How do I listen to classical music?

[ectogemia]

In the precise usage, it refers to things written between approx. 1750 and 1820.

Oh, well fuck me. I had always thought the Romantic period was part of the Classical period. Welp, if that's the case, I'm officially not a big fan of most classical music. All those wasted years as a kid playing Bach and shit when I should have been doing jazz...

[Malaki-LEGEND.sys]

Bach is actually Baroque.

Edit -

Oh, well fuck me. I had always thought the Romantic period was part of the Classical period. Welp, if that's the case, I'm officially not a big fan of most classical music. All those wasted years as a kid playing Bach and shit when I should have been doing jazz...

And this is exactly the problem with using Classical as an umbrella term: it misleads people into thinking that anything classical is basically Mozart or Mozart-sounding, when in reality there is SO MUCH great music that has been written over the centuries, but a person who might otherwise enjoy said music might pass over it because he or she heard Mozart or whoever and automatically make the association "this is classical music"(which to be fair you could do with any genre) and hate it without listening to something like Debussy's Clair de Lune or Chopin's Revolutionary Etude. But who's to blame here? I can't really fault the layman as much as I feel it's the fault of whoever decided to misrepresent centuries of music by calling it all "Classical".

/pretentious music fan

[DaMonz]

Come on dude, you're not french. French people = France. Thanks merci caliss.

Relax man, c'est juste un raccourci pour dire que je parle principalement français

[Wiesty]

So much misinformation in this thread :/

[Ethan Rex]

how do i listen to classical music?

with your ears

[GravitySuitCollector]

So much misinformation in this thread :/

Yeah.... I think sphexic's post is pretty relevant, not sure about the mixing part. Having a knowledge of music, you're able to listen to how it's performed well, and even how it might not be as could as it could be, but still enjoy it. There's something to be said how a production is executed to the audience.

Also with the whole "agnostic" thing, you're going at it wrong. By going in like that, you prevent yourself from feeling the emotion of a piece. As with reading a good fantasy novel, you can't just go, "this is an affront to my personal beliefs," and expect to get something out when you finish it. If it still bothers you just pull something out like, "this is a song of praise," and listen for it (not necessarily in the lyrics).

[ectogemia]

Bach is actually Baroque.

Edit -

And this is exactly the problem with using Classical as an umbrella term: it misleads people into thinking that anything classical is basically Mozart or Mozart-sounding, when in reality there is SO MUCH great music that has been written over the centuries, but a person who might otherwise enjoy said music might pass over it because he or she heard Mozart or whoever and automatically make the association "this is classical music"(which to be fair you could do with any genre) and hate it without listening to something like Debussy's Clair de Lune or Chopin's Revolutionary Etude. But who's to blame here? I can't really fault the layman as much as I feel it's the fault of whoever decided to misrepresent centuries of music by calling it all "Classical".

/pretentious music fan

Yeah, actually, Debussy and Chopin were my two favorite composers to play on piano back in the day. I really love their music. Mozart?? Ehhhh... not so much. I'm very aware that those two were 1800s composers and that one was Romantic and the other was impressionist, but yeah, I've always just sort of lumped them all into "classical" music. I'm not a music historian at all, and from my layman's perspective, I don't really see the point in making a distinction between the Romantic and impressionist composers and the "classical" composers like Mozart. Maybe I'm missing something, I guess, but again, if you're a layman, it's really not that crucial of a distinction to make

[Skyline Drop]

with your ears

I was wondering who'd be the first one to make that crack...

No, but I honestly feel the same about a lot of choral music. I'm not much one for the homogeneity of timbre that you get in purely choral music, and unless the director picks some really wacky arrangements, you typically don't get much in the ways of interesting rhythm.

That said, I think you might have an easier time appreciating it if you go into it with a bit more open-mindedness, and don't really analyze or search for depth or meaning in it and instead just appreciate the texture that all the overlapping vocal parts create, you dig?

[Nase]

I was wondering who'd be the first one to make that crack...

No, but I honestly feel the same about a lot of choral music. I'm not much one for the homogeneity of timbre that you get in purely choral music, and unless the director picks some really wacky arrangements, you typically don't get much in the ways of interesting rhythm.

That said, I think you might have an easier time appreciating it if you go into it with a bit more open-mindedness, and don't really analyze or search for depth or meaning in it and instead just appreciate the texture that all the overlapping vocal parts create, you dig?

Yes.

The funny thing is once you do that, the analysis stuff comes through more naturally as well. If you have a disposition for that.

Bach didn't bang his head against a wall to do his intricate compositional number games. He was just playing around on different levels.

[Monobrow]

I find this to be a good starting point for choral/opera:

http://youtu.be/1S2NI0AIP3E <--- go through all of Requiem

[Nase]

I find this to be a good starting point for choral/opera:

http://youtu.be/1S2NI0AIP3E <--- go through all of Requiem

Awesome.

I'll share my first real encounter with choral.

http://youtu.be/OvvceL4GB6E

[Xarnax42]

I find this to be a good starting point for choral/opera:

http://youtu.be/1S2NI0AIP3E <--- go through all of Requiem

Oh, man. I have had the pleasure to perform this Mass twice. It's so incredible. The last time we performed it, our soprano on the Pie Jesu was incredible. I don't get goosebumps, but I did that day.

As for you, Avatar of Justice, Palestrina's

was one of the choir's favorite and never rotated out of our repertoire. This video may help if you read music, so you can see how it breaks down. Not sure if it's exactly this kind of polyphony that you're struggling with, but here are a couple things that might help you appreciate it:

It's incredible how much harmonic movement these composers could achieve while EVERY VOICE is singing melodic lines (although the less talented composers generally screw the altos).

Listen for call and response. Often transposed a fifth, lines are often highlighted by rythmic repetition coming a few beats/measures after the initial variation.

Some composers like Palestrina and Victoria really stuck to consonant, harmonious tones, whereas

and

play more with resolving dissonance. The former are easier to get lost in, and will probably be more rewarding for you if you listen to individual parts and how they play off each other. The latter really will be more likely to be able to capture your attention as a unified piece.

It's also possible that the song selection just isn't very good. Any examples on what you've been sitting through?

[DrumUltimA]

Yeah, I was gonna say- are you sure the problem isn't that you're just listening to bad music?

This touches on what others have said, but what we call "Classical" music represents such a grandiose collection of music that its not really fair to represent it all within the context of choral music from who knows what century. I think the biggest distinction for me between classical music and anything else that's popular to the kids these days is that you have to invest yourself in the listening process. This can be difficult for newcomers of classical music because most people aren't accustomed to "trying" to listen- most music in media, as well as pop and rock and stuff typically make everything extremely obvious. Songs are shorter to pander to theever shortening human attention span, and form typically follows a predictable and widely accepted structure. For a lot of composed within the "classical" tradition, they are writing music that they want you to listen to with the same level of attentiveness you would read a good book with. Video game music and other forms of functional or popular kueic are designed to MAKE you feel something. Classical music offers you the opportunity to feel something.

[Nase]

Yeah, I was gonna say- are you sure the problem isn't that you're just listening to bad music?

This touches on what others have said, but what we call "Classical" music represents such a grandiose collection of music that its not really fair to represent it all within the context of choral music from who knows what century. I think the biggest distinction for me between classical music and anything else that's popular to the kids these days is that you have to invest yourself in the listening process. This can be difficult for newcomers of classical music because most people aren't accustomed to "trying" to listen- most music in media, as well as pop and rock and stuff typically make everything extremely obvious. Songs are shorter to pander to theever shortening human attention span, and form typically follows a predictable and widely accepted structure. For a lot of composed within the "classical" tradition, they are writing music that they want you to listen to with the same level of attentiveness you would read a good book with. Video game music and other forms of functional or popular kueic are designed to MAKE you feel something. Classical music offers you the opportunity to feel something.

All this is true only when taking into consideration that the border between classical and pop is like the border between nations - a dividing conceptual line that is mainly good for logistics, though ultimately illusionary.

Yeah, Dr Wily!! Finally.

[Kanthos]

I said I didn't like choral music much, but thinking about it a bit more, that's not entirely true, and I do own a bit of choral music. What makes the difference for me is the instrumentation backing up the singers. I've got Wagner's Ring Cycle operas, and though I have to be in the mood for the singing, I love the orchestral parts.

Also, Carmina Burana. Avatar, I guarantee you've heard the opening song, O Fortuna, played in the background of a movie trailer somewhere; it's probably the most well-known classical piece. Oh, and I also like Beethoven's 9th Symphony which has choral accompaniment on the last movement.

I guess for me, I generally like big, interesting orchestral parts behind the singing; I'm generally not interested in hearing a bunch of singers with a piano.

[Radiowar]

im just gonna throw this out there: eleanor daley's requiem (the recording is hard to find/out of print, and the only performances on youtube are of the 4th movement). i sang in a choir that performed this work a couple years ago, so im biased towards it, but i think it is incredibly beautiful. it's somewhat "traditional" as 20th century music goes, but there are a lot of interesting harmonic and textural things going on (movements 5-8 are pretty special).