[Claritas]

It's not as if I found Brahms' 2d Piano Concerto easy to understand the very first time I heard it, but as the old man said, "Give it time." Modern works aren't necessarily harder to understand, once one becomes accustomed to the idiom. Maybe they're just harder to like.

 

[Mambosenior]

The new Renaissance...it ain't. (Maybe for gadgets that keep us awake 24-hours daily and can also be accessed for useless data during those now-considered interminable 20-minute Haydn Symphonies?)

 

[LugBug1]

It's not as if I found Brahms' 2d Piano Concerto easy to understand the very first time I heard it, but as the old man said, "Give it time." Modern works aren't necessarily harder to understand, once one becomes accustomed to the idiom. Maybe they're just harder to like.

I think you may have a very valid point there my friend. 
 
I've had nights where I've listened to nothing but Birtwistle for instance (my fave living composer)and my head is banging by the end haha.. I'll then put a Chopin piece on while I have a night cap... And its like slipping into a nice warm bath hahhhh isn't that nice! But, If I'd listened to Chopin all night instead I'd probably have a sickly feeling of too much ice cream. If you know what I mean  
 
But yes the atonal/serialist works, especially with the stark contrasts to normal melody are not easy to grasp. But what comes with this is a whole new world of sounds and emotions. Abstract, in that we aren't familiar with the feelings stirred. After a while however it all becomes music. I don't really hear the atonal parts of modern composers anymore. But I get taken to places that Mozart can't. 

 

[bigshot]

There are some places I don't want to go even if I understand them.

 

[Mambosenior]

Birtwistle, among other composers, has had wonderful advocacy from world-class conductors and orchestras who have given his works great performances. Decca's commitment, in particular, is to be recognized. But, the British have consistently supported their composers in spectacular fashion: Would an American Tippett have received two complete symphony cycles by world-class orchestras--including the premiere recording of the 4th with Solti and the CSO? I am very thankful to Gerard Schwarz and Seattle SO for their continued commitment to mid-20th-century composers like Piston, Diamond, Hanson, etc.. Bernstein and Slatkin (in St. Louis--he's now busy doing a Rachmaninov cycle because there's such a desperate need for the Detroit Symphony's take on those under-recoded scores) were also contributors to the American cause.

Boulez, Sinopoli (RIP), Chailly, Rattle, Knussen, Bamert, the sensational BBC orchestras, and a few others have recorded definitive performances of many mostly-European contemporary scores. Who would have imagined back when Ozawa first recorded it in Toronto, that there would be, at least, 10 Turangalila Symphony recordings to choose from now. I am afraid, though, that those commitments by record companies may be past except for the radio orchestras in smaller European cities, like those recorded by CPO and Hannsler.

Mercifully, I own a lot of music already. The future doesn't pose a problem to my listening preferences. As you know, even dear Chopin has his gnarly scores (Polonaise-fantasie, the late Mazurkas). He was pushing the tonality envelope of his time.

 

[LugBug1]

  There are some places I don't want to go even if I understand them.

I need a constant change/challenge.. Not necessarily to conquer works... But more a need for new experience. I must stress that I also get this through listening to classics that I haven't heard in a long time as well (as going back to works that you already know can sound dramatically different as your life changes I find) but the completely 'new' or 'different' element is always stimulating for me personally. We have our comfort music no doubt, but with classical music we are able to tune into feelings and emotions that we really wouldn't ever normally. It's thrilling for me at least. I've never been to war and don't want to, but Vaughan Williams for e.g depicts a very revealing image that I can imagine in my mind and in the safety of my home. It's all art  

 

[LugBug1]

Birtwistle, among other composers, has had wonderful advocacy from world-class conductors and orchestras who have given his works great performances. Decca's commitment, in particular, is to be recognized. But, the British have consistently supported their composers in spectacular fashion: Would an American Tippett have received two complete symphony cycles by world-class orchestras--including the premiere recording of the 4th with Solti and the CSO? I am very thankful to Gerard Schwarz and Seattle SO for their continued commitment to mid-20th-century composers like Piston, Diamond, Hanson, etc.. Bernstein and Slatkin (in St. Louis--he's now busy doing a Rachmaninov cycle because there's such a desperate need for the Detroit Symphony's take on those under-recoded scores) were also contributors to the American cause.

Boulez, Sinopoli (RIP), Chailly, Rattle, Knussen, Bamert, the sensational BBC orchestras, and a few others have recorded definitive performances of many mostly-European contemporary scores. Who would have imagined back when Ozawa first recorded it in Toronto, that there would be, at least, 10 Turangalila Symphony recordings to choose from now. I am afraid, though, that those commitments by record companies may be past except for the radio orchestras in smaller European cities, like those recorded by CPO and Hannsler.

Mercifully, I own a lot of music already. The future doesn't pose a problem to my listening preferences. As you know, even dear Chopin has his gnarly scores (Polonaise-fantasie, the late Mazurkas). He was pushing the tonality envelope of his time.

Great post and yes unfortunately a true comment. Also, I am constantly surprised about the advocacy of Birtwistle when there are so many more approachable contemporary composers out there (pretty much all of them!). But he does seem to sell well. I buy into it    

 

[LugBug1]

My night cap....
 

 
And worthy of this great thread. 

 

[Claritas]

I was very pleasantly surprised by his Chopin recital. He took slow tempi, showing real confidence in his ability to pull it off. Somewhat cerebral, somewhat emotional: unexpectedly authoritative.

 

[Mambosenior]

There are some places I don't want to go even if I understand them.

Good judgement. Wish I'd had some. I understood the altar but went there, nevertheless.

 

[perhapss]

Back in the mid-seventies I heard Wozzeck at the MET--conducted by Levine with a stellar cast--and it was pretty empty as well. It was a memorable performance but dodecaphonic music, even today, falls hard on most people's ears. I never understood how we could arrive into the 21st century with "even less" aptitude for scores that are now 100-years-old. Hell, the late Beethoven Quartets (particularly the "Grosse Fuge") are as difficult to grasp in only one listening session.

(Hey, but...how about that Enya! Is it true that she is Yawnni [sic] in drag?)

Kidding here! No new-agers need get up in arms.

 
The problem with "dodecaphonic" music (generally) is that it wasn't written by Schoenberg, Berg or Webern.
If it was written by those guys then it can change 50 years of composers who tried to emulate it's methods.
In fact that's exactly what happened. It's easy now to forget the huge influence their music had on 20th century composers, especially in the 1950's to 70's.
Of course one may disagree with the validity, and near religious zeal, to which the 12 tone method was adopted by many composers(especially in the academic community) but the influence was real. Even Stravinsky himself fell under the spell.
 
Certainly these guys were not pop stars but they were famous, known and sometimes respected in certain circles.
 
Don't forget that Wozzeck was a  succesful  work in it's day.
 
Unfortunately, MANY composers adopt a methodology which is supposed to define them.Often they suffer from a lack of original thought and take on a "serious" technique or whatever.
 
This methodology could be serialism, minimalism, spectralism or whatever. Often these composers, after their music is rejected by the public, blame the public for their lack of intellectual sympathy with their methods(however original or unoriginal).The fact is, a lot of composers just don't write very compelling music.Despite the  lack of support form the general community toward advanced music, many radical composers with something to say(for example Lachenmann, Birtwistle, Rihm or the late Ligeti or Carter) found an audience and actually make/made a living with their work.
 
Expecting the general public to adopt these tastes is a waste of time and why should they?
 
Personally, I believe that when a composer has something important to say and the perseverance of will to keep going, they will find a meaningful reception for their work.
Hopefully they don't expect the reception of a pop star however.
 
And for the modern music lovers who complain about the lack of performance oppurtunities who complain about the lack of performance possibilities I say: Despite the obvious neglect from most "major" orchestras, there are today very capable and dedicated ensembles(Ensemble Modern, Ensemble Intercontemporain, Kronos Quartet, Arditti Quartet , Bang On a Can etc...) that are fully commited  to great performances of new and challenging music.They often sell out performances as well.......

 

[perhapss]

  There are some places I don't want to go even if I understand them.

 
There are places one can't understand without going.

 

[bigshot]

Been there. Came home again.

 

[Mambosenior]

The problem with "dodecaphonic" music (generally) is that it wasn't written by Schoenberg, Berg or Webern.
If it was written by those guys then it can change 50 years of composers who tried to emulate it's methods.
In fact that's exactly what happened. It's easy now to forget the huge influence their music had on 20th century composers, especially in the 1950's to 70's.
Of course one may disagree with the validity, and near religious zeal, to which the 12 tone method was adopted by many composers(especially in the academic community) but the influence was real. Even Stravinsky himself fell under the spell.

Certainly these guys were not pop stars but they were famous, known and sometimes respected in certain circles.

Don't forget that Wozzeck was a  succesful  work in it's day.

Unfortunately, MANY composers adopt a methodology which is supposed to define them.Often they suffer from a lack of original thought and take on a "serious" technique or whatever.

This methodology could be serialism, minimalism, spectralism or whatever. Often these composers, after their music is rejected by the public, blame the public for their lack of intellectual sympathy with their methods(however original or unoriginal).The fact is, a lot of composers just don't write very compelling music.Despite the  lack of support form the general community toward advanced music, many radical composers with something to say(for example Lachenmann, Birtwistle, Rihm or the late Ligeti or Carter) found an audience and actually make/made a living with their work.

Expecting the general public to adopt these tastes is a waste of time and why should they?

Personally, I believe that when a composer has something important to say and the perseverance of will to keep going, they will find a meaningful reception for their work.
Hopefully they don't expect the reception of a pop star however.

And for the modern music lovers who complain about the lack of performance oppurtunities who complain about the lack of performance possibilities I say: Despite the obvious neglect from most "major" orchestras, there are today very capable and dedicated ensembles(Ensemble Modern, Ensemble Intercontemporain, Kronos Quartet, Arditti Quartet , Bang On a Can etc...) that are fully commited  to great performances of new and challenging music.They often sell out performances as well.......

I don't disagree with anything you write. There are hack composers to be found, in multitude, in every musical epoch dating back to the Greeks. The Twelve-tone technique was Schoenberg's contribution to the musical landscape even though examples of atonality can be found in music much earlier. He and a few others created works that have endured using this system of composition. That many lesser-inspired minds found nothing in the system other than dutifully following a formula was to be expected. The Baroque, Classical and Romantic eras are filled with similar graveyards of uninspired thought...in music as well as the other arts.

The post above regarding my surprise of a half-empty house for Wozzeck...at the MET...in NYC...performed by recognized artists...was not meant to castigate the "general public" for their lack of taste (Schoenberg was well aware during his life that he was poison at the box-office), I just didn't expect it THERE! By the way, after living there for years I quickly learned that audiences in NYC were more apt to attend "well-publicized" events but voted with their feet if the music wasn't to their liking. There was a review in one of the city papers (can't remember which) that described the concert by the visiting St. Louis Symphony, performing Messiaen's Turangalila Symphony at Carnegie Hall, as having more people on the stage than remained in the audience by the end of the originally "sold out" concert. Other sure-fire exits from Avery Fischer Hall were the times Boulez (then conductor of the NYP) would program "esoteric" and hard-to-stomach fare like Ravel's "Daphnis and Chloe" or, heavens forbid, any of "that nasty Bartok person" (quote from lady in front of me as Pollini was performing the First Piano Concerto with NYP and Boulez).

You mentioned Stravinsky's foray, late in life, into dodecaphonic scores. True, but how many of them have you heard live and with what frequency? Except for the three early ballets and a sprinkle of his neo-classical things...nothing else gets performed except by niche groups. But give me a break, the Symphony of Psalms is really that daunting for "general public" consumption? The rest of his sizable canon of works, thankfully, lives mostly in recordings. (Maybe that's just the way it's supposed to be.)

Please don't misunderstand my expressions as anything more than just...surprise!

I'll go away now. Sorry for crashing the party.

 

[LugBug1]

I was very pleasantly surprised by his Chopin recital. He took slow tempi, showing real confidence in his ability to pull it off. Somewhat cerebral, somewhat emotional: unexpectedly authoritative.

I've only recently came across him, I need to check out his Chopin next thanks
 
 
Some great reading with my morning coffee guys. 
 
(Mambosenior you are certainly not crashing the party! I love your posts.)