Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
funkcroquet
Nov 29, 2004

You want to start with the EMI album with him conducting the Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima on it.

He has lots of real boring neo-romantic stuff that I never bothered to investigate but some of the choral stuff is cool too IIRC and the St. Luke Passion is great. Personally I'd get a bunch of Ligeti and Xenakis after checking out the Threnody disc and the Passion

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

funkcroquet
Nov 29, 2004

deong posted:

Thanks for the links. After reading this thread, and starting to listen to some of the music... it seems that a lot of the enjoyment (bad word, best I can think of) of classical pieces (at least, the nuances of this interpretation vs that) comes from playing a particular interment.. being part of an orchestra at some point. Does this seem accurate at all, or maybe its just a trend here?

The factor you mention may heighten the listening experience and modify tastes but it does not fundamentally determine whether you do or don't listen to classical in general. Case in point: I don't play any instruments competently and my knowledge of theory is quite spotty but I listen to classical most days of the week. Many pieces' interpretations differ in really obvious ways (in addition to the nuances of phrasing &c.), so, for example, I know what Eotvos's Berio sounds like, as opposed to Boulez's or Chailly's Berio. To some extent this depends on the composer; for example, Mahler interpretations range more broadly in terms of stylistic choices than Messiaen interpretations, though I still have multiple Messiaen interpretations for reasons of box-set economics and wanting variety.

funkcroquet
Nov 29, 2004

DrSunshine posted:

I've been flailing around kind of aimlessly, trying to investigate into the twelve-tone technique and serialism, but all of the stuff I've come across so far just sounds like so much harsh clanking and honking to me. So I come, asking this thread who the best, most listenable twelve-tone composer is. I'd really like to broaden my horizons in this area.

All roads lead to Webern.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUQT2uKJoTM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-V_niGEXisA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIqHUovf6us

funkcroquet
Nov 29, 2004

CowOnCrack posted:

Also, for those interested in musical history, Alfred Schnittke might end up being the last great classical composer. His works are mostly from the 60s/70s and are featured heavily in television and cinema. There hasn't been a composer in the 40 year gap since then who has been prolific enough to have written works for every instrumental arrangement and style (Orchestral, Concerto, Choral, Chamber, Opera, Ballets, and Solo Instrumental).

Lachenmann, Rihm, Saariaho and Neuwirth (at least) fit this in spirit if not in letter.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply