From: urena@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Richard Urena)
Subject: Re: Beginning a classical collection
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 16:35:17 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.091408.16539@leland.Stanford.EDU> you write:
>1) How can one "break" into classical music?  My current collection 
>includes the grand sum of *2* classical CD's.  My current thoughts 
>are to get a book outlining the music of different ages (baroque, 
>romantic etc.), and start with the recommendations made as to great 
>works by the major composers.

Wait for the FAQ's for this newsgroup to appear.  They contain a fairly
extensive list of works and composers by period.  I don't
recommend buying any books because their usefulness as record-buying
guides is very limited, IMHO.  It's much better to start listening
to music.  There must be a classical-music station or two in your
area.  Also, if you are in an academic community chances are
there are frequent performances of music.  Keep your ears open;
and when you hear a piece you like, wait for the announcement
at the end (if you are listening to the radio) and make a mental 
note of it; the composer's name, the name of the work, etc.
(In this regard, the FAQs also have a guide to the pronunciation
of the names of lots of composers)  If you hear something particularly
sublime, you should be able to find at least one version in
your record store.

>2) Last time I was at the local music store, I compared several CDs 
>of Tchaikovsky's 1812 overture, and noticed that the times differed
>by as much as 1 minute!  Does this mean that it may be slightly cut
>off in the shorter time performance?  This complicates CD buying.

That's one possibility.  Another (more likely) possibility is
that different performers choose different tempos.  It certainly
complicates the buying part until you figure out where _your_
aesthetical preferences lie.  It is a fact of life that, when you
start building your collection, you'll buy some jewels and 
a few duds also.

>3) Should one look only for DDD recordings as opposed to ADD or AAD?
>This further complicates CD purchasing.

Not necessarily, and I think with this question you've opened,
as Yogi Berra might have said, Pandora's can of worms ( :) )  

The question of whether analog or
digital is the subject of much theological debate, which I won't
enter for fear of comitting heresy.  Two things that you should 
keep in mind:  most of the "historical" performances, by the
"really great" conductors and performers are, or course, in
analog, and sometimes in mono as well;  and from a purely
practical standpoint, ADDs and AADs tend to be cheaper.  You
can build a collection of wonderful performances, circa 1970,
that won't cost you an arm and a leg.

>4) Should one look for particular condutors/orchestras performing that
>piece?  This really complicates CD selection!

Oh yes, absolutely.  The problem is that everybody has their
own favorites.  And you will come (very quickly) to have your
own preferences if you start listening carefully to music on the
radio, for instance.

>Thanks.  As a side note, I was recently listening to The Planets by 
>Holst.  Strangely enough, as much as I liked "Mars", I thought the 
>remainder of the CD in its entirety was boring.  I am in my early 
>20s, and seem to go for involved peices (I also like hard rock and metal).
>
>Any recommendations for my tastes?

Check out the Symphonie Fantastique by Berlioz, the Organ Symphony
(No. 3, I think) by Saint-Saens; and of course that perennial favorite,
Carmina Burana by Carl Orff.

But variety is the spice of life, and for contrast with these "heavy"
pieces you should try something a little less involved, such as, say,
Telemann.
-- 
  -=[                      Richard Urena                      ]=-
  -=[                urena@titan.ucc.umass.edu                ]=-