I admire Miles Davis, i admire Stravinsky; but i loved Chet Baker and Scriabin...You?

Thanks to remember us...

My best to you....

Admire: Billie Holiday, Benjamin Britten, Beethoven, Coltrane, Verdi
Love: Ella Fitzgerald, Kurt Elling, Chet Baker, Bach, Brahms, Puccini, Jacqueline du Pre, John Lewis, Bill Evans, Herbert Howells, some but not all Vaughan Williams
Many, many more in both lists.

This is an example of an interesting list thanks
gardners501


LIKING is related to the brain and the admiration is justified by an a posteriori reflexion...It is related to the fact that some composers ask in us for an adaptation who made ourself able to taming them...



LOVING is related to the heart and the emotion is spontaneous and direct without a posteriori analysis...

It is this way because emotions contains an a priori analysis...

Pascal: " the heart has his reasons that the reason ignore".


Then we must look at your list if we want to know you and comparing your intellectual and emotional motivated choices....


I bet people now begins to understand why a list pondered by the polarities of the heart and brain is very instructive and said to us something which pertain to the character of the person who has chosen the list more clearly than just a linear list....

We can then imagine ourself listening to a composer with the perspective given to us by an other who like or love a specific composer... If we do that it is helping us to relativize our own choices and then we learn something about ourself too...

This is the OBJECTIVE REASON for my thread....Not imposing my tastes.... 😌Or not for other to impose their tastes...

Behind my thread is a real question....

I love Stravinsky.  My dad always thought his stuff sounded ugly, but that didn't stop him from giving me a Petroushka mono LP when I was about ten (around 1960).  The orchestra was the ultra-obscure Cento Soli of Paris.  It was on a budget label.  I'll bet he got it for free. Anyway, it took several plays for me to make hide-or-hair of it but it wasn't long before I loved it and was singing along with it.  I took it to my sixth grade class on Share Your Favorite Record Friday. Naturally, everybody hated it.

**** I bet people now begins to understand why a list pondered by the polarities of the heart and brain is very instructive and said to us something which pertain to the character of the person who has chosen the list more clearly than just a linear list....****

At the risk of showing arrogance, from my first post here:

**** Important to give enough relevance to the simple fact that the distinctions made often say much more about ourselves as music lovers (and possibly in other ways as well) and less about the artists in any absolute sense. ****

Four notes; just four notes of absolute perfection following the dreamy and mysterious introduction. Not the kind of perfection that appeals to the brain only, but perfection of clarity in musical intent and attitude conveying surprise, purpose and, of course, swing. He makes the heart swing. How can one not love Miles?  Just me.

https://youtu.be/tguu4m38U78

Yes the part about ourself is the first aspect, but the invitation to change ourself, if someone like you interrogate my love in this case for Chet Baker is the key part of my initial question...

Now reading you, saying what you said, and thinking what i think about Chet, it will be interesting for me to listen at the first occasion   Miles' music and reconsiderating my "liking" without for sure imposing nothing artificial on myself, just listening with an open minds...

Revisiting ourself  is an exercise in consciousness...

Thanks to make me able and tempted to do so...

My best to you and my deep salutation to Miles....

I like Chet Baker too. Another poor soul in search of the divine. Got to love Chet Baker.

Same way about Coltrane, the humanity is obvious, but not Miles. His sound just bristles with anger and inner turbulence.
For some it might be an exploratory journey but it's not one that held much fascination for me.

Davis, I feel was at his best with the right collaborators. Springsville is one good example and of course there will always be Kind of Blue.

Sounds like a pot  party .

Yeah, as Miles himself would often say: the silence says more than the notes.

Yeah, as Miles himself would often say: the silence says more than the notes.

Anyone who like Jazz like Miles Davis...




My question is not about hating something... If you read my last post it is explained...this is it:



 LIKING is related to the brain and the admiration is justified by an a posteriori reflexion...It is related to the fact that some composers ask in us for an adaptation who made ourself able to taming them...



LOVING is related to the heart and the emotion is spontaneous and direct without a posteriori analysis...

It is this way because emotions contains an a priori analysis...

Pascal: " the heart has his reasons that the reason ignore".


Then we must look at your list if we want to know you and comparing your intellectual and emotional motivated choices....


I bet people now begins to understand why a list pondered by the polarities of the heart and brain is very instructive and said to us something which pertain to the character of the person who has chosen the list more clearly than just a linear list....

We can then imagine ourself listening to a composer with the perspective given to us by an other who like or love a specific composer... If we do that it is helping us to relativize our own choices and then we learn something about ourself too...

This is the OBJECTIVE REASON for my thread....Not imposing my tastes.... 😌Or not for other to impose their tastes...

Behind my thread is a real question....


MY best to you....

Sorry guys, but for my taste Bach is a bit monotone and homogeneous, as some other baroque   composers including Purcell, whom, by the way I also like (as well as Bach), but no more I am so much excited with them (I think there are much less "monotone" composers of more or les the same period, e.g., Handel, Scarlatti).  On contrary, Tchaikovsky's  music is  very wide and different, from Liturgy of St. John Chrystostom (I love it) to his symphonies, conciertos etc.  This is indeed admirable, at least (the same for other Russian composers including Rimski-Korsakov who was not mentioned in this thread). There is some analogy in paintings for me. There are painting that I like  at the first glance, but more I look at them, less I like them, and there are painting which i do not like from the first glance (I think they are just interesting), but more I observe them, more I like them. I would attach Bach to the first category and Tchaikovsky to the second one. By the way, Emerson, Lake & Palmer (my favorite rock group) did a very nice and important, from my point of view, interpretations of these and other classic composers (in general, I don't like interpretations of the classical music, but this is an exception for me). 

Similarly, in jazz, e.g., Chet Baker is good but he is too monotone to my taste (by the way, I like his singing as well), and I do love Miles Davis. Not only he has promoted large number of other outstanding artists, his music is too diverse starting from his pure jazz period, then he created his own  jazz style with Hancock,  Carter and Williams, then the fusion/electric music from late 60s, and finally he even approached rag before he passed away. For me, these two artists are incomparable. Of course, I like Coltrane (his active period was a bit short, but not as short as that of Jimi Hendrix, I love him). Like Miles Davis, he did created his own moods in jazz and pushed following jazz artists including Charles Lloyd, who was also able to create his own jazz mood (one of the greatest living jazz artists for me). 

First thank you for your very interesting post, which is food for our own tought....

And i appreciate particularly this part that illustrate perfectly the frame of my question/answers and my appeal to the  thinking of us all  about the many other possible answers  about the same composers or group of composers than our own....

There is some analogy in paintings for me. There are painting that I like at the first glance, but more I look at them, less I like them, and there are painting which i do not like from the first glance (I think they are just interesting), but more I observe them, more I like them. I would attach Bach to the first category and Tchaikovsky to the second one.

The more i think about that the more i think that the history of music reflect itself in us differently and touch us on spots with a different emphasis that reflect our own individual soul’s histories and events...




«History mirror itself in us but we strike back »-Anonymus Smith

Thanks for your response and an interesting observation, mahgister. Perhaps, out perception of art, and , in particular, of music has to do something with our previous lives ...

"The last time i go to a cinema was 30 years ago...I almost never go to restaurant. ... I walk instead of taking the bus....I never accept to live in a house with any neighbours.... I run away from any collective festivities ..."

I have just read this, if we replace 30 with 15, this is what I could have written about myself (and I am also a university professor). (I can add that I do not watch tv except tennis and sometimes programs about the nature and animals. I always prefer to listen to music rather to see video (concerts) that I do rarely.  And my another strong "hobby" is yoga.)

Given that we both admire music - it  remains to compare our faces (and of course the audio systems)  :) 

No problem for my face ....😁

But comparison of my system to yours will be unfair...

My audio system is under 500 hundred dollars of cost, but greatly enhanced by my own homemade creation i called mechanical, electrical and acoustical embeddings controls, and probably your system is more refine technically than mine and costlier...

Then my S.Q. even lower in qualities than your own, may produce a "shock" in you.... SO good for peanuts? Yes.....

😊


More seriously i think that the history of music is a soul cryptography that can be deciphered by our own soul but with listening attentive experiments on ourself....

I am fond of these experiments and i like to investigate my choices to contemplate their deep unknown motivation in me....

This is the reason for my thread...




I wish you the best there is.... You are always welcome....








P.S. i was not a university professor, but i worked at the library, counselling prof. or students about books on all subjects... I know a little bits on all subjects or can learn very swiftly.... 😁








«What is the difference between numbers ,music and philosophy? None, no difference can rip them apart... All is geometrical poetry in action» -Anonymus Smith

«What is geometrical poetry? Only chain of exact metaphors»-Anonymus Smith

«I always mixed or confused Euclid with Shakespeare, i must have been wise all these times without even knowing it»-Groucho Marx

... I hope with my face  either 😅

I don't know exactly how much my audio system costs but I am convinced and have always been convinced that more expensive things are not necessarily better, in particular, in audio stuff. If I would have your abilities, perhaps I could have also less costly system. Until recently I used to have mostly used and demo stuff and I think this is a good way to search for an optimal setup (in general, I hate to do unnecessary expenses). Just as an example, in the main system I have Thiel CS6 speakers which I bought used, it wasn't expensive at all - both coaxes were damaged. At that time Thiel still existed.  Rob Gillum, a very nice technician from Thiel (now he deals with repairs directly) has rebuilt it. He did an excellent job, these speakers sound wonderful since then. i am convinced that it would be difficult to find better ones ( for my taste) even if I spend 10 times more than I have spent on them. 

I think that the numbers and music have in common that they are both the means of expression of our thoughts and feelings. 

If you love Scriabin check out Samuil Feinberg and Karol Szymanowski

Thanks I know them already....The sonatas of Feinberg are underestmated they are great works of piano and one of my very loved piano works...

But others who read this thread may try them if they dont know them....

welcome and come back with your choices in a more detailed way..... 😊

Another +vote for Kurt Elling.

Happy Listening!

Kurt  Elling is the greatest male jazz artist of our time .

Who likes Kurt Elling  may also like Randy Newman 

Funny, I love Stravinsky and Miles Davis, but only admire Chet Atkins and Scriabin (sound/colour spectrum be damned!).

Funny, I love Stravinsky and Miles Davis, but only admire Chet Atkins and Scriabin (sound/colour spectrum be damned!).

This prove my point.... We learn with different histories and the relation with music is contituted in a specific history which is ours and this relative history is conscious if we confronted ourself with possible other roads in the map of significations...

Why are we so different in our understanding of music?

What this polarity love/ like or heart/brain or intimate realtion/ distant relation or internal resonance/external link means in relation with the history of music itself...History of music is first an history of  collective consciousness...Not only our personal history also....

Here's a Sisyphus-worthy task.  Go to the whitecamaross thread where you posted recently about youtube quality, and try and persuade him to use classical music in his demos.

I dare you.

Here’s a Sisyphus-worthy task. Go to the whitecamaross thread where you posted recently about youtube quality, and try and persuade him to use classical music in his demos.

I dare you.

Your sarcasm hability improved from last posts...Congratulations!

By the way i like his direct way and passionate way to compare costly gear....I am direct and passionate myself...My different and complementary  goal to his goal  is how to improve at no cost....But i like audio gear even which i cannot afford at all....

And i have listened all genre of music for your information....Not only classic....Jazz, folk,singer classical or not, Indian music, Persian music, Choral music etc....Even Chinese music and other less known music...

The "youtube files" were not the main problem i presented in this post, but discussing that  with you is of no interest at all...




Some people fix to a target and like brainless dart go their way.... It seems i am on your list....

Enjoy being a small dart zig-zagging to the target....

By the way go to practice your sarcasm rare talent with him also......He dont know you yet.....But being direct and passionate himself like i am, i doubt he will enjoy your talent....

But who knows! dare to try.....

I love John Hiatt, and admire Ry Cooder.
I love Taj Mahal, and admire Muddy Waters.
I love Charlie Haden, and admire Ornette Coleman.
I love Eva Cassidy, and admire Patricia Barber.
I love Mark Knopfler, and admire Eric Clapton.
I love Frank Zappa, and admire Trilok Gurtu.
I love Aretha Franklin, and admire Nina Simone. 
I love Steve Lacy, and admire Charlie Parker.
I love Ruben Gonzales, and admire Chucho Valdes.
I love Aaron Neville, and admire Donny Hathaway.
I love Miles Davis, and admire Freddie Hubbard.
I love Steely Dan, and admire Blue Nile.

I know little about classical music, but will certainly learn from this thread. Thanks for posting.

I dont know what you will learn but i know already that i will learn a great deal with your posts and suggestions...

Thanks very much and my deepest respect.....

Very Interesting thread, even if it is somewhat "over my head"...

I've repeatedly encountered the judgment in Jazz publications that Miles was not particularly accomplished, technically--  that his strength lay more in his ability to convey emotion or "Duende". I'm not a horn player so I don't know whether this is true but compared to, say, Woody Shaw, Miles' playing sounds less virtuosic to me. 

I'd be curious as to "which Miles" you've listened to, as his recordings cover a wide stylistic range. My responses to his playing range from love to outright dislike, depending upon the musical setting. His "second great quintet" (with H. Hancock, W. Shorter, R. Carter and T. Williams) is my favorite Jazz group, period. I love and admire what those players did in that group. When it comes to players I "love", I can't help but "admire" their musicianship. There are many players who are clearly very skilled but whose playing doesn't move me, emotionally. I "respect"  those individuals. 

I'm more of an album-by-album listener. I can't think of any case in which I love every recording by a given artist, even those artists I love above all others. For example, "Europe '72" by the Grateful Dead is one of my best-loved recordings, period-- "desert island" material. for me. The fact that I play guitar no doubts helps with appreciation and thus, admiration for the playing. However, most of the band's output is far too sloppy and technically inconsistent for me to endure. I guess I both love and hate the Dead. 

I can't comment on Classical music except to admit that I respect its creators and practictioners but find it uninvolving, as a rule. The rhythms simply don't engage my body. (I'm one of those listeners for whom PRaT is vital). At the other end of the spectrum would be Rap/Hip-Hop, which offers nothing but rhythm and of an extremely monotonous (to my ears) character. 








 

I’d be curious as to "which Miles" you’ve listened to, as his recordings cover a wide stylistic range. My responses to his playing range from love to outright dislike, depending upon the musical setting.

Thanks first for your participation and kind and interesting observations...

Food for tought!

First thing to be clear i like Miles Davis.... I dont know of anyone who like jazz who will not like him... I admire him for the player he was, taking the trumpet playing in a whole new range of styles and adventures.... His production is not all to my liking but in general i like a great portion of his creations...

Miles take the trumpet to his ultimate possibilities, and the trumpet serve him , impossible to not like him...

But the mystery for me is and always has been that Chet Baker touch me deeper in the heart with a minimalistic playing completely devoted to singing emotions with trumpet or voice.... I love him.... I dont even know if i admire him ! In truth i admire him, without being bothered by the admiration and the distance it create between the object of admiration and the admirer.... Because there is no distance, no separation at all between his music and my soul...

I listen to Miles always with pleasure, i listen to Baker with crunching emotion....


Another example is Sun Ra i admire him without reserve, but i dont know a single piece of him that can touch my heart.... None i know of.... But his production is enormous i must wait.... I like Sun Ra a lot....I will be always fascinated by him and his music engine.... But i will never love him like Bill Evans....I even bought the biography of Sun Ra....  
😁


I like Kenneth Wheeler for example very much like Miles, a true genius also, and i listen to all his cd with awe for his unique musical improvisation and sound....I admire him with all my spirit and soul and i know i admire him totally..... But why did he never touch me like Chet?
I like Wheeler so much i can listen to him 12 hours in line, i did it just days ago.....😊 I cannot be tired of his mastering of the trumpet.... It is a TRUE genius not at all under Miles... But not one of his piece touch my heart like Chet? Why?


In classical music my favorite example is Stravinsky, i admire him, but here admiration has killed my love.... I rarely listen to him, for me his music is always a cold perfect creation...A perfect object.... Unlike Scriabin that touch my soul.... Why ?




I dont say i am right, that my "taste" are right.... I am only fascinated by the mystery of music and the many levels where music touch our body, heart, soul, mind.....


Like most has understood my thread has nothing to do with bashing an artist and defending an other one at all....

My thread is a reflection about how deep music go into ourself and why?

Yes; "taste" is indeed a mystery.   I suspect, had we access to the entire spectrum of what we call a human being, we might have a better sense of what constitutes "taste". Music operates on multiple levels, some that are fairly evident and others that remain hidden from view for most of us.

I have a visceral dislike of the classically trained voice. Why? I could say that it sounds artificial or inauthentic to me, but does such terminology   really get to the heart of my antipathy? No. I suspect there is something else going on. Perhaps it's a result of experiences from past lives. Or, perhaps it has more to do with something that cannot be explained intellectually-- sound as vibration-- affecting me on levels I cannot perceive, only feel, and in a rather primitive manner at that-- solely in terms of liking or disliking. Call it resonance. 

Perhaps, the music we most love tunes us or entrains us within, a vibration or range of vibrations that connect us to a level of being we most crave to experience, whether we're cognizant of it or not. We could come up with all sorts of reasons why we love or hate Engelberg Humperdink, EmmyLou Harris, Yanni, Al Green, Ali Akbar Khan, Sara Vaughan or Kiri Takanawa  without ever perceiving what's going on at what might be called a subtle or soul level.

I'm theorizing that we recognize when what we're hearing resonates with this level because of how it makes us feel and how much we like whatever that feeling may be. For some, it may be peace; for others, aggression, excitement, melancholy or anger. People are "tuned" differently and so, enjoy "resonating" with different qualities of vibration. 

I have no idea if this is how things are or not; it's simply an attempt to expore possibilities within the bounds of my life experience and conceptual framework.  

I read you post with great interest.... You are spot on...

I think the same as you...

I think we must take the time to learn and educate our "taste" toward something larger...

But we cannot change totally what we are.....The precise connection we have with music, the privileged channel we used will not change... But the road we travel may be enlarged and can be made to encompass more than what is in our past history...

My best to you and my thanks for this interesting reflexion of yours....

There is a very nice album of Kenneth Wheeler with John Taylor -  i also like Wheeler. Check out also Paolo Fresu if you like trumpet.

mahgister:  I felt, with that last post, I was going out on a limb somewhat to speak in such esoteric terms on an Audiogon forum and am glad it resonated with you. 

If you have the time and inclination, I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts re: the process of "education".

As it happens, I seem to have arrived at a point where it's become extremely difficult to find music I like enough to buy. I'm wondering whether I've exhausted the possibilities that exist within the limits of my taste and how one might expand the boundaries. 

Excellent comments, both. Last night I began to write a post which I did not finish nor post (for no good reason) which read something like this:

**** I both admire and love your attitude, mahgister.. Conviction and/in evenhandedness.

Stuartk, the idea that Miles was not a particularly accomplished player, technically, is a myth. This notion sadly points to the lack of musical acumen on the part of some so called “critics”. There is a very important difference between a musician such as Miles sometimes sounding technically rough or unpolished because of actual technical limitations as an instrumentalist and playing in a way that could be interpreted as such for emotional effect. This is a deliberate stylistic choice....controlled technical abandon, if you will. The proof of this can be found in the many recorded examples of his beautifully controlled and virtuosic playing. ****

Segueing to more recent comments, I must include Stuartk in my admiration for the attitudes expressed. Attitudes and comments that support something that I have often felt is sorely lacking in discussions about music and musicians.

IMO, in order to make a more complete and honest assessment of the true value of a musician’s musical vision the listener needs to have, at least, a modicum of humility. I think that “humility” encapsulates much of what I think your recent comments express. Before passing ultimate judgment it would be most productive to acknowledge that our feelings and reaction to an artist’s musical vision is inevitably colored by our own individual experiences; not only as as listeners, but life in general. It is well and good, as is often suggested, to “listen to what you like” and leave it at that without any effort whatsoever to get past, or even acknowledge our built-in biases. Obviously, this is a personal call as some feel that art should not require any effort whatsoever on the part of the “consumer” (listener); that there should be immediate gratification. I disagree. This attitude is very limiting and shuts the door to growth as a listener. Not only will this limit the exploration of artists that are not immediately enjoyed, but it limits the depth of appreciation of those that we do enjoy. It also makes it far easier to recognize the imposters.

There is a very nice album of Kenneth Wheeler with John Taylor - i also like Wheeler. Check out also Paolo Fresu if you like trumpet.

Thanks niodari very good recommendation for those who may not know them....I already had all their works....Or almost and i love/like them all...

My best to you....

If you have the time and inclination, I’d be very interested to hear your thoughts re: the process of "education".

in order to make a more complete and honest assessment of the true value of a musician’s musical vision the listener needs to have, at least, a modicum of humility.

Education of self need humility....

We must learn how to learn first....

We must accept our own limitations, music touch us in a way that is a unique perspective and a specific take on our own body/soul/spirit organization...Music increase or decrease our own spititual metabolism in each of us in a particular way... The price to pay for a deep plunge in this ocean is that we cannot inhabit all islands.... Choices must be made and are made before even our birth... Then it seems that some music will never touch us , some other will if we discover it or learn how to digest it...


Knowing that we must also open our ears and mind.... Discovery has a price.... We must Learn how to listen to music like a musician must learn... Perhaps not in the same exact way, i am not a musician, and i dont read sheet of music for example...But we must learn to listen to the effect of sounds and also the effect of music on the metabolism increase or decrease body/soul/spirit.... The interaction of these 3 will change with different sounds, frequencies, rythm, chords melody, harmony, timbre etc...

We must learn to listen to sounds and music .... They are not the same....In the 2 cases a learning experience is necessary but cannot be forced nor imposed.... We must put in place the conditions to do so ourself...Reading about what we listen to is a good idea...


We will never change our basic body/soul/spirit specific metabolism, the relation for example of will/emotion/ and thinking is different in each of us.... The goal is not to like everything , we will never be able to change totally our "taste" but we can enlarge it toward new worlds of sounds, but also to new realm of music...


Other cultures music is a good way to do so.... Not only classical or popular jazz or european music....


I remember the many important moment of my musical life:


The discovery of poetry with folk singer or popular singer....

The discovery of Bach and all choral music or of the spirit...

The discovery of Bruckner or the discovery of orchestral music....Mahler after that....

The discovery of Scriabin and of piano music with pianist Sofronitsky...And the power of the musician playing and recreating the works...

The discovery of spirit no more with only Bach but with Iranian masters....and with Indian one....

The discovery of the supremum importance of the musicians themselves with jazz music.....



We must listen also to each chapter of musical european history like if it was a chapter of our own soul history.... And it is even if we are not conscious of this deep fact....Learning why a period captivate  us more than other period is also a key to understand where we come from and where we can go....


 If the soul is an earth, music is the  geology of this spirit.....

What a rich discussion !  Thank you, frogman and mahgister, for offering your deeply-considered perspectives. I'm grateful for the opportunity to participate in such a dialogue. Thanks, frogman, for the clarification re: Miles and technique. 

Up until now, I've only participated in gear forums -- most often when seeking help with system upgrades. I didn't realize what I'd been missing, here, in the music forum.

Frogman: I recognize there've been plenty of times when I've given in to the impulse to reject that which does not yield pleasure imediately. I also believe what mahgister asserts-- that "a learning experience is necessary but cannot be forced nor imposed." Taken together, your collective com-ments would appear to suggest this "education" process requires a somewhat delicate balance of "effort" and "allowing". 

For me, it seems one limiting aspect involves tension. Too much tension and I feel assaulted; too little and my attention wanders. This appears to occur on an energetic, rather than an intellectual or emotional level. For example, I enjoy dissonance/atonality up to a point but beyond that point, it evokes distress and a sort of spontaneous disengagment occurs, perhaps driven by some primitive drive for self-preservation in the face of what is perceived as a "danger". 

 Saxophonist David Murray is a good example. I've heard certain recordings in which he generally plays in a zone that moves from a degree of dissonance I can just tolerate into degrees that feel (to me) overwhelmingly off-putting. On other recordings (the ones I own), he takes more of a middle ground, moving from quite consonant playing into degrees of dissonance I can enjoy. He continually moves back and forth from one to the other, and in so doing, dissonance enhances consonance and vice versa. The yin/yang symbol comes to mind, here. 

If pitch is one means by which tension operates, then rhythm is another, no? It involves far more than the beats-per-minute or time signature. What sort of "feel" or "energy" is being expressed in a player's execution of a given rhythm makes a big difference.

I could go on, but I'll restrain myself. 











 

mahgister: I love:  "If the soul is an earth, music is the geology of this spirit....."

You are a poet?

I could go on, but I’ll restrain myself.

Never restraint yourself here.... 😊

I suggest between this fine line between "effort" and "allowing" to read and study a little bit around the music which interest you without having yet all your heart in it....

Article of music critics, philosophers, or simply bios.... Reading and studying a bit help a lot....

I remember younger when the reading of the text on the vinyl cardbox presentation of the intention and epoch of the composer and his situation in it help me a lot....Same thing about Indian and persian music elementary introduction... I read biographies of Scriabin and Sun Ra that help me to appreciate their journey for example....Reading about unusual instrument help a lot....

Do you know where come from the vichitra veena or the sarangi ?


The other helping method to cross and navigate this fine line between effort and allowance is listening at small dose, and reading at the same time around the intention of the composer or the musician... It is listening without imposing anything in the attention....Like background listening.... Alternating this with some deep attentive short listenings sessions looking for the ideas and concepts we are discovered in our reading studies...


This was my way.... Perhaps good for me and not for all.... I dont know....

One thing is for sure, enlarging my musical scope was always enlarging my own soul at the same time....

Thanks for your suggestions, mahgister. I'm curious how intellectual understanding can impact the spontaneous reaction to music/sound that occurs on a non-intellectual level. 

If an interval "feels" unpleasant to us, it's not clear to me how understanding the composer's intention can affect the interval's  "energetic charge" -- it's effect upon our metabolism. 

I apologize if I'm missing something. 

I’m curious how intellectual understanding can impact the spontaneous reaction to music/sound that occurs on a non-intellectual level.

Acclimating our soul to another soul through biography or essays is not only an intellectual work or even mainly an intellectual one... It is mostly a contextualization of another soul..A way to link our journey on earth to another one journey... If you stay only on an intellectual level in reading you will miss the task...

If an interval "feels" unpleasant to us, it’s not clear to me how understanding the composer’s intention can affect the interval’s "energetic charge" -- it’s effect upon our metabolism.

Understanding the composer intentions participate of this contextualization of his soul...And to the contextualization of your own listening interpretating soul at our own time....



I will give you an example because it is easier to give an example...

When i listen Schoenberg atonalism music i feel a strange out of this world emotion that is very powerful but that is not "metabolizable" by my spirit/soul/body organization ... The chords and colors feel are icy cold and invit me in some ethereal artificial world... It is interesting but not gripping in a transformative way for me...

No reading will modify that experience...

When i listened to the late works of Scriabin, on the fine line between tonality and atonality, the dynamic movement which withdraws me from this world and returns me there immediately after in a continual back and forth, dynamise all my creative spirit, in an uncontrolled enthusiastic surge toward the infinite, through my own being...

Reading about Scriabin, his intention, his superhuman wishes for humanity through his music illuminated his work.. Schoenberg was only a genius with his creation of atonality, Scriabin appeared before me like a Christ-like figure who used atonality WITHOUT making it a dogma and used it to transform humanity not to entertain it.....

But the main reason of my love for him was also the discovery of a rare pianist able to play him at the required level....Sofronitsky...

Then Schoenberg i may like him and admiring him... He did not touch me at all ...Like Stravinsky they are brain and genius only...I admire them and i know exactly why...

But Scriabin transform my life at each listening like Bach.... I love hin and i feel exactly why... For other reasons but related one in the history of occidental music, Bach and scriabin partake a concious masterful use of the colors tonal scale for the redemption of humanity at the limit of the tonal world but never completely out of it like Schoenberg...Schoenberg method is only new entertainment not alchemical transfrmation... The brain play the more important part in Schoenberg .... Thhe brain and the will play the more important part in Wagner.... With Beethoven, Scriabin or Bach the heart and the will play the more important part the brain come in third ....


But the first time i listened to Scriabin i only perceived a complex and uninteresting curtain of harmonies without melody...My ears/brain cannot proceed the information that was too powerful to be understood by the ears/brain/heart/will in the form of their complex initiated completely new interactive movements ...


I read much, i was also initiated by some musician in my younger years about him, that initiation kept my curiosity alive; i begun to understood slowly the promethean task behind Scriabin creation, which is not unlike Beethoven or Wagner ( that is  more artificial in Wagner more natural in Beethoven ) and my complete listening of music was changed for ever....

I begin to perceive complete new dimensions in sounds colors.... Thanks to a patient curiosity and a slow investigation.... And i loved him spontaneously at the right mature moment of true discovery and enlightenment when the moment was right in the person of his greatest interpreter on piano...

Not loving something at some time only means that we are not ready sometimes....

Without Scriabin my musical life would have been way poorer...Because listening to a new colors perceived dimensions has no price...

I place Scriabin now next to the greatest composers of all times... Not under....

Re the “fine line between effort and allowing”:

Music, like all art, evolves over time; all creative artists build on what came before to one degree or another.  Additionally, art is a reflection of the time of its creation.  These are but two of the reasons that one of the best ways to traverse this fine line between effort and allowing is to approach this process from a historical (chronological) viewpoint.  From a musicological standpoint there is tremendous and inescapable logic to the stylistic evolution of Jazz and “Classical” and there exist many parallels between the two.  For example, the listener that has at least some familiarity with the music of Charlie Parker will find the music of John Coltrane to be much more palatable on first listen than the listener whose exposure to Jazz ended with Lester Young (Swing era).  

In all serious music, the move from very comfortable harmonic and rhythmic ideas to the more liberal use of dissonance and obtuse rhythms is a direct reflection of societal changes that evoke similar changes.  Understanding this will put things in better context.  This may not necessarily cause one to actually love the music, but can do much to move one in that direction.  

Great post...

Ernest Ansermet, the great director and maestro, who was a mathematician of first formation and wrote a  masterful 1200 pages book about the musical experience says that the history of music reflect the history of the soul and the history of each soul mirror itself in the history of music...

Like you said we cannot love all there is to love on the same footing because we are all different in our approach to music, but studying a bit history and styles help a lot for a deeper experience....

Well, the two of you have provided much food for thought!  At this point, I think I need to take some time and try to digest what you've shared.  Thanks again for a deeply engaging discussion. I'll keep an eye out for your posts in the future. My best wishes to both of you. 

Well, the two of you have provided much food for thought! At this point, I think I need to take some time and try to digest what you've shared. Thanks again for a deeply engaging discussion. I'll keep an eye out for your posts in the future. My best wishes to both of you.

Thanks and much appreciated....

My best to you....

I love Beethoven. And the Beatles. 

I love Beethoven. And the Beatles.

My thread is not about "taste"....Who are interested to know our tastes? Or what we hate?

I am not intereted by the love/hate polarity but by the more subtle love/like polarity.... When our music listening is more than an unconscious habit, it begin to be a conscious journey.... In unconscious habit the polarity love/hate dominate....In the conscious music journey the polarity love/like dominate....

It is about the immediate communion with some music, i call " love"...

And about a more distant link mediated by the brain, i called " liking"...

The 2 are important, i listen to way more music i like than music i love... For sure also many music i listen to, i like and love at the same times....Here i ask for those music we mostly "love" and the music we mostly only "like" to study the forces which are at play behind these contrast in ouselves....These 2 polarities reflect something that is in the music and something that is in us....The 2, what is in us and what we pick in the music, describe our journey and sometimes something about the music itself when a great number of people could agree...

We dont want to know only or mainly  what you love, we want to understand with a multiple double lists choices how you related to music....

"Tastes" are only anecdotal in themselves....But our way to link ourself to music, sometimes more with the brain than the heart, can teach us something....It begin to be more than anecdotal and can reveal an aspect of our journey...

It is simple to spontaneously name what we love or hate; it is less easy to spot what we love and what we cannot love but like a lot.... This is the "crux" question of this thread....

My best to you....




«Crocodiles also love, but we can think before eating»-Groucho Marx