Well this is going to get into forbidden territory, but in a sense

Bach really wrote music for heaven.

I think is true. Bach's work was always a form of prayer.

 

What do you mean by emotionality & maturity? Do you suggest that other composers had a smaller expressive range?

 

No. Just that his sort tends to find you in old age.

 

I don't know where your generalization comes from. Among musicians Bach's music appeals to all ages, certainly for keyboard players who often encounter his delightful pieces for students early on. Emotionality I associate more with Romantic music. Yes, there is John Eliot Gardiner's book about Bach Music in the Castle of Heaven; as a conductor Gardiner naturally gravitates towards Bach's religious choral music.

 

I don't know where your generalization comes from. Among musicians Bach's music appeals to all ages, certainly for keyboard players who often encounter his delightful pieces for students early on. Emotionality I associate with Romantic music. Yes, there is John Eliot Gardiner's book about Bach Music in the Castle of Heaven, but as a conductor Gardiner naturally gravitates towards Bach's choral music.

Yeah, I agree. In my own case it's Schoenberg, Webern, Stravinsky and others that I've come to appreciate more as I've grown older.

 

My theory is rooted in an hypothesis I came up with that as you age, you are less interested in the fanciful delights, and want something simple, refreshing and straightforward, which I find Bach's music to be. The Debussy's and Stravinsky's are for kids according to my theory.

 

Well, no. One of this first things young progressing piano students play is the first prelude from the WTC I, or maybe some of the Inventions and Sinfonias. The thing about Bach is that there's so much there, you can spend a couple of lifetimes going through it all...and it's of amazingly consistent high quality. There is the WTC but there's also the abstract austerity of the Art of Fugue which most don't get around to until later, I'd imagine. And then there's all that unbelievable vocal music.

 

I heard and appreciated some Bach early on, roughly as soon as I got into classical music at all at about 16 years old. This was Brandenburg concertos, some of the famous organ pieces and a bit later the famous choral works. I didn't much care for the keyboard music until about 10 years later but this was partly, because there was a lot of other music to explore and partly because I didn't even like solo piano music of my most favorite composers, Beethoven and Mozart, all that much at first. There was also some overambition, the Art of Fugue (in a chamber version) was probably among my first 30 CDs and I was bored stiff...
But even then, I was only about 27 or 28 until I appreciated the main keyboard works, cello suites etc. I am still not the greatest friend of the very sound of the organ (and Bach is almost the only organ music I listen to at all) and have not heard all of the cantatas. But this is mostly just because they are so many, their general style is the same as the Passions etc., so this is not something one has to "learn".

Still, much easier to get for me than stuff like Debussy or other Frenchies

 

I am 23, and I have loved the music of Bach since I heard the Mass in B Minor when I was 19. Before then, all I had of Bach were a couple of compilation CDs and the violin concertos. So he's a composer for all ages.

That doesn't mean I entirely understand his music. Bach's music has layers, which probably contributes to his reputation-- his music doesn't wear on the ear.

 

It lacks the style of folks like Stravinsky and Debussy

Now that I can't decipher.

 

Oh come now, you see what I mean!

 

Right now, Chopin's Nocturnes find my ears. But, I think my OP is a common TREND.

 

I found the love for Bach at 25... but I'm told I'm an old soul, I do like my daddies.

Perhaps my profession (programming + software engineering) has something to do with how my brain works and the music it likes? Strucrtured patterns and rhthms, not sure where I'm going with this.

 

Perhaps my profession (programming + software engineering) has something to do with how my brain works and the music it likes? Strucrtured patterns and rhthms, not sure where I'm going with this.

All music contains "structured patterns and rhythms". That's a bit like saying, one likes Shakespeare because his plays are made out of words and verses...

 

.

 

This is not a general rule. I know many people who have loved Bach's music since they were young. As to myself I "discovered" Bach when I was eleven years old, and when I turned fifteen he had become my most treasured composer and has been this ever since. My relation to and my understanding of his music has deepened during the years, but this may be true of the music of many other composers too - a natural proces with aging.

 

Lil Ludi has loved Bach ever since he was a mere zygote.

In fact, my ancestors have adored JS from the moment they crawled out of a swamp in the Euphrates over 500,000 years ago…

Even back then, Mongo Ludi was often heard to say:

“Bach? Easy, peasy; lemon squeezy!”

 

If I may turn the tables on you, it feels like you like to come up with simplistic and definitive pronouncements and classifications about things that are really complex, and then throw them out in this forum to chum the waters (and it certainly does do that). I guess there's nothing really wrong with that, but I have to say sometimes these threads really don't feel very thought-through. I know you're just thinking out loud, but still...

 

I get it. I do need more restraint.

 

No.

 

I never claimed Bach as a favorite at this time in my life in this thread, I'm just noticing a trend that older folks tend to appreciate his work more than younger crowds.

But I enjoy some Bach from time to time.

 

I'm just noticing a trend that older folks tend to appreciate his work more than younger crowds.

I may be true if you are referring to audiences not musicians. And it would be interesting to know whether the same is true for any other major composer, for example Handel.

 

I dunno. Back when I was in my early 20s (early 1990s) and just beginning my discovery of Classical music, Bach was the 2nd composer (Beethoven first) of whose works I bought a couple CDs. I was completely unfamiliar with the Brandenburgs and Orchestral Suites and bought them on recommendations of a staff member (CD stores, remember them?). I also bought a budget priced compilation called "Bach Favorites" by Ormandy/Philharmonic on CBS Masterworks. From there it was on to his organ works, violin concertos, etc. He was introduction to Baroque music and led me to Vivaldi, Handel, Corelli, Telemann, Lully, Purcell, etc., as Beethoven took me back to Mozart and Haydn while also pushing me ahead to Schubert, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, etc. For me, Bach was more of a starting point and has been there for me ever since.

 

I agree - the first classical album I really loved was this one, when I was about 14

 

I am referencing non fanatic and non artistic audiences in this thread.

 

My long career as a Bach fan started at age 18, when I became hooked on the St. Matthew and St. John Passions, the Brandenberg Concertos, and the Well-Tempered Clavier. I've been listening to Bach's work ever since. I'm not much of a pianist, but I did try out Bach's Two-Part Inventions while in college. My son became a fan at a much earlier age, when he heard Yo Yo Ma playing movements from a Bach cello suite on Mr. Rogers. My own experience suggests that Bach has the power to appeal to all ages, though no doubt he comes to some listeners later in life. I guess it's never too late to discover a love for Bach.

 

I discovered Bach in high school (half a century ago) and have loved his music ever since. I recall my grandmother didn't like Bach because she felt his music was unemotional. I felt the exact opposite, but also could sense his music is deeply sophisticated. Maybe that was what put her off, but I loved it.
Funny thing, people talk about the famous Toccata and Fugue in D minor like it's a great piece. It's the emotional ravings of an 18 year old and lacks the architecture of Bach's later work. If you study Bach's work you find that during his lifetime the sophistication and depth progressed immensely. You get a sense of this when you compare Book 1 of the Well Tempered Clavier to Book 2 composed twenty years later. It's in his latest works: Art of Fugue, Clavier Ubung III, Goldberg Variations and the Musical Offering that this sophistication reaches incredible heights. Then there are the 14 Canons that were discovered in the manuscript for the Goldberg Variations. The inversions, augmentations and mirror techniques are simply mind bending. This video does a great job of exploring these wonderful works.

 

Captainnumber 36: Your OP is spot-on, in my experience. In my teens, it was the flashy Romantic orchestral works that first grabbed me. Then in college, I discovered Mozart. It wasn't until middle age that I became absorbed in Bach (the solo keyboard and string works, especially). I think I didn't have the musical depth earlier in life to fully appreciate the subtlety and depth of Bach.

And now, Bach—and other Baroque keyboard works—are chiefly what I listen to, day in and day out. I find the logic and structure of Bach uplifting and reassuring. Rachel Podger: "Every note and expression has its rightful place and nothing ever seems too elaborate or deprived of something or too intense. The music flows with a confidence that balances our intellectual, emotional and spiritual interests."

I see there's a lot of disagreement, and I'm happy a lot of folks fell in love with Bach earlier in their listening careers than I did.

 

I've always been interested in art and music that has the reputation of "old person art" - Someone once told me re: my non-love of Bruckner that "You have to be old to appreciate Bruckner". Always found it interesting that certain art gets that reputation

 

This is not my experience. Bach's music was second for me, right after Beethoven that I discovered in my teens.
I have only gotten more deeply into it as I have aged into my 60s.

I have a "friend" who adored Bach in his 20s. The last time I saw him, I asked about his love of Bach. He said he didn't listen to Bach much any more. He found him too simple. Now, he said he adores Mozart.

(As I've aged, I find I cannot stand most of Mozart's music. I used to find it lovely and abstractly interesting, but not particularly deep. Now it all seems too light, too flimsy, too facile, too Rococo, too contrived, too speciously lovely, and full of too much aristocratic foppishnesss. As someone said earlier, too much foolishness. Perhaps ironically, I really like Haydn.)

 

This is not my experience. Bach's music was second for me, right after Beethoven that I discovered in my teens.
I have only gotten more deeply into it as I have aged into my 60s.

I have a "friend" who adored Bach in his 20s. The last time I saw him, I asked about his love of Bach. He said he didn't listen to Bach much any more. He found him too simple. Now, he said he adores Mozart.

(As I've aged, I find I cannot stand most of Mozart's music. I used to find it lovely and abstractly interesting, but not particularly deep. Now it all seems too light, too flimsy, too facile, too Rococo, too contrived, too speciously lovely, and full of too much aristocratic foppishnesss. As someone said earlier, too much foolishness. Perhaps ironically, I really like Haydn.)

There is something nice about Haydn.