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

Netherlands2748 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

vAltyR

United States581 Posts

October 02 2009 14:10 GMT

#21

Hahaha, yay classical music! I was a clarinet performance major for a year, before realizing I didn't want to practice 8 hours a day for the rest of my life, but I still listen to orchestral music a lot.

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

October 02 2009 14:12 GMT

#22

my contribution:

mrgerry

United States1508 Posts

October 02 2009 14:45 GMT

#23

His facial expressions while playing that made me cringe -__-

Chromyne

Canada561 Posts

October 02 2009 15:20 GMT

#24

If you like jazz, I would recommend the contemporary composer Nikolai Kapustin *points to signature* Being considered both a piano virtuoso and a talent jazz pianist, he composes classical pieces infused with jazz idioms. I have been listening to him for the past 1 1/2 years and he never ceases to amaze me. Some will definitely find some of his works too busy or involved but I love the flurry of ideas and the directions he takes with them!

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

Aiur21549 Posts

October 02 2009 21:35 GMT

#25

If you get overwhelmed by the sheer number of recommendations here, just stick to searcher's posts for now. His advice is great if you're new to classical music.

Carnivorous Sheep

Baa?21242 Posts

October 03 2009 00:51 GMT

#26

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

October 03 2009 01:41 GMT

#27

Dvorak's 8th Symphony
Russian Easter Overture
Russian Sailor's Dance
Zirguernerweisen

phosphorylation

United States2935 Posts

October 03 2009 01:53 GMT

#28

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.

Triple7

United States656 Posts

October 03 2009 02:50 GMT

#29

One of my favorite songs ever:

Refrige

United States179 Posts

October 03 2009 03:11 GMT

#30

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

October 03 2009 05:07 GMT

#31

On October 03 2009 09:51 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:

Show nested quote +

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

October 03 2009 06:04 GMT

#32

Would anyone happen to know pieces that are in the same vein of Rachmaninoff's first movement of his second concerto?

OpticalShot

Canada6330 Posts

October 15 2009 01:41 GMT

#33

There's enough recommendations above for at least a few months of listening, so I don't think I'll be listening any of my favourites here~ (I mean, they've been mentioned already above somewhere).

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.

Normal

Please or register to reply.

Classical Music

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming