100 Albums You Would wish for...from a Genie

I read that as a pretty amazing post...

 

Music is not about tonality versus atonality... Etc...

Music is about visible architecture and rythmical times ....And musical time is way more complex than physical time...

I prefer Persian and Indian music or chinese and japan to all dodecaphonic , seralism and other for me artificial written system with no possible historical emotional background for the musician interpretation ... It is music without history or feelings...Boring in a word... Silence is better... I dont deny that some of these works can be interesting and they are , like Berg concerto for example...

i valued improvisation and musician microdynamic management and emotional investment in his improvised interpretation of classical music....

Music is about feeling, willing, and thinking...It is a tool to put consciousness to another level...It is why musical time with his 2 dimensions, horizontal and vertical, instead of a line or instead of a timeless set of notes, is so complex...

In serialism music is disconnected of the natural rythms of human metabolism ...Rythms and times may be cosmical but must not loose their link with the human body... Scriabin i admired so much succeeded in doing this...

You cannot call Bach "art of the fugue " boring... You make me smile at least... 😊

You cannot call Beethoven quartets "boring" and hoping to be taken seriously...Sorry... 😊

Boring means : no surprize, no complexities, no emotions...

I think that the most boring music ever written is the music by Shoenberg serialism...There is no "time" in this music...It is really a simplistic music... A music where rythmical times are evacuated and we are let in a no man’s land of sounds ... This music attracted no more any great interest because composers need a public and need interpreters more than they need a "fancy" abstract new language...

You had never seen what is in Bach art of the fugue , it is like calling Euclidean geometry boring... It is not even wrong, it reflect only your limit not the Euclid geometry status ...

And you cannot answer to me that serialism is like fractal geometry  compared to Euclidean geometry... Because in music time is the central concept and rythm of times not deconstructed forms as Mandelbrot geometry deconstructing Euclidean concepts of dimensions...Because music is rythms of time and times of rythm not visual forms not mere "notes" systems...Serialism is like Chaos theory compared to complexity theory, in complexity theory we see how emerge order from chaos... Serialism is born from classical musical history, it is a "moment" of this history, not his culmination and his abolition in timelessness..

Most of the composers you like had no interest at all for me...Because they lost rythm and time... Musician playing this are robots...

I prefer Charles Ives and Scriabin... Scriabin is a genius who unlike Schoenberg did not create an algebraic system , his genius dictated and improvized  his last sonatas between tonality and atonality in a clever way... There is a place for emotions there ...

For opera try Akhnaten of Philip Glass a masterpiece ressuscitating the spirit of Egypt ...

For something different try : Ostad elahi...Supreme master of rythms...

Or Nikhil Banerjee...A god in India...

And you will see what is  "non boring" music...

I prefer Sun Ra to Schoenberg... Each one has his gods i imagine... 😊

Anyway i apologize for my answer... It is very interesting to have so divergent oppposite opnion... Dont take it personal... I like discussion...

You are not as the average dude then my post is not only a complete reversal of your opinion but a compliment to someone who dare to speak his mind...

 

Music is rythms as the heart is rythms and the cosmos rythms and we need Nature to recognize cosmic rythms and musical history to understand music...We cannot reduce nature to transhumanism 2.0 and reduce music to serialism... Listen to African speaking Yoruba drummers masters to know about non boring music ...Not Schoenberg..

 

Second, as far as Beethoven, Bach, Mozart, and other tonal, "common practice" composers go, I find them boring and predictable. My interest in classical music didn’t start until I discovered: atonal, serial, avant-garde, 12 tone, spectralism, ’new complexity’, and, generally, ’thorny’, challenging classical music. Now I am almost obsessed.

@mahgister

Music is not about tonality versus atonality... Etc...

I am just stating a personal preference, I am not making any statements on the musical theory.

I just know, that for me, classical music that does happen to be tonal, I find predictable and boring.

Music is about visible architecture and rythmical times ....And musical time is way more complex than physical time...

That is certainly part of what is about. And complex time signatures and rhythms is one of the things that draws me to post WWII classical music.

I prefer Persian and Indian music or chinese and japan to all dodecaphonic , seralism and other for me artificial written system with no possible historical emotional background for the musician interpretation ... It is music without history or feelings...Boring in a word... Silence is better..

I also like Indian and Persian music, Chinese and Japanese, not so much.

And it is nice for you, that you enjoy them more than serial music. I do not.

I am not sure why the lack of historical background is at all important. And I am also not conceding that that is even true. And I have no problems getting all sorts of emotional impact and content from post WWII classical music.

I also have to mention, that serialism is only a small part of the classical music I listen to. Elliott Carter is probably my favorite composer, and in his very long career (he lived to the age of 103, and was composing up until he died), and he never composed a serial piece in all that time.

 

Music is about feeling, willing, and thinking...It is a tool to put consciousness to another level...It is why musical time with his 2 dimensions, horizontal and vertical, instead of a line or instead of a timeless set of notes, is so complex...

I am 100% agreement!

While listening to the classical music that I like, I am constantly feeling, willing, and thinking, and I much more often than not, transported to different levels of consciousness. There have been more times than I can count, where my wife will come into my sound room, and I am so transported by the music of Carter, Wuorinen, Berio, or some other ’thorny’ sounding music, and I am completely unaware of her presence.

In serialism music is disconnected of the natural rythms of human metabolism ...Rythms and times may be cosmical but must not loose their link with the human body...

Again, you are talking only about serialism. The majority of the classical music I listen to, is not serial.

And, even if true, I am not sure why being disconnected from the rhythms of the human body are important, or why I should care?

It’s almost as if you think there is only one way to listen to music, and there is only a limited list of reasons to listen, or attributes that are important.

You’re not implying, that you have the ’correct’ way of listening, and I, and others that enjoy some atonal and thorny sounding music, are incorrect?

You cannot call Bach "art of the fugue " boring... You make me smile at least... 😊

You cannot call Beethoven quartets "boring" and hoping to be taken seriously...Sorry... 😊

I did not say they were boring. I said they were boring TO ME.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t both of our musical tastes and opinions, subjective?

When I listen to those composers, all I hear, is emotions that are obvious and predictable. The classical music I listen to, for me, is also loaded with emotional content, but is not broadcast in neon. It takes some work to understand it, then it will reveal the emotional content. It just takes a different way of listening, than the obvious (to me) emotional content of Beethoven.

Boring means : no surprize, no complexities, no emotions...

I admit Beethoven and Bach have emotion in their compositions, it is just too obvious for me. And yes, I find both of them, (and Mozart, Mahler, Brahms, etc,) to be completely unsurprising.

The classical music I listen to is as complex as any you mention, it is just complex in different ways.

And once again, you continue to talk about nothing but serialism, which I will say again, is just a small portion of the classical music I listen to.

Most of the composers you like had no interest at all for me...Because they lost rythm and time... Musician playing this are robots...

They did not lose rhythm, they just express it in more complex ways. Sometimes over short fragments of music, other times, over the entire piece, with different rhythmic fragments returning, and being modified. There is quite a bit of symmetry in quite a bit of post WWII classical music, it is just expressed differently. It just takes a different way of listening.

I prefer Sun Ra to Schoenberg... Each one has his gods i imagine... 😊

As far as Philip Glass goes. I used to be a fan of minimalism, now, not so much.

As far as Indian classical music goes, I am a fan. I have a decent collection.

And I am also a fan of Sun Ra, although, I do like other avant-garde jazz musicians a bit better. Anthony Braxton, who I have on my list of 100. I probably own about 10 Sun Ra recordings, and saw him live a couple of times.

And again, you continue to go back to Schoenberg and serialism, when the vast majority of the classical music I listen to, is not serial. Not to mention, that Schoenberg, is nowhere near my favorite composer.

 

"For example, the sound of a classically trained voice is like fingernails on a blackboard"

"Your subjective tastes are not some sort of universal standard by which to measure others’ esthetic (sic) preferences.".
Well some have taste and others like doof doof music.

I did not say they were boring. I said they were boring TO ME.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t both of our musical tastes and opinions, subjective?

I reacted to your provocative claim about Bach being boring for YOU....If you were in pop music i would have not reacted...

For sure , the music you call "thorny" is mostly boring for me...

Then we are on the same subjective footing ...

I, as you did , gave my take...

Music is for me always intimately related to a historical tradition... Be it Persian or classicaL OR jazz...

And for me music is related to body rythms and not only to the mind...

Then any composer who go to far and cut too much link with his tradition appear a bit boring to me and not healthy...

But as you said it is subjective and we even may like the same composer with our own different reasons...

But claiming to be "bored" by Bach art of the fugue and the last quartets of Beethoven is astounding for me coming from someone liking music...

It is a gesture ....😊

You like to be provocative , i reacted...

For me Scriabin or Sorabji or Robert Simpson are not less a giant than Carter...They are not "thorny" for sure...

Take my answer as a "gesturing" answer like your post was...😊

No one go on the same road to the same house... You are right about that...

My best to you...

 

@mofimadness ,

100 in to small of a number!  My list would include about ninety of the albums you listed plus about ninety that @stuartk listed plus some from others lists and then there’s my additions.  Feeling under the weather this morning, but I’ll try figure out a l list later.