|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
|
|
Music Lane It's all about the music, dude! Sit down, relax and listen to some tunes. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Why is it a surprise posted by castironandtubes on April 2, 2007 at 14:04:11:
Well, the thread was about top recordings, not top music, and I for one do make some big distinctions between the two. You may have a point about the poster seeking other's "top" choices, but he also said that he was thinking of the more popular symphonies or concertos from Mozart and Beethoven as a starting point so rather than choosing my top 5, I tried to select some music from an area that wasn't getting much representation and which might appeal to someone who liked Mozart and Beethoven. A little variety is nice and others were covering the standard reportoire quite well. I felt no need to duplicate or add to recommendations in that area but I thought it worth while to offer a few choices from a different period, a period which I think does not receive the attention and recognition it deserves.I did try to suggest works that might appeal to someone with the tastes he mentioned rather than suggesting recordings I loved that would likely leave him cold. Part of the reason for that is simply that I don't like using taste as a base for classifying things as "top". Everyone does have individual tastes and one person's top 5 can easily be another's "not even also rans". I wasn't interested in trying to say that these are "the top 5 recordings and you have to have and appreciate them". I was interested in saying "here are 5 great recordings from a period that isn't getting much attention in the responses you're getting, and which I think could appeal to someone who likes Mozart and Beethoven".
"…the fact that other people didn't name any in their "5 top" is no reflection of their relative awareness of it."
I did not criticise any poster as being unaware of the late 20th century. I made the observation that it was not well represented in the recommendations others had made, and that I thought ignoring this period was detrimental to the health of classical music as a tradition. I made no criticism of other posters or any attack on their tastes. They chose to give choices that they thought would suit someone who liked Mozart and Beethoven and so did I. I simply stepped a little further away from those 2 composers and avoided duplicating the recommendations of others whilst making an observation about why I thought concentrating on the works of past composers to the exclusion of contemporary ones was detrimental to classical music.
There are going to be a lot of recommendations made in response to the original request, and the poster is not going to race out and buy them all. I certainly wouldn't suggest that he race out and buy all 5 of mine. I would like to see him consider the purchase of at least one 20th or 21st century work in his choices (not necessarily including one of my recommendations), and also some music from the renaissance, baroque, and classical (mostly before 1800 AD) periods as well. I'd love to see others join in with selections from those periods that they think are well recorded, and which would add a bit more variety to the general run of recommendations. There's an awful lot of music in the classical tradition and the late 18th to early 20th century tends to get a disproportionate amount of attention in many ways.
As to what constitutes aural wallpaper, I'd respond that it largely falls into 3 categories. The first is great music that gets played far too often so that it loses its freshness and appeal for the listener. Beethoven's 5th Symphony has probably qualified for a long time now. Back in the 60's or 70's when the film "Elvira Madigan" came out, Mozart's 21st Piano Concerto definitely qualified for a decade or more. Thankfully it is heard much less often these days, and I appreciate it much more as a result. There's nothing wrong with such music, it is genuinely great music, but it can be destroyed and reduced to cliché status by being played too often. The second category is less than great music that gets too much attention for some reason or another. Lots of Mozart got there during his 250th anniversary year. All of Mozart's music is at least good, and a lot of it is great, but Mozart became wallpaper for me that year because of the fact that my local radio station embarked on a "let's play everything he wrote, and play it as often as we can" campaign which resulted in a lot of less than great Mozart being played in preference to playing some great music from other composers. The third category is that of music which simply does not engage the listener making the judgement. Everyone has their own choices here and I see no reason to identify mine since the 'problem' if you want to call it that is not so much the composer or the music but simply the fact that it does not suit my taste.
So, for me the term "aural wallpaper" is not necessarily a criticism of the music but, more importantly, a criticism of the way in which a lot of good music is abused by excessive exposure. Listening to other music can open new horizons, but it also has the virtue of 'cleaning the ears' and allowing one to appreciate the standard reportoire again, even being able to appreciate it more deeply than previously simply because one's experience has grown and returning to a work which had previously become overly familiar and boring with a bit of new experience under the belt can allow you to find new things in the work, things that could not be found if one did not also listen to other music as well.
David Aiken
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Why is it a surprise - David Aiken 21:10:02 04/02/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
