Building a Library?

Yes, there's a problem with complete anything - you're right in that there's a lot of music you might listen to once and that's it. I have avoided those Brilliant boxes for that reason. To own every last little thing by some composers might be a goal of serious fans of said composer, most of us just really want the basics - the best he wrote. Of course when it comes to "best" recording opinions are all over the place. There's a new Hurwitz evaluation of the Rachmaninoff 2nd. He thought Previn's remake on Telarc was boring and dull. I find it excellent - exciting, beautiful and all you could ask. For the editor at Arkivmusic, its one of the recommended recordings. So choosing recordings is a challenge - which critic do you trust? For years, the go to reference was the venerable Penguin Guide, alas long gone. (The last remaining writer Robert Layton, just died.) The Penguin Guide was a great way to build a solid library. If I have time for it today, I might take up your challenge with one of my favorite, lesser known composers.

mbhaub said:

Yes, there's a problem with complete anything - you're right in that there's a lot of music you might listen to once and that's it. I have avoided those Brilliant boxes for that reason. To own every last little thing by some composers might be a goal of serious fans of said composer, most of us just really want the basics - the best he wrote. Of course when it comes to "best" recording opinions are all over the place. There's a new Hurwitz evaluation of the Rachmaninoff 2nd. He thought Previn's remake on Telarc was boring and dull. I find it excellent - exciting, beautiful and all you could ask. For the editor at Arkivmusic, its one of the recommended recordings. So choosing recordings is a challenge - which critic do you trust? For years, the go to reference was the venerable Penguin Guide, alas long gone. (The last remaining writer Robert Layton, just died.) The Penguin Guide was a great way to build a solid library. If I have time for it today, I might take up your challenge with one of my favorite, lesser known composers.

Click to expand...

I'd appreciate that. And I don't think a variety of opinion is to be feared. I got lots of people recommending different recordings of the Tchaikovsky "standards": I picked three symphony cycles and called it quits. Doesn't stop others chiming in and saying, 'no this Symphony No. 6 is better than that one', but then it's up to the reader to make a judgment call for themselves as to how many versions of a work they're willing to acquire!

And, of course, no-one's going to agree on what a 'core' library for composer X is, either. The Tchaikovsky again was a good one: half-way through, someone said, "What about the Orchestral Suites!", and so they got added to the mix too. I think that's fine.

I just look at my Beethoven (courtesy, for the most part, of Brilliant Classics) and think, there's no way, this side of Heaven and Hell, I'm ever going to listen to all those 'Scottish' or 'Welsh' songs! So if someone said 'Symphonies, Late String Quartets, Fidelio, Piano Concerti, Piano Sonatas', I'd feel that was a much better quality library that I'd be likely to listen to than "don't forget the 800 one-off songs you'll probably not enjoy much"!

I did like the Penguin Guide, and I'm not sure when it died, but there's so much stuff that has been recorded in the 2010s that I'd prefer not to just have a recitation of ye olde Penguin (which, from memory, was always very keen on British conductors and orchestras anyway!) But anything's better than nothing... so I really look forward to your go at a lesser-known composer.

I'll illustrate what I'm on about for Britten.

Building a Britten Library:

1. Operas:
Peter Grimes - Benjamin Britten,
Billy Budd - Decca, Peter Pears, Conducted by Britten
Turn of the Screw - Colin Davis, Orchestra of the Royal Opera House Covent Garden
Gloriana - Charles Mackerras, Welsh National Opera
A Midsummer Night's Dream - Benjamin Britten, London Symphony Orchestra
Curlew River - Benjamin Britten, Peter Pears, John Shirley-Quirk, Bryan Drake etc
Death in Venice - Steuart Bedford, English Chamber Orchestra
Paul Bunyan - Philip Brunelle, The Plymouth Music Series, Minnesota

2. Choral Works
Rejoice in the Lamb - Harry Christophers, The Sixteen
Hymn to St. Cecilia - Matthew Best, Corydon Singers
War Requiem - Benjamin Britten, London Symphony Orchestra

3. Orchestral Works
The Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra - Benjamin Britten, London Symphony Orchestra
Violin Concerto - Benjamin Britten, English Chamber Orchestra, Mark Lubotsky (violin)

4. Chamber Works
Cello Suites - Rostropovich for #1 and #2, Tim Hugh for #3
Nocturnal after John Dowland - Julian Bream
String Quartet No. 3 - Amadeus Quartet

5. Vocal Works (with & without orchestra)
Phaedra - Janet Baker, Steuart Bedford
Serenade for tenor, horn and strings - Britten & Pears with Barry Tuckwell (horn)

I mean, there's a huge amount of stuff I've missed out there, but I think if someone went out and acquired those works -and those particular recordings of those works- they'd have a good feel for what Britten did and in the form of some of the best recordings of those works that I know. It would be a 'core' from which they could go on to learn more about Britten as he takes their fancy. And if they're not keen, they haven't acquired a bazillion CDs getting to the point of deciding they don't like him!

Becca said:

Other than being reminded of works which may have escaped ones attention, I disagree, the point should be to listen yourself. Taste is so personal that no one person can steer you in 'the right direction' as there is no right direction. While it may not have been so practical 20+ years ago, that isn't true any longer given the proliferation of streaming and video sites. Personal exploration is the key.

Click to expand...

You're still missing the point, I fear.

I come to you as a complete neophyte. I know nothing at all about a composer or his work, his style or his "place" in the scheme of things. Point me, please, to a handful of his works which you think would be essential to understand the man. And if you can recommend some specific recordings along the way, so much the better. At least tell me the ones to avoid because they tell you more about Conductor X than composer Y.

Forget "reminding people of works they have forgotten". I'm talking about: assume a complete newbie. Now guide him or her in the right direction to get a rounded view of a composer.

I know what you're getting at in terms of "you have to work it out for yourself", but if one is floundering in a sea of 1000 pieces by a composer, performed by 2000 different orchestras and conductor combinations... where the hell do you start?! Getting started is the thing. Blindly picking stuff on Spotify and hoping you get lucky is not what I'm talking about. Be a mentor. Be a teacher. And if you still think that's the wrong thing to do, then clearly you're not the intended audience for this particular idea.

Becca said:

I am not "missing the point", I am disagreeing with the premise however it's your thread so I will shut up.

Click to expand...

I don't think you've understood the premise! If you had, you wouldn't have mentioned being "reminded of works which may have escaped ones attention". The premise is that your reader doesn't know ANY works, at least not enough to know what's worth listening to compared to what isn't!

You didn't spring forth from the womb loving (I don't know... say) Mozart or Beethoven. Someone guided you to appreciate those things. It may have been an author of a book; it may have been a brilliant violinist friend. I don't know. But no-one forms intelligent opinions about things in a vaccuum. And your advice to, essentially, go to Spotify and click on stuff until something makes sense is vaccuum education: work it out for yourself.

I'm suggesting there is a better way. "This" worked for me to understand X, maybe it will help you too. You will have to listen and make your own judgements -but you're now listening in a framework or guide that I think will help you make those sorts of judgments for yourself".

Bulldog said:

Bach's my favorite, and I came to that conclusion by listening to his music and the music of others. I did this long before there were computers or streaming services. I extensively used library services and purchases - bought a lot of recordings that ended up being a waste of time (such as Vivaldi), but it's only money.

I'll shut up now unless you insult me again.

Click to expand...

I didn't insult you! Quite the contrary, I said you had "well-formed musical opinions"!

I fundamentally asked you a question as to how you decided what things to borrow from the library and what things to purchase. You still haven't really answered that one. I simply don't believe you cooked these decisions about what to borrow and what to buy out of thin air, or at random. If we take your answer at literal face value, you've never have a friend recommend something; you've never read a review of a concert; you've never read a library book about a composer.... ??

If you were to ask me about how I started to form my opinions about music, I would have mentioned a history teacher and an English teacher who both really got me started with choral music, and then a professor at Uni who got me into Church choral, and then a student friend who spent 5 hours telling me the entire story of The Ring, or lawyer friend who thought I listened to too much Britten and thought I might like Bach... and so on. I have no qualms about admitting that as a young man, I was a blank sheet of paper, musically, and I needed (even if I didn't realise it) help to navigate the enormous quantity of music that's out there. And no, just because Uni professor said, 'This is marvellous!' doesn't mean I thought it was. But if I disliked it, I had to have a reason for disliking it that I could at least formulate, because clearly others didn't dislike it, and so on.

All I'm advancing is that age-old concept of teaching, or mentoring, or guiding. Here's something that will get you started with Tchaikovsky; here's something that will give you a bird's eye view of Britten... None of it is an end of anything. It's merely a start of an exploration. And, actually... it's how we all started on this classical music caper, even if you won't admit it.

Its a difficult concept, AB, because there are so many differing opinions not only on performances but also what constitutes core repertoire. I know what you're saying but I rarely (with some exceptions) enjoy vocal works for example and complete operas. To others these works are essential. So apart from disagreement on core repertoire you have problems with performance interpretations. I can think of quite a few recordings that polarise opinions (a certain performance of Beethoven's 9th, for example that is lauded by some here but described as "terrible" by myself and a certain well-known music critic :lol. Its so difficult recommending anything to anyone. Even the old Penguin Rosettes were contentious for some. I used the old Penguin guides to start to build a collection but found that there were much more interesting recordings around and think that some of those rosettes were very undeserved. I actually felt that over those early years I wasted a fair amount of money listening to other people's recommendations. With the advent of streaming theres no need to take a shot in the dark any longer as you can listen to many of these on Spotify, etc. You can sample on YouTube, etc for free and try out repertoire and find what you like. Then theres the problem of tastes changing over time. Years ago I rarely enjoyed many string quartets apart from a few warhorses but now they are core to my listening. If id made a list of core repertoire in 2002 it would look very different today. Dont get me wrong, im not being critical, its just that its so difficult to make recommendations to anyone. When I do my Beethoven reviews I know there are some people sat at home thinking "this guy is talking utter *****, conductor X's Beethoven is fantastic." It doesnt stop me but even I change my mind over time. The TC recommended symphonies, SQ, etc threads are good for newbs.

Merl said:

Its a difficult concept, AB, because there are so many differing opinions not only on performances but also what constitutes core repertoire. I know what you're saying but I rarely (with some exceptions) enjoy vocal works for example and complete operas. To others thee works are essential.

Click to expand...

I take that point. My thought was that you -for example- wouldn't have mentioned Peter Grimes for Britten, but someone else might. Clearly, everyone's "Building a Library" contribution will be derived from their own experiences and/or preferences. But I think if you were somehow to review that Tchaikovsky thread I mentioned, that worked quite well. Lots of different opinions expressed, which is fine, and someone mentioned Orchestral Suites as being a 'must' that others had not. It all seemed to work out fine in the end though!

Merl said:

So apart from disagreement on core repertoire you have problems with performance interpretations. I can think of quite a few recordings that polarise opinions (a certain performance of Beethoven's 9th, for example that is lauded by some here but described as "terrible" by myself and a certain well-known music critic :lol. Its so difficult recommending anything to anyone.

Click to expand...

Obviously so, I think. But if people had in mind, "What would I recommend to a novice, in such a way that it wouldn't befuddle him or her", I think that would help. The advanced nuances of performance practice can be left for a more skilled audience, probably. I quite like Hurwitz on Bach, for example, a month or so ago: yes, there are HIP performances; yes, there are "modern instrument" performances; both are fine, but today I'm going to do the modern performances, because they're valid too.

Sure. If people get precious about things, and protecting their turf, as it were, then I can see it wouldn't work. But, to take one example, if in a discussion of Bach we kind of agreed that the Goldbergs were essential listening, I wouldn't have a problem with someone recommending Gould. Despise it though I do, I quite understand that a well-rounded listener at least needs to have heard the Gould in order to form an opinion about it!

Merl said:

Even the old Penguin Rosettes were contentious for some. I used the old Penguin guides to start to build a collection but found that there were much more interesting recordings around. I actually felt that over those early years I wasted a fair amount of money listening to other people's recommendations.

Click to expand...

Well, I think that's where things have improved a lot since then -because now you can listen to someone's recommendations on Spotify, for example, for nothing at all (at least, as I understand Spotify's free tier service). There's no drawback in having recommendations when it doesn't cost someone actual cash to follow up on them.

That said, obviously the idea is to 'channel' exploration to some extent, so I wouldn't want to see 58 recommendations for a work. That's just the same as having none at all! But a smattering of different suggestions seems a reasonable thing to do. On the Tchaikovksy, we got three symphony cycles recommended before someone piped up for Petrov (I think it was): I was committed by that point, so the extra recommendation fell on stony soil!

Merl said:

With the advent of streaming theres no need to take a shot in the dark any longer as you can listen to many of these on Spotify, etc. You csn sample on youtibe, etc for free and try out repertoire and find what you like.

Click to expand...

I should probably read your whole reply before answering to bits of it! I see we are of the same opinon... but seem to be coming to different conclusions! The fact that one can experiment for free is a huge improvement on the days of having to either borrow a crappy, scratched copy from a library or spend up big and keep your fingers crossed. But I see that as not only a great opportunity, but a monstrous wall of choice, in the face of which people... simply refuse to choose. Without any information about what or why they should listen to something, they simply won't. It doesn't mean that if you recommend Smirnov's Beethoven 9th, then no-one will ever listen to Blenkinsop's. Spotify means that they will listen to Smirnov's because you told them to... and then they'll be able to listen to lots of other versions and then make up their own mind. But a pointer in a vaguely right direction is an indispensible first step, I think.

Confession time: I had a lot of Beethoven Symphonies. None of them made particularly coherent sense and I generally didn't listen to any of them. Then I read your multi-multi-part guide to a bazillion cycles, made my choice from that and now have 4 I listen to quite a bit. Lose the wall of choice; focus down to a few recommendattions... then people can learn to find their own way forward. It's worked for me with you and Beethoven; it\s working for me with Tchaikovsky... I figure it can work for other people, too.

Merl said:

Then theres the problem of tastes changing over time. Years ago I rarely enjoyed many string quartets apart from a few warhorses but now they are core to my listening. If id made a list of core repertoire in 2002 it would look very different today. Dont get me wrong, im not being critical, its just that its so difficult to make recommendations to anyone. When I do my Beethoven reviews I know there are some people sat at home thinking "this guy is talking utter *****, conductor X's Beethoven is fantastic." It doesnt stop me but even I change my mind over time.

Click to expand...

That's fine too. Plastic information is a plus. The trouble with those Penguin Rosettes is they couldn't be updated in real time. We're not constrained in that way today.

And I don't think changing tastes is an issue. Again, look at the Tchaikovsky thread I keep banging on about. 6 people mentioned symphonies, ballets and a couple of opera. Only then did one lone voice pipe up and mention 'Orchestral suites, anyone?", and then lots of people piled in and said 'Oh, of course, forgot about them". If you are not a String Quartet person today, then someone else will be. That's the whole point of a collaborative effort in a public forum, I think.

Short version: I wouldn't over-think this. Come up with (for example) a 'core Beethoven' corpus, throw it out there and see what happens. The worst that can happen, surely, is that 43 pages later, no-one agrees on anything. But chances are, if it was phrased as 'this is how I would start with Beethoven', I think people would constructively add to it, but wouldn't -I'd hope- try to argue subtle nuance at interminable length.

JAS said:

I have the BIS set of Sibelius. It was interesting to hear the earlier versions of some of the works, but I do not see myself selecting the early version of symphony 5 over the last one very often.

Click to expand...

Yup. I just got done ripping that. 5 different versions of some obscure vocal work I'm never going to listen to again... no thanks! And one track of 31 seconds consisting of a hitherto unknown version of Bars 5 to 16 of Symphony whatever... Yeah. I'll pass!

I took from that a very good set of Vanska-conducted symphonies, some chamber works, some choral works, Snöfrid, and that was about it. The rest goes into the musicological trivia folder!

PS. I make an exception for the violin concerto, only because last year, pre-plague, I enjoyed a Proms concert and the violin concerto I heard was almost but not quite what I was expecting to hear! I think they'd dug out the original 4-movement (?) version and were playing that... and I have to say, I really enjoyed the unexpectedness of it all. The tune you thought you knew, but then it did something weird and unexpected etc. So I will always want two versions of that concerto... but I don't need the 5 bars of scribble he used to put his coffee cup on one day so that it wouldn't put a ring on his table!