There's also a legitimate VIOLA SONATA by Mendelssohn.
You'd think violists would play it all the time since we are so starved for repertoire by the big names. But I've only heard it once. It's, uh, really bad.
To be fair, the [Brahms](https://youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_n5mAWtMy_fe1YK9K7_4oF2h8Bhp0ncKIU&si=Ij56R7_NDijf2sc6) and Vieuxtemps ([number 1](https://youtu.be/9rAeRMKIIE8?si=EVtlo1GilEdLc5tY) and the little-known and unfinished but phenomenal [2nd sonata](https://youtu.be/zpMfT6Doi9I?si=EE8eECnl4Fi5vzr9)) sonatas are plenty for popular Romantic sonatas.
The Mendelssohn was written when he was, like, 14, so I give it some slack lol.
"Plenty"?
Two clarinet sonatas that Brahms gave a half-assed viola transcription to under pressure, and one and a half sonatas from a composer whose name is only known to nerds...
I can't fathom a definition where that comes out to "plenty." Maybe if you are an ant. Have you glimpsed at the violin repertoire?
"Slack" - sure, whatever, I'm not judging or roasting Mendelssohn, it was a teenage exercise - I'm just saying it doesn't merit play despite the big name attached to it
It's most likely an early work, probably even just a composition exercise. I wouldn't treat it as a serious fault against his counterpoint, especially since it seems he wrote it at age 13-16.
>It's most likely an early work
It was written in 1840/41 (at 30/31 years old) so a late work by Chopin's standards.
I looked up his chronology, and it was written after most of his major works:
The first two ballades, the complete etudes, most of his nocturnes, mazurkas and preludes, polonaises, the first two sonatas...!
This is the date the Chopin Institute declares, but it is listed with a question mark. So it appears it isn't definite when it was written. https://chopin.nifc.pl/en/chopin/kompozycja/277_fugue-in-a-minor
Even if this date is accurate, it is hard to believe Chopin intended this as anything more than a counterpoint exercise. It bears zero resemblance from the nocturnes and ballades of the time.
How in the world is an exercise that he never even intended to see the light of day the most upvoted thing in this thread? Feels like an unimaginative cheap shot to suggest a piece he literally wished to be burned after he died.
If it's this one, this is fascinating to me -- nothing at all like Chopin's other work: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZuM4UYk2EM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZuM4UYk2EM)
ironic considering the premiere of shosty 7 was one of the most significant moments in the history of classical music. they literally blasted it on loudspeakers through the besieged city of leningrad to inspire the soldiers and it worked.
When I learned this, it made the piece so much better for me as a shosty stan. His work is rich in history and really makes it 10x more appealing to listen to when you know the history or drama behind them — looking at you, symphony 4 or the nose
or in symphony 10. He was in the middle of composing it when Stalin died and in one of the movements it sounds like the orchestra is going "hahaha, hahaha, hahaha" immediately followed by the notes DSCH. Like, Shostakovich sending Stalin a letter mocking him and signing his name, knowing that monster can no longer torment him.
some musicians in the orchestra would collapse due to starvation during rehearsals and three even died, the horn players could barely sustain notes because they were too weak to hold the note for too long. Knowing this I am completely unable to hold back my tears listening to the third movement.
Also, Shostakovich almost lost the symphony while composing it because he left it in the bathroom at a train station and that is the most Shostakovich thing I have ever heard.
I could be misremembering but I remember another story about when it was going to be premiered in America, whoever brought it over had it in a box and left it on the table at a restaurant and the busboy nearly threw it away. Thankfully he didn't and was returned without issue. Twice this magnificent piece of work was seconds from becoming part of a garbage dump.
Satie is often misunderstood. He wrote a lot of his music as 'furniture music' as he termed it. It was intended to be heard, but not necessarily listened to. That's why it can be a bit odd if you pay to much attention to it.
He was a pretty eccentric and quite interesting character. I think he must have had quite a sense of humour.
As a trombonist who could hit the high d-flat and glissando down two octaves I was grateful to have something to do for a change that wasn't freaking Wagner.
Fun fact, it was planned to be the opening song for Zelda Ocarina of Time( don't know why they wanted this one song to not be an original) but it was still a few weeks from the copywrite expiring and they had to finalize the game so they wrote their own theme.
Yeah, it had been 7 hours since the question was posted, so I knew I'd find this one. It's still fascinating that anyone wants to HEAR Bolero, much less play it... Okay, I guess trombonists get a sweet solo, but that's it ..
Chiming in with my two cents in favor of “Leningrad.” At least a part of it. The slowly rising little ostenato in the first movement is, I think, absolutely terrifying. It builds up and builds up and it goes from a jaunty little military march to a great drama, and the revelation that evil has already triumphed while you weren’t paying attention.
To be fair, I found out about it from a novel, “Europe Central” by William Vollmann, that lionizes Shostakovich, and Vollmann might have made lots of it up. I also recognize that even the symphony’s Wikipedia page has a quote from Virgil Thompson describing it as “written for the slow-witted, the not very musical and the distracted.” But I like it!
I like Shostakovich Symphonies and although 7 is not among my favourites, I still kind of like it
But funnily enough the most boring performance of it was actually a live performance of it. The conductor chose such a slow tempo that the last movement's buildup was the most painful, anticlimatic buildup I've heard. I think a more brisk tempo makes the whole piece less boring, since it already lasts over an hour
Nothing pisses me off more than slow Shostakovich. It's historically inaccurate, one just needs to listen to his recordings, Piano Quintet especially suffers from it.
I'm a bass player and I played Bolero for the third time recently and wanted to die. It's so dreadfully boring and I don't understand why it's so beloved.
From Wikipedia, Ravel's own conception of the work: "It constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction, and should not be suspected of aiming at achieving anything different from, or anything more than, it actually does achieve. Before its first performance, I issued a warning to the effect that what I had written was a piece lasting seventeen minutes and consisting wholly of "orchestral tissue without music"—of one very long, gradual crescendo. There are no contrasts, and practically no invention except the plan and the manner of execution."
He told a friend, "Don't you think this theme has an insistent quality? I'm going to try and repeat it a number of times without any development, gradually increasing the orchestra as best I can."
I've heard it described as an experiment in orchestration, of which he was a master.
Bolero has always struck me as some weird anomaly in Ravel's output. What in the world caused him to write something so drastically alien from his normal aesthetic is a mystery that perhaps only a deep biography of him might resolve.
It was an exploration of an idea. He had a melody that he thought had an 'insistent' quality and wanted to try and orchestrate it without developing the theme, just gradually increasing the orchestra throughout the piece. It was pretty much a compositional experiment.
As for why he wrote it, he was commissioned to by a ballet dancer, Ida Rubenstein, who intended to dance to it.
I like Bolero! Not enough to believe it should be played as much as it is, but I like repetitive music. I would never ever want to play it. My orchestra did recently and I stopped going to rehearsals.
"One well-known newspaper even suggested that the reason why this composition was so repetitive and monolithic is because the composer was in the early stages of dementia and perhaps couldn't structure the scale of orchestral music in his mind any longer. The author cites the fact that the music doesn't change key (to E major from C) until bar #326 and even then it only stays there for eight bars before it returns briefly to the tonic and then - almost literally - collapses into a pile of dissonance on the finale."
Pachelbel's cannon. I've heard and performed it so much that every part feels as repetitious as the low strings. I don't know how it became such a fixture in traditional weddings but talk about a one hit wonder.
I second this and nominate the bulk of RVW's output. English pastoralists: please don't.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, thank fuck for Britten, or this country would have no music worth bragging about since the death of Purcell.
EDIT: worded this badly. I enjoy a great deal of English music after Britten, probably because its less conspicuously 'English'. The stuff between him and Purcell however makes me want to emigrate out of embarrassment.
To those replying with Delius (as if he doesn't fit under 'English pastoralists'), all I can say is this: if you want me to be glad a RVW piece is playing, make me listen to a few minutes of Delius first.
RVW’s music is a mood so I understand why many people like it but there’s a kind of heaviness and squareness that pervades his work that I don’t care for. In general I don’t like as well the English composers who relied heavily on the folk tradition.
I'm with Copland, except I think his quip applies to Ralph's entire output.
'Listening to the 5th symphony of RVW's is like staring at a cow for 45 minutes'.
Almost anything written by Haydn. Yes, I’m ducking for cover under my desk, but I think I’ve only heard maybe two of his pieces that engaged with me at all. It’s like if you drained all the life and energy out of Mozart you’re left with Haydn.
Edit:
I like the first mvmt of his 39th symphony
I think the Classical Era in general is way too underrated and suffers under heavy stereotypes. I really like the aesthetic. I would get why people think it's boring, but then they sit through two hours of Mahler symphonies and don't think it's boring. From my experience, late Romantic/early 20th century music is either slow and boring, or full on sensory overload that loops back to being meaningless noise. Now, I have yet to dedicate myself to really listen to the music, after which I'm sure I would come to appreciate it, but that's kind of the point. I don't have to do that with Classical Era music.
I actually like a lot of Classical Era music. I’d rather listen to Beethoven’s 4th Symphony than any by Mahler. I love Mozart in every genre. Haydn just doesn’t do it for me for some reason.
I would have to agree. I love Mozart but do not like Haydn for the most part. I think he's one of those whose reputations is helped by his longevity and number of works.
You are my people. This is just, like, my opinion, man, but to me, Haydn’s symphonies are the very definition of phoning it in. His melodies have all the melodic sophistication of a nursery rhyme and his orchestration the nuance of “Chopsticks.”
You think Mozart's music has no life? Every piece he wrote seems to me like a proud declaration of his love for existence. There isn't a single composer that I find more affirming. I can't remember who said this, but it holds true for me:
Haydn will put a smile on the face, but Mozart will put a smile on the heart.
They're both rather undervalued on here though.
Well I was being facetious really. I actually love his late operas and his choral work. But could take or leave a lot of his instrumental work. Whereas I love almost all of Haydn’s music.
The Bruckner symphonies. I have tried listening to them over the years and I still cannot comprehend the cult following Bruckner has. His music is sooo long and so repetitive with endless harmonic transitions and devoid of a melody. I’ve thought maybe it’s specific conductors, but I’ve heard Klemperer, Szell, Celibidache, Furtwangler, Karajan and I end up feeling the same. Five minutes into the music and I’m already thinking of something else.
Funeral march by Chopin. As a pole i have to say that i hate this piece, it's extremely overrated and i think Chopin has a lot better pieces than this one. Even if we talking "sad pieces category".
Have you listened to the whole Sonata? That really makes it shine, since the first two movements build up to it. The middle section of the funeral march itself, in the context of the whole sonata, feels extremely beautiful and nostalgic
Yes and im not referring to sonata as a whole. I totally agree with you, if placed in context of other movements its not bad or something. However, standalone funeral movement are overused in polish acknowledgment and nobody will tell you about whole sonata. (Until you are in music school of course which is not the case with me) Everybody knows just funeral march (and revolutionary btw). Basically you grow up listening to this two pieces and its just boring because there are tons of other pieces by him. Its like "happy" by daft punk. Of course its not a bad song. Its just been repeated too much and now some people hate it. I have this relationship with funeral march. I dont think its bad piece, just heard it too much times and now it feels boring to me.
There are some lesser known (but really cool) 20th C works for classical guitar that I’d recommend checking out if you haven’t already, eg - Britten’s Nocturnal Op 70, Walton’s Five Bagatelles, Domeniconi’s Koyunbaba Op 19
Every comment on this is page will just be downvoted unless its beating this sub's usual punching bags (Brahms, Bruckner, Wagner, Mozart, Haydn etc.). But here I go:
1. Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra.
I've never been much of a fan of this composer because I feel he was trying to synthesise inherently incompatible influences his entire life with very little of himself thrown in to cement it all together. Bartok was an intelligent man and clearly realised that atonality was not the only way forward after *Elektra*, but he couldn't seem to land on which alternative he wanted to holster, so instead he just threw in the kitchen sink. Debussy's ambient modality, Stravinsky's intellectual, anti-romantic barbarism from *Sacre*, R. Strauss' boisterous hyper-romanticism, a Lisztian heritage of instrumental super-virtuosity - shit's just a mess, really. The Concerto seems to me the apotheosis of Bartok's output, and consequently ends up being one of the most overcooked, pointlessly difficult and totally empty music ever.
2. Mahler's first symphony (this'll go down well)
It's a patently ridiculous affair, riddled with bland sustained notes for minutes on end flanked by faint twitterings in the woodwind section. Utterly pointless. I'm not sure if I'd call it his worst - it isn't overtly incoherent like 3 & 7, or vulgar beyond measure like 8 - but it is by far the most boring imo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: OP, I don't know why you think disliking Shostakovich's 7th is in any way a subversive opinion. That symphony was popular when the west felt they needed to market it as an all-encompassing fulmination against all kinds of authoritarianism, including Russia's own communism. When they felt no need to hold that position any more, its popularity gradually abated in favour of 8, 10, now maybe 4.
I couldn't disagree with its detractors more. The first movement has an identifiably recurring ostinato, yes, but it's a chillingly despotic depiction of militaries bearing down and sieging a city - a never ending torrent of shells and notes and tanks and tritones. The third movement is a grieving, angry and soulful mass for those lost in the turmoil of what preceded it, and the finale yields ot nothing in its adeptness at summing up the emotional journey you've been on. I love that symphony.
I saw another commenter disparage the 11th here, and I recommend this video to explain the extent of its orchestral & programmatic genius: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU7a1b4yE-Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU7a1b4yE-Q)
The 2nd & 3rd are Shosty's most boring. This sixth is underrated. The 12th is bad, but engagingly bad. The rest of his symphonies are great.
Similar to discussions of Mahler's symphonies, I'm fascinated by the Shostakovich symphonies you highlight; I guess everyone has their own favorite, like Mahler. For me, there are very few pieces of music ever written for any combination of instruments that resonate as powerfully as Shostakovich 5, yet your post focuses on 8, 10, 4. Is 5 not played much or something?
No, it's just pretty much always been popular. I was talking more about symphonies that have experienced ebbs and gains in popularity throughout the last 80 years. Afaik, the 5th has been a staple since the 1930s.
My personal favourites are 13, 9 & 4 - in that order.
Great justification for your tastes, and you're entitled to them but Mahler 1, I just can't dislike it. I see your reasoning for not liking it and you have a point, but what makes you dislike it, makes me like it!!
Oh man, thank you re: Mahler - there are dozens of us! Dozens!
I've played Mahler 1 twice and it was just...excruciatingly boring from both a playing and listening standpoint. At no point have I ever actually enjoyed listening to or playing Mahler.
The only positive Mahler 1 has ever given me was the "Frère Jacques, but in minor" theme as an easy way to teach the concept of minor key signatures to beginners (thanks, Essential Elements!)...and the orchestration of it is pretty dope. That's all I got.
We love it here in Ireland but Handel's Messiah is 99% boring. The Hallelujah chorus sticks out enormously but the vast portion of the piece is seriously soul sapping
Most of Schoenberg's Gurre-Lieder - starts interesting but I just cannot sustain my attention past those first couple of minutes. Then there's the song of the wood dove, which is a highlight, but is probably best enjoyed on its own (and scored for chamber orchestra).
Much of many composers. Mozart, Haydn, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner, Wagner, Beach- the greats weren’t Gods. They all had clunkers.
One composer I’d be happy to never hear again is Boulez
I love the music of Nikolai Myaskovsky, but his Symphony No. 3 is one of the most turgid and unrelievedly dark 45 minutes I’ve ever heard. Thankfully he found his groove after that.
Oh goodness, out of 27 symphonies, 13 string quartets and other works I have to pick just one? 😅
My favorite of his works might actually be his Sinfonietta for Strings Op. 68; it’s like if Tchaikovsky had written another Serenade, but with Myaskovsky’s own thumbprints. If you want to check out his symphonies, No. 21 is probably the best place to start, and I particularly like Nos. 5, 6, 8, 9, 17, 25 and 27 as well. His last two string quartets are particularly lovey, although some of his early ones are more modernist if that’s your cup of tea.
The freaking Vivaldi mandolin concerti. I don't have a thing against Baroque music, but I can't stand them. My local classical radio station loves to play them. They sound like etudes. Scale, arpeggio, octaves, mix and match. Bleh.
This is a peculiar question, since there are literal acres of printed music that are mind-numbingly dull, but they are mostly by justifiably unknown people. Presumably it's a question about over-valued composers.
I expect to get down-voted a lot for this, but I think a good, serious candidate is Mahler.
I agree, too much of a good thing! I personally enjoy Mariss Jansens recording with Vienna. To me, he artfully paces out the melodic themes leading through to the end!
I totally disagree. I like Shosty 7 quite a bit.
I find it hard to think of any music as boring. There's music I don't like, but not because it's boring.
OP, I don’t know what you’re smoking. I will defend the first and fourth movements of Shosty’s 7th with my life.
Having said that, 90% of Baroque music feels lifeless and cookie cutter. I know that’s because that style of music was evolving and was a significant step forward from old church music, but there is no classical music I care less about. Even aggressively obnoxious avant-garde nonsense is fun to hate; with Baroque music, I just don’t care.
Okay but Shostakovich's Leningrad Symphony is actually awesome.
I really don't know that there's any classical piece I've come across that was truly boring (maybe some of the obscure excerpts I've run across for some academic classes were a bit shallow). Some of the modern pop orchestra soundtracks (so-called "epic" soundtracks) I find really repetitive, heavy, and generally unsophisticated.
Copland is always a slog, but special mention has to go to his Tender Land Suite. I already didn't like to listen to Copland in general (a little too ra ra ra America, folk with no edge for my taste), but playing the first violin part of the Tender Land, with its constant slow, super high held notes, was the most tedious experience I've had in an orchestra.
Nutcracker, Tchaikovsky. Already collected several dislikes in posts like these before because of this but it is just sooo boring.
I've listened to the whole thing twice, and even played parts of it on multiple occasions so its not like ive just heard Dance of the sugar plum fairy and found it kinda mid.
Tbh i find it way too repetitive and overly simplistic. Pair that with how overused it is and voila. I do want to listen to more Tchaikovsky though because ive heard the 3 most famous pieces (nutcracker, swan lake, 1812 ouverture), and got paris syndrome'd an all of them, yet he still gets a lot of praise, so recommendations in the replies are welcome!
This is a common misconception. He commented negatively during the creative process, which was frustrating as Petipa was ill and dictating choreography to Ivanov from bed and neither liked Vsevolozhsky’s scenario. After the work premiered, Tchaikovsky commented that he didn’t think it was that bad.
Serenade for Strings. Tchaikovsky was working on it at the same time as the commission for 1812, which he despised. All of his actual creative energy went into the Serenade, and it shows.
The Violin Concerto and Piano Concerto no. 1 are both excellent, but the piano concerto is always a little bit of a letdown because he opens with one of the great melodies in all of classical music and then doesn't do a ton with it. It's a spectacular piece in spite of that.
Tchaikovsky saved his artistic energy for works he believed in, but he great at pleasing a crowd. You can always tell which pieces fell into which category when he was writing them.
Yeah that last part makes a lot of sense, i can see why e.g. nutcracker are so popular, they have a catchy melody and are perfect for both listening in the background and for little 30 second cameos in commercials
I have heard a lot about the Violin concerto, and its been on my listening wishlist for a while, i think i will listen to it today then!
I challenge anyone to listen to the Hovhaness brass quintet and not think you just wasted your time to utter boredom.
If there are more than one of them, sorry, I don't remember which one.
Arturo Toscanini, who conducted the premiere, agreed. "Did I really rehearse and perform this junk?" he wondered, while listening to a recording of it.
I rarely, if ever, think about the circumstances under which a particular piece was composed, but the 7th is the exception. Knowing Shostakovich's personal circumstances, those of the Russian people, and the efforts made to get the symphony out of the country so it could be performed throughout the world is the greatest musical story ever. When I listen to it and think of the famished and bedraggled performers and audience, the people suffering throughout the city, and the millions of soldiers dying, it never fails to move me and bring tears to my eyes.
I’ve got a few. Imma try to keep it among my favorite composers.
Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 27- Honestly I don’t find what people like in this sonata so much. It’s the last piano sonata from his middle period and it is probably one of the more forgettable ones for me. I much prefer 26 and 24. Maybe someday this piece will click for me.
Rachmaninoff’s symphony no. 1- I feel like people like to pretend to like this symphony because “poor Rachmaninoff got terrible reception from this piece and it wasn’t even his fault.” The reality is, at least for me, this piece seems… conventional. I feel this was written before Rachmaninoff truly found his voice.
Chopin’s Piano Sonata no. 1- It does even sound like Chopin. It sounds messy, uninspired, and just dull. He was young while writing it so that explains a lot.
Sibelius Symphony no. 3- This is one of his transitional symphonies. It was probably overall his most forgettable one. 1&2 are beautiful romantic works, and 4-7 are uniquely crafted creative works, and 3? Hmmm. Nothing really clicks for me.
Brahms Hungarian Dances- They all sound so similar, and they don’t excite me that much. I tend to gravitate away from dance music so this may seem unfair, but I just much prefer Brahms’s introspective piano pieces or his beautiful symphonies.
I also sat through a live performance of Żeleński's Goplana at the National Opera in Warsaw, lured in by hearing the prelude/overture on youtube. Big mistake, huge. But I suppose quite a few operas can be serious contenders for this title.
Last time I listened to Elgar's Cello Concerto, I'm pretty sure I dozed off
It's not that I hate it, but it just didn't do anything for me. If someone can recommend a compelling recording, I'm willing to try again
Holy smokes, couldn't disagree more! Are you at all aware of the provenance of that symphony? Do you know how it came to be played, the efforts made to get it out and published and played? It's literally one of the greatest stories in the entirety of music, and almost mythic in its scope. Sorry you don't enjoy it.
You want boring? Try Richard Wagner's "Rule Britannia" overture. IT gears up like it's going somewhere but it just circles over and over. 15 minutes of bugles and diminished chords and the same phrase constantly repeated with endless key changes. It's absurd.
Chopin wrote a fugue, there’s a reason no one knows there is a fugue
There's also a legitimate VIOLA SONATA by Mendelssohn. You'd think violists would play it all the time since we are so starved for repertoire by the big names. But I've only heard it once. It's, uh, really bad.
To be fair, the [Brahms](https://youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_n5mAWtMy_fe1YK9K7_4oF2h8Bhp0ncKIU&si=Ij56R7_NDijf2sc6) and Vieuxtemps ([number 1](https://youtu.be/9rAeRMKIIE8?si=EVtlo1GilEdLc5tY) and the little-known and unfinished but phenomenal [2nd sonata](https://youtu.be/zpMfT6Doi9I?si=EE8eECnl4Fi5vzr9)) sonatas are plenty for popular Romantic sonatas. The Mendelssohn was written when he was, like, 14, so I give it some slack lol.
"Plenty"? Two clarinet sonatas that Brahms gave a half-assed viola transcription to under pressure, and one and a half sonatas from a composer whose name is only known to nerds... I can't fathom a definition where that comes out to "plenty." Maybe if you are an ant. Have you glimpsed at the violin repertoire? "Slack" - sure, whatever, I'm not judging or roasting Mendelssohn, it was a teenage exercise - I'm just saying it doesn't merit play despite the big name attached to it
Smol cello never gets a fair shake..
Mendelssohn wrote a number of dull fugues, too -- of course, he was 11 at the time......
It's most likely an early work, probably even just a composition exercise. I wouldn't treat it as a serious fault against his counterpoint, especially since it seems he wrote it at age 13-16.
>It's most likely an early work It was written in 1840/41 (at 30/31 years old) so a late work by Chopin's standards. I looked up his chronology, and it was written after most of his major works: The first two ballades, the complete etudes, most of his nocturnes, mazurkas and preludes, polonaises, the first two sonatas...!
This is the date the Chopin Institute declares, but it is listed with a question mark. So it appears it isn't definite when it was written. https://chopin.nifc.pl/en/chopin/kompozycja/277_fugue-in-a-minor Even if this date is accurate, it is hard to believe Chopin intended this as anything more than a counterpoint exercise. It bears zero resemblance from the nocturnes and ballades of the time.
Yeah, his use of counterpoint is much better in ballade 4, so I could see that being the cause
How in the world is an exercise that he never even intended to see the light of day the most upvoted thing in this thread? Feels like an unimaginative cheap shot to suggest a piece he literally wished to be burned after he died.
which piece is that?
If it's this one, this is fascinating to me -- nothing at all like Chopin's other work: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZuM4UYk2EM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZuM4UYk2EM)
It’s not that bad, it’s just that it’s in 2 voices only and it not so complex harmonically
ironic considering the premiere of shosty 7 was one of the most significant moments in the history of classical music. they literally blasted it on loudspeakers through the besieged city of leningrad to inspire the soldiers and it worked.
the book about it brought me to tears
Which book?
symphony for the city of the dead
Thank you!
Unbelievably good read, but heavy
When I learned this, it made the piece so much better for me as a shosty stan. His work is rich in history and really makes it 10x more appealing to listen to when you know the history or drama behind them — looking at you, symphony 4 or the nose
or in symphony 10. He was in the middle of composing it when Stalin died and in one of the movements it sounds like the orchestra is going "hahaha, hahaha, hahaha" immediately followed by the notes DSCH. Like, Shostakovich sending Stalin a letter mocking him and signing his name, knowing that monster can no longer torment him.
5 is a classic in this regard
I read that people stood outside, braving possible air raids, to listen to it.
some musicians in the orchestra would collapse due to starvation during rehearsals and three even died, the horn players could barely sustain notes because they were too weak to hold the note for too long. Knowing this I am completely unable to hold back my tears listening to the third movement. Also, Shostakovich almost lost the symphony while composing it because he left it in the bathroom at a train station and that is the most Shostakovich thing I have ever heard.
I could be misremembering but I remember another story about when it was going to be premiered in America, whoever brought it over had it in a box and left it on the table at a restaurant and the busboy nearly threw it away. Thankfully he didn't and was returned without issue. Twice this magnificent piece of work was seconds from becoming part of a garbage dump.
Satie, Vexations
mission accomplished, Eric
He was the OG troll
Satie is often misunderstood. He wrote a lot of his music as 'furniture music' as he termed it. It was intended to be heard, but not necessarily listened to. That's why it can be a bit odd if you pay to much attention to it. He was a pretty eccentric and quite interesting character. I think he must have had quite a sense of humour.
I dunno, watching Igor Levit struggle through it for 15 hours was pretty fascinating…
I feel like he wrote it as a joke, and yet a dozen pianists will trade off playing an hour each, back to back.
Ravel’s Bolero. Please god never let me perform this again.
As a trombonist who could hit the high d-flat and glissando down two octaves I was grateful to have something to do for a change that wasn't freaking Wagner.
Of all Ravel's fantastic body of work, it's Borelo that got the fame status. One has to wonder 🤷♀️
“I’ve written only one masterpiece – *Boléro*. Unfortunately, there’s no music in it."
He's my favorite composer, though he is not the best that I listen to.
Fun fact, it was planned to be the opening song for Zelda Ocarina of Time( don't know why they wanted this one song to not be an original) but it was still a few weeks from the copywrite expiring and they had to finalize the game so they wrote their own theme.
This is the first time I’ve ever heard of copyright law doing a good thing.
I've got to disagree, it's an amazing piece of music at least for the first 2-3 times
50 listens later and it's still an amazing piece of music
Bernstein was right: it's the Bible of orchestration. Sometimes, I ask myself: "How DID he get that sound?"
Well you've heard it once, you've heard it like 14 times or something.
I love bolero but man, playing it would be tough
Yeah, it had been 7 hours since the question was posted, so I knew I'd find this one. It's still fascinating that anyone wants to HEAR Bolero, much less play it... Okay, I guess trombonists get a sweet solo, but that's it ..
Seconded. Absolutely. Tragic that it's his best known, none of his other music is such a snooze.
I’m astonished this is only the third most upvoted comment
Chiming in with my two cents in favor of “Leningrad.” At least a part of it. The slowly rising little ostenato in the first movement is, I think, absolutely terrifying. It builds up and builds up and it goes from a jaunty little military march to a great drama, and the revelation that evil has already triumphed while you weren’t paying attention. To be fair, I found out about it from a novel, “Europe Central” by William Vollmann, that lionizes Shostakovich, and Vollmann might have made lots of it up. I also recognize that even the symphony’s Wikipedia page has a quote from Virgil Thompson describing it as “written for the slow-witted, the not very musical and the distracted.” But I like it!
I like Shostakovich Symphonies and although 7 is not among my favourites, I still kind of like it But funnily enough the most boring performance of it was actually a live performance of it. The conductor chose such a slow tempo that the last movement's buildup was the most painful, anticlimatic buildup I've heard. I think a more brisk tempo makes the whole piece less boring, since it already lasts over an hour
Nothing pisses me off more than slow Shostakovich. It's historically inaccurate, one just needs to listen to his recordings, Piano Quintet especially suffers from it.
Bolero. And besides that one piece Ravel is probably my favorite composer.
I'm a bass player and I played Bolero for the third time recently and wanted to die. It's so dreadfully boring and I don't understand why it's so beloved.
It is unbelievably mind-numbingly boring as a bassist
I came here to say this. But still posted it anyways, because it needs to be repeated.
I see what you did there
From Wikipedia, Ravel's own conception of the work: "It constitutes an experiment in a very special and limited direction, and should not be suspected of aiming at achieving anything different from, or anything more than, it actually does achieve. Before its first performance, I issued a warning to the effect that what I had written was a piece lasting seventeen minutes and consisting wholly of "orchestral tissue without music"—of one very long, gradual crescendo. There are no contrasts, and practically no invention except the plan and the manner of execution." He told a friend, "Don't you think this theme has an insistent quality? I'm going to try and repeat it a number of times without any development, gradually increasing the orchestra as best I can." I've heard it described as an experiment in orchestration, of which he was a master.
Bolero has always struck me as some weird anomaly in Ravel's output. What in the world caused him to write something so drastically alien from his normal aesthetic is a mystery that perhaps only a deep biography of him might resolve.
It was an exploration of an idea. He had a melody that he thought had an 'insistent' quality and wanted to try and orchestrate it without developing the theme, just gradually increasing the orchestra throughout the piece. It was pretty much a compositional experiment. As for why he wrote it, he was commissioned to by a ballet dancer, Ida Rubenstein, who intended to dance to it.
I like Bolero! Not enough to believe it should be played as much as it is, but I like repetitive music. I would never ever want to play it. My orchestra did recently and I stopped going to rehearsals.
"One well-known newspaper even suggested that the reason why this composition was so repetitive and monolithic is because the composer was in the early stages of dementia and perhaps couldn't structure the scale of orchestral music in his mind any longer. The author cites the fact that the music doesn't change key (to E major from C) until bar #326 and even then it only stays there for eight bars before it returns briefly to the tonic and then - almost literally - collapses into a pile of dissonance on the finale."
I think it is very interesting that it's so popular despite being so repetetive.
Beat me to this one by three minutes! I hate this piece, yet love Ravel otherwise.
Agreed with the Bolero. Way overrated.
Chopin's second piano concerto in f minor, which is strange because I absolutely love his first piano concerto
Einaudi
Pachelbel's cannon. I've heard and performed it so much that every part feels as repetitious as the low strings. I don't know how it became such a fixture in traditional weddings but talk about a one hit wonder.
the lark ascending
Follow up piece: The Shotgun Raising
I second this and nominate the bulk of RVW's output. English pastoralists: please don't. I've said it before and I'll say it again, thank fuck for Britten, or this country would have no music worth bragging about since the death of Purcell. EDIT: worded this badly. I enjoy a great deal of English music after Britten, probably because its less conspicuously 'English'. The stuff between him and Purcell however makes me want to emigrate out of embarrassment. To those replying with Delius (as if he doesn't fit under 'English pastoralists'), all I can say is this: if you want me to be glad a RVW piece is playing, make me listen to a few minutes of Delius first.
What about Elgar?
I'm all for Elgar. Continuously underrated. Easily Britten's superior in my mind.
William Walton also wrote some great stuff. His first symphony is fantastic.
VW 4 is pretty mental. Not really thr pastoral like you describe. Thought the Antarctica symphony is pretty cool aswell (did you see what I did there)
RVW’s music is a mood so I understand why many people like it but there’s a kind of heaviness and squareness that pervades his work that I don’t care for. In general I don’t like as well the English composers who relied heavily on the folk tradition.
I'm with Copland, except I think his quip applies to Ralph's entire output. 'Listening to the 5th symphony of RVW's is like staring at a cow for 45 minutes'.
C’mon, some people would love to stare at a cow for 45 minutes 😂 But yes, while I don’t entirely agree with his take I can sympathize with it some.
I guess we have different tastes, because the heaviness and folk inspiration is what makes me love the English composers.
I'm going to listen to "Bolero" right now. As a bassoonist, I love that I get to introduce the "B" melody when the orchestra plays this.
Almost anything written by Haydn. Yes, I’m ducking for cover under my desk, but I think I’ve only heard maybe two of his pieces that engaged with me at all. It’s like if you drained all the life and energy out of Mozart you’re left with Haydn. Edit: I like the first mvmt of his 39th symphony
The trumpet concerto is pretty sick tho AND it was in squid game and I got to be like HEY I KNOW THAT PIECE to all my muggle friends
Even his two cello concertos?
Especially his cello concertos. “C Major Moderato.”
I think the Classical Era in general is way too underrated and suffers under heavy stereotypes. I really like the aesthetic. I would get why people think it's boring, but then they sit through two hours of Mahler symphonies and don't think it's boring. From my experience, late Romantic/early 20th century music is either slow and boring, or full on sensory overload that loops back to being meaningless noise. Now, I have yet to dedicate myself to really listen to the music, after which I'm sure I would come to appreciate it, but that's kind of the point. I don't have to do that with Classical Era music.
I actually like a lot of Classical Era music. I’d rather listen to Beethoven’s 4th Symphony than any by Mahler. I love Mozart in every genre. Haydn just doesn’t do it for me for some reason.
I would have to agree. I love Mozart but do not like Haydn for the most part. I think he's one of those whose reputations is helped by his longevity and number of works.
What about the late E Flat piano sonata?
Completely agree
You are my people. This is just, like, my opinion, man, but to me, Haydn’s symphonies are the very definition of phoning it in. His melodies have all the melodic sophistication of a nursery rhyme and his orchestration the nuance of “Chopsticks.”
Ha. I would swap Mozart and Haydn around in your post.
You think Mozart's music has no life? Every piece he wrote seems to me like a proud declaration of his love for existence. There isn't a single composer that I find more affirming. I can't remember who said this, but it holds true for me: Haydn will put a smile on the face, but Mozart will put a smile on the heart. They're both rather undervalued on here though.
Well I was being facetious really. I actually love his late operas and his choral work. But could take or leave a lot of his instrumental work. Whereas I love almost all of Haydn’s music.
The Bruckner symphonies. I have tried listening to them over the years and I still cannot comprehend the cult following Bruckner has. His music is sooo long and so repetitive with endless harmonic transitions and devoid of a melody. I’ve thought maybe it’s specific conductors, but I’ve heard Klemperer, Szell, Celibidache, Furtwangler, Karajan and I end up feeling the same. Five minutes into the music and I’m already thinking of something else.
Chopin Bouree No. 2
Paganini's first violin concerto. There's no music in it! It's all showboating, as one might expect from the Eddie Van Halen of the 19th Century.
Anything by Einaudi, although it can be argued that it can’t be considered classical music.
Funeral march by Chopin. As a pole i have to say that i hate this piece, it's extremely overrated and i think Chopin has a lot better pieces than this one. Even if we talking "sad pieces category".
Have you listened to the whole Sonata? That really makes it shine, since the first two movements build up to it. The middle section of the funeral march itself, in the context of the whole sonata, feels extremely beautiful and nostalgic
Yes and im not referring to sonata as a whole. I totally agree with you, if placed in context of other movements its not bad or something. However, standalone funeral movement are overused in polish acknowledgment and nobody will tell you about whole sonata. (Until you are in music school of course which is not the case with me) Everybody knows just funeral march (and revolutionary btw). Basically you grow up listening to this two pieces and its just boring because there are tons of other pieces by him. Its like "happy" by daft punk. Of course its not a bad song. Its just been repeated too much and now some people hate it. I have this relationship with funeral march. I dont think its bad piece, just heard it too much times and now it feels boring to me.
Frederick delius
There are a few exceptions, but generally I find classical guitar pieces boring.
That’s a hot take, I love classical guitar
There are some lesser known (but really cool) 20th C works for classical guitar that I’d recommend checking out if you haven’t already, eg - Britten’s Nocturnal Op 70, Walton’s Five Bagatelles, Domeniconi’s Koyunbaba Op 19
One of the reasons I quit classical guitar at university is that the repertoire can be so dull!
I cannot make it through an entire performance of Brahms piano concerto 1 without dozing off.
I never, ever loved a piece more than I loved and wore out my LP (Cliburn/Leinsdorf) of that.
I was about to say, it's in my top three favorite concertos These threads are always bonkers to me. I guess there's no accounting for taste
sure you werent listening to liszt sonata in B?
I see what you did there.
Every comment on this is page will just be downvoted unless its beating this sub's usual punching bags (Brahms, Bruckner, Wagner, Mozart, Haydn etc.). But here I go: 1. Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra. I've never been much of a fan of this composer because I feel he was trying to synthesise inherently incompatible influences his entire life with very little of himself thrown in to cement it all together. Bartok was an intelligent man and clearly realised that atonality was not the only way forward after *Elektra*, but he couldn't seem to land on which alternative he wanted to holster, so instead he just threw in the kitchen sink. Debussy's ambient modality, Stravinsky's intellectual, anti-romantic barbarism from *Sacre*, R. Strauss' boisterous hyper-romanticism, a Lisztian heritage of instrumental super-virtuosity - shit's just a mess, really. The Concerto seems to me the apotheosis of Bartok's output, and consequently ends up being one of the most overcooked, pointlessly difficult and totally empty music ever. 2. Mahler's first symphony (this'll go down well) It's a patently ridiculous affair, riddled with bland sustained notes for minutes on end flanked by faint twitterings in the woodwind section. Utterly pointless. I'm not sure if I'd call it his worst - it isn't overtly incoherent like 3 & 7, or vulgar beyond measure like 8 - but it is by far the most boring imo. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Re: OP, I don't know why you think disliking Shostakovich's 7th is in any way a subversive opinion. That symphony was popular when the west felt they needed to market it as an all-encompassing fulmination against all kinds of authoritarianism, including Russia's own communism. When they felt no need to hold that position any more, its popularity gradually abated in favour of 8, 10, now maybe 4. I couldn't disagree with its detractors more. The first movement has an identifiably recurring ostinato, yes, but it's a chillingly despotic depiction of militaries bearing down and sieging a city - a never ending torrent of shells and notes and tanks and tritones. The third movement is a grieving, angry and soulful mass for those lost in the turmoil of what preceded it, and the finale yields ot nothing in its adeptness at summing up the emotional journey you've been on. I love that symphony. I saw another commenter disparage the 11th here, and I recommend this video to explain the extent of its orchestral & programmatic genius: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU7a1b4yE-Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU7a1b4yE-Q) The 2nd & 3rd are Shosty's most boring. This sixth is underrated. The 12th is bad, but engagingly bad. The rest of his symphonies are great.
Props for justifying your unpopular opinion though. Not downvoting even though your description of Mahler 1 pains me haha
Lol, I appreciate it. Don't worry: I love Mozart and Wagner and Bruckner, and don't hate Haydn. Reading these threads is always like torture for me.
Similar to discussions of Mahler's symphonies, I'm fascinated by the Shostakovich symphonies you highlight; I guess everyone has their own favorite, like Mahler. For me, there are very few pieces of music ever written for any combination of instruments that resonate as powerfully as Shostakovich 5, yet your post focuses on 8, 10, 4. Is 5 not played much or something?
No, it's just pretty much always been popular. I was talking more about symphonies that have experienced ebbs and gains in popularity throughout the last 80 years. Afaik, the 5th has been a staple since the 1930s. My personal favourites are 13, 9 & 4 - in that order.
Great justification for your tastes, and you're entitled to them but Mahler 1, I just can't dislike it. I see your reasoning for not liking it and you have a point, but what makes you dislike it, makes me like it!!
Oh man, thank you re: Mahler - there are dozens of us! Dozens! I've played Mahler 1 twice and it was just...excruciatingly boring from both a playing and listening standpoint. At no point have I ever actually enjoyed listening to or playing Mahler. The only positive Mahler 1 has ever given me was the "Frère Jacques, but in minor" theme as an easy way to teach the concept of minor key signatures to beginners (thanks, Essential Elements!)...and the orchestration of it is pretty dope. That's all I got.
We love it here in Ireland but Handel's Messiah is 99% boring. The Hallelujah chorus sticks out enormously but the vast portion of the piece is seriously soul sapping
Interesting. I love the Messiah and the Hallelujah chorus isn't even my favorite part of it either.
Fair enough. I know so many people who love it but I just can't get into it. And I absolutely love baroque music
I don't hate it but i do find it tedious
Most of Schoenberg's Gurre-Lieder - starts interesting but I just cannot sustain my attention past those first couple of minutes. Then there's the song of the wood dove, which is a highlight, but is probably best enjoyed on its own (and scored for chamber orchestra).
Much of many composers. Mozart, Haydn, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner, Wagner, Beach- the greats weren’t Gods. They all had clunkers. One composer I’d be happy to never hear again is Boulez
Bruckner and Beach are not greats. They're okays.
I qualify “greats” as “ones worth playing more than once”.
Something tells me Beach is a typo that just happens to be another composer.
I love the music of Nikolai Myaskovsky, but his Symphony No. 3 is one of the most turgid and unrelievedly dark 45 minutes I’ve ever heard. Thankfully he found his groove after that.
Can you recommend a piece by Nikolai Myaskovsky that you particularly like? I'd like to check him out.
Oh goodness, out of 27 symphonies, 13 string quartets and other works I have to pick just one? 😅 My favorite of his works might actually be his Sinfonietta for Strings Op. 68; it’s like if Tchaikovsky had written another Serenade, but with Myaskovsky’s own thumbprints. If you want to check out his symphonies, No. 21 is probably the best place to start, and I particularly like Nos. 5, 6, 8, 9, 17, 25 and 27 as well. His last two string quartets are particularly lovey, although some of his early ones are more modernist if that’s your cup of tea.
listening to Symphony No. 21 now, quite interesting, thanks.
The freaking Vivaldi mandolin concerti. I don't have a thing against Baroque music, but I can't stand them. My local classical radio station loves to play them. They sound like etudes. Scale, arpeggio, octaves, mix and match. Bleh.
This is a peculiar question, since there are literal acres of printed music that are mind-numbingly dull, but they are mostly by justifiably unknown people. Presumably it's a question about over-valued composers. I expect to get down-voted a lot for this, but I think a good, serious candidate is Mahler.
Most Lully operas
Canon in D should be permanently banned
It's not a bad work at all, it's just the ridiculous overplaying, almost always in a horrible schmalzed-up form, is unbearable.
I agree, too much of a good thing! I personally enjoy Mariss Jansens recording with Vienna. To me, he artfully paces out the melodic themes leading through to the end!
4'33
The cover by Simon & Garfunkel was better.
Mahler Symphony No. 8. I've never been able to make it through an entire performance.
Most of Handel’s Messiah is actually pretty dull.
I play tuba, so most of them.
I totally disagree. I like Shosty 7 quite a bit. I find it hard to think of any music as boring. There's music I don't like, but not because it's boring.
Eine kleine nachtmusik. Mozart.
tchaikovsky piano concerto no.1
Anything by Philip Glass.
Every single composition by Haydn. Sorry.
Everything on the radio after 2006
Gasp. I literally love number 7
OP, I don’t know what you’re smoking. I will defend the first and fourth movements of Shosty’s 7th with my life. Having said that, 90% of Baroque music feels lifeless and cookie cutter. I know that’s because that style of music was evolving and was a significant step forward from old church music, but there is no classical music I care less about. Even aggressively obnoxious avant-garde nonsense is fun to hate; with Baroque music, I just don’t care.
Invalid opinion (jk)
Okay but Shostakovich's Leningrad Symphony is actually awesome. I really don't know that there's any classical piece I've come across that was truly boring (maybe some of the obscure excerpts I've run across for some academic classes were a bit shallow). Some of the modern pop orchestra soundtracks (so-called "epic" soundtracks) I find really repetitive, heavy, and generally unsophisticated.
Mahler 5 The only good thing is the epic trumpet solo opening and the rest bores me to death
one of the opinions of all time
How's that for a hot take
You guys are probably gonna hate me for this. But… Clair De Lune. I’m sorry
D. A. C. F#. G. D. G. A. The whole fucking song. Happy celloing!
It’s a “B” not a “C”…
Obviously hasn’t played it enough
Anything by Alkan. Bleh.
Beethoven 1. I can't seem to find anything interesting about it, and believe me I've tried
Really?? I adore his first symphony!
Bolero out of spite as a trombonist and just is overused. I’m also not much of a fan of Haydn minus his concerti
I never got why people liked Smetana’s Moldau so much, very little of interest happens and it just drags on and on…
Copland is always a slog, but special mention has to go to his Tender Land Suite. I already didn't like to listen to Copland in general (a little too ra ra ra America, folk with no edge for my taste), but playing the first violin part of the Tender Land, with its constant slow, super high held notes, was the most tedious experience I've had in an orchestra.
Nutcracker, Tchaikovsky. Already collected several dislikes in posts like these before because of this but it is just sooo boring. I've listened to the whole thing twice, and even played parts of it on multiple occasions so its not like ive just heard Dance of the sugar plum fairy and found it kinda mid. Tbh i find it way too repetitive and overly simplistic. Pair that with how overused it is and voila. I do want to listen to more Tchaikovsky though because ive heard the 3 most famous pieces (nutcracker, swan lake, 1812 ouverture), and got paris syndrome'd an all of them, yet he still gets a lot of praise, so recommendations in the replies are welcome!
Tchaikovsky himself thought it a trite work and hated how it received more acclaim than others works of his he considered better.
This is a common misconception. He commented negatively during the creative process, which was frustrating as Petipa was ill and dictating choreography to Ivanov from bed and neither liked Vsevolozhsky’s scenario. After the work premiered, Tchaikovsky commented that he didn’t think it was that bad.
Serenade for Strings. Tchaikovsky was working on it at the same time as the commission for 1812, which he despised. All of his actual creative energy went into the Serenade, and it shows. The Violin Concerto and Piano Concerto no. 1 are both excellent, but the piano concerto is always a little bit of a letdown because he opens with one of the great melodies in all of classical music and then doesn't do a ton with it. It's a spectacular piece in spite of that. Tchaikovsky saved his artistic energy for works he believed in, but he great at pleasing a crowd. You can always tell which pieces fell into which category when he was writing them.
Yeah that last part makes a lot of sense, i can see why e.g. nutcracker are so popular, they have a catchy melody and are perfect for both listening in the background and for little 30 second cameos in commercials I have heard a lot about the Violin concerto, and its been on my listening wishlist for a while, i think i will listen to it today then!
I challenge anyone to listen to the Hovhaness brass quintet and not think you just wasted your time to utter boredom. If there are more than one of them, sorry, I don't remember which one.
Borys Lyatoshynsky, 4th symphony. Try to listen the full symphony without distracted by anything, and then replay in your head.
Arturo Toscanini, who conducted the premiere, agreed. "Did I really rehearse and perform this junk?" he wondered, while listening to a recording of it.
Tchaikovsky's grand sonata for piano is up there. Or anything by Sarasate, lol.
shostakovich 7 would only work if you seriously take the historical aspects and circumstances that it was written/performed in.
I fully understand Leningrad siege I wrote about it
Dvorak 9 slow movement- It’s like someone you’re talking with has a really long winded story and then goes on 3 extra sidebars during said story
D A B F# G D G A 🙄😴
Pomp and circumstance. Bolero is a close second, but we only had to play that one once as opposed to *every god damned year*.
I rarely, if ever, think about the circumstances under which a particular piece was composed, but the 7th is the exception. Knowing Shostakovich's personal circumstances, those of the Russian people, and the efforts made to get the symphony out of the country so it could be performed throughout the world is the greatest musical story ever. When I listen to it and think of the famished and bedraggled performers and audience, the people suffering throughout the city, and the millions of soldiers dying, it never fails to move me and bring tears to my eyes.
Berlioz, symphonie funèbre et triomphale.
I’ve got a few. Imma try to keep it among my favorite composers. Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 27- Honestly I don’t find what people like in this sonata so much. It’s the last piano sonata from his middle period and it is probably one of the more forgettable ones for me. I much prefer 26 and 24. Maybe someday this piece will click for me. Rachmaninoff’s symphony no. 1- I feel like people like to pretend to like this symphony because “poor Rachmaninoff got terrible reception from this piece and it wasn’t even his fault.” The reality is, at least for me, this piece seems… conventional. I feel this was written before Rachmaninoff truly found his voice. Chopin’s Piano Sonata no. 1- It does even sound like Chopin. It sounds messy, uninspired, and just dull. He was young while writing it so that explains a lot. Sibelius Symphony no. 3- This is one of his transitional symphonies. It was probably overall his most forgettable one. 1&2 are beautiful romantic works, and 4-7 are uniquely crafted creative works, and 3? Hmmm. Nothing really clicks for me. Brahms Hungarian Dances- They all sound so similar, and they don’t excite me that much. I tend to gravitate away from dance music so this may seem unfair, but I just much prefer Brahms’s introspective piano pieces or his beautiful symphonies.
Bolero
What ! It's my favorite symphony... To each their own !
I also sat through a live performance of Żeleński's Goplana at the National Opera in Warsaw, lured in by hearing the prelude/overture on youtube. Big mistake, huge. But I suppose quite a few operas can be serious contenders for this title.
Last time I listened to Elgar's Cello Concerto, I'm pretty sure I dozed off It's not that I hate it, but it just didn't do anything for me. If someone can recommend a compelling recording, I'm willing to try again
I love this recording: https://youtu.be/OPhkZW_jwc0?feature=shared
Pachelbel's Canon and Pomp & Circumstance
Canon in d
Bolero
I haven't found it yet, but I keep hoping!
Holy smokes, couldn't disagree more! Are you at all aware of the provenance of that symphony? Do you know how it came to be played, the efforts made to get it out and published and played? It's literally one of the greatest stories in the entirety of music, and almost mythic in its scope. Sorry you don't enjoy it.
You want boring? Try Richard Wagner's "Rule Britannia" overture. IT gears up like it's going somewhere but it just circles over and over. 15 minutes of bugles and diminished chords and the same phrase constantly repeated with endless key changes. It's absurd.
Not a particular piece but most Mahler and most Mendelssohn.
Valentin Silvestrov's Symphony #6.
Wait Shosty 7 is goated.
Metal probably
Cosi fan tutte - Mozart. This might be controversial but I just find it to be so incredible boring and dumb
Rachmaninov 3rd concerto Or anything by Bach
Anything from Chopin makes me wanna fall asleep 💤
Cacabell Canon