Searching for classical music...

November 18, 2005 11:45 AM

I want to listen to classical music.

Unfortunately, I know next to nothing about the genre. What are the essentials? What should be my first purchases? What should I avoid? Help me find one or two dozen CDs to start building a collection from.

posted by dead_ to media & arts (37 comments total)

ClassicalMusicFilter: I know very little about classical music, and I was just thinking how nice it would be to have some playing whilst I'm sitting here reading. What'd be some nice chilled evening classical music?

I guess I'm looking for anything accessible but not cheesy or greatest hits. I'm not going to understand the nuances of different conductors/ performances etc of the same piece so that's not so important. I like pianos a lot, but I'm open to anything - my local library has a great collection, so hopefully I'll be able to pick up some of your recommendations there.
posted by matteo at 12:02 PM on November 18, 2005

A few recommendations in no particular order:

Carl Orff - Carmina Burana (aka O Fortuna) - this is the entire work from which the classic horror film crescendo comes from. The entire piece is actually quite good.

Tchaikovsky - Nutcracker Suite - You want a complete recording, not just a highlights album.

See what your libarary has for George P Tellemann. His concertos for woodwinds are entertainingly energetic.
posted by nomisxid at 12:09 PM on November 18, 2005

I don't really know a whole lot about classical music that is old and well-known. But I think Max Richter's The Blue Notebooks probably fits the genre. An it's FANNNNtastic. Plus it has the added benefit of being modern and thus it is easier for someone who listens to modern music to appreciate. It could be a transition disc.
posted by panoptican at 12:22 PM on November 18, 2005

Great music that's easy to listen to:

Mozart - Eine Kleine Nachtmusik; Clarinet Concerto
Handel - Water Music; Royal Fireworks Music
Vivaldi - The Four Seasons
Delibes - Suite from Coppelia
Copland - Appalachian Spring; Fanfare for the Common Man
Schubert - Rosamunde Suite
Bizet - Carmen Suite

Avoid collections of snippets, with titles like "World's Greatest ..."; "Top 100 ..." or "Chill to ..."
posted by KRS at 12:25 PM on November 18, 2005

To start with, find a nice classical radio station in your area and/or a good audio stream. Classical music radio is probably one of the cheapest ways to get into the genre. Another cheap way is to see what collections your community library might have.

There are also several ways to split up Classical music. "Classical music" is a bit of an anachronism in many ways. The most typical way of splitting this up is by musical period and composer:
Baroque 1600-1750: J.S. Bach, Handel, Vivaldi
Classical 1750-1820: Mozart, Haydn, Rossini, and Early Beethoven.
Romantic 1820-1900: Dvorak, Berlioz, Chopin.
Modern 1900-: Copland, Bartok, Paert, Gershwin

However, other people might split it up by insturment or genre (symphonic, chamber music, solos, dances, opera, etc..).

Also, don't think that you need to be able to sit through an entire symphony or opera starting out. You might try smaller works like movements from large works, dances, and songs first. Also, if you like a particular insturment, compilations by a soloist might be a good introduction. (I'm partial to cello, so I end up with Yo-Yo Ma stuff.)
posted by KirkJobSluder at 12:38 PM on November 18, 2005

The essentials are in The NPR Guide to Building a Classical CD Collection. I was fortunate enough to have my whole CD collection stolen at a pivotal time, and to be insured; I used this and the Penguin Guide to Jazz on CD to start building a reference collection.

Of course it helps a bit to know what you're after in the first place, especially with the Penguin Guide, but the NPR guide is pretty good at helping the classical newbie figure out what he likes, even if it means some misstep purchases of excellent recordings of music that isn't exactly your thing every now and then.

The strong point of the NPR book is that it doesn't just tell you "Get Mahler's 2nd", it tells you why Mahler's 2nd was important, and why the conductor, orchestra, and recording they're recommending is the one of hundreds out there to get.
posted by mendel at 12:39 PM on November 18, 2005 [1 favorite]

I like the sparse intense stuff that builds and builds and builds and just gets under your skin, and on that front I'd point you to Arvo Part (Fratres), Henryk Gorecki (his 3rd Symphony will just like lay waste to you), and just to diverge a little bit Brian Eno's Discreet Music which is electronically tampered classical music and contains three blissful variations on Pachelbel's Canon in D. Plus the recently reissued remaster is gorgeous.

Though, just as a point, 'classical music' is so broad that it's almost useless as a genre, really.
posted by xmutex at 12:41 PM on November 18, 2005

My suggestion would be to start simple, with solo Piano or pieces for small groups and work your way up, at least that is what I found enjoyable.

My start off point for not bombastic, not cliche and not full booming orchestra would be Bach's Well Tempered Klavier, simply lovely piano works.

and dear god stay away from Grieg (i kid, i kid!)
posted by Cosine at 12:41 PM on November 18, 2005

If I were you, I wouldn't take random recommendations from a bunch of well-meaning MeFites with varying musical tastes (you're going to get a lot of Orff and Tchaikovsky recommendations, not that there's anything wrong with that)—I'd get a good, reliable book that will put you on the right track and give you a good basis from which to go further in whichever direction you choose. Fortunately, I happen to know of such a book: The NPR Guide to Building a Classical CD Collection: The 350 Essential Works. I don't care how you feel about NPR, the book is very, very well done, explaining each period and composer as well as suggesting particular recordings. You won't regret it.
posted by languagehat at 12:42 PM on November 18, 2005

Here is a better link to Gorecki's third, with samples.
posted by xmutex at 12:43 PM on November 18, 2005

So many great classical radio stations are streaming live online. I think that would be the perfect introduction. Here's a site that keeps a list of streaming classical stations (with links to the stream). They keep it up-to-date and current too - that's a big plus.

-
posted by Independent Scholarship at 12:49 PM on November 18, 2005

I am not a classical music "freak", but a few more recommendations:
Holst - The Planets
Bach - Brandenburg Concertos
Beethoven - Ninth Symphony
posted by ObscureReferenceMan at 12:49 PM on November 18, 2005

Great link Independent Scholarship I'd also put in a plug for PublicRadioFan.com which will tell you what shows are on live.

Really, radio and streams are some of your best sources for getting exposed to a wide variety of classical music.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 12:58 PM on November 18, 2005

There are also several ways to split up Classical music. "Classical music" is a bit of an anachronism in many ways.

The way I've understood it, classical music means art music in general, regardless of era, and Classical music means music from the common practice period, largely characterized by dominant-tonic harmony, homophonic textures, regularly phrased melodies, etc.
posted by ludwig_van at 1:00 PM on November 18, 2005

Unfortunately, selecting the works is the easy part. Even a poorly stocked record store will have many versions of the more popular pieces. I recommend Naxos. They record the cannon performed and conducted by immensely talented non-rock-stars (which are particularly abundant in Europe), so you get to hear impeccably executed consensus-interpretations of important pieces. You'll want to move on before you become a classical music lover, but it's a great resource for starting out without undue retail option paralysis.
posted by Eothele at 1:02 PM on November 18, 2005

If you're serious about learning about classical music, I suggest an appointment with Dr. Greenberg.
posted by agropyron at 1:13 PM on November 18, 2005

ludwig_van: My objection is that the term "art music" is something that is applied retrospectively to the works and doesn't really reflect how those works were regarded by their composers and contemporary audiences.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 1:30 PM on November 18, 2005

Do you have a record player? When I started getting into classical music I found a few places (the university record library, thrift stores) which sold used classical records at 25 cents - 1 dollar. At those prices I could afford to pick up 10 albums at a time, listen to them, and figure out what I really liked. I'd then drop by the classical section of Tower Records and ask the cute girl there what version of each particular piece she'd recommend. Worked out very nicely (the CD collection at least, not so much the girl).
posted by Gortuk at 2:59 PM on November 18, 2005

Damn, here I go again.

If you're going to spend money on this, the first $20 you spend ought to be at the Naxos web site - it'll buy you a year of complete streaming audio for all of their 7000 or so CDs; listen as much as you want. Their composer bios are a good read, too. There have been plenty of other AskMe threads with classical music recommendations for this, that or the other taste, not to mention reading about and learning about classical. The NPR guide is a good read. It'll get you acquainted with the rough characteristics of different forms of classical music (symphony, quartet, concerto, tone poem, solo instrumental, etc) and the different eras (baroque, classical, romantic, 20th century - but things really blow up at that point). Read a bit, see if something doesn't sound intriguing to you, then go listen. Don't sweat the business of which performer/conductor is "the best" for a particular composer or piece. This is mostly just a pastime to keep Mahler fans busy.

If I was going to guess at what you'd find to be accessible but rewarding entry points, I might guess the following:

Any of Beethoven's symphonies
Mozart's last few symphonies (say, the very last two, #40 and #41)
Any of Tchaikovsky's 4th-6th symphonies, especially the 6th.

Any of Beethoven's piano concertos (esp. #4 and #5).
Brahms's first piano concerto.
Mozart's clarinet concerto, or any of his later piano concertos (say, K466 and K491).
Mendelssohn's E minor violin concerto, or either of his two piano concertos.

Beethoven's solo piano sonatas (#8, "Pathetique"; #21, "Waldstein"; and #23, "Appassionata" are all very stirring and the well-known #14, "Moonlight" a bit more contemplative)
I understand that Chopin has written some nice things for piano.
Not Mozart's solo piano sonatas.

Bach's Brandenberg concertos
Brahms's string sextets
Haydn's Op 33 and Op 74 quartets
Haydn's Piano Trios
Mendelssohn's Octet
Mozart's string quintets

Holst's Planets suite
Any of Sibelius's tone poems (Tapiola, Finlandia, En Saga)
Any of Richard Strauss's tone poems (Ein Heldeleben, Till Eulenspiegel, Also Sprach Zarathustra) - they're big & bombastic and will certainly show off your speakers.

Any of those would be considered a given in a well-stocked library and as such are fairly conservative guesses. But I'm going to stop now because I'm just guessing; only you know what you like and you'll mostly find out just by plunging in and trying stuff. Try different eras and different genres. Reading is your friend; if you read about the massive orchestral forces Bruckner and Mahler brought to their symphonies and think "Whoa, that sounds cool", then go listen. If you read about Bartok's or Stravinsky's weird, driving rhythms and think that sounds cool - go listen, and see if it actually turns out to be cool, or gives you a headache. For all I know you might find Mozart boring and Schoenberg invigorating, or the other way around, or love them both.


Classics Today is a great stockpile of reviews, and you can learn a lot from browsing there.

The BBC's Discovering Music is a treasure trove of audio programs.

Grout's A History of Western Music is another great read that will whet your appetite with enticing descriptions of different composers' styles.

And if you find a piece you really like - say, the Mendelssohn Octet really grabs you - consider spending a couple of bucks to buy a Dover paperback edition of the score. You may find it really intriguing to "look under the hood" and you will almost certainly see some patterns - even if you don't read music! - that might have escaped your ears. I think that possibility of discovering structure, patterns, and relations is what gets many people so hooked on classical and makes the experience so different from other kinds of music.
posted by Wolfdog at 3:26 PM on November 18, 2005

Jan Swafford's book should be all you need.

As you can see from these comments, some people will advise you to listen to the greatest hits (Tchaikovsky, Orff); others will tell you to listen to minimalists (Pärt); others will tell you to get a broad historical survey. Any of these approaches could be good or bad depending on what you enjoy. Just start listening to a wide range of things, see what jumps out at you (a certain composer, era, style, instrument, etc.), and then look for more of that.

You should listen to the same pieces of music over and over again. Until you do that, most classical music will probably seem fairly shapeless and indistinct. That means that CDs are probably the way to go—not the radio or live concerts.

I second the recommendation of Naxos. Super-cheap CDs are risky, because some of the performances are very bad. But Naxos CDs are generally excellent.

Remember that it would cost thousands of dollars just to have a library with all the absolute essentials. Don't worry about having gaps in your knowledge of classical music; worry about enjoying the music. If you enjoy discovering as many different composers as possible, then do that. If you enjoy just listening to a few of the most famous composers, then do that.
posted by Jaltcoh at 3:28 PM on November 18, 2005

ludwig_van: My objection is that the term "art music" is something that is applied retrospectively to the works and doesn't really reflect how those works were regarded by their composers and contemporary audiences.

Not always, though, especially with modern classical music. You're right though, it's imperfect, but it seems good enough as imaginary musical category descriptions go. I suppose there could be disagreement over whether a given piece is to be considered classical or popular, but in most cases I think it's clear enough.
posted by ludwig_van at 3:56 PM on November 18, 2005

Ditto on the NPR book.

Gustav Mahler's 5th nearly makes me weep every time, and I'm a Big Strong Man Who Doesn't Weep.
posted by intermod at 5:33 PM on November 18, 2005

Believe it or not, there are not that many classical compositions worth listening to. Nowhere near the amount in rock. It IS the person who is playing.

Start with Glen Gould playing Bach's Goldberg variations. You are going to feel music speak to you in a way you didn't think possible. Then listen to more Gould playing Bach - there is no better place to start. Another favorite player of mine is Pablo Casals. Start with those two.
posted by xammerboy at 8:51 PM on November 18, 2005

Agropyron's suggestion is terse but good. If you really do want to learn about classical music, really do want to find some Good Stuff, then you need to learn what you like. It's no good buying Bach if you don't like Bach. It's no good buying Berlioz if you don't like Berlioz.

But how do you know what you like?

Robert Greenberg's "How to Listen to and Understand Great Music" is a fine introduction to the subject. It's a series of forty-eight lectures, each of which is forty-five minutes long. He covers a great deal of music history, shares all sorts of pieces, and describes the different styles. I've been listening to it for the past several weeks, and I recommend it highly. It may seem expensive, but it's worth it! (Also, if you e-mail the Teaching Company, they'll send you Greenberg's list of recommended recordings in Excel format. Or, if you e-mail me, I'll send you his list.)

Your profile says your in Tokyo. I have no idea what sort of public library system you have nearby, but around here, that's how I've been expanding my musical knowledge. If a piece piques my interest, I seek out more like it and then borrow them from the library.

While some people dislike compilations, I don't think there's anything wrong with them, especially when you're starting out. You can find some very cheap compilations containing dozens of pieces from all sorts of composers. Sure, they're not the greatest recordings, but so what? You can listen to a wide variety of work and pick up on what you like best. I have maybe a hundred classical CDs, and I still listen to compilations. Sometimes it's fun to pop in Classical Thunder and hear a bunch of rousing stuff at once. Other times I choose Classical Chillout, which contains a wide range of soothing tracks. Compilations are a great way to discover what appeals to you, but they're a poor choice for a permanent library of quality works.

Happy listening!
posted by jdroth at 11:35 PM on November 18, 2005

Stravinsky ... Pulcinella, Petrushka , The Firebird...
Vaugh Williams...Lark Ascending
Prokofiev, Love of 3 Oranges, Lieutenant Kiji, Romeo & Juliet
posted by lois1950 at 2:23 AM on November 19, 2005

BBC Radio 3 (you can listen online). Great for all kinds of "serious music". I think there's enough free stuff out there to learn what you like without having to spend money on CDs that may bore the pants of you.
posted by teleskiving at 2:43 AM on November 19, 2005

obdisclaimer: i work for an evil corporate record label thats been in the news lately. I had nothing do to with the reason they've been in the news.

"Classical" music is really such a wide range of music that it can seem daunting and overwhelming (like sombody saying 'i want some good jazz records'). There is a big of a learning curve. If you're actually trying to learn about the genre, I would recommend getting one of those "100 best classical works ever", having a listen and picking out the tracks that speak to you and then researching those composers/pieces further. classical.net has a good list of definitive performances of a lot of the more popular pieces that might show up on one of those.

You might also check the classical chart on iTunes...those 30 second samples are good for something :)
posted by softlord at 5:33 AM on November 19, 2005

Believe it or not, there are not that many classical compositions worth listening to. Nowhere near the amount in rock.

Whaaa?
posted by ludwig_van at 6:11 AM on November 19, 2005

I think that's what they call a troll.
posted by languagehat at 6:16 AM on November 19, 2005

I disagree with those who have recommended compilations. Avoid CDs that extract isolated movements from larger works, e.g. "2nd movement of Symphony X." You're not really hearing the music if you're hearing it out of context. Symphonies are not like rock albums, where there's no problem with listening to individual songs on their own.
posted by Jaltcoh at 8:04 AM on November 19, 2005

Believe it or not, there are not that many classical compositions worth listening to. Nowhere near the amount in rock. It IS the person who is playing.

Yeah, I only have 250 hours or so of the good stuff in my collection, and I suspect the good pieces I haven't bought may only number in the tens of thousands.

On a less sarcastic note, though, please listen to the people who have counseled against the "World's Greatest ..." "Top 100 ..." and "Chill to ..." type collections. When I was getting started buying recordings, and I was young and knew no better, I bought a collection of 30 CDs including a few dozen major composers. It seemed like a good deal at the time, but as soon as I started buying other recordings, I realized it was an absolute stack of crap. The recordings and the performances had no life to them, to the point that they could have turned me off to some pieces that, properly heard, would have amazed me. Such collections are, for the most part, not designed to provide good introductions to a genre; they're designed to peddle mediocre recordings of what are often out-of-context-snippets of great works to people who don't yet know any better.

It's also really nice to avoid excerpted movements from larger works, as Jaltcoh said. You don't want the slow movement from Dvorak's 9th... you want the whole thing, because it's amazing and, since the Romantic period anyway, the movements of a multimovement work are usually not unrelated and independent.

Perhaps most importantly, avoid falling into the trap of thinking of classical music as mood music or music for relaxation. Marketers love this concept, but it's dead wrong for appreciation. Some of it can be relaxing, yes, but the vast majority of this music was not written to be heard, but to be listened to, and it should not, by any means, be played too quietly.

Enjoy this! I'm a firm believer that if you have open ears and are willing to look for it, there's something in so-called "classical" music for everyone.

To that point, if you'd like really insightful recommendations of specific CDs from us, it might help to have an idea of what you have heard (in and out of the genre) and what you thought of it.
posted by musicinmybrain at 9:42 AM on November 19, 2005

Also, Jaltcoh's advice earlier in the thread seems very sane.

By the way, although sometimes if you want quality you end up having to shell out full price for it, which is fair enough, some mid-priced CDs can become super-cheap if you're willing to buy used. I've had very good experiences purchasing gently used CDs from well-rated sellers through Amazon.com.
posted by musicinmybrain at 9:48 AM on November 19, 2005

Avoid CDs that extract isolated movements from larger works

Good god, yes. Do not start down that path. You might as well not bother with classical music at all.
posted by languagehat at 9:49 AM on November 19, 2005

I've got to chime in again as a lonely voice in the wilderness: if you truly are just beginning with classical music, a couple of inexpensive compilations are fine purchases. No, they're not great performances. No, they're not great recordings. Yes, they're often movements isolated from larger works. So what? In this case, I'm not recommending that you build a library of these compilations; that would be silly.

However, as an introduction to the general melodic elements of various compositions, these compilations are fantastic. Also, they allow you to taste Bach, for example, without buying an entire disc of his cantatas. Why buy an entire disc if you don't know you'll like them?

Everyone here is right: the compilations CDs are of lesser quality than the other classical stuff you can obtain. But, these CDs do serve a purpose. To deny this is a form of intellectual snobbery. For $20 you can get three CDs featuring music from the baroque, classical, and romantic eras that will really help you determine your tastes. (Also, try listening to a classical music station over the internet. That might be a good compromise between my advice to try styles and pieces before you buy, and the advice of others to avoid compilations.)
posted by jdroth at 10:08 AM on November 19, 2005

... if you truly are just beginning with classical music, a couple of inexpensive compilations are fine purchases. No, they're not great performances. No, they're not great recordings. Yes, they're often movements isolated from larger works. So what? ... these CDs do serve a purpose. To deny this is a form of intellectual snobbery. For $20 you can get three CDs featuring music from the baroque, classical, and romantic eras that will really help you determine your tastes.

It's not snobbery. You'll actually save money by avoiding the compilations that extract Beethoven or Mozart movements, because you'd just end up re-purchasing those movements in context once you got more into classical music. For $20, you could get 3 normal CDs of Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms, which would serve the same purpose you're describing except that you would be hearing complete pieces of music instead of dismembered ones.
posted by Jaltcoh at 10:24 AM on November 19, 2005

Perhaps most importantly, avoid falling into the trap of thinking of classical music as mood music or music for relaxation. Marketers love this concept, but it's dead wrong for appreciation. Some of it can be relaxing, yes, but the vast majority of this music was not written to be heard, but to be listened to, and it should not, by any means, be played too quietly.

Good advice. And again, instead of compilations, try classical radio, either traditional or internet-based; there are plenty of classical WinAmp shoutcast stations, for example.
posted by ludwig_van at 12:29 PM on November 19, 2005

It's not snobbery.

I have to agree - I started this thread on classical music largely because I'd listened to lots of excerpts and nothing seemed that appealing. Although I did find the excerpted parts of stravinsky & arvo part immediately engaging, I later found that when I listen to the full 71 minutes of Beethoven's 9th with a good set of headphones & at a high volume, it can bring me to tears. You have to be patient & willing to fully enter that world, be taken away by the music, to really appreciate it...
posted by mdn at 8:44 AM on November 21, 2005