|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
124.177.41.18
In Reply to: My First Opera posted by Karma16 on April 22, 2007 at 08:17:31:
.... be prepared to persevere a little more. Yes, opera can be boring and it is important -* to be in a receptive mood
* to overlook the absudities in many plots
* to listen quite a few times (and this applies to many classical pieces)
* to find artists whose voices you like
* to listen to recordings that are recognised as being good artistically, and at least listenable technicallyNow that is quite a list of conditions so it is unsurprising that opera does not appeal to a lot of people. And try to avoid being hung up either for or against a particular composer. There is NO composer who has not composed works of mediocre appeal just as very few artists have always produced great recordings (add in the vagaries of microphone positioning, hall acoustics, producer & engineering skills and you have another set of hurdles).
So yes, not all Mozart is spine chilling, but, given the right circumstances (and that might not be a live performance either) then Mozart's music can spell magic. And do not expect all of the opera to be engrossing. It has its highlights just as any music has. And the beauty of great music is that familiarity does not breed contempt. Greater familiarity reveals greater insight to the music.
Bottom line to many of us is that opera is the ultimate expression of music. But you have to be in the mood, ..... and try a few of the excellent DVDs available (if you have decent sound attached to your TV) because the video can add immeasurably to enjoyment. Of course poor quality audio or video can have the opposite effect and that is why the audio system here is attached to the video.
John
Do not criticise the idiots in this world - we need them as they make the rest of us look so much better :-)
Follow Ups:
HI John,
Thanks for your thoughtful and gentle reply. I have a question for you.In the modern world we have the luxury of listening or watching a composition as many times as we wish. But prior to recorded music, one might see or hear a piece once, only once in a lifetime. So how would one study a piece over and over again to understand its wonder? I do not think that is realistic in the "old" times.
Rather, the piece must make its impression the first time or not at all. True, the musicologist might read the sheet music, study its intricacies, and be amazed at its craft. But was that the experience of the ticket buying public? I don't think so. The only thing that matters is the first impression.
So, from my point of view, if a piece does not impact me the first time I must wonder if it is really worth anything to me. I do grant that modern ears must acclimate to stylistic differences caused by time. Because of this I am willing to be a little patient with myself and the music. But eventually, I either like it or leave it behind. As was said below, life really is too short.
One more thing. I hold the view that the quality of the performance, within reason (underline this), does not make or break the composition. I love a great singer or orchestra or soloist as much as anyone. I do think that subtleties can improve the listening experience. But I think great music can be made by more humble performers. Music critics (I hate critics) will nit pick the most inconsequential things and pronounce a performance dreck.
Well, I feel that most of this babble is just not important and the composition, if good, will survive less than perfect performances. And what is perfect? Critics very often pan a performance if the composer conducts. What? Does this make sense? Who knows the intent of the music better than the composer? Makes no sense to me.
Well Sparky, I guess we can only agree to disagree about this. But I do feel you are depriving yourself of a heap of musical experiences and pleasures by adopting this mantra. For sure, there are some works that we all find too much work to persevere with so give up on them, probably too early.My experience over 6 decades of listening to music is that many (not all) musical items of immediate attraction become very boring on repeated listening, mainly because they, like the pop culture music around now, are shallow.
But, as stated before, music appreciation is very subjective so what appeals to one person may not appeal to another. It would be a very boring world if we all had identical tastes. However I do urge you to be more open minded and be prepared to give works that most people enjoy (but you do not at the moment) a second or third audition.
We are in a far better situation than those pre recording era music lovers who only had concerts as their musical source. We are in a position to be able to gain deeper appreciation through recordings works that previously only artists were familiar with. To not take advantage of the power of recordings for further emjoyment of unfamiliar works which do not immediately appeal to you (but do appeal to others) is a lost opportunity.
John
Do not criticise the idiots in this world - we need them as they make the rest of us look so much better :-)
"But prior to recorded music, one might see or hear a piece once, only once in a lifetime. So how would one study a piece over and over again to understand its wonder?"Those who wanted to, or needed to, used one or two piano reductions.
"So, from my point of view, if a piece does not impact me the first time I must wonder if it is really worth anything to me. I do grant that modern ears must acclimate to stylistic differences caused by time. Because of this I am willing to be a little patient with myself and the music. But eventually, I either like it or leave it behind. As was said below, life really is too short."
You're right, but I can't tell you how many times I revisited a piece--at my own pace and perogative--and suddenly it made sense. Why? I don't know. I believe many or most at the premiere of Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake or Sleeping Beauty didn't like it at all, and it seems pretty easy to "get" and enjoy to me. I hope that they gave it a try again someday. After years of revisiting, I've "left behind" Messian, Ives, and most Haydn. Oh, and how 'bout the reverse-- music that I liked the first time but don't like (I get bored with) now? Sadly, very sadly, Shostakovich is falling into that category.
that immediately appeals to YOU based on your taste. With apologies, you are not well equipped for the rest of what Classical music has to offer. The strengths of the art are complex, subtle, not always about "excitement" or even "beauty" and are certainly not for everyone. Many folks simply cannot get into Classical music, and never will. You most certainly have a "preconceived" definition of what "good" is in Classical music. It's YOUR definition, so by all means stick with it. As you can see from this thread, however, it is not a perspective that plays well with knowledgeable fans.
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: