Has education expanded your listening tastes?
****I suppose the growing pressure on classical artists to be hyper-attractive is an inevitable consequence to living in such image conscious times**** Concertmasters, like conductors, are not under this growing pressure. Obviously, the astute listener can see (hear) through any possible veneer, but this is something to keep in mind when assessing the relative musical abilities of a great concert master vs that of some of the high profile soloists. The great concertmasters are amazing musicians. Some interesting reading on the subject: http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20100103/ARTICLE/1031012 http://www.scena.org/lsm/sm4-8/concertmaster.htm |
Every time one picks up a copy of a classical music magazine and looks at the industry ads for new releases, you cannot help but notice how soloists have to have both talent and physical charms in today's competitive market. It's not just female performers who are subject to rising standards for appearance, male performer's appearance standards are also affected. Conductors don't seem to be so critically judged on appearance, but it doesn't hurt your career to look like Hogwood or Karajan. I suppose the growing pressure on classical artists to be hyper-attractive is an inevitable consequence to living in such image conscious times (as well as a diminishing market for classical music.) |
Rok2id, So true, and that crossed my mind when I ever so carefully chose to limit my comments to "charisma." As for your recent LvB trios, that sounds like a winner of a combo. I've had the pleasure of hearing Lynn Harrell live twice. Best Dvorak concerto I ever heard, and I've heard a number of the big names including Ma. |
It is a leap and mistaken assumption that going from concertmaster in a top orchestra to a solo career is necessarily "moving up". As Brownsfan points out "a steady job in a world class orchestra may be a better fit" for an individual; this could be for a variety of reasons. First of all, the life of a soloist is not all that it may seem to be. Constantly traveling is very difficult on the person and that person's family, and different individuals will have different levels of tolerance to these difficulties. As musicians, some have more of a team-player mentality (to their credit) and find a great deal of satisfaction in the role of leader of an ensemble with the special relationships that are established, not only with the other players and instrumental sections, but also as liaison between these players and the conductor; a particularly important role in our age of constantly changing guest conductors. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, soloists are often limited to performing certain solo works over and over again. As concertmaster a player can truly have the best of both worlds: playing in a top orchestra and performing all the wonderful orchestral repertoire, and also perform as soloist with that orchestra and (fairly regularly) as guest soloist with other orchestras; many do this quite successfully. |
Rok2id, Lynn Harrell went from 1st Chair cello in the Cleveland to a distinguished solo career. On the other hand, I remember several years ago listening to Alban Gerhardt discuss the excruciatingly difficult decision he had to make in turning down an offer from the Berlin Philharmonic for 1st chair cello in favor of a solo career. I’m sure there are many other examples. I will say this—if you think about the soloists that really do well, it is my perception they tend to have more than their fair share of personal charisma in addition to their musical talents. There are obvious examples where this is not true. But just think about people like Hillary Hahn, Itzhak Pearlman, Yo Yo Ma, Joshua Bell—they can work a crowd in a unique way. For others, a steady job in a world class orchestra may be a better fit. |
A music question: I think about this a lot. What is the difference between a first chair violinist in any of the world's top Orchestras, and a person that makes a career as a violin soloist. I assume a solo career would be more rewarding from both an artistic and financial perspective. I am not aware of any situation where a player 'moved up' from Orchestra to solo career. What's holding them back? Could anyone talk about this? Thanks Cheers |
Photon46: I put the book in my CART. Thanks for the tip. My bookcase currently is filled with books about music and war / military, so I know I will like it. One of my favorite books "The German Way of War", has a section on 'The Orgins of Frederician Warfare'. Very interesting. Brings home the point that Geography is Destiny! Cheers |
Rok2id, glad you found the link entertaining, I thought it was rather witty. I know what you mean about the difficulty of conveying the exact meaning of our thoughts in these forums, it can be difficult. If anyone has any interest in further exploration of Bach's work and his times, a very entertaining and non-technical book is the easily read biography of Bach and Frederick the Great "Evening in the Palace of Reason." It explores the collision of Baroque and Enlightenment world views and how a challenge from Frederick goaded Bach into writing "A Musical Offering." http://www.amazon.com/Evening-Palace-Reason-Frederick-Enlightenment/dp/0007156618/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1393257326&sr=1-1&keywords=evening+in+the+palace+of+reason |
Years ago, I recall a NPR program called "The Art of Fugue" which went into great detail explaining that particular work. My appreciation of the music of Bach went way up from that. Some music is just fun though. Not much to think or learn about. Music can work so many different ways. Just one of the interesting things about it. SW thanks for those kind words. |
Hi Rok - my comments were not actually directed at you, but such opinions have indeed been either stated or strongly implied from time to time in threads like these, and are even expressed by college music students, as Photon says. I agree with him that any sort of discussion of aesthetics has almost entirely disappeared from our culture, and that is not a good thing, IMO. I would also say that your experience with Photon's link is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about. I do believe you will enjoy (not just understand) any canon much more the next time you hear one now that you know how one works. There is so much more to music than just the emotional content and/or the emotional response it provokes (or doesn't). These other aspects of it will only add to the emotional aspect of your enjoyment, because they do involve your mind more while listening. You are more of a jazz fan - I would submit that looking up a bit of info about basic jazz forms will greatly enhance your listening experience, in much the same way Photon's canon link has done. Frogman could probably provide such a link, I would guess. |
Photon46: Nice clip. I learned what a Canon is, and I thank you for that. I think we do not have any disagreement about all this. It could be just that, in previous posts, on a different thread, on this subject, we were talking pass each other because our words mean different things to us. Not so much you, because you are new to this 'discussion'. :) I do not disagree with anything you have said. Did I enjoy the piece by Bach more after reading the narrative and watching the animation? I am not sure 'enjoy more' would be the words I would use. After looking up the meaning of the word 'canon' as used in music, I would say I have gained new knowledge about music, and that is good. I now have a new word in my musical vocabulary. Something to watch for in the linear notes. The wiki gave a few examples of canons. Popular songs sung by children. Never would have known to call them canons. Getting back to the terminology thing. I often listen to music and say to myself, "I wonder what they call that?" Referring to a certain section of a score, or a style of playing. But, you are correct. I will never again listen to Bach quite the same way. Sort of like, I now listen for Bass Intonation in Jazz recordings. Cheers |
Rok2id, I agree with you to a point. However, I do not agree that someone without knowledge of an artistic creation's historical context and means of creation enjoys a work as fully or hears music the same as someone with more informed knowledge. That's not being elitist, just basic truth it would seem to me. Take this as an example. Listen to the opening few minutes of J.S. Bach's "A Musical Offering." Now, listen to the same Ricercar after reading the brief one page explanation of a crab canon and while listening along with the animated film that illustrates the evolution of the canon. http://aminotes.tumblr.com/post/651794581/j-s-bach-canon-cancrizans-the-crab-canon Is lack of this knowledge going to stop you from enjoying the composition, of course not. But it defies logic to say one hears it the same way after learning more about Bach's incredible compositional genius. |
*****What I do not understand is the folks who are obviously afraid that educating themselves more about music is somehow going to decrease their emotional enjoyment of it****** This 'accusation' was made long ago, not by Learsfool, and went unchallenged at that time. Now, as in politics, it has become Fact! It does not apply to any poster I have read. Certainly not to me. I only suggested that having formal instruction in music is not a prerequisite to the enjoyment of music. I would suggest that this applies to the vast majority of the people that support classical music in this country. Including those that give financial support to the arts. I would also suggest that the major advantage a 'musical educated' person has over the layman, is the musical vocabulary. They don't hear it any differently, or are affected by it, any more than the layman, they can just talk about what they are hearing, using the correct words. They know the terminology. They may know how the 'sausage' is made, but anyone can enjoy the taste. Cheers |
Learsfool, I agree with your thoughts regarding the reluctance of certain types of listeners to educate themselves. It is baffling, but the longer I live, the more I am amazed at the profound differences among humans in the way we process information, relate each other, and prioritize values. In America, we are generating humans who increasingly value the individual's raw and unformed subjective response to aesthetic stimuli above informed and educated insight. I know this sounds like the griping of an old man who's shaking his fist at the younger generation. However, decades of education and cultural values that has emphasized self-esteem and self-empowerment has skewed many peoples sense of need for education regarding the arts. Unlike Brownsfan, I suspect the majority of people DO feel that when it comes to aesthetics and art, one opinion is as good as another. |
Last night I pulled out HvK's 1963 Eroica and gave it a listen. I thought about how much more I like this recording than almost all of the other Eroicas I have. If someone were to ask me, "Why do you like this version best," the most candid response would be because I do. Learsfool and Frogman could probably entertain me for 2 hours talking about why they do or do not like that particular recording better than another. Everyone has a right to an opinion, but not all opinions are of equal value. During a pre concert lecture the lecturer (a local music professor) played a part of a chamber work from Brahms and another one from Beethoven. She asked me to briefly describe the difference. I answered that the LvB went straight to my heart, while the Brahms engaged my mind. That was a valid answer, but an utterly subjective one devoid of any particular value to any one but myself. When I retire, perhaps I will have time to educate myself more on that which I love so much. I really can't fathom how anything bad could come from that. |
Wow - some very interesting posts since I have checked in. If I may ask Schubert something. I originally thought I knew exactly where you were coming from, but I am not at all sure anymore. Perhaps I am totally misunderstanding what you are trying to say. You wrote a while back: "Germany, like the USA, has no shortage of ignorant people. If I ask the recovering addict, 8th grade drop-out painting my room in WI if he listens to Beethoven the reply likely will be, I don't listen to that crap. If I ask the 8th grade drop-out recovering addict in Germany painting my room ,who knows no more about LvB than his american counterpart, the reply will likely be ahh, Beethoven , a great man. Makes a LOT of difference." I would submit to you that the reason the German kid says what he does is indeed education, not just cultural difference (though that of course affects the educational system). He would certainly know quite a bit more about him than his American counterpart, especially nowadays. I am therefore not quite sure what your ultimate point is here. Photon, no offense taken at your comments, which are good ones. No one is arguing that someone should be silent if they are not an expert - as you say, that is ridiculous, and I also agree that "there is nothing wrong with having less than fully formed opinions about art forms they are a fan of." This is not what Frogman and I are objecting to at all. What I do not understand is the folks who are obviously afraid that educating themselves more about music is somehow going to decrease their emotional enjoyment of it. Exactly the opposite occurs, in every single case of which I am aware. Yet some refuse to even consider the possibility. They don't know what they are missing, and maybe never will, which is saddening, and their attitude also makes it much more difficult to discuss music seriously with them, which is a shame. That said, that will not stop me from attempting to discuss music with them if they clearly have a desire to do so. |
Mapman, soldiers do and have done the bidding of man is a truth. Soldiers can also do the bidding of God. Yes, this truth has been perverted by man with all kinds of unspeakable things being done in the name of God and God was no part of it. Man's error however does not nullify the truth that God has and will continue to move as He pleases through soldiers in this fallen world. If the Bible is understood as relevant, truth, and inspired by God, then no other conclusion is possible. If one does not think the Bible is truth, then yes I suppose any thought can be perceived as truth. Over and over in scripture soldiers were used by God to carry out His purpose, not man's. This is undeniable, thus one must not believe in the authority of scripture to question this truth. We are free to believe or not believe in the Bible and what it shares about our Creator. I happen to believe it and to stay consistent with it . |
When it comes to music, I'd say the fewer rules, the better. Just let it be, take it or leave it. It all works out in the end. I was listening to some old Robert Johnson recordiI ngs last night and found myself mesmerized by his guitar playing and voice. Same happens with a lot of classical. Each registers differently for me as it should, but the magnitude is hard to compare. Why bother? One is either moved or not by a particular piece. It can't be quantified why or how. So math for sure falls short in most things uniquely human. Spirituality included. |
Schubert, You say Van the Man is dumbing down? You cannot be serious? You must have not listened to most of his non-pop/rock hit music? As you must know we live in a fallen world and everything under the sun is corrupt and corrupted. Soldiers are not only needed, but often times required and used by our Lord to do His will on this broken planet. Not ideal, not beautiful, not lovely, but reality and needed this side of heaven. God was pleased with King David saying he was a man after his own own heart. He was a soldier and God was indeed pleased with him and his role as a soldier and King. |
As far as expanding a person's listening tastes (likes / dislikes), Maybe 'Exposure' would be a more appropriate word than 'education'. I think most people are exposed to music as opposed to being educated about music. Can you dislike a certain music even after being educated about it? I say absolutely. But you cannot stop liking music you love, even after being educated about it. I feel the education thing is just nice to know. Of course COMPOSERS are exempt from this theory. :) They are the creators and have an entirely different perspective. Cheers |
Rok2id, I would love to hear their perspective. I work within a very large University art department with practitioners of many art forms, so I obviously have great respect for the opinions of professional musicians and educators. As educators, we have to find ways to communicate with each other across our particular specialities and hopefully instill love and knowledge of the arts in both students who are arts majors as well as students who are taking arts courses because of graduation requirements. I'm not sure what level of expertise qualifies someone to be worthy of public commentary in your mind, but if educators were to suggest that students keep their mouths shut and their less than fully informed opinions to themselves until they had reached a predetermined level of artistic maturity, we'd not be doing a very good job of educating them by today's standards. I fail to see why adults attempting to educate themselves about an art form should also be relegated to the silent corner unless they pre-qualify as an expert opinion. It's just art we're talking about here, not as if we are risking spreading bad advice about how a disease is spread. I would also advise a slight tempering of reverence for the opinions of art professionals as oracles of absolute truth. I've worked with many artists and known a few composers, people who have been in history and textbooks for decades. They were and are subject to prejudices, biases, and irrational exuberances in spite of having great erudition in their specialty. No disrespect meant to Frogman and Learsfool, just making a general point. |
Coming from my perspective, that of a Christian, the best is that which leads you closer to the divine reality in a manner that makes you profoundly grateful that God inspired the great soul who created it ,and that you got to hear it and were lead closer to him by it. Bach's Cantatas being the a prime example. In the case of the very greatest composers of religious music, like Bach or Monteverdi, it seems as if God infused them rather than inspired them. There has NEVER been a good war or a bad peace. The USA has never been in a war that could not have been prevented. God is not pleased that anyone is a soldier. If you haven't killed anyone personally, don't bother to correct me on this point. |
Schubert, I think I understand your perspective, but just as relativism is the potential downfall of morality, so is absolutism of values the fossilization of aesthetic practice. In my mind, insisting that base emotions are unworthy inspirations for great art is to consign art to a place of precious near irrelevance. Without the base emotions that inspired Van's Brown Eyed Girl we wouldn't have much of Shakespeare and the plots in many great novels, the art of Egon von Schiele, many Japanese Ukiyo-e prints, some of Monet's paintings and many of the great operas and ballets that are part of our heritage. I don't agree that nothing good comes of being a soldier but I do agree that nothing good has made need of soldiers. Again, innumerable great works of literature, opera, painting, theatre, and film use that dark side of mankind as artistic inspiration. Rok2id, nothing wrong with people having less than fully informed opinions about art forms they are a fan of. The survival of "elevated" forms of art depend entirely on the sustained interest of the dilettante. We just have to remember Moynihan's adage "everyone is entitled to his own opinions, just not his own facts." |
*****Some things are better than other things, you do not have to like the best, or support the best ,but you need to know it is the best.******* How does a person determine what is the best musicaL genre? What methodology?? *****There is nothing good about being a soldier***** You just better thank the Lord we have them! *****James Brown IS dumbing down****** Nope. Brown just went places you could not follow. And speaking of going places, I think the posters on this thread are going places they are not qualified to go. Cheers. |
Photon, There is nothing good about being a soldier, I used that example only to say we all can relate to things difficult as a basic trait of our humanity. My sole point is that relativism is dry rot of the mind and soul. Some things are better than other things, you do not have to like the best, or support the best ,but you need to know it is the best. James Brown IS dumbing down .So is Van the man, though I listen to "Brown Eyed Girl" at times for reasons best not described on here, I'm aware its appealing to my baser side. |
Frogman, your commentary is very insightful. We've all heard Duke's "good & bad" take on the hierarchy of musical genres and it's a good maxim to keep in the back of one's mind. It becomes a very slippery slope when we start proclaiming this or that the cultural apogee. A meaningful artistic practice can't be a static set of principles, it has to be a living art that morphs and changes. Otherwise we end up with an ossified, ready for the museum art form. For a moment, let's think about a few of classical music's attributes and why they represent the highest attainment of Western civilization in our minds. Obviously, giving musical form to the quest for spiritual understanding is a primary reason. The link between mathematics and music is another aspect. Counterpoint between music and the increasing complexity of human thought in the sciences, other art forms, and philosophy is another reason. Ok, it's obvious where this train of thought leads. Problem is, this unending focus on the noble can lead to a place of static creativity. Like Mozart complaining in the movie "Amadeus," "I am fed to the teeth with elevated themes! Old dead legends! Why must we go on forever writing about gods and legends?" We know the noble retort of Baron von Sweiten to this sentiment, but the complaint is valid. Think of the state of visual arts in France right before the Impressionists. Since 1648, the French Academy had controlled the development of art and directed its expression of noble themes. By the mid 19th century, we had artists of supreme technical virtuosity in the service of centuries old themes completely dominating the official artistic landscape. An artistic revolt got started, gained traction, and has never relented in its constant pushing against the constraints of conventional taste. Schubert's recounting of a soldier's toughness reminds us that life gains meaning in things other than rarefied contemplation. The exuberant energy of youthful passions given expression in musical forms other than classical music art are important to maintaining living art forms. Frogman's friend who was obsessed with James Brown's music wasn't dumbing down in my book, just focusing on something different. Think playing James Brown's music is easy? Ask a classical musician to play in his band and generate some steamy funk. It reminds me of the tension between the Jazz and Classical students in a university. The Jazz students give props to the Classical students for their technical chops and skills, but deride them for their lack of ability to express a full range of emotion, lack of improvisational skills, and limitations of rhythmic expression. I don't know where today's diversity of expressive means will lead. In spite of the general level of cultural stupidity that dominates popular culture, I'm not ready succumb to resignation that the best is behind us. |
I've been in a few swamps over the years. I've always considered them fascinating unique places and beautiful in their own unique way as well. Not good for running though.Mapman, you are a man of unusual grace and extraordinary sophistication. Schubert- You might want to consider that there are other aesthetics than your own. |
No doubt, attitude has a lot to do with it. Lots of bad ones around these days. I won't judge why that is case by case. Some may be justified, others not. One can only strive towards their own goals, have faith those are good ones, and hope maybe others manage to do the same as well. I've been in a few swamps over the years. I've always considered them fascinating unique places and beautiful in their own unique way as well. Not good for running though. |
Walk before you run? Ain't going to win many races starting from a swamp. Germany, like the USA, has no shortage of ignorant people. If I ask the recovering addict, 8th grade drop-out painting my room in WI if he listens to Beethoven the reply likely will be, I don't listen to that crap. If I ask the 8th grade drop-out recovering addict in Germany painting my room ,who knows no more about LvB than his american counterpart, the reply will likely be ahh, Beethoven , a great man. Makes a LOT of difference. |
True, but you have to walk before you can run. Only a few ways to be the fastest or best but many paths are available to help get there. Where one starts from is a big consideration. PEople start from different places. That's part of the history aspect that only makes things more interesting! ANd even the best runners still decide to take a nap or just walk slowly from time to time..... Plus, Bach or Beethoven should sound even more illustrious when the opening act they follow say is Abba, The Black Eyed Peas, AC/DC, or say even Hank Williams. Personally, I would enjoy each most likley on their own terms for different reasons, some of which have nothing to do with higher thougts or forms or being civilized. That's just my perspective though. Reality is everyone has their own when it comes to music, even if intellectually we may all strongly suspect that all paths eventually lead to the same place (or two maybe), given enough time. For some, toe tapping alone might = heaven. I will say that in the end time tells all. That Bach still sits so well so many years after the fact speaks for itself and makes a strong case for him being the overall champion at least at this point in time. |
"Classical Music is the absolute apex of Western Civilization " I've always tended to think of it that way as well. Thing is music is more than that. Its something that most everyone can relate to in some way regardless of how civilized or not they might be. Understanding that aspect of it as well helps diversify ones musical tastes. There is learning involved in that as well. |
You would have to be dead to go to a thousand Classical concerts and not grasp how hard it is for and on a performer. Any human can grasp anything human if they wish to expand the time and effort of mind and heart to do so. As Blake said, "the world in a grain of sand" . I've done 50 mile forced marches carrying 70 pounds packs and a ten pound rifle in 100 degree temperatures and poured an inch of blood out of my boots at the end . Thats hard. I do not doubt you can grasp that just from that sentence. When I said 2 semesters of Music History ,I really wanted to say 24 Semesters . I totally disagree with you and Ellington, IMO Classical Music is the absolute apex of Western Civilization and no other genre can begin to approach the greatness of something like Bach's Mass in B Minor. I may have to move to Japan where they agree with me. |
Schubert, you are clearly a deep thinker and devoted music lover. I am not entirely sure that I am interpreting some of the comments in your last post correctly; so please correct me if I am not. Additionally, I assure you that my comments are not coming from a stance of defensiveness, but from a desire to further what has been a very interesting discussion. Obviously, some of these topics are extremely "close to home" for any performer. Your comments about the inextricable link between music and history are very insightful and spot on. ****the general public not grasping the difficulty of performance is of course true, but I would say same is readily apparent to any serious classical listener.**** Perhaps. Certainly to varying degrees and more so to those like yourself. But, to any? ....unlikely. Again, I stress this not to garner any kind of undue support or credit, but to hopefully tie in some of the other themes we are discussing in a more complete manner. With all due respect, and not meaning to put too fine a point on any of this, at least one other of your comments seems to point to the need for further clarification. ****And two semesters of Music History at any conservatory or university won't change that.**** The study of Music History and history in general (especially as it relates to the music at hand) goes far beyond "two semesters" for any serious performer. Music history and history in general is a constant theme in the life of a music student in conservatory; not only in the classroom, but in the private study of scores during preparation for performance. It continues as a constant theme as part of living the life of a performer. Two semesters of Music History will give no more a complete understanding than reliance on record liner notes for the understanding of form and theory. Ironically, while acknowledging the relevance of your insightful comments about this topic (in general terms), I disagree with your conclusion about how it relates to the subject of a performer's feelings about certain musics. ****IMO the not really liking to perform has more to do with the cognitive dissonance generated by living in a culture radically different than the one the works you play were created in and for. **** First of all, I think that the subject being discussed (and one that you introduced) was the subject of performers sometimes not wanting to listen to the works that they spend their working hours performing and, instead, finding a kind of respite in other genres. The joy of performance is, if anything, even greater for styles outside of and removed from the present era. The study of performance practices of, for instance, late Baroque German ornamentation is fascinating and a great deal of simple fun. For most serious musicians the cliche (and to quote Duke Ellington) "There are only two kinds of music, the good kind and the other kind" is a life mantra. The true relevance of this is something that even serious listeners don't always respect to the extent that they could. A musician who spends hours upon hours preparing and performing certain works will sometimes seek a break or change of pace by listening to, and sometimes performing, a style or genre of music that is very different not necessarily because of any cognitive dissonance (although that is a very real consideration), but simply because it is different and, more importantly, because if core music values are high there is no needless judgment about the superiority of one genre over the other. |
The greatest of the Romans and one of THE wisest humans who ever lived, Cicero, said; "Not to know what has transpired in former times is to be always a child." Children are easier to control than adults which is why History is both the sine qua non of an educated person AND the worst taught subject in the USA. Even as a former history teacher and avid reader of same for over 60 years, I never quite realized until this post how my mind automatically put me into the milieu of music heard, from the Renaissance Italy of Frescobaldi , the England of Purcell and Byrd, to the Biedermeyer Vienna of Beethoven and Schubert , the Bismarkian Germany of Brahms or the dismembered Hungary of Bartok etc etc etc. What Frogman says about the general public not grasping the difficulty of performance is of course true, but I would say same is readily apparent to any serious classical listener. IMO the not really liking to perform has more to do with the cognitive dissonance generated by living in a culture radically different than the one the works you play were created in and for. And two semesters of Music History at any conservatory or university won't change that. Even more true of the audience for Classical Music. |
