 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
211.27.170.252
In Reply to: Why is it a surprise posted by castironandtubes on April 2, 2007 at 06:59:27:
You said "But if Bach and Beethoven are "aural wallpaper" to you, I'm less inclined to check out your recommendations already..."Well, what I said was "…lots of nineteenth century aural wallpaper…". The last time I looked, Bach was 18th century and while Beethoven managed to make it into the 19th century, I didn't suggest all of the 19th century was "aural wallpaper".
You asked: "Would you really rate your recommendations as the five most important pieces of music in history? "
Well, no I wouldn't but let's go back to the original post which said (exact quote):
"I'm finding it hard to choose good classical CD recordings with all the various performances and vintages available. Would anyone be able to recommend 5 superb sounding, well played CDs? I'm thinking the more popular symphonies or concertos from Mozart, Beethoven etc. as a place to start. "
So, a person finding hard to choose good recordings with the variety of performances and VINTAGES available. Should I interpret "vintage" as referring exclusively to old recordings (no one else has) or to the various periods of classical music which does include the contemporary period. What I did was list 5 good to superb sounding, well played discs from one period that everyone else was largely overlooking. I also commented that nothing in my selection was "too prickly or aggressive, and some of it is downright sweet". I tried to pick pieces that I thought someone who enjoyed Mozart and Beethoven might find approachable and perhaps, even, enjoyable.
Note also that the original request was not for "the five most important pieces of music in history" but rather simply for "5 superb sounding, well played CDs" with no mention of how important the music had to be.
My reply was a genuine and relevant response to the actual question asked, adding some suggestions for good to superb sounding, well played discs from a "vintage" that had to then been largely ignored by other posters.
I see that while you're prepared to attack my response and misrepresent what I said, you haven't been prepared to make any suggestions of your own. Come back and have another go at me after you've made an response to the original request. Let's see what you think are some good discs to throw into the list of suggestions.
David Aiken
Follow Ups:
'Well, no I wouldn't but let's go back to the original post which said (exact quote):"I'm finding it hard to choose good classical CD recordings with all the various performances and vintages available. Would anyone be able to recommend 5 superb sounding, well played CDs? I'm thinking the more popular symphonies or concertos from Mozart, Beethoven etc. as a place to start. "'
Except you forgot the title of the thread which was "Recommend 5 *TOP* classical recordings" so I don't think it's such a stretch to figure that he wants suggestions of what people would consider their "top 5" or "5 top" if you want to be literal.
Yes he said recording not piece of music, but it shouldn't be a surprise that for many they are not far apart.
So what is 19th century aural wallpaper? Brahms? Tchaikovsky? Wagner?
If I'm supposed to answer your "challenge", presumably to clear my name from the accusation of being unable to adequately name five good recordings/pieces of music, I'll pass thanks and go on living in shame. We should have another thread that rates the top 5 recommendations of top 5, and see who wins... fun.
My point is that you chose an awfully strange thread to make a big deal about 20th century music, and the fact that other people didn't name any in their "5 top" is no reflection of their relative awareness of it.
Dave
Well, the thread was about top recordings, not top music, and I for one do make some big distinctions between the two. You may have a point about the poster seeking other's "top" choices, but he also said that he was thinking of the more popular symphonies or concertos from Mozart and Beethoven as a starting point so rather than choosing my top 5, I tried to select some music from an area that wasn't getting much representation and which might appeal to someone who liked Mozart and Beethoven. A little variety is nice and others were covering the standard reportoire quite well. I felt no need to duplicate or add to recommendations in that area but I thought it worth while to offer a few choices from a different period, a period which I think does not receive the attention and recognition it deserves.I did try to suggest works that might appeal to someone with the tastes he mentioned rather than suggesting recordings I loved that would likely leave him cold. Part of the reason for that is simply that I don't like using taste as a base for classifying things as "top". Everyone does have individual tastes and one person's top 5 can easily be another's "not even also rans". I wasn't interested in trying to say that these are "the top 5 recordings and you have to have and appreciate them". I was interested in saying "here are 5 great recordings from a period that isn't getting much attention in the responses you're getting, and which I think could appeal to someone who likes Mozart and Beethoven".
"…the fact that other people didn't name any in their "5 top" is no reflection of their relative awareness of it."
I did not criticise any poster as being unaware of the late 20th century. I made the observation that it was not well represented in the recommendations others had made, and that I thought ignoring this period was detrimental to the health of classical music as a tradition. I made no criticism of other posters or any attack on their tastes. They chose to give choices that they thought would suit someone who liked Mozart and Beethoven and so did I. I simply stepped a little further away from those 2 composers and avoided duplicating the recommendations of others whilst making an observation about why I thought concentrating on the works of past composers to the exclusion of contemporary ones was detrimental to classical music.
There are going to be a lot of recommendations made in response to the original request, and the poster is not going to race out and buy them all. I certainly wouldn't suggest that he race out and buy all 5 of mine. I would like to see him consider the purchase of at least one 20th or 21st century work in his choices (not necessarily including one of my recommendations), and also some music from the renaissance, baroque, and classical (mostly before 1800 AD) periods as well. I'd love to see others join in with selections from those periods that they think are well recorded, and which would add a bit more variety to the general run of recommendations. There's an awful lot of music in the classical tradition and the late 18th to early 20th century tends to get a disproportionate amount of attention in many ways.
As to what constitutes aural wallpaper, I'd respond that it largely falls into 3 categories. The first is great music that gets played far too often so that it loses its freshness and appeal for the listener. Beethoven's 5th Symphony has probably qualified for a long time now. Back in the 60's or 70's when the film "Elvira Madigan" came out, Mozart's 21st Piano Concerto definitely qualified for a decade or more. Thankfully it is heard much less often these days, and I appreciate it much more as a result. There's nothing wrong with such music, it is genuinely great music, but it can be destroyed and reduced to cliché status by being played too often. The second category is less than great music that gets too much attention for some reason or another. Lots of Mozart got there during his 250th anniversary year. All of Mozart's music is at least good, and a lot of it is great, but Mozart became wallpaper for me that year because of the fact that my local radio station embarked on a "let's play everything he wrote, and play it as often as we can" campaign which resulted in a lot of less than great Mozart being played in preference to playing some great music from other composers. The third category is that of music which simply does not engage the listener making the judgement. Everyone has their own choices here and I see no reason to identify mine since the 'problem' if you want to call it that is not so much the composer or the music but simply the fact that it does not suit my taste.
So, for me the term "aural wallpaper" is not necessarily a criticism of the music but, more importantly, a criticism of the way in which a lot of good music is abused by excessive exposure. Listening to other music can open new horizons, but it also has the virtue of 'cleaning the ears' and allowing one to appreciate the standard reportoire again, even being able to appreciate it more deeply than previously simply because one's experience has grown and returning to a work which had previously become overly familiar and boring with a bit of new experience under the belt can allow you to find new things in the work, things that could not be found if one did not also listen to other music as well.
David Aiken
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
