Had I never listened closely enough?

[verismissimo]

Interesting article in New York magazine by Justin Davidson. His subject is Philip Glass.

http://nymag.com/print/?/arts/classicaldance/classical/reviews/philip-glass-2012-2/

Do you have composers who you try and try again with but remain resistant to, vaguely feeling it might be your fault?

I had trouble with Hugo Wolf for many years, but then the dam broke.

[rauschwerk]

Falling in love with a piece of music is like falling in love with a person - it's completely irrational. If you are not in love with someone then getting to know them better is very unlikely to change that. Glass's music (or what I know of it) bores me and I don't feel, even vaguely, that it might be my fault.

Every so often I revisit Berg's violin concerto but my negative reaction to it remains the same. That doesn't bother me.

[Parry1912]

Glass's music (or what I know of it) bores me and I don't feel, even vaguely, that it might be my fault.

[salymap]

most of Bruckner leaves me cold. Too long,too thickly scored. My tinnitus doesn't help to be fair to AB.

[Panjandrum]

Falling in love with a piece of music is like falling in love with a person - it's completely irrational. If you are not in love with someone then getting to know them better is very unlikely to change that.

Not always true. To extend your analogy, that initial attraction to someone wears off fast, unless there is more lying beneath the surface glitter to sustain interest over a period of time.

Some works reveal their beauties only gradually. I'm thinking of the Bartok quartets which initially left me cold; these are now among my very favourite works, and I'm might glad I persevered with them. Ditto Lutoslawski, the Gross Fuge and the symphonies of Robert Simpson, to name but a few.

[Serial_Apologist]

I must admit to never really having "got" Robert Simpson's music. To me, after Beethoven, the greatest composers were those who expressed a feminine side to their musical personalities. Simpson, though, seemed determined to plough on with that uber-masculine, mid-Beethovenian way... little or no give - always struggle, struggle, struggle to the fore.

I blame Bruckner and Nielsen.

[vinteuil]

... a lot of the music that is now central to my listening was not something I found immediately comprehensible or attractive. It took me a very long time to 'get' Brahms and Bruckner. But I am glad I persevered.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Do you have composers who you try and try again with but remain resistant to, vaguely feeling it might be your fault?

Jonathan Harvey and Michael Finnissy in particular. And my own "Wolf Dam" remains un-busted.

But I had the same difficulties with Martinu until a couple of years ago (thank you Mr Belohlavek!) - so I keep listening in the hope that there's the same sudden revelation.

Best Wishes.

[cloughie]

I sometimes think that 'memory almost full' kicks in. As I have got older I listen to more and varied music, classical and non-classical, some of which I embrace, others reject or put on one side for later. There are some works works that I am gradually getting to know better, and it is only recently I have really got to grips with Mahler 9. But one problem I still have is wanting to hear too much and maybe I should select a few works to crack per month. I like the sound of Arnold's symphonies (Shostakovich with an English accent) and have the Penny set on Naxos but I cannot say I know any of them intimately. I have, I suspect like others on these boards, CDs of works awaiting listening.

[Panjandrum]

I must admit to never really having "got" Robert Simpson's music. Simpson, though, seemed determined to plough on with that uber-masculine, mid-Beethovenian way... little or no give - always struggle, struggle, struggle to the fore.

I blame Bruckner and Nielsen.

It is true that the symphonies do plough similar furrows (or perhaps that should be, chart the same astronomical course) but, in the best of them (3,5,7,8, 9 and 10) an irresistible musical logic is at play.

[Suffolkcoastal]

Berlioz is very much a 'hit & miss' composer for me. I love parts of the Romeo & Juliet symphony for example, but find Harold in Italy rather weak and tedious and was most disappointed by the Requiem the first time I heard and I still struggle with it. I just can't put my finger on why I struggle with Berlioz. My problems with Mahler are well known, believe me I've tried endlessly, I do 'get on' with the 6th & 9th symphonies and some of the songs, but the 2nd, 3rd, 7th & 8th symphonies in particular try my patience and just don't think I'll ever 'get them'. I have similar problems with the Bel Canto operas of Bellini, Donizetti and early Verdi. Of more recent composers I've tried and failed with include Schnittke, I just can't make head nor tail of it and Birtwistle whose sound world I find intensely ugly and cluttered. It's not that I think either composer is necessarily a bad one though.

[Ferretfancy]

I like the orchestral music of Faure, and of course The Requiem, but his instrumental and chamber music leaves me cold> In the end you have to say "not for me"
Lots of people seem to admire Reger, who I find terribly dull.

[jayne lee wilson]

Come on, S-A, what about the slow movements and scherzi of Nielsen and Bruckner? There's much there that is soft, tender and yielding, "feminine" if you like, which balances the more questing and robust music in true classical style. Even in the battleground of Nielsen 5th's first movement, it's the radiant "endless melody" which triumphs over the drummer's attacks, and the coda is magically sweet and atmospheric. The thrustful opening of Part 2 later becomes the most lovely and haunting of slow, quiet fugatos.

Similar things could be said about the end of Bruckner's slow movements, his trios and many finale episodes. They demand the listener to see, to hear, the whole range of human possibility, they ask a lot of your response.

I must admit to never really having "got" Robert Simpson's music. To me, after Beethoven, the greatest composers were those who expressed a feminine side to their musical personalities. Simpson, though, seemed determined to plough on with that uber-masculine, mid-Beethovenian way... little or no give - always struggle, struggle, struggle to the fore.

I blame Bruckner and Nielsen.

[cloughie]

Come on, S-A, what about the slow movements and scherzi of Nielsen and Bruckner? There's much there that is soft, tender and yielding, "feminine" if you like, which balances the more questing and robust music in true classical style. Even in the battleground of Nielsen 5th's first movement, it's the radiant "endless melody" which triumphs over the drummer's attacks, and the coda is magically sweet and atmospheric. The thrustful opening of Part 2 later becomes the most lovely and haunting of slow, quiet fugatos.

Similar things could be said about the end of Bruckner's slow movements, his trios and many finale episodes. They demand the listener to see, to hear, the whole range of human possibility, they ask a lot of your response.

Bruckner was the pioneer of the expansive symphony, and contain many memorable themes. I like them overall but still find some of his finales sound thrown together. I have a problem with some 20th century English symphonists, lots of hours of music, but not always easy on the ear or strong reasons to listen again or persevere with eg Bax, Rubbra, Simpson. No doubt there will be those who disagree and champion these composers.

[EdgeleyRob]

I have a problem with some 20th century English symphonists, lots of hours of music, but not always easy on the ear or strong reasons to listen again or persevere with eg Bax, Rubbra, Simpson. No doubt there will be those who disagree and champion these composers.

Cloughie take cover I feel a few pelters may be coming your way now.
It wouldn't do for us all to be the same but for me the Bax, Rubbra, Simpson symphonies are to die for!.

My blind spot is Sibelius.Despite the efforts of a Sibelius nut friend of mine his music does nothing for me and I have tried many times over the years.(I'll take cover now).