Albie writes:

>Hi Peggy, umm...  you're just starting, huh? A lot of the works (in fact,
>the majority) you listed I myself won't touch, and I've been into classical
>for nearly a decade-and-a-half...  almost all of them wouldn't be
>considered "basic" or "good foundation" works...  and several really appeal
>to only the tiniest of niche audiences...  by all means, start out with the
>big ol' names-- Beethoven (concertos/symphonies), Brahms (C/S), Bach,
>Chopin (certainly for piano!), then expand (i.e.  first maybe Ravel or
>Debussy, then Bruckner or Mahler...  then who knows where you'll go).  But
>sheesh, you thinkin' of starting out with Ives, Berg, or Webern??? Any one
>of those would be a super tough nut to crack!!

Let me disagree with Albie.  I started almost exactly with the tough nuts,
mainly because Albie's "foundation" didn't appeal to me at all.  In fact,
it bored me out of my mind.  I found it mostly too predictable to keep my
interest.  I've since come back to composers like Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven,
Chopin, and Brahms.

The point is, this idea of "foundation" implies that there's only One
True Path (although that thought may have been furthest from Albie's mind),
that you mustn't tackle people you might like before you get through a
prescribed set That All Cultured People Know.  Who knows? You may never
like Beethoven, but think Stravinsky's the bee's knees.  I've never found
two people's tastes in absolute synch.  There are as many ways to enjoy
classical music as there are people.  I would suggest listening to as much
free stuff as possible -- for example, at the public library.  Make a note
of what or who you like and explore from there.

Steve Schwartz