Options

The Classical Music Thread

1246720

Posts

  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    Actually that's bullshit. There are a thousand composers of the time who could be taught for adhering to a structure, that's what everyone did. Mozart and Bach are taught precisely because they transcend the form while staying within it, though in actual fact Mozart broke more musical rules than pretty much anyone until serial technique in the 20th Century.

    Two other things: First, every composer I have ever met and worked with acknowledges that simplicity is the hardest thing to achieve in music - it's easy to throw lots of lines and instruments into a film orchestra to muddy the water and create a wall of sound, it's much harder and more exposed trying the same thing with a string quartet - so I'm not entirely sure how calling Mozart 'simple' is a bad thing. Second, if you think that his music is 'inherently limited emotionally' have you actually, um, heard it? Have you listened to the C Minor Mass and Requiem? Are you completely insane or are you just a mechanical bot posting lines from some internet dictionary? Listen to the final act of The Marriage of Figaro...great composers have said that they would happily die to have written just that one act, it's considered to be a crowning achievement in music throughout history, and if you can listen to it without being deeply, deeply moved then I submit that you have no soul and/or emotions and thus are in no position to judge emotional responses to music.

    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    stiliststilist Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    hey guys i really like this one composer and if you don't agree with me you're a complete retard who has no right to talk

    just so we're clear and all

    stilist on
    I poop things on my site and twitter
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    stilist wrote:
    hey guys i really like this one composer and if you don't agree with me you're a complete retard who has no right to talk

    just so we're clear and all

    You're forgetting that I play the piano! If you can't hear that, than I can't help you.

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    stiliststilist Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Poldy wrote:
    stilist wrote:
    hey guys i really like this one composer and if you don't agree with me you're a complete retard who has no right to talk

    just so we're clear and all
    You're forgetting that I play the piano! If you can't hear that, than I can't help you.
    You're not handling this any better than (s)he is.

    Can't we all agree to goddamn disagree?

    stilist on
    I poop things on my site and twitter
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    stilist wrote:
    hey guys i really like this one composer and if you don't agree with me you're a complete retard who has no right to talk

    just so we're clear and all

    Bartók 4 ever

    Elendil on
  • Options
    stiliststilist Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    The worst part of these stupid arguments is that there are some of us who are just happy to listen to anything, and don't give a shit about showing off our knowledge or pushing our opinions on others.

    stilist on
    I poop things on my site and twitter
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    stilist wrote:
    Poldy wrote:
    stilist wrote:
    hey guys i really like this one composer and if you don't agree with me you're a complete retard who has no right to talk

    just so we're clear and all
    You're forgetting that I play the piano! If you can't hear that, than I can't help you.
    You're not handling this any better than (s)he is.

    Can't we all agree to goddamn disagree?

    I don't know. I kind of try and refrain from personal attacks.

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    Poldy & Stilist don't get your collective knickers in a twist, it's just rhetoric. The suggested response is to fire a broadside back, not get all defensive and try to justify yourself.

    In reference to the beginnings of opera, yes you are correct re: greek theatre and dance, I was trying to simplify, my point being either way that it came from introducing music into speaking word plays.

    As for the rest of it to which you took offence, well what do you expect when you boldy state that Mozart's opera can't be the best ever written because they have talking in them and that Wagner beats Mozart any day or the week because...er, you say so. The level of my response was tailored to the level of your statement :P

    Of course what individual people enjoy is going to be subjective, it's fucking music after all, but don't try flying against centuries of accepted wisdom on your word alone without expecting someone to call you on it. Just say that you personally prefer Wagner to Mozart and be done with it!

    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    Blah blah personal attacks blah blah CAN PEOPLE STOP BEING SO GODDAMN TOUCHY-FEELY INSECURE AND GROW A THICKER COCKING SKIN!

    I profusely apologise to anyone who considered that previous sentence to be a personal attack.



    It has been brought to my attention that the previous sentence could be construed as prejudicial to people who didn't consider the penultimate sentence to be a personal attack, to whom I thorougly profusely apologise.

    Honestly, go read some Plato or Cicero, the fathers of debate were rude & vicious bastards much of the time, it's fun people!





    I thoroughly profusely abjectly apologise to anyone who has already read Plato or Cicero and objects to the inference that they had not, I shally ritually flay myself until such time as etc etc

    PS He

    PPS Poldy, the piano is actually just for fun & work, I until recently was an orchestrater and occasional composer, so not entirely being an arrogant know-it-all, it is based on a little experience.

    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    YosemiteSamYosemiteSam Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Sarastro wrote:
    Actually that's bullshit. There are a thousand composers of the time who could be taught for adhering to a structure, that's what everyone did. Mozart and Bach are taught precisely because they transcend the form while staying within it, though in actual fact Mozart broke more musical rules than pretty much anyone until serial technique in the 20th Century.
    I'm not talking about whether or not he obeyed the rules that were established before his time. He "broke" a lot of preexisting rules, but the style that resulted was still very restrictive.
    Sarastro wrote:
    Two other things: First, every composer I have ever met and worked with acknowledges that simplicity is the hardest thing to achieve in music - it's easy to throw lots of lines and instruments into a film orchestra to muddy the water and create a wall of sound, it's much harder and more exposed trying the same thing with a string quartet - so I'm not entirely sure how calling Mozart 'simple' is a bad thing.
    I'm not sure where you got the idea that I was calling the simplicity of Mozart's music a bad thing. The problem in a lot of his music is its emotional simplicity. Also, although Mozart was revolutionary in his time, to contemporary ears a lot of his work is very predictable and somewhat monotonous.
    Sarastro wrote:
    Second, if you think that his music is 'inherently limited emotionally' have you actually, um, heard it? Have you listened to the C Minor Mass and Requiem? Are you completely insane or are you just a mechanical bot posting lines from some internet dictionary? Listen to the final act of The Marriage of Figaro...great composers have said that they would happily die to have written just that one act, it's considered to be a crowning achievement in music throughout history, and if you can listen to it without being deeply, deeply moved then I submit that you have no soul and/or emotions and thus are in no position to judge emotional responses to music.
    Yes, some of his music is very emotional; when he tried to be emotional in his music, it showed. However, the great body of his music doesn't have that much to it emotionally when compared to later composers.

    Apparently you have the idea that I don't like Mozart's music. I like it a lot, and I didn't say all of those good things about Mozart for fun. I would just be hesitant to call him the single greatest composer ever. That doesn't mean that some of his individual works aren't among the greatest works ever written, but he fills in the gaps with a lot of mediocre stuff.

    Also, I don't really want a lesson on Plato and Cicero, because (a) regardless of what they did, it's more constructive to keep discussions civil, and (b) hopefully we've made some progress in debating styles in the past 2000 or so years?

    YosemiteSam on
  • Options
    stiliststilist Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Whatever, guys. I'll satisfy you both by telling you I'm currently working on downloading Mozart, and after that I'll download Wagner.

    stilist on
    I poop things on my site and twitter
  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    stiliststilist Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Sarastro wrote:
    Been using the second since the beginning of the thread; I'll have to check the first out for extra stuff. :)

    stilist on
    I poop things on my site and twitter
  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    I'm not talking about whether or not he obeyed the rules that were established before his time. He "broke" a lot of preexisting rules, but the style that resulted was still very restrictive.

    Hmm, disagree, but better than what you seemed to be saying. Nonetheless there are few later composers who wrote with greater variety (within their time and work) than Mozart, so he seems to have done well enough, restrictive or not.
    I'm not sure where you got the idea that I was calling the simplicity of Mozart's music a bad thing. The problem in a lot of his music is its emotional simplicity. Also, although Mozart was revolutionary in his time, to contemporary ears a lot of his work is very predictable and somewhat monotonous.

    I would argue that this is precisely because Mozart came the foundation that everyone else learned from. Personally, I feel the same way about Bach, but intellectually I can recognise that this is simply because so many people have used and copied him that it is impossible to listen to his music in a vacuum. In contrast, I grew up mostly on Mozart before anything else, thus had a clean slate and could hear it as if for the first time in the 18th century.
    Yes, some of his music is very emotional; when he tried to be emotional in his music, it showed. However, the great body of his music doesn't have that much to it emotionally when compared to later composers. Apparently you have the idea that I don't like Mozart's music. I like it a lot, and I didn't say all of those good things about Mozart for fun. I would just be hesitant to call him the single greatest composer ever. That doesn't mean that some of his individual works aren't among the greatest works ever written, but he fills in the gaps with a lot of mediocre stuff.

    Hmm, again disagree. There is clearly a lot of Mozartian stuff which isn't up to the same quality as the best, but yet there is more of his best than most composer's entire works.
    Also, I don't really want a lesson on Plato and Cicero, because (a) regardless of what they did, it's more constructive to keep discussions civil, and (b) hopefully we've made some progress in debating styles in the past 2000 or so years?

    Rubbish! We still have wars, politics and prostitution, and even now I see some people leaving the pubs for the night looking for a vomitorium. I'm just off to slaughter a bullock then I'll get back to you. Night!

    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Sarastro wrote:
    Rubbish! We still have wars, politics and prostitution, and even now I see some people leaving the pubs for the night looking for a vomitorium. I'm just off to slaughter a bullock then I'll get back to you. Night!

    Who said there's anything wrong with prostitution?


    :winky:

    edit

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    stiliststilist Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Poldy wrote:
    [quote="Sarastro
    Rubbish! We still have wars, politics and prostitution, and even now I see some people leaving the pubs for the night looking for a vomitorium. I'm just off to slaughter a bullock then I'll get back to you. Night!
    Who said there's anything wrong with prostitution?


    :winky:[/quote]
    Your poor snipping capabilities seem to think it.

    stilist on
    I poop things on my site and twitter
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    stilist wrote:
    Poldy wrote:
    Sarastro wrote:
    Rubbish! We still have wars, politics and prostitution, and even now I see some people leaving the pubs for the night looking for a vomitorium. I'm just off to slaughter a bullock then I'll get back to you. Night!

    Who said there's anything wrong with prostitution?


    :winky:
    Your poor snipping capabilities seem to think it.

    Curse you, BBCode.







    Or my intelligence. Whatever.

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
    edited January 2006
    I've just been getting in to classical music myself, so glad the thread popped up.

    Anyway, two things... so far, I've loved a lot of what I've heard by Beethoven ( Ninth Symphony, late String Quartets, late music just in general and the more known pieces like 'Moonlight' ), and Mozart ( Don Giovanni/Figaro, Piano Concertos 20, 21, 23 & 24, Requiem of course ), but I haven't quite been able to get in to Bach yet. Any recommendations on a good starting point, or anything by him you consider one of his best?

    Also, glad Rite of Spring, Berg's Violin Concerto and Concerto for Orchestra have been mentioned :D. Just wanted to mention Mahler's Ninth Symphony, one of my other favourites out of what I've heard so far in 20th Century Classical. Really beautiful, especially near the end.

    Unknown User on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Jurnor wrote:
    I've just been getting in to classical music myself, so glad the thread popped up.

    Anyway, two things... so far, I've loved a lot of what I've heard by Beethoven ( Ninth Symphony, late String Quartets, late music just in general and the more known pieces like 'Moonlight' ), and Mozart ( Don Giovanni/Figaro, Piano Concertos 20, 21, 23 & 24, Requiem of course ), but I haven't quite been able to get in to Bach yet. Any recommendations on a good starting point, or anything by him you consider one of his best?

    Also, glad Rite of Spring, Berg's Violin Concerto and Concerto for Orchestra have been mentioned :D. Just wanted to mention Mahler's Ninth Symphony, one of my other favourites out of what I've heard so far in 20th Century Classical. Really beautiful, especially near the end.

    I really got into Bach through the Brandenburg Concerti. You've heard the third one before. And yeah, Mahler rocks the casbah

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    Jurnor wrote:
    but I haven't quite been able to get in to Bach yet. Any recommendations on a good starting point, or anything by him you consider one of his best?

    Nina Simone.

    It's a circuitous route, but a good one. :wink:

    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Sarastro wrote:
    Jurnor wrote:
    but I haven't quite been able to get in to Bach yet. Any recommendations on a good starting point, or anything by him you consider one of his best?

    Nina Simone.

    It's a circuitous route, but a good one. :wink:

    Preez Exprain

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    I am grooving out to The Rite of Spring right now.

    It's difficult to comprehend, but at one time I didn't care for this.

    What the hell was I thinking.

    Elendil on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Elendil wrote:
    I am grooving out to The Rite of Spring right now.

    It's difficult to comprehend, but at one time I didn't care for this.

    What the hell was I thinking.

    The Rite is wierd like that. When you think about it, it's not hard to comprehend at all. Even I child can understand it (hence it gets in Fantasia.) But it's very difficult to understand why it's so easy to comprehend, because it's very complex rhythmically and tonality wise. (Though it's not atonal. I wanna say ditonal, but that sounds wrong.)

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Poldy wrote:
    Elendil wrote:
    I am grooving out to The Rite of Spring right now.

    It's difficult to comprehend, but at one time I didn't care for this.

    What the hell was I thinking.

    The Rite is wierd like that. When you think about it, it's not hard to comprehend at all. Even I child can understand it (hence it gets in Fantasia.) But it's very difficult to understand why it's so easy to comprehend, because it's very complex rhythmically and tonality wise. (Though it's not atonal. I wanna say ditonal, but that sounds wrong.)

    While I agree, that's not really what I meant. :P I just find it hard to believe that at one time I didn't really like it. Pieces tend to sneak up on me like that. Ever had anything like that? Listen to a piece, kind of dismiss it, then come back and be blown away by it?

    Elendil on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Elendil wrote:
    Poldy wrote:
    Elendil wrote:
    I am grooving out to The Rite of Spring right now.

    It's difficult to comprehend, but at one time I didn't care for this.

    What the hell was I thinking.

    The Rite is wierd like that. When you think about it, it's not hard to comprehend at all. Even I child can understand it (hence it gets in Fantasia.) But it's very difficult to understand why it's so easy to comprehend, because it's very complex rhythmically and tonality wise. (Though it's not atonal. I wanna say ditonal, but that sounds wrong.)

    While I agree, that's not really what I meant. :P I just find it hard to believe that at one time I didn't really like it. Pieces tend to sneak up on me like that. Ever had anything like that? Listen to a piece, kind of dismiss it, then come back and be blown away by it?

    Definitely! The most recent piece would have to be Wozzek. I thought it was trash, but then one time it popped up on my iTunes and before I could think about it, I was floored.

    Before that, while I didn't dismiss them, I never really listened to Beethoven's string quartets, mainly focusing on his symphonies. Boy, was I dumb!

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Poldy wrote:
    Elendil wrote:
    Poldy wrote:
    Elendil wrote:
    I am grooving out to The Rite of Spring right now.

    It's difficult to comprehend, but at one time I didn't care for this.

    What the hell was I thinking.

    The Rite is wierd like that. When you think about it, it's not hard to comprehend at all. Even I child can understand it (hence it gets in Fantasia.) But it's very difficult to understand why it's so easy to comprehend, because it's very complex rhythmically and tonality wise. (Though it's not atonal. I wanna say ditonal, but that sounds wrong.)

    While I agree, that's not really what I meant. :P I just find it hard to believe that at one time I didn't really like it. Pieces tend to sneak up on me like that. Ever had anything like that? Listen to a piece, kind of dismiss it, then come back and be blown away by it?

    Definitely! The most recent piece would have to be Wozzek. I thought it was trash, but then one time it popped up on my iTunes and before I could think about it, I was floored.

    Before that, while I didn't dismiss them, I never really listened to Beethoven's string quartets, mainly focusing on his symphonies. Boy, was I dumb!

    It happens scarily often to me. I like to make an effort once in a while to hit up something I've neglected. It's why I'm afraid to really badmouth any composers (though I haven't actually found any I'd want to badmouth--I've yet to come across a piece or composer with no redeeming values). It's way too easy to end up eating your words.

    Anyway, it's infuratingly difficult to find recordings of Prokofiev symphonies. I'd like to really dig into his work but there's always 5,000 Peter and the Wolf recordings and practically nothing else. Bah.

    Elendil on
  • Options
    DBReedDBReed Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Poldy wrote:
    Sarastro wrote:
    Poldy wrote:
    Fencingsax wrote:
    Poldy wrote:
    BTW, am I the only one who thinks that the only truly good piece of music Mozart wrote was his Requiem?

    Well Twinkle, Twinkle isn't bad.

    Seriously though, are you mad?

    Prove me wrong.



    (I'm trying to think of a smiley to demonstrate the lightheartedness of that statement.)

    Well aside from the fact that The Marriage of Figaro and The Magic Flute are clearly far and away the best operas ever written, not to mention other minor compositions like Don Giovanni, Cosi Fan Tutte etc etc, have a go at the C Minor Mass (in fact, even just the Kyrie of the C Minor Mass should prove the point), slow movement of the A Major Piano Concerto (KV 488), Adagio from Serenade for Thirteen Wind Instruments (KV 361), Concerto for Flute and Harp (particularly slow movement again), oh and, I don't know, everything else he ever fucking wrote.

    The man was one of the true bona-fide geniuses in the history of Western civilisation, the total number of whom I could probably count on one hand, don't be so weak-minded to think that the popular is always worthless.

    Oh man, I am actually offended by this. How are Mozart's opera the best ever written? They have talking in them. Talking! That completely defeats the purpose of Opera. Wagner beats Mozart any day of the week, about sixhundred times every day. And sevenhundred on sundays. He wrote some nice, melodic music, but most of the Romantics and Baroque artists blow him away in terms of symphonic beauty.

    You don't know what you're talking about. It's not called talking, it's called recitative. It is a style of singing that is freer than an aria and sounds more speechlike, and is used to advance the plot.

    If you ever get to study Don Giovanni, you'll learn that Mozart used recitative in that opera to achieve a great dramatic effect. The normal format of opera was a recitative followed by an aria, and then the audience would applaud and applaud before the next recitative began. Mozart realized that all that applause really interrupted the story and as such greatly decreased the dramatic effect by taking the audience out of what was happening. In Don Giovanni, he would have the arias and recitatives come one after the other so that the audience didn't have time to applaud. This kept them engaged in the drama. Wagner did the same thing, except he didn't use arias or recitatives, he just had continuous music and achieved the same effect on a much greater scale. Not only Wagner, but all the major opera composers picked up on Mozart's idea. Listen to Verdi, Puccini, or Weber and you'll hear what I'm talking about.

    So this "talking" is actually a very important part of opera and shouldn't be dismissed so lightly. That wonderful Wagnerian opera you like listening to owes quite a bit to Mozart's innovations.

    DBReed on
  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    *cough cough* Actually some of Mozart's operas have actual talking in them, sometimes quite a lot of it (ie Magic Flute).

    Poldy, what I meant by Nina Simone: she was a jazz singer/pianist (I'm 99% sure you know this), and did quite a few well-known songs which used Bach in jazz improvisations - listen to the famous improvisation in My Baby Just Cares For Me for example.

    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Sarastro wrote:
    *cough cough* Actually some of Mozart's operas have actual talking in them, sometimes quite a lot of it (ie Magic Flute).

    Poldy, what I meant by Nina Simone: she was a jazz singer/pianist (I'm 99% sure you know this), and did quite a few well-known songs which used Bach in jazz improvisations - listen to the famous improvisation in My Baby Just Cares For Me for example.

    Yeah, I know, I never really noticed the Bach. I'll have to dig out her albums and check them out. Thanks.

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    DBReedDBReed Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Sarastro wrote:
    *cough cough* Actually some of Mozart's operas have actual talking in them, sometimes quite a lot of it (ie Magic Flute).

    I don't believe I said otherwise, but thanks for that.

    DBReed on
  • Options
    Not SarastroNot Sarastro __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2006
    DBReed wrote:
    You don't know what you're talking about. It's not called talking, it's called recitative. It is a style of singing that is freer than an aria and sounds more speechlike, and is used to advance the plot.

    Er, what was that about then? Mozart uses spoken word, as well as recit and so on. So the guy was correct, it is called talking.

    Not Sarastro on
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Oh man.

    $60. That's like...a little more than a single video game, right?

    Help me rationalize this purchase.

    Elendil on
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Can anyone recommend some really rhythmically interesting composers (along the lines of Stravinsky or Bartók)?

    Elendil on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    Elendil wrote:
    Can anyone recommend some really rhythmically interesting composers (along the lines of Stravinsky or Bartók)?

    Ornette Coleman.

    Yeah, he's jazz. I am completely unaware of any rhythmically interesting composers outside of the listed. John Adams does some cool stuff, but nothing amazing.

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    walrus333walrus333 Registered User new member
    edited January 2006
    What does everyone think of Iannis Xenakins and Jan Sibelius

    walrus333 on
    "Me and a book is a party, but me a book and a cup of coffee is an orgy"
    - Robert Fripp
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited January 2006
    walrus333 wrote:
    What does everyone think of Iannis Xenakins and Jan Sibelius

    I've heard relatively little Xenakis. Just Pleiades and and a few orchestral works (of which Jonchaies is my favorite). Pleiades is a fun work. He's one I have to explore further.

    I also like Sibelius, particularly the 4th Symphony and the tone poem Pohjola's Daughter. Luonnatar is a fantastic vocal work. Gorgeous music.

    Elendil on
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited March 2006
    I am reviving this thread to ask a question.

    Yea or nay?

    Elendil on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited March 2006
    Not a big bartok guy. Seems like you could find a better show. Maybe head up yto NY for the Met, or the philharmonic. I definitely think you might like this

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • Options
    DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
    edited March 2006
    How bout haydn?

    Unknown User on
  • Options
    PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    edited March 2006
    How bout haydn?

    I love Haydn. His London symphonies are absolutelt divine. Sometimes I feel like I am his only backer. If you happened to see my Classical music starter set, I had about five of his symphonies, while the only Mozart was his Requiem. Seriously - the man taught Beethoven!

    Podly on
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
Sign In or Register to comment.