How to get into classical music? I ask here because /mu/ is too plebeian

>four seasons

Try this out. youtube.com/watch?v=0FdNlhZAYBE
Really, I don't think it's possible to "get" Wagner's music as a work of music in itself, rather than as a product of his artistic theories. Familiarize yourself with the plot and read the libretto while reading, I guess. I'm not a huge fan but Wagner is fantastic.

I'm tired of the music I listen to for about 5-6 years. Also I begin to study German philosophy at the university. I always imagined that these areas are closely related.

I might add that you should learn Latin and Old German and read 19th century Russian lit

Three ways:
1) Learn to play a classical instrument, learn music theory (although this actually ruined my enjoyment of late baroque-romantic music, it works for other people)
2) Start listening to Scaruffi-core, and then work into the modern classical that influenced it (Schaffler, Stockhausen, Xenakis, Reich etc). Then work backwards.
3) Start with the Gregorians (Perotin, Leonin, Hildegard) and work forwards.

Just to be clear, Vivaldi doesn't deserve the shit he gets from some people. Listen to this, if you on the off chance have not yet: youtube.com/watch?v=IjR3mTbwPCo

Listen to Vivaldi, Bach and Weiss. And lute music

Thanks, I really like it so far. It does remind me more of Vivaldi. Its the instruments used I guess.

By the way, I'm an Orthodox Christian. One good man recommended Handel's spiritual works.

>listening to music
>not just reading the score
You're all plebs.

In case the faggot mods try to delete this for being off-topic, I post this to remind them that studying classical music and literature are inextricably intertwined. St. John's college (which has its students literally start with the Greeks in their freshman year and read the entire canon and end with modernism in their senior year) has the works of a number of composers as part of their curriculum, and not just operas:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._John's_College_(Annapolis/Santa_Fe)#Sophomore_year

This is a shitpost but listening along to the score does actually help if you want to understand what is going on. With enough practice, you should be able to look at a score for a small number of parts and "imagine" what the music sounds like.

>1) Learn to play a classical instrument, learn music theory (although this actually ruined my enjoyment of late baroque-romantic music, it works for other people)

could you elaborate on that last part? I would have assumed that someone who knows musical theory can appreciate a pompuous style more than an untrained ear? or am I naive in assuming that baroque is more complex than others?

>Hildegard
My bro
youtube.com/watch?v=N1byhvBl00o

I don't have time to learn to play a musical instrument. Are there any lifehacks for subhuman?

Exit bag

Become a DJ and drown in pussy

I'm fucking afraid of death.

I can't stop myself from autistically analyzing it in my head when I listen to it instead of appreciating it for what it is. Really early music (medieval) and very modern classical (e.g spectralism) operates on a different set of "rules" that I do not understand fully, so the mystique is kept. Also, a lot of classical-era stuff is really simple and I don't get why people think of themselves as being superior for listening to it (particularly poseurs).

Start with the Greeks

You're afraid to ask on /mu/ because they'd instantly pick you out as another cultured teen trying to force themselves into enjoying something they don't like. There's an active /classical/ general up 24/7.

Forgot to say that (good) early music performances will have a lot of improvisation, which is an aspect of classical music that I think got killed off prematurely.

I've already read Phaedo.

hey bud, lifelong classical musician here.

learning an instrument is very good to start to love and understand classical music. also, if you have the chance going to a live performance of classical music should be good once you've started listening.

i'd recommend honestly listening to those "classical music 4 hour compilation" videos on youtube, and seeing what really piques your interest.

it's important to not that you shouldn't force a liking onto it, but you should also be very open. Mozart, Bach, Chopin, Hayden, and Vivaldi are the masters of the craft: start with them if you need a base. Move on to Wagner, Stravinsky, and the rest of the later guys further on. some of their stuff is far different from the old guys and some of it might not be too good, but some of it is true genius. good luck!

I've started listening more to classical, especially after seeing the film Amadeus. There's just so much beauty to it all that it's unmatched. A ton of subtleties.

One composition I've heard recently that's more modern and especially touching is this one. Really good.
youtu.be/94ByTxhtT38

Start with Tchaikovsky, easy for plebs like you to enjoy.

Listen to it. Some of it won't make sense at first. In those cases, try different performances and give it time. I personally couldn't get Bach's polyphony until I listened to Gould's suites, for example. Some styles will just take time to become understandable to you.
Read about the theory, form and history. There's lots of good resources on the internet (Wikipedia, Classical Notes), but I also found Aaron Copland's book "What to listen for in music" to be very useful and approachable.
As said, it is good to go to concerts. That is the natural environment for classical music and there you are most directly confronted with it.

Here are some favourites among classical newbies
>Beethoven's 14 piano sonata "Moonlight"
>Vivaldi's "Four Seasons" concerti
>Carl Orff's Carmina Burana (I particularly recommend this one because once you get used to the more complex styles, Carmina's simplicity might end up just boring you)
>Chopin
>Debussy
>Tchaikovsky
>Stravinsky's Rite of Spring
>Dvorak's 9th symphony "From the New World"
>Smetana's "Ma vlast" symphonic poems
>Moussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition" suite (generally the orchestrated version seems to be preferred) and Night on the Bare Mountain

Read this before listening to anything. You need historical foundations (and strong opinions) first.

Now is not a good time to check /classical/, we are having some derailment issues.

>/mu/ is too plebeian
>it's a babby can't handle Xenakis and Stockman episode
There is no hope. You're doomed to be a lowly pleb forever.

I imagine you don't actually enjoy music.

>enjoying music
What kind of faggot are you?

I like Chopin, Stravinsky, Saint-Saëns, and Dvořák.

>classical = Xenakis and Stockman
>>>rym

Watch a good music appreciation course. Listen to every piece that's discussed and listen for the things that are discussed about them. After that you'll have your sea legs and can make an informed decision about what to do next.

oyc.yale.edu/music/musi-112

>tfw i'm a sophomore at st. john's studying that music this year

feels good famalam

exploringmusic.wfmt [dot] com

Only classical music that's ever really appealed to me was piano music. I've thought about trying to learn the instrument as a way in (I just know how to play guitar, which I couldn't care less about) but goddamn, it's hard to find the time for something like that and keep up my other hobby, which is reading.

the mods left a few months ago

>lute music
I rec Dowland, great stuff

leave Veeky Forums for good and you'll easily find the time

Baroque > Romantic > Impressionist > Renaissance > Classic

i'm happy with any ranking that puts classical last

>classical last
Shit taste

this, marin marais is my favorite.
youtube.com/watch?v=FrN0pqmwk-I

I didn't like classical music until I was about 14 and started learning Beethoven sonatas and Bach preludes on the piano. Now it's virtually all I listen to.

impressionism is not an era of music history in the same sense that the others you've given are. here is definitive list:

Baroque > Renaissance > 20th century > Medieval > Romantic > Classical

>not dividing 20th century into modern and post-war
wew.

Also, real list:
Classical > Renaissance > Baroque > Modern > Romantic > Contemporary > Post-War = Medieval

ok fine I stick to my original list but insert "Pre-1960 > Post-1960" in place of "20th century." I say that the advent of minimalism is a more important aesthetic threshold than is the war.

No, because post-War = Darmstadt style/American styles while post-1960 would more imply what I call "Contemporary" in my list (German and Danish New Simplicity, post-minimalism, acousmatic music)

Though it's really just autistic and arbitrary

>post yfw your favorite piece hits that crescendo that the whole thing has been building up to for the last 25 minutes

Don't know that feel since I don't listen to late romantic garbage like that

yah but i feel like it's also a mistake to separate reactions to the war from stuff written in the build-up because it's all sort of the same ilk, you know?

yeah are you listening to post-rock or something? pleb

There is a DEFINITE ideological shift in the post-war Darmstadt school from the pre-war currents, some of it even manifests in formal terms.

Why does this thread still exist?

I've been playing and listening to classical for 20 years and I don't really like Wagner either. I appreciate his preludes, but actually listening to the operas themselves, they drone and on and devolve into annoying cacophony to me.

Opera is a subset not all classical lovers really dive into.

Access your library's catalogue and look up this heavy-handed and uncharismatic oaf. Robert Greenberg PhD. I recommend his lectures especially if you wish to understand what you're hearing.

Put on Mozart, go about your day, pause and look up the song whenever you feel a spark of enjoyment from what you're hearing. While the vast bulk of Western music is plainchant, starting with the Baroque is the musical equivalent to starting with the Greeks.

youtube.com/watch?v=5_yOVARO2Oc&list=PLh9mgdi4rNezhx8YiGIV8I22ICSuzslja

i listen hip-hop now

how to get into classics?

youtube.com/watch?v=czSL8P5X-4Q

>All that hate on medieval music
But it's really majestic and beautiful. There are a lot of great pieces both secular and religious.
youtube.com/watch?v=nj5Bc8zwwU0
youtube.com/watch?v=Z6rA2x_lPq0
youtube.com/watch?v=NnWhThoW8N0
youtube.com/watch?v=DyzpYmszYZ4

There's something really captivating in early music: slight musical naiveté, minimalism, the way it shows mindset of people living long time ago. It allows musicians to take quite a lot of freedom in arrangements. When people play Bach, it's always Bach, but when people play Machaut, Reuental or Vaqueiras, it's always something different, for better or worse. After long-time exposure to post-Bach music, it all seems like a whole new alien world.

It's really a great shame, that it doesn't get discussed that much.

How is What to Listen for in Music by Aaron Copland? Would that be a good book for a beginner?

So many pretentious people here. Just fucking listen to any composer and then listen to others and develop your taste.

I have it. It doesn't delve into the history of music much, but it explains basic theory pretty nicely. Melody, harmony, structure and such stuff. Yeah, I'd say it's good for a beginner.

Good post

Thanks

youtube.com/watch?v=BRfF7W4El60

Listen to this piece. It lasts 10 minutes.
youtu.be/emYTG80B2vU
Since I already know how you will listen to this piece, I'm asking you to take extreme carre of the piece starting from 6.34. Just focus on it. Keep in mind that after every "slow" part a bombastic one will follow, and you will love it.

The trick to get into classical music is to find a single piece you like. Once you find something that you are willing to listen to for 10 minutes, half of the work is done. You mow have am object of interest over which you can develop your attention span: sure, you can force yourself to listen to Haydn's symphonies for hours, but in the beginning it would be more useful to find a few Beethoven's sonatas you might like, and listen to them until you get used to listen to 30 minutes pieces.
Here's some Beethoven's sonatas that every edgy il/lit/erate will love: sonatas no. 8, 14, 17, 23, 29 (if you like complex music you will love from the get go, if you don't this should be his last sonata to listen to), 30, 31, 32.
Beethoven was a master of the classical style, and said style was mainly built wround the taste of the audiences of his time, which means that for us it has to be an acquired taste. This applies mostly to Beethoven's second movements, which are usually light hearted and almost childish for our contemporary sensibilities. In the sonatas I've told you to listen, these movements will be the boring one, yet I assure you that at some point you will learn to love them. You'll love the firsts and thirds movements: they are all intense, and filled with interesting ideas that csn be captured by untrained ears.

Also, some Bach. This is my personal advice: listen to these 3 fugues extensively.
Contrapunctus I: slow and contemplative. This will be the first contrapunctual piece you'll listen to. Focus on the different voices cohordinating one with each other. This is the first classical piece I've listened to, ever: it immediatly striked me as the most mature piece of music I've ever heard.
youtu.be/zwkzf-KUNPM
Contrapunctus IX. A virtuosistic one. You'll love the middle part (from 0.52 to 1.50 circa: listen to these passages multiple times, and you'll discover how catchy can classical music be).
youtu.be/FAU4EGgfGm0
Contrapunctus XI: this is a multifaceted one. The sections are articulated this way: slow, fast, slow, nevrotic. I personally find the part that starts at 03.05 irresistible. You might find yourself tspping the rhythm during the part that goes from 3.44 to 4.14.
youtu.be/GRRw-mMbykM

After you got used to these 3 pieces, listen to Bach's Art of Fugue by Gould (one of the most accessible interpretations out there). Once you are comfortable with these pieces explore harpsichord and organ interpretations,

I genuinely hope this post will help you.

For what concerns Beethoven, start with Pollini's interpretations, then branch to more traditional ones.

where do you live? i am going to mahler symphony this friday, cracow here

Modern Classical > Romantic > Classical = Baroque.

If you want to get into classical just listen to a shit load of it and maybe commit to learning an instrument. Part of enjoying the music is understanding how it works formally, harmonically, and technically.

This basically. The 3bs of Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms are pretty great. Mozart is GOAT and then once you've graduated from the entry level stuff check out Schoenberg, Berg, Ives etc.

Dvorak's New World and Shostakovich's 5th are also great more modern symphonies.

>I know more about Beethoven than I know about my own father
Only on fucking Veeky Forums.

Unironically, by watching Kubrick films.

Just listen to compilations of classical music on YouTube until you find someone you like and explore them further.

Brahms is a terrible starting point, so are Schoenber, Berg and Ives. Their works are long, slow in their developments and generally auite hard to figure out (especially Brahms, who will be a boring piece of shit until you'll train your ears and study some theory).

The problems of most of you guys is that yoj are suggesting OP to listen good composers not because they are accessible, but only because they are good, as if a first timer could possibly understand Berg or the less intense pieces by Bach (if you suggest him to listen to harpsichord interpretations first you will probbaly even alienate him from Bach's music).
Most of classical music is an acquired taste, therefore suggestioms of these sort should account for accessibility. For example Mozart (who is seen as boring, childing and repetitive by philistines) is far less accessible than Ravel (for example when listening to Mozart one has to learn how to accept repetitive musical figures such as Alberti basses, or perfect cadences that ends in trills). Also someone like Schubert is infinitely less accessible than Beethoven, and early Beethoven is far less accesible than late Beethoven. Somehow what seems to be the most digestible music (it certainly was for 19th century crowds) is instead the hardest music to follow through.

Imo the best path is to suggest short, intense music first, and slowly build the concentration necessary to listen to slower, more peaceful music, such as the one of Mozart of Bach's church works.

tl;dr: suggest him music that he will certainly like, and account for contemporary sensibilities rather than 18th-19th century ones

Romantic = Impressionism > Classical > Modern = Baroque >>>> Vulture Bone Flute Music >>> Post Modern

I'm trying to figure out classical music myself but it has been a rocky road, and I haven't found any firm ground to really build my understanding on.

So far:
>listened casually for a couple years, downloaded stuff at random to try things out
>started out liking Haydn's symphonies a lot
>then fell in love with Mozart's concertos (esp. the run of piano concertos 17-26), and The Magic Flute
>Mozart is still my favourite composer by far
>tried out Beethoven, but I seem to prefer his earlier (less innovative, more formal?) to his later more sweeping, developmental, emotional stuff?
>tried out Bach a lot, absolutely amazed by certain things, think I like it as much as Mozart, but I think I need to understand music theory more to fully appreciate
>been reading about the history of music also
>have a reasonable understanding
>listen to some medieval and reconstructed ancient music to try to soften my reliance on the modern musical paradigm

But where I really run into trouble is post-Beethoven:
>"enjoy" a lot of things from Tchaikovsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Mussorgsky, etc., but never on the transcendent level of Mozart
>my single biggest problem: I don't know how to fully appreciate the shift from Mozart/Bach-like wholeness to "narrative complexity" in the post-classical era
>many developmental symphonies (e.g.) are very nice, but it feels like a different animal altogether from baroque/classical - less like "pure music" and more like suggestive soundtrack music for an imagined stageplay
>have to strain my mind to understand how something like Tchaikovsky or Beethoven is superior to Mozart
>enjoy Debussy and Mahler, but especially with them I get the sneaking suspicion that I am enjoying it on the level of hollywood movie soundtrack "background music," not experiencing them with full attention
>all in all, everything from beethoven onward feels like "tone poems," whose logical completion is in gestamtkunstwerk, which just seems like kitsch to me
>read several books on the epistemology of modernism in music
>try to understand what Stravinsky, Debussy, Schoenberg are doing philosophically
>agree with deconstructing reliance on modern musical paradigm, insofar as I understand, but really wish I had more technical music theory to combine with my philosophical guesses about what music "is" (what it should do, and how one should listen to it)

Also
>read Birth of Tragedy obviously
>trying to read Stumpf but my middling German makes it difficult
>surprised at how difficult it is to find Husserlian/Heideggerian phenomenology of music
>reading Adorno's books on Beethoven and other composers to see how Adorno's own phenomenology of music works (his Wagner book didn't help in this regard, because obviously focused on Wagner's antisemitism/personality and lyrical content rather than pure music)
>reading a book on Deleuzian theory of music but it's not great

Overall I'm frustrated with how difficult it is to find systematic philosophical theories of music. The vast majority of music theorists tend to be interested only in surface level analysis, like cultural preferences. Too many unexamined assumptions, like "more sound is better sound!" without really doing rigorous phenomenology of sound experience. Very very frustrated by how rare it is to find prescriptive philosophies of how to listen, and what the mind does/should do while listening.

Colin Wilson has a line somewhere in one of his books about how Schoenberg's intent is right, but his means of going about it is "founded on a subtle fallacy."

Moscow.

Start with the romantic composers.
They're the least challenging.

this might sound utterly pretentious but honestly you have to play it to really get it

NOTHING compares to sitting in the middle of a full orchestra going hell for leather

Did anyone watch any of the Proms this year?