How to discover and learn about classical music
Posted by: Fred Mulder on 08 May 2014
I'm keen to learn about classical music, but haven't got a clue where to start.
The genre is overwhelming, unfortunally I don't have a family member or friend who is very familliar.
Perhaps someone can point me in the right direction/source/website to get started?? I'm also curious about the context/story behind the music.
kind regards, Fred
btw where did I "proseletise for him"? I enjoy his music, fair enough, but I never did try to convert you or anyone else to being of the Wagner faith, did I?
It may be a free country but if you wish to criticise my posts then it would be nice if you read them first.
I never said that you were proseletising for him though, did I? If you are going to criticise me for criticising your posts it would be nice if you read them [more carefully] first.
btw where did I "proseletise for him"? I enjoy his music, fair enough, but I never did try to convert you or anyone else to being of the Wagner faith, did I?
It may be a free country but if you wish to criticise my posts then it would be nice if you read them first.
I never said that you were proseletising for him though, did I? If you are going to criticise me for criticising your posts it would be nice if you read them [more carefully] first.
Kevin I quote from your post in question: "You like Wagner's music, I don't (and I've sat through two of his bloody operas). If you wish to proseletise for him, then great. It I or anyone else wants to say it's a vacuous and bombastic din, then great too. It's a free country."
I take that as you saying that I am proseletising for him, wouldn't you?
If you are going to criticise me for criticising your posts it would be nice if you read them [much more carefully] first.
Kevin I quote from your post in question: "You like Wagner's music, I don't (and I've sat through two of his bloody operas). If you wish to proseletise for him, then great. It I or anyone else wants to say it's a vacuous and bombastic din, then great too. It's a free country."
I take that as you saying that I am proseletising for him, wouldn't you?
If you are going to criticise me for criticising your posts it would be nice if you read them [much more carefully] first.
You may take it as such, but you are wrong.
I said "If you wish..." as an assumption, not as a statement of fact. I have no evidence that you have proseletised for Wagner in the past; perhaps you have, perhaps you haven't - I don't know Perhaps I should have said "one" instead of "you" but you probably know exactly what I meant and are just choosing to be a bit obtuse - or difficult - this morning.
Kevin I quote from your post in question: "You like Wagner's music, I don't (and I've sat through two of his bloody operas). If you wish to proseletise for him, then great. It I or anyone else wants to say it's a vacuous and bombastic din, then great too. It's a free country."
I take that as you saying that I am proseletising for him, wouldn't you?
If you are going to criticise me for criticising your posts it would be nice if you read them [much more carefully] first.
You may take it as such, but you are wrong.
I said "If you wish..." as an assumption, not as a statement of fact. I have no evidence that you have proseletised for Wagner in the past; perhaps you have, perhaps you haven't - I don't know Perhaps I should have said "one" instead of "you" but you probably know exactly what I meant and are just choosing to be a bit obtuse - or difficult - this morning.
NO I didn't know exactly what you meant.
Consider the following exchange:
Person A says "I really enjoy his music but as a man he was an odious little creep"
Person B replies "If you wish to proseletise for him, then great."
Now I am having difficulty seeing how the statement from A provoked that from B, especially as B was talking about the man not his music - "proseletise for him" not "proseletise for his music". I find the inference that I would praise such a person as Wagner to be truly offensive and that sentence, whether you like or not was inferring that.
Now of course, it was all person A's fault because he got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning. Even though the first post in this little exchange was done last night
NO I didn't know exactly what you meant.
Consider the following exchange:
Person A says "I really enjoy his music but as a man he was an odious little creep"
Person B replies "If you wish to proseletise for him, then great."
Now I am having difficulty seeing how the statement from A provoked that from B, especially as B was talking about the man not his music - "proseletise for him" not "proseletise for his music". I find the inference that I would praise such a person as Wagner to be truly offensive and that sentence, whether you like or not was inferring that.
Now of course, it was all person A's fault because he got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning. Even though the first post in this little exchange was done last night
Yes but your hypothetical "Person A/B" exchange is NOT the same as the original exchange we were having, is it? You have misread (or have chosen to misread) my original post(s).
You can either go back and re-read, or you can continue to labour under your current misapprehension. Either way, it matters not, as I have to pootle off to earn a crust and won't back able to read, or reply to, anything you write (or not) for 24 hours or so.
NO I didn't know exactly what you meant.
Consider the following exchange:
Person A says "I really enjoy his music but as a man he was an odious little creep"
Person B replies "If you wish to proseletise for him, then great."
Now I am having difficulty seeing how the statement from A provoked that from B, especially as B was talking about the man not his music - "proseletise for him" not "proseletise for his music". I find the inference that I would praise such a person as Wagner to be truly offensive and that sentence, whether you like or not was inferring that.
Now of course, it was all person A's fault because he got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning. Even though the first post in this little exchange was done last night
Yes but your hypothetical "Person A/B" exchange is NOT the same as the original exchange we were having, is it? You have misread (or have chosen to misread) my original post(s).
You can either go back and re-read, or you can continue to labour under your current misapprehension. Either way, it matters not, as I have to pootle off to earn a crust and won't back able to read, or reply to, anything you write (or not) for 24 hours or so.
"Person A/B" exchange is NOT the same as the original exchange we were having, is it?" Sorry I thought I had quoted you exactly and basically all I ever said about Wagner was that I really liked his music but I think he was an odious little creep. Yes I have taken out and simplified the exchange but please point out where I have changed the meaning of anything.
Now it is also my fault because not only did I get out of the wrong side of bed this morning but I am now making up your quotes
What a shame that such a potentially beneficial thread turned into this mess. Grow up!
BBM
There have been many good threads before, and there will be many again!
Try looking at a search for First Concertos, First Symphonies, First Piano Music, --- etc.
This is a set of initial classical musical threads I initiated about ten years ago, and just as useful today as when composed ...
ATB from George
There have been many good threads before, and there will be many again!
Try looking at a search for First Concertos, First Symphonies, First Piano Music, --- etc.
This is a set of initial classical musical threads I initiated about ten years ago, and just as useful today as when composed ...
ATB from George
For example:
First Concertos:
https://forums.naimaudio.com/topic/first--concertos
ATB from George [Fredrik]
What a shame that such a potentially beneficial thread turned into this mess. Grow up!
BBM
It's just because they're sexually frustrated, that's all.
Returning to the O.P. , what about Gilbert o and Sullivan, they're quite accessible, unfashionable however, but each to his own, what? Hmm? Yes.
I think only sexually frustrated people like their operas - I hate them.
Try Der Rosenkavalier, lots of sex in that.
I was at Symphony Hall Birmingham for a concert performance on Saturday night, the final trio was orgasmic!
I hope you took some spare underpants.
Really? I thought jazz started in the brothels of New Orleans.
Try Der Rosenkavalier, lots of sex in that.
I was at Symphony Hall Birmingham for a concert performance on Saturday night, the final trio was orgasmic!
Too much information, but apparently you came to the performance.
Next up is WNO's Moses und Aron at Birmingham Hippodrome; I am particularly looking forward to the orgy scene.
Pray that I don't sit next to you ...
That’s a shame; there are plenty of seats available if you change your mind.
Schoenberg does not seem to be as popular as Puccini.
No thanks on either ...
My opera loving friend asked me if I would go to see Don Giovanni with him if he could get good seats.
Maybe I am not going to be an opera virgin any more soon.
But the Don is one opera worth seeing as much as listening to.
Done both and listening alone is completely compelling after see in once ...
Try Der Rosenkavalier, lots of sex in that
for that matter Salome has even more of this.
That’s a shame; there are plenty of seats available if you change your mind.
Schoenberg does not seem to be as popular as Puccini.
What a surprise!
Next up is WNO's Moses und Aron at Birmingham Hippodrome; I am particularly looking forward to the orgy scene.
Save yourself some dosh and go to a pole dancing emporium.
Actually I’m really looking forward to this; for the music, believe it or not.
I have had the Pierre Boulez version on vinyl since the mid eighties & this is the first opportunity I have had to see it live.