Classical Music

OhNoes

United States58 Posts

October 02 2009 07:56 GMT

At the behest of a friend, I picked up some Claude Debussy. It is spectacular. The only problem is, most of the people I know don't listen to classical music. As such, other than the super famous composers, I don't really know where to look for really good classical music.

If anybody knows of any composers that have a large body of music, great. Otherwise, one or two tracks is also appreciated.

For reference, Clair de Lune is easily my favorite song of Debussy's. So any classical music, of any movement, would be great.

zgl

United States1055 Posts

October 02 2009 07:59 GMT

On October 02 2009 16:56 OhNoes wrote:
If anybody knows of any composers that have a large body of music, great. Otherwise, one or two tracks is also appreciated.

Wagner is The Word. Check out the Der Ring des Nibelungen.

Also, Beethoven's Middle and Late String Quartets.

ArvickHero

10387 Posts

October 02 2009 08:17 GMT

Shostakovich is a particular favorite of mine, especially his eighth quartet, fifth symphony, and cello sonata. Mahler is awesome too, look up Mahler Adagietto on youtube. Suite for Strings by Foote is very nice, but it might be hard to find a recording for that. Langsamer Satz by Webern is just awesome. I really like Stravinsky and Penderecki, but those composers are modern and doesn't appeal to everyone. Mendelssohn is good too, I especially like listening and playing his Octet.

I like listening to a lot of concertos, my favorites being Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto, Mendelssohn Violin Concerto, Elgar Violin Concerto, Bach Double Violin Concerto, Sibelius Violin Concerto, Vieuxtemps Violin Concerto, Brahms Double Concerto, J.C. Bach Viola Concerto, Shostakovich Cello Concerto, Saint Saens Cello Concerto, Dvorak Cello Concerto, Lalo Cello Concerto, Elgar Cello Concerto, Schumann Cello Concerto.

Also Dance of the Elves by Popper played by Rostropovich is just spectacular, you should at least watch that.

Those are off the top of my head, trying to avoid the obvious ones I think. I can think of some more later I guess

doktorLucifer

United States855 Posts

October 02 2009 08:23 GMT

Debussy isn't Classical, just fyi.

I guess people have gotten too used grouping all of Baroque/classical/romantic/contemporary orchestral into classical(?)

Franz Liszt has some pretty interesting compositions. He arranged a few symphonies for solo piano. He was the first piano virtuoso.

+1 for Der Ring des Nibelungen.

Helene Grimaud has some interesting recordings (Credo was interessssttinnngg)

Linkage:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Hexameron
http://www.kdfc.com/ (Radio station in CA I listen to. :< )

A piece I randomly remembered that I enjoy immensely: Mendelssohn's "Die Hebrides." Amazing.

Slithe

United States985 Posts

October 02 2009 08:33 GMT

On October 02 2009 17:23 Thesecretaznman wrote:
Debussy isn't Classical, just fyi.

I guess people have gotten too used grouping all of Baroque/classical/romantic/contemporary orchestral into classical(?)

Franz Liszt has some pretty interesting compositions. He arranged a few symphonies for solo piano. He was the first piano virtuoso.

+1 for Der Ring des Nibelungen.

Helene Grimaud has some interesting recordings (Credo was interessssttinnngg)

Linkage:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Hexameron
http://www.kdfc.com/ (Radio station in CA I listen to. :< )

Dude, Debussy is classical music. You're the one getting confused here, as the word classical has two meanings. Baroque/classical/etc are the names for the different periods of music that fall under the blanket category of Classical Music.

@op, I'd recommend some Chopin. I think you'd like his Nocturnes. Chopin's ballades are really good too.

Also, Rachmaninoff is another composer you might wanna take a look at.

besiger

Croatia2452 Posts

October 02 2009 08:44 GMT

take a gander at these, ive been listening to them more or less non stop for the last few days

+ Show Spoiler +

Refrige

United States179 Posts

October 02 2009 08:52 GMT

aghhh there's just too much good classical..

OhNoes

United States58 Posts

October 02 2009 08:57 GMT

Thanks for the recommendations. This will keep me in music for the time being, but more recommendations are always welcome. My only real exposure to a lot of this music was from Rolf... not that he's that bad >.>

@thesecretaznman, I do realize he's not classical, the interbutts said he was Impressionist, but I just did the broad baroque/classical category, hence the movement comment.

Navane

Netherlands2749 Posts

October 02 2009 09:03 GMT

Satie is the one you're really looking for.

JFKWT

Singapore1442 Posts

October 02 2009 09:17 GMT

#10

If you like complex harmonies perhaps Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms might suit your tastes

For "simpler" music maybe Haydn, Vivaldi

For more passionate music the late romantic/patriotic periods might be interesting e.g. Tchaik, Rachmaninov, Shost (Russian) (dissonant tho, he was abit crazy imho), Dvorak/Smetana (Czech)

I like Sibelius (Finnish, think tundras and winter), Schumann (German)

There are a bunch of modern pieces with unconventional directions like symphony for 100 metronomes and 4:33 (the famous silent piece).

Vocal music im not too sure. Operas <- Puccini, other Italian composers.

Btw Debussy has a string quartet that I'm partial too, as well as the Arabesque (solo piano). Clair de Lune is great too as it appeals casual listeners as well (compared to Mahler,Stravinsky and such)

Spinfusor

Australia410 Posts

October 02 2009 09:47 GMT

#11

http://www.classical.net/music/rep/lists/med.php

As good a list as I've ever seen.

You might as well take a look at some other Debussy starting with the the Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune, La Mer, and first book of Preludes. I can upload/link you to good recordings if you're interested.

d3_crescentia

United States4054 Posts

October 02 2009 10:01 GMT

#12

If you liked Clair de Lune, try the rest of Suite Bergamasque by Debussy. I've recently learned how to play Clair de Lune and now I'm working on the Prelude.

Also, if you're into more Romantic-era stuff, try some Liszt. I'm afraid my knowledge is quite limited since most of Liszt's work is for much much more advanced pianists than I am, but I know that most of what I've listened to of his was really awesome.

searcher

277 Posts

October 02 2009 10:11 GMT

#13

I think a lot of the above posters are recommending whatever they happen to like at the moment and instead something a beginner is more likely to appreciate.

Unless you are as talented as Mozart it is unlikely that Wagner, Beethoven's late string quartets, Satie, and anything written in the 20th century is worth getting into when you start, despite the fact that a lot of it is brilliant.

If you want to take classical seriously realize that in addition to the melodic component to music, which is by and large what appeals to people who listen to contemporary music, there is depth and substance which is far more essential to the experience. It is easy to enjoy Debussy from the beginning because there is that melodic component, but it is hard to take Debussy seriously as a beginner because the real depth and substance to his music is not something that can be grasped without refernce to earlier works.

So go for something easier. You can easily jeopardize your future enjoyment of classical by only sticking to showpieces and the like however, which is virtually everything that Refrige has recommended. They are mostly exciting for their melody and virtuosity and not much else.

Personally I think what will make sense for you are pieces that have both the melodic component to anchor your interest, but a depth to them that additional listening can build upon. In that vein you have stuff like Bach's Double Violin Concerto, Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto, the Mozart symphonies (40,41,25,29,31,35,36,38 are my favourites), Beethoven's No.5 (you will like the first movement easily, but soon learn that everything else, especially the second movement, are ingenious). From there you can branch into most of Tchaikovsky's and Mozart's works, begin a journey into Bach perhaps (the longest journey you will ever make in music), and try out the other Beethoven symphonies and piano sonatas.

I wouldn't recommend starting with opera because it gives you the bad habit of only listening to the arias and "good bits" and not finding the more valuable movements.

I could write a whole lot more about how to enjoy classical having studied it and helped friends get into it but this post has already gone on too long. As a final rule of thumb, you can only really enjoy every facet of a piece if you have memorized it. Remember this before you discard the third movement of Beethoven's 8th as "boring" or something. Melodies are so much longer in classical music that you have to listen to them many more times to make sense of them. Imagine if you read a poem where each sentence was many pages long - without reading it several times and memorizing it to the point you can have the whole thing in your head at once, you won't be able to understand it.

genryou

Malaysia390 Posts

October 02 2009 10:13 GMT

#14

I recommend:

- Beethoven: Symphony No. 7, Opus 92 (Opening)
-Rachmaninoff: Piano Concerto No. 3 Op. 30, 1st movement
-Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue (arranged by Hattori Takayuki)

or

just get it here:

Nodame Cantabile Special
Nodame Cantabile BEST 100

Spinfusor

Australia410 Posts

October 02 2009 10:26 GMT

#15

Hmm advice that reminds me of Aaron Copland's book (particularly that part about memorizing pieces).

I really wouldn't start with Mozart though. I found his works harder than late Beethoven and even Ligeti for that matter. I'd also consider taking the Mendelssohn concerto over the Tchaikovsky since it's a better balanced work even if it doesn't lead in to other repetoire quite as well.

I disagree about the Debussy part too. I don't think harmony is as abstract as, say, form. It's like saying you shouldn't listen to Bach until you gone over Josquin.

EDIT: re searcher

nepeta

1872 Posts

October 02 2009 10:29 GMT

#16

The human voice:

searcher

277 Posts

October 02 2009 10:35 GMT

#17

I agree harmony is not an abstract part of the experience, but it is a lot more insightful when you listen to Debussy's harmony with a foundation in the baroque and classical perspectives on harmony. The novelty of it is almost startling. In a sense it is like learning the history of the Starcraft metagame from the beginning, when the competitive scene had just begun. Then you come to 2007 and the Bisu build is so refreshing and new it seems all the more amazing, whereas if you had studied the metagame through Liquipedia you would have less appreciation for its ingenuity and perhaps less of an idea of why it was developed and how it compares to what Protoss had been doing against Zerg until then.

evanthebouncy!

United States12796 Posts

October 02 2009 11:05 GMT

#18

bach
bach
bach

oh my god the fugues and the BWVs and counter points and jIZZ JIZZ!!! so good.
pick it up

dekuschrub

United States2069 Posts

October 02 2009 11:10 GMT

#19

some yummy stuff in this thread.

im a big fan of Barber's adagio for strings.

Also some corelli in your life never hurt anything.

Also mozart. symph 29... lots of his are amazing though.

kaleidoscope

Singapore2887 Posts

October 02 2009 11:16 GMT

#20

Liszt, Chopin, Rachmaninov, Grieg, Hadyn, Enrique Granados, Godowsky, Schumann, Tchaikovsky, Ravel, Mendelssohn

Edward Elgar, Gershwin

1 2 Next All

Please or register to reply.

Classical Music

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming