| Blogs > OhNoes |
|
OhNoes
United States58 Posts
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
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
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
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
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
+ Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Refrige
United States179 Posts
aghhh there's just too much good classical.. | ||
|
OhNoes
United States58 Posts
@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
Netherlands2757 Posts
| ||
|
JFKWT
Singapore1442 Posts
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
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
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
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
- 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
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
| ||
|
searcher
277 Posts
| ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
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
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
Edward Elgar, Gershwin | ||
|
vAltyR
United States581 Posts
Orchestral music: Shostakovich - symphonies 5, 9 and 10 Beethoven - 9th symphony is great, 5th is good but overplayed, the rest is pretty good too Holst - The Planets Brahms has some good stuff, but I'm only somewhat familiar with his symphonies. Ravel - Bolero Respighi - Pines of Rome Mussorgsky - Pictures at an Exhibition Richard Strauss - Also Sprach Zarathustra, Till Eulenspiegle's Lustige Streiche Rimsky-Korsakov - Scheherezade Mahler - 5th is excellent, don't know the rest well enough to comment Clarinet Specific music: Weber concertos + quintet Saint-Saens sonata Mozart concerto Hindemith concerto, sonata, quintet Copland Concerto Bernstein sonata Rossini Introduction, theme and variations Ponchielli - Il Convegno (clarinet duet + piano) Brahms Sonatas *whew* I have more I could recommend, but I need to go to class. I'll reply when I get home and can go through my stack of CDs | ||
|
exalted
United States3612 Posts
| ||
|
mrgerry
United States1508 Posts
| ||
|
Chromyne
Canada561 Posts
Some pieces I have enjoyed so far (you'll never know until you give them a listen!): Op. 39: Piano Sonata No. 1 "Sonata-Fantasy" for piano Op. 40: Eight Concert Etudes for piano Op. 41: Variations for piano Op. 45: "Motive Force" for piano Op. 46: "Big Band Sounds (The Sounds of Big-Band)" for piano Op. 58: Andante for piano Op. 86: Trio for flute, cello and piano Op. 105: Concert for violin, piano and string orchestra You can find some of his works over the internet, and you/anyone can always PM me if you can't find it/like it. He's still composing to this day. Long live Kapustin! </shamelesspromotion> | ||
|
SonuvBob
Aiur21550 Posts
| ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21245 Posts
On October 02 2009 18:17 JFKWT wrote: 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) Shostakovich is not considered part of the romanticism movement. In fact he's very far from it. | ||
|
VorcePA
United States1102 Posts
Russian Easter Overture Russian Sailor's Dance Zirguernerweisen | ||
|
phosphorylation
United States2935 Posts
| ||
|
Triple7
United States656 Posts
| ||
|
Refrige
United States179 Posts
On October 03 2009 10:53 phosphorylation wrote: Yeah, the enthusiastic responses are great but they are not always so considerate for the beginning listener. I second SonuvBob's suggestion; searcher's post is some great advice. But, I disagree that you should shy away from showpieces; even the showiest of the classical repertoire has enough substance to warrant listening to. And it will certianly make you more likely to be hooked to the genre. yes showpieces ftw  it's difficult to get into the deeper pieces at first.. | ||
|
JFKWT
Singapore1442 Posts
On October 03 2009 09:51 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Shostakovich is not considered part of the romanticism movement. In fact he's very far from it. Thanks for the rectification, shos is more into the 20th century but the influence of Tchaik can still be clearly seen in the early 20th century Russian composer imho | ||
|
Sky
Jordan812 Posts
| ||
|
OpticalShot
Canada6330 Posts
If you liked Clair de Lune, maybe you've tried Arabesque (#1, in E+). Both are people's favourites, and they aren't too technically challenging, making them more popular amongst budding pianists and such. Next steps - I'm actually recommending something! lol. - next steps, I'd say, may go like: 1) More abstraction -> Maurice Ravel. His pieces are of similar nature to Debussy's, but they are more technically challenging (jeux d'eux, or Water Games, recommended) and slightly more abstract in general. If you like the technical virtuosity, Rachmaninoff next!! 2) More romantic -> you've already sensed it, it's time to enter the Romantic period. Since you started at Debussy, I'd do the Romantic period from the back (no pun intended!) so that means Richard Wagner's famous Ring Cycle (few excerpts should do, but the whole thing is pure epic), Hector Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique (movements 4 and 5 recommended), and some of Liszt's later pieces. Ok, Berlioz wasn't so "back" of Romantic period, but his symphony is definitely awesome. Enjoy! P.S. I don't think anyone's mentioned this yet - Richard Strauss's piano accompaniment for Lord Tennyson's "Enoch Arden" is quite an epic. Enoch Arden is a long long poem story thingy, and Strauss basically added a bunch of picturesque music to accompany it. It's about 20 minutes of recitation+piano, 20 minutes of pure recitation. Definitely the best if you like romantic poetry and music together. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games Grubby2517 FrodaN1971 singsing1173 Liquid`RaSZi1111 Beastyqt791 Mlord705 JimRising  518Lowko424 PiGStarcraft406 IndyStarCraft  245TKL  229Hui .150 XaKoH  105UpATreeSC78 JuggernautJason71 XcaliburYe35 Nathanias33 |
|
OSC
WardiTV Weekly
The Patches Monday
Sparkling Tuna Cup
PiG Sty Festival
PiGosaur Cup
Replay Cast
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
