[extrabigmehdi]

. It doesn't take a lot of thought to realize why. Audiences hate it. Musicians generally find it unfulfilling to play. Composers from 1950 and on wrote music that is unintelligible to the human brain. They did more math than music.

I think you  shouldn't underestimate the impact of western culture  on your tastes. I wouldn't be surprised, if for instance  you hate  Gamelan music, while Indonesians would like it.
If you look at the reviews of soundtrack at filmtracks.com , they often give a bad rating to anything that doesn't sound like a traditional orchestral work (solaris, inception, the social network ...)

 

[bigshot]

I like Gamelan music, but I don't think it's great when it's recorded. It is more of an experience thing than a recorded and written down musical thing. That sets it apart from Western classical music, and recorded music in general.

 

[eyeresist]

Well to be fair, the standard canon is always going to cater for the masses. That's why the X-Men film's fill the box office too. (did you go?) It was 70 years after JS Bach died that lots of people first started enjoying his music.... Another 50 before it got accepted into any standard repertoire.

The time lag before Bach entered the canon was not because his music was "difficult" (as I understand it, JSB's music was in his time actually regarded as somewhat anachronistic, rather as Brahms's was years later). Bach composed in an age when music wasn't written for the ages, but was much more transitory. If music was required, the natural thing to do was commission a new piece, not replay an old one. So, when a composer died, so did their music. How else to explain how something as memorable and easily enjoyable as Vivaldi's Four Seasons languished in obscurity for two centuries? Bach's music was first of all kept alive because his sons were noted composers (arguably more famous in their time than JS was in his), and because his work was circulated as an object lesson for composers studying the "antique" style of counterpoint. Then in the mid-19th century he entered the popular consciousness (thanks to Mendelssohn), which by your argument automatically made him mediocre.

Music had to change. We'd had over 100 years of romantic music. Every melody, chord progression and harmony had been wrung out and stretched to the absolute limit. Something had to give!

Listening to Schoenberg's tonal music certainly gives me the sense that the music of his time was exhausted, but I think that says more about Schoenberg than about music. While he transformed himself into a darling of the shockers of the bourgeoisie, other composers wrote new music that was fresh, tonal, and substantial. This means the "historical inevitability" of the 12-tone system was an ideological pose.

Oh, and Prokofiev and Shostakovich wouldn't have dared going atonal with Stalin looking over their shoulder... But if you listen to their earlier works before they got told to 'stop it' you will hear music that is not played in the standard canon as well. 'Stop it! Stalin said, 'we want traditional music for the masses'!

Prokofiev in his early years had opportunity to go atonal, but even in his caustic 2nd symphony he did not abandon his essential, contrasting lyrical side (admittedly, apart from a few hits, Prokofiev is still regarded as too weird for the mainstream, but that's more due to his personality than his tonality). Shostakovich did experiment with tone rows, for his 14th symphony, 12th quartet, and violin sonata. It didn't take.

 

[eyeresist]

 
To quote Varese: "The present day composer refuses to die".

He didn't keep his word.

Reminds me of the old joke about two people walking past a graveyard who hear a familiar tune played backwards. "What's that sound?" "Oh, that's just [insert name of composer here] - he's decomposing."

 

[LugBug1]

The time lag before Bach entered the canon was not because his music was "difficult" (as I understand it, JSB's music was in his time actually regarded as somewhat anachronistic, rather as Brahms's was years later). Bach composed in an age when music wasn't written for the ages, but was much more transitory. If music was required, the natural thing to do was commission a new piece, not replay an old one. So, when a composer died, so did their music. How else to explain how something as memorable and easily enjoyable as Vivaldi's Four Seasons languished in obscurity for two centuries? Bach's music was first of all kept alive because his sons were noted composers (arguably more famous in their time than JS was in his), and because his work was circulated as an object lesson for composers studying the "antique" style of counterpoint. Then in the mid-19th century he entered the popular consciousness (thanks to Mendelssohn), which by your argument automatically made him mediocre.

Noo, my point was even though Mendelssohn introduced large audiences to Bach it still took a long time before it was accepted by the 'masses'. Seriously, we are looking at probably a hundred years later! Bach's music is still some of the of the most 'difficult' music in history for musicians to play. Bach wasn't famous in his lifetime because his music was not fashionable anymore. But Mozart, Beethoven and other later composers still knew of his works and were greatly influenced.

And to allude that I am claiming that Bach is mediocre is a very cheap shot my friend and I can see through your devious ways You have concluded that something is mediocre just because it becomes popular but to me this is absurd. Are Beethoven, Mozart and Bach mediocre??   

Listening to Schoenberg's tonal music certainly gives me the sense that the music of his time was exhausted, but I think that says more about Schoenberg than about music. While he transformed himself into a darling of the shockers of the bourgeoisie, other composers wrote new music that was fresh, tonal, and substantial. This means the "historical inevitability" of the 12-tone system was an ideological pose.
Prokofiev in his early years had opportunity to go atonal, but even in his caustic 2nd symphony he did not abandon his essential, contrasting lyrical side (admittedly, apart from a few hits, Prokofiev is still regarded as too weird for the mainstream, but that's more due to his personality than his tonality). Shostakovich did experiment with tone rows, for his 14th symphony, 12th quartet, and violin sonata. It didn't take.

Again you have missed my point. I wouldn't have wanted Prok or Shost to go atonal - I love their music as it is! My point was, I was defending their earlier angst ridden music that Stalin disagreed with and that it was not (and still not) part of the mainstream repertoire even though there are people like myself that love these works. And just because they aren't played for the masses doesn't mean that they are not any good. 
 
I suggest that you start listening to more music my friend instead of reading Wikipedia. You will learn a lot more about the music discussed

 

[LugBug1]

  Which is in fact highly consistent with the history of "classical". The name of the game was to become the official composer for the "court". The political climate at any given time is intricately weaved into the fabric of the music.
 
Perhaps the state of modern composition in fact does reflect the strata of sprawling nameless governing bodies

Absolutely.  
 
I still find it hard to believe that Sir Peter Maxwell Davies has just finished his stint as the Master of the Queen's music here in the UK. He is one of the most uncompromising modernist's of the last 50 years and heavily influenced by Schoenberg's techniques.  

 

[LugBug1]

Liszt's transcriptions of Schubert's songs are one of Liszt's greatest achievements imo. Schuberts haunting melodies carved out and shaped beautifully. Beautifully played here by the Liszt champion Jorge Bolet. He only recorded a few of these transcriptions which is a big shame. There are other recordings out there that give you all of them but none that matches Bolet's silky technique. Absolutely essential listening! 
 

 

[icebear]

 
I think you  shouldn't underestimate the impact of western culture  on your tastes. I wouldn't be surprised, if for instance  you hate  Gamelan music, while Indonesians would like it.
If you look at the reviews of soundtrack at filmtracks.com , they often give a bad rating to anything that doesn't sound like a traditional orchestral work (solaris, inception, the social network ...)

 
 

  I like Gamelan music, but I don't think it's great when it's recorded. It is more of an experience thing than a recorded and written down musical thing. That sets it apart from Western classical music, and recorded music in general.

 
I have to admit I didn't know Gamelan music but checked it out in the world wide woods, easy enough to do. My impressions was very similar to bigshot. This might be best experienced in the "original context" i.e. a temple surrounding. Isolated in a recording it will loose the purpose, as this is not for entertaining.
 
But anyway, as it often is you discover something new in the woods, so I ended up ordering some classical Indian music from the Shankars, Ravi and his daughter Anoushka.
 
This is what I like most about these threads, discoveries of something new.

 

[LugBug1]

Released only yesterday, Barenboim Schubert Piano Sonatas. You get the last 6 sonatas and also numbers 13/14/9/7/4 on 5 cd's. 
 
Early days (no reviews as yet) but I'm finding it hard to find any fault. In fact, these new recordings could be up there with the very best! His touch is remarkable in its gentleness and force - a very good balance, rather than stroking the keys one moment and then trying to smash them the next (as quite a few Schubert interpreters do). Schubert packs so much mixed emotion in small passages its hard not to get carried away but easy to fall into exaggeration. You can tell that he really knows these pieces well and doesn't attempt to hide any of the real sadness in the late works. There is a sense of indulgence in parts (such as the D958 Adagio) and this can give some parts a more romantic feel. The sound quality is big and warm (my hd800's are picking up the occasional foot pedal, but hey its part of the piano!)
 He sounds like he's treasuring every note and mark my words this is going to be a set to treasure!  
 

 

[Quinto]

  Released only yesterday, Barenboim Schubert Piano Sonatas. You get the last 6 sonatas and also numbers 13/14/9/7/4 on 5 cd's. 
 
Early days (no reviews as yet) but I'm finding it hard to find any fault. In fact, these new recordings could be up there with the very best! His touch is remarkable in its gentleness and force - a very good balance, rather than stroking the keys one moment and then trying to smash them the next (as quite a few Schubert interpreters do). Schubert packs so much mixed emotion in small passages its hard not to get carried away but easy to fall into exaggeration. You can tell that he really knows these pieces well and doesn't attempt to hide any of the real sadness in the late works. There is a sense of indulgence in parts (such as the D958 Adagio) and this can give some parts a more romantic feel. The sound quality is big and warm (my hd800's are picking up the occasional foot pedal, but hey its part of the piano!)
 He sounds like he's treasuring every note and mark my words this is going to be a set to treasure!  
 

I love Schubert's piano stuff, I'll check it out, thanks

 

[perhapss]

Undisputed classic:
 

 
I doubt these recordings of these wonderful concertos have been surpassed(at least musically).
 
They have been re-masterred and reissued digitally but I'm not expert enough to know which of the reissues are best.
I know EMI and Brilliant have released big box sets of Oistrakh but I also know that the information provided about the recordings on them are not always accurate.
Maybe there's an expert on this thread regarding historical recordings(Bigshot for example) who could clarify this point.

 

[bigshot]

I don't have either the Brilliant or EMI Oistrakh boxes, but the recent EMI remasters of other material from this era have been excellent. EMI used to be the worst for sound, now it's one of the best.

 

[SunTanScanMan]

  Released only yesterday, Barenboim Schubert Piano Sonatas. You get the last 6 sonatas and also numbers 13/14/9/7/4 on 5 cd's. 
 
Early days (no reviews as yet) but I'm finding it hard to find any fault. In fact, these new recordings could be up there with the very best! His touch is remarkable in its gentleness and force - a very good balance, rather than stroking the keys one moment and then trying to smash them the next (as quite a few Schubert interpreters do). Schubert packs so much mixed emotion in small passages its hard not to get carried away but easy to fall into exaggeration. You can tell that he really knows these pieces well and doesn't attempt to hide any of the real sadness in the late works. There is a sense of indulgence in parts (such as the D958 Adagio) and this can give some parts a more romantic feel. The sound quality is big and warm (my hd800's are picking up the occasional foot pedal, but hey its part of the piano!)
 He sounds like he's treasuring every note and mark my words this is going to be a set to treasure!  
 

 
I'd been enjoying Brendel's Schubert sonatas which @Quinto had recommended back in April on this thread. Lovely music to savour especially late night going to early morning 

 Currently streaming Barenboim's. The piano is nearer and intimate - lovely.
 
These are not major reviews nor too much enlightening at that, but I did manage to find couple if anyone is interested
 
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/364314e2-21ce-11e4-a958-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3AsMzFMEl 
 
http://www.classicfm.com/composers/schubert/album-reviews/piano-sonatas-barenboim/

 

[LugBug1]

^^Nice one thanks for that  
 
Yes Brendel is king of Schubert! 

 

[Claritas]

Schnabel is. And Perahia and Edwin Fischer.