it's not worth the effort of even trying to appreciate it. Stick to the basics of a truly fulfilled human life: pay the bills, fill that stomach, and get laid. 

A pity that syphilis got in the way really, or did he die young due to something else (I can't remember if other things were involved)?

Shostakovich gets my vote.

A long read, but insightful into just this.....

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/02/16/listen-to-this

And now a shameless plug for a friend of mine who is a professional conductor, who has worked with many top orchestras. This year work has dried up so he’s started a free podcast,  ‘A mic on the podium”, interviews with top conductors and classical musicians. It’s very good. 

I had to turn that down!

Very partial to a few things mentioned, Sibelius has always seemed the essential landscape music and you’ve reminded me to relisten to Kullervo. Bet that was good with a bunch of Scandis. Bruckner I have o be in the right frame for, he’s quite draining. Mind you Shost isn’t far from that mindset.

Honourable mention too for some of Sibelius’ smaller pieces like the Swan of Tuonela, Karelia, etc.

I rarely can feel emotionally engaged with the more rousing classical pieces, such as in the OP, and I'm left with a much less fulfilling, largely dispassionate admiration for the subtle changes and progressions.

That contrasts with many of the slower works, piano sonatas and cello pieces in particular, during which I can genuinely feel absorbed and transported to a different place within my head.

Strange, because with jazz I find there are plenty of much more lively, almost violent saxophone tracks that do similar things for me, and I recognise that a lot of these will not be of interest to most other folk.

Maybe you were just unlucky and caught a poor performance of this classic piece. It's not easy to get right, as the following report from a  respected music journal makes clear:

AMATEUR PERFORMERS BOTCH UP JOHN CAGE’S 4’33”

An ensemble of enthusiastic amateur musicians have received overwhelming criticism for their ‘inadequate’ rendition of John Cage’s 4’33′.

One reviewer called attention to the whispering between performers during the performance, calling it ‘undisciplined’, whilst another accused a trombone not-player of texting during the piece. It was clear the ensemble hadn’t learnt their parts thoroughly, several members of the ensemble reportedly looking as if they were about to play a note before nervously deciding against it. ‘They just lacked any conviction’, a local paper states bluntly.

Many reviews appear self-congratulatory, claiming that the audience did most of the work for the musicians.

Most audience members also complained of the piece lagging, ending up lasting nearly twenty minutes, and at times appearing simply to be an awkward silence in which the performers contemplated their ineptitude.

‘It was as if someone had made a joke about dead babies,’ one critic declared. ‘Everyone was just anxiously waiting for the situation to diffuse. It’s a classic case of not messing with the classics. Everyone has their own favourite memory of the piece, and a group of students are only going to end up butchering it. It’s a piece which people really love. Families perform it at the dinner table when they have nothing better to do, and a virtuosic rendition has been known to win big favours from mobsters. I personally had it as a ringtone for quite some time, although that admittedly did cause some issues.’

Those more lenient amongst the audience have blamed the performance environment, saying the toilets were too close by, and at times one could hear the miasmic melée a touch too clearly. ‘It felt depressingly symbolic,’ admitted conductor Gunter Hasselhoven.

What they performed wasn’t even really 4’33′. Given it’s radical deviation from what is accepted, some in the art community have hailed the performance as ‘challenging the very nature of challenging the very nature of music.’

I kept turning it up but still couldn't hear anything.

Nothing wrong with popularity per se. It has survived being used widely for on-hold music. I wonder if you've ever come across a Dutch jazz violinist name of Tim Kliphuis? He is an amazing talent. Trained as a classical player, and a gifted violinist, he also has a great gift for improv.  A lot of his stuff is on Youtube, including his jazz take on 4 Seasons.

I've been lucky enough to attend several of his gigs. He loves the north of England, especially the Lakes, where he enjoys fell runs whenever in the area. The last time I saw him about a year ago was in the village hall in Orton, with an audience of about 100. He tours Britain (or did, BC) so not hard to find.

Without an emoji I can't tell if this is what you really think. Reminds me of a friend who said he thought people only professed a love of classical because they thought it made them look good. I was both offended and thought it was a ridiculous comment.

Now here's an interesting thing I've been thinking about recently.  My dad (not privately educated, now in his mid 70's) used to listen to all the normal 60's music at the time, big Stones and Bob Dylan fan etc...  But by the time he got to the age I am now (knocking on 40s door) he'd begun to also listen to classical music.

Between us my friends and I all have broad tastes in music - Pop, Rock, Jazz, Dance, Electrionica, Hip Hop, Soul etc... All sorts, yet I can't think of anyone my age who has any real interest in classical music.

Was there a bit of a classical music boom in the late 70's early 80's?  Was that just something that people in their late 30's and early 40's got into at the time?  Why doesn't it seem (to me) to be happening as much now?  Has the way we consume music affected what we listen to?

My wife and I went to see Steve Reich's piece Music for 18 Musicians a few years ago. It was mesmerizing live, not so much recorded.

classical music as represented by the invidious radio station of the same/similar name may deserve the description, and its annoying, repetitive, nauseous adverts certainly do.

Being blown away in the arena at the RAH by the brass of the Chicago Phil in a Bruckner symphony at the Proms definitely is not...

Is this about classical music or can we include baroque and romantic (that's not a swipe at the OP, it's more a dissatisfaction with the use of the term to reflect a longer range/time-period of music that it is not)

At one time I thought Beethoven's 9th was pretty boring until the 4th movement but I listened to it last night for the first time in years and was captivated right from the start.

I don't know, I started going to gigs in the mid 80s and was generally one of the youngest there. That still seems to be the case 35 years later, we must be running out of audience soon

The last time I took my daughter it was like a zimmer themed zombie movie at the interval when they sensed fresh meat. No offence like.

This doesn't come as a huge surprise, I thought it might be the case that classical music has an aging audience...

But then the same can be said for many types of music.  Go to a hardcore/rave night everyone there is in their 40s.  Golden era hip hop and it's all guys in their 30s etc...

I went to an Orbital gig a while back and it was a sea of bald heads, barely anybody there not well into their 30s, very few women too!  

Ha, thanks for the warning, some things may be better as a memory

Don't worry, I didn't feel swiped. The terminology is a bit of an issue. I'm thinking about music for which the audience doesn't talk, shout or move about while it's being played. I just can't think of another term, except serious music, which doesn't sound very appealing and likely to raise the ire of lovers of other kinds of music who may not want the implied suggestion that their music isn't serious. And serious has several alternative meanings. Minefield, really.

It is largely true. When Mrs Wilko and I go to Bridgewater Hall we have been known to comment, though we are quite aged ourselves. But we also notice significant numbers of youngsters, which may have something to do with the existence of two major music colleges in Manchester. There doesn't seem to be a problem of shrinking audiences as far as I can see. Bridgewater Hall is huge and it's quite often nearly sold out such as when there's a Mahler symphony or other popular event. 

I must say I'm quite a fan of Reich and I do love this piece. I was very lucky to see a marvellous performance of it fairly recently here in Birmingham. It was a promenade in-the-round concert, together with a mixed abled/disabled troupe of dancers and acrobats! We in the audience were free to move around the concert space - so you sometimes had the feeling that you were physically following themes as they evolved. A memorable night. Different Trains is another rivetting Reich piece I particularly like. I assume you're familiar with the Terry Riley piece In C, that's often bracketed with Music for 18 Musicians? Well worth checking out if not.

One of my favourite memories from my time as a headteacher was when a couple of our A-level musicians performed Reich's Clapping Music at one of our evening concerts. We were a supposedly "bog standard" state comp in an ex-mining area and I was delighted we were bringing minimalism to the local community. Everyone loved it.

Yes, this music is just totally boring...

youtube.com/watch?v=PM0HqmptYlY&

and this well, one can hardly call it music...

youtube.com/watch?v=7FdDLvED_4E&

Upon reflection though, I have to agree fantastic curves and lovely legs. The Yamaha is one of my favorite pianos!

Yes, although other Russians are available - Stravinsky (nobody could call Firebird or Rite Spring boring), Tchaikovsky's ballets and piano concertos, not to mention the 1812! 

I actually think Tchaikovsky's Pathetique Symphony is one of the greatest pieces of music of its kind ever written. It is heartrendingly sincere and 'authentic', and absolutely chillingly bleak at the end: completed only about 11 days, I think, before he committed suicide.

In reply to SandraWL:

Hi Sandra. Welcome to UKC.

Google Flash mob Ode to joy  Nuremberg 

It's certainly hard to concentrate on the music. But you're still a philistine.

Call me an old cynic, but what are the odds on a covid post next?

You win the internet for today!

CB

Classical music certainly is an acquire taste, in that it is easier to enjoy the more you know and have at hand as references for comparison.

Stuff that simply "sounds nice" can indeed get boring quickly.

This is indeed true for much of Mozart, especially the Magic Flute. Probably the most formulaic opera ever, and with a preposterous libretto.

On the other hand, he was responsible for this:

youtube.com/watch?v=jwhWcIdpukg&

CB

Or this here:

youtube.com/watch?v=Wi0ekhf6_J0&

Maybe not the most professional and technical performance of Bach's Christmas Oratory, but by a light year the coolest*! Performed and recorded in a shared student flat in Leipzig in 2012.

CB

* My favourite bit is the men's voices ordering more beer after cantata 2

I’m glad you said it was 2012 otherwise I was thinking there’s the source of the global pandemic.

I listen to techno and classical music. I was just about to say "but not at the same time" and then I realised that wasn't actually true:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1RFhK4Q7go&ab_channel=Masomenos-Topic

But what sort of school did I go to? Definitely not a private one!

If you're interested in music, listen to it! Find out what really does it for you. There's a reason people are still listening to composers who died hundreds of years ago, and it's because they managed to say something in music that transcends time, culture, whatever.

I used to be able to play 4' 33" in my sleep.

I'm a bit out of practice now though.

I watch this at least once every advent, with a beer in my hands, it just brings such a smile to my face!

Reminds you how shitty that whole pandemic situation is. No sports, no culture, just nothing.

I guess it will be some time before I forgive the bat eaters who have unleashed this on the rest of the world through their useless initial response and subsequent cover up, and with the help of their stooges at the WHO.

This is probably the only thing where I agree with Trump, at least to an extent (and of course not with his own bungled response).

John Cage also wrote an organ piece complete with composer's notes that it should be "played as slowly as possible".

The current performance at the Lutheran Church in Halberstadt is scheduled to last 639 years or so.

Entry is free, but you need tickets to attend the ceremony of changing the notes, which occurs roughly once a year.

CB

Obviously great.

I guess Mozart can sound on the surface like it's just supposed to sound pleasant, and that's it. But, as you know, once you start really listening there's a lot more going on. There's definitely plenty of times he's taking the piss, because he was musically so much more intelligent than anyone else around:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95JemP2h4iE&ab_channel=smalin

After demonstrating he can do Bach no problem for the first minute or so, he hits you with the most silly banal tune (the theme that comes in at 1.23). Is he taking the piss out of Bach perhaps, "come on, no one can put up with this stuff for long, let's give it a break"? Or his audience? Or maybe he just thought it sounded great, because it was silly. And then the counterpoint goes into overdrive, and the thing rounds off another masterpiece nicely.

It's magic.

Mozart undoubtedly was a genius!

I also doubt very much that he was taking the piss out of Bach, after all he declared himself his greatest fan!

There is an anecdote still told in the boarding school of the Thomaner choir, whereby Mozart stopped by on one of his concert tours, looked at the sheet music of the St Matthew's passion (or one of the other major choir works, I don't remember exactly), exclaiming how great that all sounded.

The tricky part was that back then each voice had their own sheet music, there was no synoptic edition as we use it today, except one partial one for the cantor. He was looking at the voices sequentially!

For my normal human brain this is absolutely inconceivable.

One thing I  stumbled across a few years ago is that Mozart was not composing in a vaccuum.

Listen to this on youtube and guess the composer without looking:

youtube.com/watch?v=cG5pa6-nXWE&

CB

edit to add, the link is safe, just some classical music, no nasty tricks.

It's a good one! There's another story about him composing one work in his head while he was in the act of "copying out" (writing the manuscript of) another. It sounds ludicrous, but it comes from a letter written by someone in the room at the time.

Haha yes. Wikipedia tells me that this Bach was pretty important in developing the classical style (sonata form etc.) when that credit usually goes to Haydn (whose music I find a little bit on the dry side compared to Mozart and early Beethoven, but maybe in time I'll discover more). But did this guy write anything as good as Mozart's G minor quintet or the dissonance quartet? As long as human beings are on the planet, they will still be listening to those pieces.

Classical can be dull, but Shostakovich isn't classical, modern orchestral yes, but not classical. And anyone who thinks that stuff is boring hasn't heard it loud enough, it's not noodling parlour entertainment.

re Cage's 4'33; it's as dull as the place it's performed. Contrary to popular belief it's not 4+ minutes of silence, it's 4+ minutes where the performer doesn't play an instrument, an extended interlude minus the played sounds that contain it, it's scored after all. Cage was intent on allowing environmental incidental sounds into music - all sound is intentional to some degree - so the interlude permits that. Sound fills the 4+ minute space which the performer has created, but it's up to you to hear them just as it's up to you if you tune out any sounds or music. Of course it's conceptual, a product of 1950's avant guardism like Duchamp's stuff, and the experience isn't for everyone.

nice song

But I think there are much more interesting options of Electronica classical blends,  Venetian Snares is awesome breakcore/classical and a lot of the classical stuff is composed by him rather than just ripping existing songs. The album My Downfall is my favorite from him.

youtube.com/watch?v=FbJ63spk48s&

youtube.com/watch?v=1W9B25_nFoI&

youtube.com/watch?v=r9HaUI8Qixc&

something a bit more poppy, just a based up version of Edivn Martons bitter sweet symphony

youtube.com/watch?v=OSegCAoFUig&

Apologies for the pedantry, but Duchamp's brilliance can't really be called a "product" of the 1950s. The truly avant-garde masterworks are mainly 1910s/20s. The late stuff was a surprise return to art. Of course, "conceptual" now can be hard to distinguish from corporate investment.

Fair points and pedantry welcomed, and I should have used the term 'post war' as opposed to 1950's. I agree that the high points of avant-guarde were between the wars, but Duchamp's dive into conceptualist design and music after the war was hand in hand with Cage.

Yes, 'conceptual' now seems to be very sponsored, though I suppose that comes with the often extravagant platforms for presenting it.

I enjoyed the relatively recent excellent exhibition at the RA, Duchamp and Dali. Surprising affinities, unlike Duchamp and Cage. But I fear I've been unduly influenced by MD. I seem to have incorporated too much of his interest in the aleatory into my own approach to risk-assessment when climbing.

An interesting place to have arrived at, Duchamp's influence on climbing.

I can see how the exhibition would be insightful. I've seen some of Dali's work outside of the big, polished paintings and can maybe see where things might run into Duchamp. His sculpture and sketches, particularly from his atomic phase, are very different from the stuff he's usually known for.

Love Venetian Snares, Rossz Csillag Alatt Született. I'll check out My Downfall, not heard it, cheers.

It took me a while to get used to Shostakovich but wow it was worth it. His 7th 10th 11th and 12th symphonies are superb. His piano concerto No 2 is an all time favourite. Prokofiev violin concerto No 1 is brilliant and Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring is downright terrifying.

It all helps if you like a bit of dissonance.

Don't restrict yourself! Have you heard the 4th? It's the one that was not published till later because Stalin walked out of the first performance and so Dmitry quickly penned the 5th which he described as a response to justified criticism or something of the sort. For me, a lot of the political background is really interesting. I also love the 15th (last) with its references to William Tell in the first movt. 

I must admit I've never heard the piano concerti - I must make good on that.

We attended a Prom in the RAH featuring the 4th, but I found it rather unsatisfying compared with the CD I have, which is by the Netherlands Radio Phil conducted by Mark Wigglesworth.

I am not into classical music (rock and hardcore are more my thing) and was of the opinion that it was boring as every concert i had been to i was bored after 5-10 minutes. My wife though is into classic music as she did her training to be a classical musician and still works for an organisation for which music is a large part of what she does. As a birthday present i got tickets to see the Berlin Philharmonic at their home concert hall with Mariss Jansons conducting a concert of Strauss, Liszt and Wagner.  All i can say is wow, I was engrossed for the full length of the concert and it felt like the whole thing was only about 10 minutes long when in fact the concert went on for over an hour and a half. I expect that it is a bit like anything in that seeing a world class orchestra with a world renowned conductor I was amazed, whereas seeing an average orchestra with an average conductor i get bored and the music does nothing for me. 

Good to see so much appreciation for the Shostakovich symphonies. As a lover of all things string quartet, can I suggest people might also check out what I think is his equally impressive writing in this form. The whole cycle 1-15 is a magnificent and - again - hugely varied achievement. For anyone looking for a place to start, the 8th is the most popular. And for those like yourself, interested in the political background, Julian Barnes's novel, "The Noise of Time" is based on Shostakovich and is a fascinating read.

I think it's a huge mistake to make a hard division between 'classical' and other types of music. As it is, the term 'classical' is a confusion in that, in the context of music, it conflates the old dichotomous terms classical and romantic. Since Bach, at any rate, 99% of all western music has used the same system of keys (based on the circle of 5ths) and the same 24 keys (major and minor). The blues scale is very slightly different, by one semitone, IIRC. There is a huge range of styles and genres, but the fundamental differences come with the quality/inventiveness/depth of the music. Put bluntly very good, good, less good and indifferent/second-rate. I think one either likes music or one doesn't. When I was working as a music editor it didn't matter to me a jot if it was classical, baroque, modern classical, pop, rock, old time music hall, folk, jazz, songs, or whatever.

Yes I have heard them all.  The William Tell sections in the 15th are brilliant. The 13th is rather good too. The second movement in the Piano Concerto number two is my all time favourite, it's so emotional.

I have 2 CDs of his quartets and have heard a number played live. I find most do take a bit of effort, but the effort is rewarded.

Enjoyed The Noise of Time. Sadly a bit short.

I wonder if the programmes are the cause of your different responses? I can enjoy quite a range of what I'm calling classical music, but when it comes to paying and making the effort to get to a live performance I am very selective. 

You've done more than me, then!

This is something the thread hasn't looked at much. Although my sister, who loves orchestral stuff and is mad on opera too, has been exposed to chamber and solo stuff (partly when I've taken her to hear things) she remains a bit half-hearted in her praise.  I'm fairly sure that quite a lot of folk who like some, maybe quite a few, orchestral pieces won't have heard much chamber music, if any, but if they did would find it boring. I first went to hear a string quartet when I was about 25 and living in Leek. At the time the Lindsay Quartet were based at Keele Uni, and they came to a small venue in Leek. I didn't know any of the music, but was bowled over by it. It included Schubert's Death and the Maiden. We soon started being regulars at their recitals in the Theatre-in-the-Round (was it the Victoria?). They played lots of Beethoven and Haydn (whose string quartets are for me his best works) and often slipped in a Shostakovich or a Bartok, both of which I didn't really appreciate at the time.  I think it has to be heard in a suitable-sized venue and some of my most memorable chamber music experiences have been in places with only about 40 seats. Living in S Lakes is great for live chamber music (though not so much at present) and some of the less known venues are very enjoyable. Brantwood (Ruskin's home overlooking Coniston Water) has had an irregular season of recitals, often featuring young up-and-coming players, held in Ruskin's drawing room.  For over 25 years, Derek Hood, who runs the cinemas (Zefferelli's, etc) in Ambleside and has several hotels too has hosted mainly classical but some jazz gigs in the lounge at Yewfield, near Hawkshead. These feature some top players like Pascal Roge and some others whose names elude me at present (aphasia setting in).

To really enjoy chamber music you need to be able to see the whites of their eyes! 

It’s posted in the Radio thread where it does a good impression of having read the OP

Chamber music all the way for me, I rarely listen to a orchestral music at all. This might be  because my parents used to take me to concerts as a kid rather than get a babysitter, and I didn't get it so I've always thought classical concerts weren't for me. I've only recently got into classical (etc.) music later in life (now I'm too old to go dancing to techno, and I haven't been into guitar bands since I was a teen). I'm listening via youtube at home and I find chamber music feels far more engaging in my front room than some huge bombastic symphony. I'll get to know what I like over the years, there's plenty of time (well probably, can't guarantee it). I was surprised when I tried Schubert's Great that I didn't get it at all, given how much I love his chamber music.

Amazing piece, but it's pretty chewy - it took me quite a few listens to really get into it. Would probably be different live. No. 15 (G "major", his last) is just as good and intense. I've hardly seen any live performances of chamber music at all...

Great! I've been to a lunchtime piano recital at Kendal town hall, which was wonderful (Chopin Ballade 1, Beethoven Pathetique Sonata, the wildcard was something by Hans Gal). It'll be good when they eventually start up again.

I look forward to seeing a lot more over the next few decades - Beethoven quartets would be top of my list when there are any happening in the North West.

I think the Kendal midday series is still happening somehow, but we haven't felt like following it up until we've been vaccinated.

Have you caught up with LDSM? it obviously didn't happen this year, but it is a fortnight of chamber music. World class players. Soon gets quite expensive!

You really need to catch up with Yewfield and Brantwood, and there's also the rather grandly titled Ulverston International Music Festival. Oh, and nearly forgot the Grange Music Society season. And there's a Penrith one too. And worth keeping an eye on Martin Roscoe's website.

Love Tim Klephuis. He came to the Shetland Folk Festival a couple of years ago. I remember a dedicated finger-in-ear folkie saying afterwards - "Not really my sort of music but I do like to hear something done well!"

Hooray! Another Neilsen fan. One of the real greats as far as I'm concerned. I started off with the usual Mozart, Beethoven etc. when I was about 12 but over the last 50 yrs or so I've been more into 20th century stuff. Big fan of Martinu, Hindemith, Walton, Ravel, Debussy and also the Americans - Roy Harris, Aaron Copland, William Schumann, Leonard Bernstein. Also the Brits of course, Vaughan-Williams, Holst etc. One guy I just don't get though, despite years of trying, is Mahler. 

In general, classic music which I ever heard gives me thought that this music founded for people with problems mental health. I can't say the classic music gives me satisfaction. In my mind, this music must be heard in live.

Similar development to mine. Took me a while to get into Mahler. Seemed a bit formless to me at first. I would recommend seeing a live performance of second symphony if you haven't already.

With all those 20th century favourites I'm surprised Shostakovich isn't in there. Or Prokofiev.

Welcome to UKC, Alisa. 

I don't think many one here will agree with your comments about mental health but never mind.

You might think it strange, though, that a forum thread can spend five days discussing classical music with barely a mention of opera  and your comment about live performances may well be true in this particular area. I've been to a few but not as many as I'd like.

You have a very English sounding name. But you are not a native English speaker. People on this site are getting very suspicious of non-climbers invading the site for nefarious reasons. What have you done on grit? (that question is by way of a shibboleth)

Agree totally - so much so that I named a recent new route in its honour

Different Trains (6c)

Excellent. I'll make sure I pay a visit next year - looks like I might be waiting for a warm spell though!

Unless you've climbed Shibboleth. Then you can miss the Grit.

This has to be about the very definition of un-boring. I love it went Glenn Gould comes back again at about 5:00. Pity sound quality not v good by modern standards – it's half a century old.

youtube.com/watch?v=kpz_U8wHpa8&

Thanks for the tips, I'll look out for those events and hopefully see you there in the future.

Lets hope it's not too long a wait.

When I was at school/college/Uni and a bit later, I used to earn extra money playing in theatre orchestras, and other classical gigs with small ensembles. From a players point of view, nothing will ever match Wagner’s Ring Cycle. There’s a slice of my life I’m never getting back! The baroque stuff was and remains my favourite, but I have to admit I never ‘got’ Mozart’s popularity. I always found Mozart and Vivaldi a bit ‘meh’.

I have been skim reading this thread with interest. One of the interesting features about classical music in its wide sense is its intellectual appeal. That is why it has lasted over the centuries. But intellectual appreciation requires effort. Imagine that you'd never climbed but only read about it, as was my case until I was 28. So I gave it a go and was hooked. I was participating and that was what mattered, not just watching others doing what I had just discovered. How far you go depends on the effort you put into it. Passive listening leads to boredom. so does not exploring and widening your repertoire. I see a lot of people here kicking Mozart down the road. If I could take one set of music into the after life it would be his piano concertos. But you have to understand his use of harmony to appreciate  the shifts of mood, the tear jerking beauty coupled to sheer exuberance.  Great music has to be listened to with total intensity, you will kill it if you treat it as background.  My appreciation came with maturity and tying to play them.

And as one matures so the range of what one comes to love widens. Richard Strauss opera entered my ken but was furthered by reading his correspondence with von Hofmanstahl. And then came what I used to think of as dissonance. Shostakovich seems to be much appreciated by many, and the variety of his  symphonies: number 11 is perhaps my favourite because when I'm down the sheer desolation of that work and its horrors of war make me realise how lucky I've been  not to be exposed to what millions suffered and gave their lives for. But then for sheer excitement I'd much prefer to listen to Prokofiev.

No, if you are bored by classical music you are still messing around, content to climb VDiffs with the kiddywinks at Stanage. At one with the crowds. Move along and make an effort. 

I played in an orchestra for several years when I left the brass band world for something more "meaty". I stopped playing after about six years because some classical music is very definitely boring. While I still listen to classical I much prefer choral, early and baroque music although these pale in comparison with my lifelong passion for metal. Music should move me at first hearing, if I have to work at manufacturing an emotional response to it then it isn't really for me.

Sometimes I hear something that sounds great on first listen - it generates a response. But listen a few times, and it fades, because there's not much there. I don't think it's for you to say what music "should" do, only what you want it to do for you.

With something meaty, like a Beethoven quartet (any of them, honestly), the first listen might or might not have a big impact - depends on the context in which you were listening. But the more you listen, the more you hear, and the more of its content is revealed. Sometimes a piece that's new to me can have an explosive impact - but that's quite rare for me. Other times it's only after 5 or so listens I'll have really tuned in. That's not manufacturing anything - if I didn't like it the first time, I wouldn't have listened 4 more times. It's just that by the 5th time, I'm oriented, I know what the shape, structure and mood of the piece is so the detail becomes vivid - whereas the first time I was just getting an impression and there was too much to take in for me to really capture much of what's there.

I didn't enjoy this the first time I heard it nearly as much as I do now I know it, but no one is going to tell me that my emotional response is "manufactured". As one of the youtube comments puts it poetically, it is "the most eloquent testimony ever made about the frozen loneliness of the human condition". In these 45 minutes are contained a whole lifetime, and death itself, in music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lncNcNtGkJY&ab_channel=incontrariomotu

It takes more than one listen to get to grips with it. It's a big piece of work; a lot happens, and it's complicated and there are periods of devastating desolation to be encountered. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but the more I listen, the more I get to know it, and the deeper it works its way into my soul. 

I share your love of this work, but it can be rather intense for some moods. Sometimes you just want to revel in something lighter, but still a work of genius. Though I don't think the piano quintet repertoire is filled to brim with memorable works, these two give a lighter but still wonderful 40 minutes of listening.

Dvorak A major op 81 (one of my all time favourites in the chamber music area)

Shostakovich (yes, him again) his solitary composition of the genre. Heard live performance of this by a very young bunch of players in Ambleside parish church in 2018 or 2019 in the LDSM. It went down a storm. Very different experience than the Schubert we both love. 

Great tips, I shall check them out. I like the Dvorak string quartets and viola quintet I've heard and it looks like I'll be getting into Shostakovich sooner or later.

Brahms op 34? The poor chap hasn't had so much as a mention yet. Other than that quintet and his amazing Paganini variations, I'm yet to explore his music (although I've got the clarinet quintet on now). I opened that door when I was furloughed and I had a lot of time on my hands, but I find it quite serious (Beethoven on steroids?) and a bit like hard work, I have to be in just the right mood.

Schubert Trout Quintet. Yes it's good, but it doesn't carry the weight of Death and the Maiden or no. 15 quartets (or the Piano Trio in Eb). They are hardcore.

Great stuff, I enjoyed the first listen and will get to know it.

Check out any of the Brahms symphonies-all top quality. As for Schubert, the string quintet is about as good as it gets. Tchaikovsky Sovenir De Florence should also hit the spot.