A philosophical question.


I want to pose a sort of philosophical question about our listening to music.
The obvious answer to the question is that we should listen to whatever we damn please. But the query is: should we be happy listening to our favorite composers and compositions, or should we feel guilty about not exploring new horizons and music we’re prone to hate?  For me, the obvious bitter pills are such as Liszt, Neilson and Bruckner, not to mention the Second Viennese school.  We run the risk of close-mindedness by ignoring that which we don’t know and missing out on what what glories might be out there.  On the other hand, we only have so much time, and there is a universe of more accessible music available.
I just wonder if this dilemma has crossed anyone else's mind.
rvpiano
IMO part of discovery is setting aside well worn paths and ego and deliberately seeking out new or different. Humbling oneself to have a Sensei is quite powerful and certainly a traditional thing in some cultures.. including music and musical expression

anyway, “ enjoy every sandwich “ as the late great Warren Zevon said....

some day... it will be that last sandwich
Students attending the music conservatory don’t realize how good they’ve got it. Where I am, the training at CCM is extremely conservatory but excellent nonetheless. There used to be a composers festival during the summer and people like Moritz Eggert, Steve Reich, etc. would visit, perform, direct clinics, etc. It was great and nothing at all like putting something unfamiliar on the stereo.

I just believe there are so many variables where it comes to whether I’m touched by something or not. I grew up manly appreciating classical and jazz but always looked forward to seeing the Grateful Dead because I like freaky weirdo’s and thus developed a taste for what and how they played. Most often, I need to feel involved in some way, even if it just means having a simple appreciation. I do have hope that gifted new artists and composers will be recognized.

Do I believe Beethoven and Jimi Hendrix should be a part of the same conversation, not really but not in a comparative way. For sake of not over complicating things, they can be appreciated for what they are and unless I have low self esteem, it really doesn’t matter beyond that.
As far as I'm concerned, genre is truly overrated as a way of choosing music to listen to. If it's good, i.e., if it moves you on any aesthetic, emotional or visceral level, it's worthwhile. As Jethro Tull's Ian Anderson once said, it's all noise to a Martian anyway.

And oh yeah, if you don't like Bruckner, try the Third Movement of the guy's Symphony No. 8, the Adagio, especially the old DG recording with Eugen Jochum and the Berlin Phil.  Transcendentally lovely and moving.  And hey -- I saw that Michel Legrand gig at Shelly's Manne Hole. Was it because my buddy had to see Ray Brown?
In my opinion, it's for the best to try and explore everything out there, all music genres. You might be surprised to see that you like a variety of other genres, artists, and so on. Yes, time is limited, so you should spend it exploring whilst still prioritizing what you like most.
On the other hand, we only have so much time, and there is a universe of more accessible music available.

millercarbon describes my situation and approach very well. I'd add that repeated listening to something not to my taste is unlikely to warm me. When my wife was in her graduate music program, I must've listened to a Scriabin (and one other I can't recall) piece on the piano hundreds of times. It was the proverbial "Fingernails on a blackboard" to me and I just don't warm up to that. More power to those who can acquire a taste.
I have a better record for acquiring taste in food, but if it's on the menu, yeah, the lamb. Or the calf's liver.