theramon's Comments
@anony: a lot of every type of music has gone south.
Crappy music is everywhere. Luckily, so is good, thoughtful music.
Crappy music is everywhere. Luckily, so is good, thoughtful music.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@Rich T: Not sure what you are addressing.
I think many people have a problem with the term "classical." It doesn't seem to mean anything really (unless you are referring to the era).
There is no really good term for what we are talking about, so I guess we take what we can get.
Other terms that fall short of the mark:
New Music, Concert Music, Fine Art Music
I think many people think "classical" is a genre, but that's also not really true. Genre refers to things such as opera, string quartets, symphonies, song cycles, etc.
Also, there's some pretty chaotic music from every time period/style/place.
I think many people have a problem with the term "classical." It doesn't seem to mean anything really (unless you are referring to the era).
There is no really good term for what we are talking about, so I guess we take what we can get.
Other terms that fall short of the mark:
New Music, Concert Music, Fine Art Music
I think many people think "classical" is a genre, but that's also not really true. Genre refers to things such as opera, string quartets, symphonies, song cycles, etc.
Also, there's some pretty chaotic music from every time period/style/place.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
This article seems to address something most people know without all the expensive research - that people have their own tastes.
For some reason when "modern" classical music is discussed, Schoenberg and Webern are the first mentioned. Fair enough. But why isn't contemporary music part of the conversation? The Second Viennese School is a century old; it's challenging to listen to and study; it's easy to bash, but certainly critics realize that some pretty obscure music has been written since.
How about a comparison of music by living composers instead (or even recently deceased)?
Tristan Murail - spectralist - your average listener won't relate. Between the clusters and lack of clear [traditional] melody, his music tends to appeal to the hyper intellectual.
David Del Tredici - he's one of the guys that made tonal music fashionable again. Some call him a neo-romanticist, but I think the label falls short of a good description.
Moritz Eggert - writes and plays a bunch of piano music. The real charm is seeing him perform live. Not as intellectually challenging as earlier mentions, but that doesn't mean it's not surprising.
Chen Yi - I wouldn't even know how to describe her music beyond mentioning that it has a heavy Chinese influence (as it should - she grew up during the Cultural revolution in China). Totally worth a listen if anything to determine whether or not you want to listen to more.
Astor Piazzolla - ok he's dead, but in these terms he was composing not long ago. The story goes that as he was studying with Nadia Boulanger, she was so enamored with his tangos, he was strongly advised to keep writing them. His music has melody, harmonic progression, accessible rhythms, and passion.
Anyway, my point is that some people like to detach from thought when listening to music. Others like to dive into the numbers. There's middle ground too.
Besides, what percentage of the people you know walk around listening to Bach and Mozart?
For some reason when "modern" classical music is discussed, Schoenberg and Webern are the first mentioned. Fair enough. But why isn't contemporary music part of the conversation? The Second Viennese School is a century old; it's challenging to listen to and study; it's easy to bash, but certainly critics realize that some pretty obscure music has been written since.
How about a comparison of music by living composers instead (or even recently deceased)?
Tristan Murail - spectralist - your average listener won't relate. Between the clusters and lack of clear [traditional] melody, his music tends to appeal to the hyper intellectual.
David Del Tredici - he's one of the guys that made tonal music fashionable again. Some call him a neo-romanticist, but I think the label falls short of a good description.
Moritz Eggert - writes and plays a bunch of piano music. The real charm is seeing him perform live. Not as intellectually challenging as earlier mentions, but that doesn't mean it's not surprising.
Chen Yi - I wouldn't even know how to describe her music beyond mentioning that it has a heavy Chinese influence (as it should - she grew up during the Cultural revolution in China). Totally worth a listen if anything to determine whether or not you want to listen to more.
Astor Piazzolla - ok he's dead, but in these terms he was composing not long ago. The story goes that as he was studying with Nadia Boulanger, she was so enamored with his tangos, he was strongly advised to keep writing them. His music has melody, harmonic progression, accessible rhythms, and passion.
Anyway, my point is that some people like to detach from thought when listening to music. Others like to dive into the numbers. There's middle ground too.
Besides, what percentage of the people you know walk around listening to Bach and Mozart?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
If you were referring to some of my composer selections, then you should really have a listen to some of them. Silverware drawers they are not.
As an (hopefully trained) orchestral performer, you should probably not generalize the last hundred years or so of notated music. If you really think it is all terrible, that is fine by me, but it is NOT all the same.
I'm totally with Acheron12. Unfortunately, I'll likely never know what sticks and what doesn't