# If you only listen to classical music, you're missing out.



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

Yes, classical music is great, but there are as good music in all other genres, except maybe a few.
As a professional composer with quite a few years of experience, a lot of music education, latest being a masters degree in composing for film, I very much believe that the only two types of music there is, very broadly speaking, as it is obviously a spectrum, is good and bad. (Personal taste obviously decides what YOU personally like to listen to, but that doesn't change the fact that it is either objectively good or bad in the end.)
There are objectively fantastic music in almost every genre, and if one limits oneself to only classical, i think "missing out" is putting it very lightly.
If you are one who find yourself unwilling or reluctant to explore anything other than classical music i very much advice you to try to broaden your musical horizon.
I know this is a classical music community, but i am 100% certain that we enrich our musical understanding and insight by opening up ourselves and taking in multiple forms of music.

I will add some of my personal favorites:

Old timer, instrumental synth rock - 



 I just LOVE the intensity of the track, with its perfectly placed polyrhythmic hits, the catchy AF melodies and the intelligent chord progressions. And ofc the unmistakable 70s/80s sound is heavy and awesome. This guy is a genius and he has made so much musical gold. It is not only this track.

Authintic-ish viking music - 



 Yes it is not super inventive in the harmony or melody, but it is the "rawness" that gets me. The imagery that it brings. It transports me to a different dimension where i am a badass, rough viking that takes no **** from anyone.

Fusion - 



 What can you even say? These guys are absolutely insanely talented.

Heavy synth metal - 



 HOLY **** LETS ******* KILL SOME ************* DEMONS!!! Such a GENIUS sountrack... Simply genius.

Orchestral black metal - 



 Surely not everyone's cup of tea, but you can't deny that this is objectively fantastic music.

Country that is actually good - Alison Krauss & Union Station - Baby Now That I've Found You (Live in Concert) This whole concert is gold.

Scandinavian folk music with a modern take - Øyvind Smidt - Kattejakta If this doesn't make you smile i don't know what will.

Jazz - All the Things You Are (Remastered) No need to say anything.

I could go on for hours, but i will stop it there.

K-pop - TVXQ! 동방신기 '수리수리 (Spellbound)' MV Yes K-pop.. This is good music. I couldn't give two ***** what it's called or who is the general audience.

Anime style jazz - Bunny Girl Senpai Ending Song "Fukashigi no Carte" by Bunny Girl Shut up, its good. I DON'T CARE THAT ITS CALLED "BUNNY GIRL SEMPAI"! And you shouldn't either!

I don't even know, but it's awesome - [Come on Baby Do the] Balkan Boogie It's crazy.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Do you have an example in mind of what you would consider bad music? I really don't know what you mean without any clarifications. 'Just curious.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> I very much believe that the only two types of music there is, very broadly speaking, as it is obviously a spectrum, is good and bad.


I fully agree.


pianoedvard_b93 said:


> the fact that it is either objectively good or bad in the end


Please, could you help me? What are the criteria for deciding objectively, i. e. not being confused by any kind of individual taste, whether music is good or bad "in the end"?


pianoedvard_b93 said:


> i very much advice you to try to broaden your musical horizon.


Thank you very much. Based on your internet suggestions, I will think over what went wrong in my life and what I have to change according to your suggestions. Thank you so much.

Maybe you also have suggestions for other areas of life ...?


----------



## Chilham (Jun 18, 2020)




----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Music unlike ice cream comes in more than 31 flavors. The deeper you dig the more gold nuggets you discover. There is good in almost every genre.

The music that you have posted would not make MY lists, but that's the wonderful thing about music.

Here are three "perfect" songs, from my POV:


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Yes, classical music is great, but there are as good music in all other genres, except maybe a few.
> As a professional composer with quite a few years of experience, a lot of music education, latest being a masters degree in composing for film, I very much believe that the only two types of music there is, very broadly speaking, as it is obviously a spectrum, is good and bad. (Personal taste obviously decides what YOU personally like to listen to, but that doesn't change the fact that it is either objectively good or bad in the end.)
> There are objectively fantastic music in almost every genre, and if one limits oneself to only classical, i think "missing out" is putting it very lightly.
> If you are one who find yourself unwilling or reluctant to explore anything other than classical music i very much advice you to try to broaden your musical horizon.
> ...


As a fellow composer I can agree with your sentiment, (especially re Oscar Peterson and your link is a fantastic rendition of a great song). My problem is I don't have enough time nor even inclination whilst in the midst of composing. In 'downtime', then yeah I like YTubin' for music I don't know although it eventually ends up being late 20th and 21stC concert music with score.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Surely not everyone's cup of tea, but you can't deny that this is objectively fantastic music.


The drumming absolutely MAKES that track.

Another fav of mine from that universe:


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Jazz - All the Things You Are (Remastered) No need to say anything.


My "perfect song" in jazz (one of them) is "Poinciana."


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Scandinavian folk music with a modern take - Øyvind Smidt - Kattejakta If this doesn't make you smile i don't know what will.


That's very good. My current favorite for rocked-up Swedish folk tunes is Hoven Droven:


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> K-pop - TVXQ! 동방신기 '수리수리 (Spellbound)' MV Yes K-pop.. This is good music. I couldn't give two *** what it's called or who is the general audience.


Impressive cinematography. Very few cuts, and there's A LOT going on!


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Country that is actually good - Alison Krauss & Union Station - Baby Now That I've Found You (Live in Concert) This whole concert is gold.


Her brother's even better I think.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Philidor said:


> I fully agree.
> 
> Please, could you help me? What are the criteria for deciding objectively, i. e. not being confused by any kind of individual taste, whether music is good or bad "in the end"?
> 
> ...


[ _(mutters) ... _oh, you guys! ... ] I take it this is _not _the time to state my staunch belief that some music is neither entirely good nor entirely bad.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Chilham said:


>


I hope he's not lamenting his "theme song". It's actually pretty good.

By the way -- to keep this submission legitimate -- I spent the afternoon today with punk rock. Masters such as Greg Ginn, Klaus Flouride, Will Shatter, Henry Rollins, and Mike Muir stampeded through my sound system. If you know the names, you'll know the music. A lot of good stuff there, too.


----------



## AndorFoldes (Aug 25, 2012)

What is the deal with posters trying to convince people to listen to non-classical music on a classical music forum? It seems to be a recurring theme. I also listen to non-classical music, but don't feel inclined to advertise it here. Are there actually any people who are so dogmatic that they refuse to listen to anything but classical music? Surely there are other forums for you for whatever you want to discuss.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

NoCoPilot said:


> Her brother's even better I think.


Yes, I find her voice quite boring. But that's what she might be going for. Many friends of mine find it soft and pretty. That's what they like.
The band chooses very good songs, so there's that..


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Yes, we all know there is other worthy music out there besides classical. In fact, there's a lot of classical that I don't find worthy of its reputation. I listen to a lot of movie music, some country/western, and I have a thing for music from the Roaring Twenties, theater organ, and band marches. Try as I might, I cannot stand heavy metal, most any pop stuff today, and utterly despise rap entirely. Call me a snob, but I like good tunes, beautiful harmony, and something that's not always in 2- or 4- beat patterns. I also don't like jazz.

But why is it that it's always us classical listeners and fans that are told WE need to broaden our listening world? Do you ever hear people say to metal heads that they need to listen to Mahler, Beethoven or Tchaikovsky? Are rappers ever looked down upon because they don't listen to Bach, Brahms or Beach?

Life is just too short to listen to crappy music.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

AndorFoldes said:


> Are there actually any people who are so dogmatic that they refuse to listen to anything but classical music?


I do, I only listen to European classical music. But why/how would that be dogmatic?


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> objectively good or bad


How can music be objectively good or bad? 

Do you mean notes played as intended through lack of ability or practice?


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

hammeredklavier said:


> I do, I only listen to European classical music. But why/how would that be dogmatic?


I'll take a guess here. I think it refers to why you only listen to a certain type of music.
It would be dogmatic if your reason was because it was superior.
It would not be dogmatic if it were simply a preference and no claim to superiority were made.,


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

NoCoPilot said:


>


Leo is amazing. You might like this little story from him about meeting Bob Dylan.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Dogma or not, as the OP pointed out, limiting yourself in this way is missing out on whole other worlds of wonderful music.

Yes, this is a CM forum. Does that mean everybody here listens only to CM? Of course not.

If the forum is LIMITED to discussing CM and only CM, so be it. Makes the forum as blindered as people who only listen to CM, but whatever.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

I've seen Leo in concert 17 times. I've heard most of his stories. They're as good as his guitar playing.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

eljr said:


> I'll take a guess here. I think it refers to why you only listen to a certain type of music.
> It would be dogmatic if your reason was because it was superior.
> It would not be dogmatic if it were simply a preference and no claim to superiority were made.,


Classical music is superior, to _me_.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> Call me a snob, but ...


In my book, the only way to be "a snob" is to refuse to even try something different. If you sampled it & didn't care for it, that's not snobbishness. That's being discerning.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I'm very fond of the folk music of. ethnic minorities in Russia , the now independent form Soviet Republics such as Georgia, Azerbaijan , Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan , Uzbekistan , Turkmenistan , as well as Mongolia and. Xinjiang province of China, once the independent republic of East Turkestan etc . Tuvan and Mongolian throat singing i amazing , and so is the polyphonic music for chorus of Georgia . 
Within the Russian republic , the folk music of. Chechnya , the republic of Dagestan and the republic of North Ossetia and. other parts of the north Caucasus is wonderful , as well as the folk music of the Tatar republic of the Volga, the adjacent republic of Bashkiria ( Bashkortastan, ) the Chuvash republic , which is also adjacent and. the folk music of. the of the Mari El republic . people of the Volga, who speak a language related to Finnish is. really cool .


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Examples? I'll admit almost complete virginity.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

ORigel said:


> Classical music is superior, to _me_.


Then it would be dogmatic.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> Do you ever hear people say to metal heads that they need to listen to Mahler, Beethoven or Tchaikovsky?


Yep, I tell them all the time.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

eljr said:


> Yep, I tell them all the time.


And some of them do.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

My criteria* for the music I love, is the following (no particular order):

Very high levels of musicianship, deep and broad range of emotional and/or intellectual content, very or fairly high levels of complexity, (usually) long form pieces, not too much repetitiveness, avoidance of verse>chorus>bridge>>repeat song format, no need of a 'catchy hook'.

Music without most or all of the above criteria tends to bore me. I am open to most forms of music that has the above attributes.

I came to classical somewhat late in life, after already being into quite a few other genres and subgenres that have most or all of the above listed attributes. It became obvious to me, that classical had all of those same attributes, and fit nicely with the other genres I was already listening to.

The various genres/subgenres I listen to are:

Jazz - fusion, post bop, M-Base, chamber-jazz, avant-garde, free jazz, jazz-metal
Prog - avant-prog, Canterbury, Zeuhl, prog-metal, technical-metal, classic prog, folk-prog
Classical - mostly from post WWII (serial, atonal, spectralism, modernism, ultra-modernism, etc)

So, if one wants to say I am close minded because my tastes are limited to those attributes ( which eliminates all forms of popular mainstream genres), that is fine.

But I find it hard to consider one close minded, when in one listening session, I can go from fusion (Brand X, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Panzerballett), to prog-metal (Pain of Salvation, The Contortionist, Haken, Tesseract), to avant-garde jazz (Thomas Stanko, Art Ensemble of Chicago, Anthony Braxton), to classical (Elliott Carter, Bruno Maderna, Sofia Gubaidulina, Berg, Anna Thorvaldsdottir), or any of the other subgenres I listen to.

*I did not consciously come up with these criteria, rather, I just noticed over a period of time, that music that did not have most or all of these criteria had less and less interest for me. I just lost all interest in genres such as: mainstream rock. pop, country (besides blue grass), hip hop, almost all forms of dance music.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

ORigel said:


> Classical music is superior, to _me_.





eljr said:


> Then it would be dogmatic.


So what? You saying I am "missing out" is equally dogmatic


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

I don't think ANYONE would accuse you of being close minded, Simon.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

If one is completely absorbed in the music they love there is nothing to be missed, so I disagree with the OP's assumption. I do find it odd that accomplished musicians, especially Americans, don't like jazz. But that being the case, if they don't like it they are not missing out by not listening if they are totally absorbed by something else. You can only miss out if you're not listening closely to what you do enjoy. But we all have to deal with distractions.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Progressive Rock is high quality rock music. I would say the Classical version of rock. Lots of interesting things going on.


----------



## Hogwash (5 mo ago)

I have the freedom to listen to the music I enjoy hearing. I’ve enjoyed watching and listening to this music video. Jon sometimes writes serious music also 😄


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

ORigel said:


> Classical music is superior, to _me_.


Yes, I think everything developed from CM. So, the goals of expression (expressive goals) in CM became the goals in pop, jazz and others. But we can see what happened in history, in audiences, in the life's work of all types of composers.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

I rather feel liberated, that I stopped trying to listen to the contemporary pop music hitparades to have the common grounds with my peers.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

That Jon Batiste video is wonderful. So joyful, so self-deprecating, so inclusive, so respectful of Black culture. Reminds me a lot of Pharrell's "Happy":


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

AndorFoldes said:


> What is the deal with posters trying to convince people to listen to non-classical music on a classical music forum? It seems to be a recurring theme. I also listen to non-classical music, but don't feel inclined to advertise it here. Are there actually any people who are so dogmatic that they refuse to listen to anything but classical music? Surely there are other forums for you for whatever you want to discuss.


Post of the day


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

mbhaub said:


> ...
> But why is it that it's always us classical listeners and fans that are told WE need to broaden our listening world? ...


Why? Because whoever says this sort of thing does so in blatant ignorance.

The majority of "pop" music listeners I know are comfortable listening to music often within a single decade of two -- the 60's and 70's perhaps, or the decade of "the Seattle Grunge Sound", or the Blue Note jazz era (1950's and 1960's). Even if one is a fan of the entire rock-n-roll period, one is limited to less than a century of music. Jazz lovers can appreciate a little over a century, and some wide variety there is to that, too. But as a "classical" fan, I enjoy music from the eras of Gregorian chant and Hildegard von Bingen through the Renaissance of Palestrina, Monteverdi, Dowland and Dufay, through the Baroque of Bach, Vivaldi, Handel, Telemann, Scarlatti, and Schütz, through the classical age of the Bach sons, Boyce, Haydn, Salieri and Mozart through the classical transition to Romanticism of Beethoven, Weber, and Schubert through the vast ranges of Romanticism (Schumann, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Franck, Bruckner, Brahms) and High Romanticism (Mahler, Strauss, Chausson) through Impressionism (Debussy, Ravel, Ives, DeFalla) through the early modernism of Schoenberg, Webern, Berg, and Stravinsky through later modernism of Berio, Cage, Boulez, Xenakis, and Penderecki, through to our current century's "contemporary" music, including the works of such notables as Beat Furrer, Nicholas Maw, Bruno Maderna, and Wolfgang Rihm. And you folks reading this know that I just barely scratched the surface. But ... how many centuries of music is that? From the Gregorian chant of the ninth century to today? Thirteen centuries!? Thirteen centuries of musical development and change and innovation and discovery and redefinition! And yet, I find quite a bit of variety within the narrow scope of pop music, or of rock, or punk, or jazz, or what have you. But _thirteen centuries worth_ of music? How much broader can a classical music fan's ears go?

I agree: cut us a break. We are doing our part. Now, what about the rest of you? Where's that guy who likes only the music of one polka band. Maybe we can start with him, introduce him to a second polka band. We can then prompt a little bit here and a little bit there and help the others out there who are stuck within a single century or less. But just don't tell us to "broaden our listening world". We needn't stand for that.

And thank you, mbhaub, for your fine post.


----------



## 4chamberedklavier (12 mo ago)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Yes, classical music is great, but there are as good music in all other genres, *except maybe a few.*


(emphasis mine)

That's spicy.  What might those genres be?

I'm not judging you for not thinking that all genres are equally good. I'm just legitimately curious about what other people don't like.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

I'll venture a swing at that, though it wasn't my original post.

Native American drum music (not much innovation)
prepared guitar music (viz Fred Frith's "Guitar Solos" - lots of innovation but not much music)
the Thai Elephant Orchestra (look it up)
"Metal Machine Music" by Lou Reed and "Zero Tolerance for Silence" by Pat Metheny (good for removing unwanted guests after a party. Also used by the FBI at Branch Davidian if memory serves)
Gosh almost anything I suggest is going to have SOME contrarywise supporter


----------



## Dreadful_Engines (5 mo ago)

NoCoPilot said:


> I'll venture a swing at that, though it wasn't my original post.
> 
> Native American drum music (not much innovation)
> prepared guitar music (viz Fred Frith's "Guitar Solos" - lots of innovation but not much music)
> ...


Noise music obviously has possibly the lowest entry barrier for any contemporary style but those on the better developed end of it are doing very sophisticated things which require familiarisation with the relevant theory, technique, technology and form to fully appreciate in the same way that western art music does. Is the former as good as the latter? No. But it's also much newer. Because of its virtually non-existent mass appeal many of its best artists exist in total obscurity, but the likes of Merzbow, Ramleh, Yellow Swans, Incapacitants et al. are worth much more than getting rid of people after parties.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

I was tempted to list Borbetomagus "self titled" but I'm sure someone would come to its defense.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

Life is too short for listening to every music you could could appreciate. So focussing makes sense in order to get more out of your selection.

I like "Smoke on the Water". The guitar riff in the intro is a stroke of a genius. However, if I listened to the piece, say, every day, after some days the attractivity would decrease.

The same would happen if I listened to Schubert's String Quintet every day. But not to the same degree.

In addition, delving into Schubert's Quintet enriches my listening and boosts my understanding. So focussing on works of that league makes even sense in another way, because you get more and more details as well as architectural aspects which enrich your listening. The listening experienced can be boosted by knowledge, if you want.

Sorry to say that working on "Smoke on the Water" doesn't deliver the same boost to the pleasure. Maybe someone has other experiences, then I would be glad about sharing.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

I listed some "perfect songs" upthread that have survived hundreds of listens in my house without losing their appeal.


----------



## Dreadful_Engines (5 mo ago)

NoCoPilot said:


> I was tempted to list Borbetomagus "self titled" but I'm sure someone would come to its defense.


I've never heard of it but it looks as though it might bear some similarity to a good deal of John Zorn's output which is tremendously well respected.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

AndorFoldes said:


> What is the deal with posters trying to convince people to listen to non-classical music on a classical music forum? It seems to be a recurring theme. I also listen to non-classical music, but don't feel inclined to advertise it here. Are there actually any people who are so dogmatic that they refuse to listen to anything but classical music?


And if there are some such people, so what? They don't have to be "dogmatic" either, maybe they came to the conclusion that they like classical best and that it will usually be a waste of time to try other music because one will not like much of it anyway. It's simply pragmatism in the end. One will always "miss out" on something. I am deliberately "missing out" a lot of classical stuff (e.g. not following a series like hyperions "romantic concertos) because I tried a bunch of them and found them between mildly interesting and a waste of time. 

And it's worse with non-classical.
I listened to all the pieces (not completely through) of the OP and the only one I like enough that I might want to listen to it again, is the Oscar Peterson (once in a while, it's not a huge favorite but I have heard such music before and might even have a Peterson anthology somewhere). The others are between nice/tolerable (but often tiring after a minute, such as the folksy pieces), a silly blast from the past (the Rocky music, like looking into some comic book or TV show one used to like at 12 years old although I probably never watched a complete Rocky movie I remember the later ones being popular among classmates in the 1980s) or just annoying (most of the rest). It would be an utter waste of time for me to explore such stuff instead of listening to classical music (or the non-classical I occasionally listen to already now).

As for why people do it, ask Haidt or other psychologists. To me, it seems a kind of signalling superior taste and openness. Like in Haidt's moral psychology people and groups differ by the importance they put on different "moral foundations" (e.g. "purity", "loyalty", "harm reduction" etc.), people probably differ in their aesthetic psychology. But nowadays and for some time it is clearly more respected to be as "open" as possible and have an appreciation for a broad spectrum of (here) music, including "ironic consumption" of obviously tacky and "campy" things, whereas a "purist" is something bad, a pretentious wanna exclusive "elitist".
There is also sociological research that explains at least to some degree why you find these threads more frequently in a "classical" forum than in a popular music forum. Namely, that classical listeners are more frequently "omnivores", i.e. _not_ purists, than listeners who mainly listen to other genres. The paper I read almost 20 year ago IIRC also found a correlation between SES (socioeconomic status) and being an omnivore wrt music (this was stronger than the supposed correlation between SES and preferring classical).


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

4chamberedklavier said:


> I'm not judging you for not thinking that all genres are equally good. I'm just legitimately curious about what other people don't like.


I think one needs to consider that many people mean with "bad" not "completely lacking in skill". 
Just like one needs without a doubt skills to put up brutalist concrete buildings (in fact one needs technology and skills builders in e.g. 15th century Florence did not have) but some people find them depressingly ugly, anti-human etc.


----------



## Dreadful_Engines (5 mo ago)

Kreisler jr said:


> The paper I read almost 20 year ago IIRC also found a correlation between SES (socioeconomic status) and being an omnivore wrt music (this was stronger than the supposed correlation between SES and preferring classical).


Would you use a Windows 2000 manual for information on operating your phone? The common understanding of what "phone" means has completely changed in that time frame, not to mention the way in which people listen to music. My theory, totally lacking in evidence: people take this kind of position because they know that they don't know why art music is better than pop music and they feel insecure about it — if they can turn ignorance into a virtue they can perform a sort of alchemical operation on that insecurity, though because it doesn't work and thus remains insecurity they need the affirmation of others in order to feel all right about themselves. But they're still left under the illusion that, for example, John Williams is within even several leagues of the likes of Wagner.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I don't understand what you mean. That people are even less able to focus on anything for more than 3 min. because of "smartphones" having made them even dumber than they were 20 years ago 

I don't think that research is obsolete only because many younger people listen even more haphazardly now than 20 years ago when they often still had to buy CDs. I would never put too much weight on sociological research, especially when to qualify for "listening to classical" it would have been enough to put on a baroque trumpet concerto for sunday brunch or having a Three tenors disc, but I don't think they did a completely horrible job. (It was a UK study, IIRC, so it might reflect the strange social strata there as I suspect it would be different in e.g. Austria.)


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

This discussion (with a few small variations) reappears on this site with a monotonous regularity. It seems that there is a deep-seated craving on the part of certain individuals to drag CM down to the level of pop and rap. No doubt, forms part of the Gestalt of the modern left. It is facilitated by a ludicrous liberal myth that all men are born equal. By extension, no type of music is inherently superior to another.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The "old left" in the late 19th and early 20th century held that humans were sufficiently equal to be able to enjoy the aesthetic experience of "high art" (IMO rightly so, within the normal variations of inclinations and interests people happen to have) and therefore it should be made accessible to everyone via general education and without "artificial" hurdles like top hats or high ticket prices etc. Some time in the 1960s or 70s this attitude shifted towards "high art" being a suppressive bourgeois concept that needed to be abolished and "liberation" meant that there was to be no difference to folk/"low" art (which unfortunately by then had usually little to do with "folklore" or grassroots but was mostly already perfectly commercialized anglophone pop culture or would become thus within a few years, like any later "underground"/"alternative" art/music/style movement of the last 50 years). "Fortunately" this fit well with commercial interests and the hedonist individualism that was often the only thing that remained from the social movements of the 1960s.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Is there some reason this discussion appears in a classical music forum?


----------



## Dreadful_Engines (5 mo ago)

Kreisler jr said:


> I don't understand what you mean. That people are even less able to focus on anything for more than 3 min. because of "smartphones" having made them even dumber than they were 20 years ago
> 
> I don't think that research is obsolete only because many younger people listen even more haphazardly now than 20 years ago when they often still had to buy CDs. I would never put too much weight on sociological research, especially when to qualify for "listening to classical" it would have been enough to put on a baroque trumpet concerto for sunday brunch or having a Three tenors disc, but I don't think they did a completely horrible job. (It was a UK study, IIRC, so it might reflect the strange social strata there as I suspect it would be different in e.g. Austria.)


I mean that because of the internet people can and do listen to whatever they want for free, and can find music they would never have encountered in the days of record shops. People on the whole are far less likely to listen to only one type of music, specifically because of the internet. This is true even for people who don't care about music.


----------



## Dreadful_Engines (5 mo ago)

advokat said:


> No doubt, forms part of the Gestalt of the modern left. It is facilitated by a ludicrous liberal myth that all men are born equal.


This is not a stone's throw away from 12 year olds arguing in Youtube comments. Don't let yourself get the impression that you're among the ubermensch.


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

There are people who consider 99% of 'pop music' as noise.
Well, they don't miss anything out when they eventually decide to only listen to classical music.

As long as you're happy and satisfied with your own criteria, you're fine.

(In other words: I have a very boring opinion about this.)


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

Dreadful_Engines said:


> This is not a stone's throw away from 12 year olds arguing in Youtube comments. Don't let yourself get the impression that you're among the ubermensch.


You probably mean Übermenschen. The first letter is U with an umlaut, and nouns in German are capitalised. Also, Übermensch is singular; the plural would be Übermenschen. I have a nagging suspicion that you have not read Nietzsche in the original, after all. This is a pity since the exercise enhances the appreciation of certain strains in CM. May I gently suggest you take some classes in the civilised German language, especially since you insist on using it conversationally.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

ORigel said:


> dogmatic


No, if fact it would not be. I am simply providing definition. If you say you enjoy classical music to the exclusion of all else, that is not dogmatic. When you say it is superior... we;; people may well consider that dogmatic. Fairly so it seems to me.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Many or perhaps most of TC's regular posters have described their interests in other kinds of music on this site. Perhaps it would have been wise, or at least polite, to have found out about those you're addressing before offering patronizing advice no one needs or wants? And, by the way, there is a forum on this site for sharing your favorite non-classical music. It's not this one. Surprisingly, it's called the Non-Classical Music forum.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

SONNET CLV said:


> Why? Because whoever says this sort of thing does so in blatant ignorance.
> 
> The majority of "pop" music listeners I know are comfortable listening to music often within a single decade of two -- the 60's and 70's perhaps, or the decade of "the Seattle Grunge Sound", or the Blue Note jazz era (1950's and 1960's). Even if one is a fan of the entire rock-n-roll period, one is limited to less than a century of music. Jazz lovers can appreciate a little over a century, and some wide variety there is to that, too. But as a "classical" fan, I enjoy music from the eras of Gregorian chant and Hildegard von Bingen through the Renaissance of Palestrina, Monteverdi, Dowland and Dufay, through the Baroque of Bach, Vivaldi, Handel, Telemann, Scarlatti, and Schütz, through the classical age of the Bach sons, Boyce, Haydn, Salieri and Mozart through the classical transition to Romanticism of Beethoven, Weber, and Schubert through the vast ranges of Romanticism (Schumann, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Franck, Bruckner, Brahms) and High Romanticism (Mahler, Strauss, Chausson) through Impressionism (Debussy, Ravel, Ives, DeFalla) through the early modernism of Schoenberg, Webern, Berg, and Stravinsky through later modernism of Berio, Cage, Boulez, Xenakis, and Penderecki, through to our current century's "contemporary" music, including the works of such notables as Beat Furrer, Nicholas Maw, Bruno Maderna, and Wolfgang Rihm. And you folks reading this know that I just barely scratched the surface. But ... how many centuries of music is that? From the Gregorian chant of the ninth century to today? Thirteen centuries!? Thirteen centuries of musical development and change and innovation and discovery and redefinition! And yet, I find quite a bit of variety within the narrow scope of pop music, or of rock, or punk, or jazz, or what have you. But _thirteen centuries worth_ of music? How much broader can a classical music fan's ears go?
> 
> ...


Shouldn't we try to figure out what turns people off as soon as they hear the beginning of some serious music, from any of those eras of CM. I know from experience with young people that if you put on a snippet of popular music or jazz their faces light up (before they're even consciously aware of the 'joy'), but if you try to sneak in some CM their brains immediately react with, "Oh, this is going to be serious..". 
Being in school all day - some types of learning become more of a chore for the brain than others. Music is so different that it invites and allows for these extremes. Math can do it too, but without the emotional intensity, so there's less impact for developing likes and dislikes. 
Have other teachers seen this?


----------



## rjsaettone (5 mo ago)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Yes, classical music is great, but there are as good music in all other genres, except maybe a few.
> As a professional composer with quite a few years of experience, a lot of music education, latest being a masters degree in composing for film, I very much believe that the only two types of music there is, very broadly speaking, as it is obviously a spectrum, is good and bad. (Personal taste obviously decides what YOU personally like to listen to, but that doesn't change the fact that it is either objectively good or bad in the end.)
> There are objectively fantastic music in almost every genre, and if one limits oneself to only classical, i think "missing out" is putting it very lightly.
> If you are one who find yourself unwilling or reluctant to explore anything other than classical music i very much advice you to try to broaden your musical horizon.
> ...


I completely agree. Most of what I listen to nowadays is classical (regardless of time period), but I came to classical music by way of metal. There is an inherent relationship in the construction of melodies and harmonies in both genres. And I agree every genre has something unique to offer. Bartók was badass BECAUSE he heard eastern Asian music and recognized that it was (to quote you) "objectively fantastic music." Being able to incorporate ideas from many different genres makes music better, and makes us better as composers, performers, and audience members.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

Genres of music that truly suck

Late 90s FM radio buttrock
Middle Eastern and Indian pop music - the stuff you hear in restaurants
bro country
new age

any others?


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

4chamberedklavier said:


> (emphasis mine)
> 
> That's spicy.  What might those genres be?
> 
> I'm not judging you for not thinking that all genres are equally good. I'm just legitimately curious about what other people don't like.


I deeply struggle to find anything nice to say about modern hip hop, AKA trap. Usually when clueless music students say stuff like "A child could make that kind of music!" and referring to pop music, they are just clueless and have no idea what goes in to it. But in this case... I think they would be correct. A child without a single musical gene in its body actually could make a hit trap track, i think.
Then there are the Norwegian genre of "Russemusikk" or in english "Russ music". Which is basically just subpar, unimaginative and lackluster EDM with extremely vulgar lyrics made by teens who haven't decided what they want to be when they grow up yet.

That's it, i think? To my knowledge, at least.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

Bwv 1080 said:


> Genres of music that truly suck
> 
> Late 90s FM radio buttrock
> Middle Eastern and Indian pop music - the stuff you hear in restaurants
> ...


Trap


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

Marc said:


> There are people who consider 99% of 'pop music' as noise.
> Well, they don't miss anything out when they eventually decide to only listen to classical music.
> 
> As long as you're happy and satisfied with your own criteria, you're fine.
> ...


Yeah well about 99% of modern pop music is kinda noise.. However, there is that 1% left that is worth checking out.


----------



## rjsaettone (5 mo ago)

Luchesi said:


> Shouldn't we try to figure out what turns people off as soon as they hear the beginning of some serious music, from any of those eras of CM. I know from experience with young people that if you put on a snippet of popular music or jazz their faces light up (before they're even consciously aware of the 'joy'), but if you try to sneak in some CM their brains immediately react with, "Oh, this is going to be serious..".
> Being in school all day - some types of learning become more of a chore for the brain than others. Music is so different that it invites and allows for these extremes. Math can do it too, but without the emotional intensity, so there's less impact for developing likes and dislikes.
> Have other teachers seen this?


Let me know if you ever find the answer to how to get people to open their minds to CM. My wife is a music major and she STILL gets that look on her face when I try to show her some CM (as opposed to just casually playing it). She's told me she thinks I listen to music with too much of an "agenda," whatever that means. I mean, doesn't a sonata by DEFINITION have an agenda?? I can't win 😭😂


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

EdwardBast said:


> Many or perhaps most of TC's regular posters have described their interests in other kinds of music on this site. Perhaps it would have been wise, or at least polite, to have found out about those you're addressing before offering patronizing advice no one needs or wants? And, by the way, there is a forum on this site for sharing your favorite non-classical music. It's not this one. Surprisingly, it's called the Non-Classical Music forum.


If you think that was patronizing, i would invest in a thicker skin, tbh.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

larold said:


> Is there some reason this discussion appears in a classical music forum?


Why not?
There is no reason for you to partake in the discussion if you don't want to.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

AndorFoldes said:


> What is the deal with posters trying to convince people to listen to non-classical music on a classical music forum? It seems to be a recurring theme. I also listen to non-classical music, but don't feel inclined to advertise it here. Are there actually any people who are so dogmatic that they refuse to listen to anything but classical music? Surely there are other forums for you for whatever you want to discuss.


The reason why people who listen to CM gets this, maybe more than many others are because if you enjoy CM in the first place it is highly likely that you have a pretty good musical ear and understanding. There is no reason to try to convince a modern hip hop nut to listen to classical. It is most likely way above his/her head. The people who actively listens to CM are capable musically to take in and consider most music there is since they are most likely highly intelligent, musically. Same with jazz people, and many other genres as well which music requires a musical brain to be enjoyed.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Trap


I like Travis Scott, Astroworld was a good record


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

I think there's some interesting posts in most threads. I care about the interesting posts, not about thread titles or the uninteresting posts. 
Interesting and helpful posts pop up all over. We can scan in half a second and we don't have to dwell on any uninteresting posts.

It's not like you're at a party and you have to be polite and listen to endless diatribes from slightly intoxicated but popular folks. Anyway, that's the way I look at it, but a minor consequence is that I post erratically, and not always immediately relevant to anyone reading them. I use the forum for my own selfish purposes and sometimes it unintentionally clashes with policies.
How about other posters?


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

rjsaettone said:


> Let me know if you ever find the answer to how to get people to open their minds to CM. My wife is a music major and she STILL gets that look on her face when I try to show her some CM (as opposed to just casually playing it). She's told me she thinks I listen to music with too much of an "agenda," whatever that means. I mean, doesn't a sonata by DEFINITION have an agenda?? I can't win 😭😂


Yes, my wife is an Art Therapist and so we have very complicated avenues of communication about CM. A visual artist tries to relate in the way that they relate to their art in art history, and this I think takes the long way around. So like you, unless I'm playing for my wife (which entails all these other emotions) she doesn't take music as seriously as I do (like you say).
I hope that's understandable I don't have a lot of time.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Bwv 1080 said:


> Genres of music that truly suck
> 
> Late 90s FM radio buttrock
> Middle Eastern and Indian pop music - the stuff you hear in restaurants
> ...


Stadium dubstep/"Brostep".

New age is having something of a quasi-revival, funny enough.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

I would rather wish people stopped calling Pop music "noise". Noise music is a fine genre with an active community and some great artists.


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

music is a big ocean, and we dont live long enough to explore it all. 

so we're all missing out on something


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

Nate Miller said:


> music is a big ocean, and we dont live long enough to explore it all.
> 
> so we're all missing out on something


And this is a good good post after which we all sing Kumbaya and end the discussion on the upbeat note.


----------



## prlj (10 mo ago)

fbjim said:


> New age is having something of a quasi-revival, funny enough.


And it's called "Classical Crossover" these days, which I find quite interesting.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Who brought s'mores?


----------



## wormcycle (Oct 14, 2020)

eljr said:


> I'll take a guess here. I think it refers to why you only listen to a certain type of music.
> It would be dogmatic if your reason was because it was superior.
> It would not be dogmatic if it were simply a preference and no claim to superiority were made.,


I am dogmatic all the way. Classical music is clearly superior. And I listen to other genres as well.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

The most superior genre of music is television production music. Classical is second, narrowly edging out the music that plays when you start up Microsoft Windows 95™



(fun fact, the latter was composed by Brian Eno, who said he liked the challenge of having to compose a five second piece of music)


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

advokat said:


> And this is a good good post after which we all sing Kumbaya and end the discussion on the upbeat note.



couldn't we sing something other than Kumbaya? I never listened to that tune, so I don't think I know it.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Yes, classical music is great, but there are as good music in all other genres, except maybe a few.


I accept your overall point since I generally agree, although I don't agree that someone who only listens to classical music is missing out, just like I don't believe that anyone who doesn't listen to any classical music is missing out. 

The reason is because I do not think there are any "bad" music _genres_ - only examples which may not express the best aspirations of that genre. There are also many different reasons why a song/work was written or created for which the priorities are not "high art." These works/songs may fulfill the creator's goals 100% but you might find them examples of "bad music" - e.g. what you call "bro country."

I also believe that most music appreciation is subjective and what one person thinks of as great music others will find uninteresting or even worse. For example, I do not care for any of the clips you posted. While I have enjoyed music from most of those genres, your specific examples do not interest me. But I would never go on to say that those genres are without merit. It's just that your taste and mine are different.

*So to sum up: I reject your claim that people who only listen to classical music are missing out; and I reject your allegation that there are some genres which only contain bad music.

Other than that I basically agree with your premise that there is plenty of great music outside of classical.*


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

SanAntone said:


> I reject your allegation that there are some genres which only contain bad music.


I shudder to think what a "good" Gangsta Rap sounds like.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

fbjim said:


> The most superior genre of music is television production music. Classical is second, narrowly edging out the music that plays when you start up Microsoft Windows 95™
> 
> 
> 
> (fun fact, the latter was composed by Brian Eno, who said he liked the challenge of having to compose a five second piece of music)


A person's favorite music tells us more about the person than it gives us objective descriptions about the music. Because we're unlikely to hear the same things.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

advokat said:


> I shudder to think what a "good" Gangsta Rap sounds like.


Rap is like Bebop so long ago. Did it try to alienate parents and other groups of people? Did it exaggerate identities? Probably not as much as Rap.
The Black music critics are interesting to listen to. They bring up points that I would never think of.


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

advokat said:


> I shudder to think what a "good" Gangsta Rap sounds like.


check out Ice Cube's "AmeriKKKas Most Wanted"


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Yeah well about 99% of modern pop music is kinda noise.. However, there is that 1% left that is worth checking out.


That's all personal.
I find much more than 1% worth checking out.
I like a shitload of bands and artists.

And I don't mind when people say that pop music is nothing special, and they only listen to classical music. It's personal.
To their ears, they're not really missing something out. Good for them.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Good gangsta rap is like, Ice Cube's "Amerikkka's Most Wanted" or Raekwon's "Only Built 4 Cuban Linx". Like many "hardcore"/underground genres it did not take to commercialization very well (though some 50 Cent is fun as party music)


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Rap is like Bebop


Everyday one learns something new. What a wonderous world we live in!


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

Nate Miller said:


> check out Ice Cube's "AmeriKKKas Most Wanted"


No. Right now I am about to put on the disc of Tchaikovsky's S.6 by Fricsay on DG. I have bought it this summer in a second-hand section of Foyles on Charing Cross Road. The section is carefully curated and always has some out of print gems. The disc is Made in Japan, and is of a superb quality. And I have some very nice Albariño. Why should I waste my only life on something called ice cube when I have that?


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

Luchesi said:


> Rap is like Bebop so long ago. Did it try to alienate parents and other groups of people? Did it exaggerate identities? Probably not as much as Rap.
> The Black music critics are interesting to listen to. They bring up points that I would never think of.


when I got out of the Navy and came back to the States in 1993, all my jazz playing friends were listening to rap. It WAS the new bebop. It came from the streets of NYC, just like bop did. Hell, Ron Carter recorded with Tribe Called Quest for cryin out loud (If you dont know who Ron Carter is, ask somebody.)

you see funk is based on the 16th note, but rap is based on the 8th note...just like bebop


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

advokat said:


> I shudder to think what a "good" Gangsta Rap sounds like.


it sounds like this:


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

advokat said:


> Everyday one learns something new. What a wonderous world we live in!


We can think that every group of music lovers of one genre alienates other closely-related groups. I think this is wholly natural.


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

advokat said:


> No.



but...but....you're missing out! 😄


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> We can think that every group of music lovers of one genre alienates other closely-related groups. I think this is wholly natural.


Still an absolute classic - The Onion's "I’m Tired Of These Punks Coming Through My Neighborhood Blasting Their Late-1990s, Ghettotech, DJ Godfather–Inflected Hip-Hop"



https://www.theonion.com/i-m-tired-of-these-punks-coming-through-my-neighborhood-1819585044



"Besides, I’m long past the point of trying to ignore these troublemakers. Most nights, the second I hear DJ Assault’s distinctive pulsating groove followed by the lyrics “In the club / And on the street / I keep bangin’ / I keep bangin’ the beat,” I’m out on my porch yelling at them at the top of my lungs to turn down their goddamn fusions of juke, hyphy, and Miami bass."


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Nate Miller said:


> when I got out of the Navy and came back to the States in 1993, all my jazz playing friends were listening to rap. It WAS the new bebop. It came from the streets of NYC, just like bop did. Hell, Ron Carter recorded with Tribe Called Quest for cryin out loud (If you dont know who Ron Carter is, ask somebody.)
> 
> you see funk is based on the 16th note, but rap is based on the 8th note...just like bebop


Yes, you can really hear the difference very quickly between bebop, funk and rap. How do our poor overworked brains do it, without any conscious effort? That question is at the ground floor of why I enjoy music.


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

Nate Miller said:


> but...but....you're missing out! 😄


Good.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Luchesi said:


> Shouldn't we try to figure out what turns people off as soon as they hear the beginning of some serious music, from any of those eras of CM. I know from experience with young people that if you put on a snippet of popular music or jazz their faces light up (before they're even consciously aware of the 'joy'), but if you try to sneak in some CM their brains immediately react with, "Oh, this is going to be serious..".
> Being in school all day - some types of learning become more of a chore for the brain than others. Music is so different that it invites and allows for these extremes. Math can do it too, but without the emotional intensity, so there's less impact for developing likes and dislikes.
> Have other teachers seen this?


In my role as a teacher, I've had a conversation such as this:
ME (to Student): So, what Shakespeare play is your favorite?
STUDENT: I don't like Shakespeare.
ME: Well, which Shakespeare plays have you read, or seen?
STUDNET: I never read any Shakespeare. And I don't like to see plays.
ME: Oh.

That dialogue may well transfer to another art form. Often, students don't like what they have never experienced. It's like the kid who doesn't like broccoli. He's never tasted broccoli. He probably couldn't pick out broccoli from an assortment of green veggies. 

I've read the Sophocles _Oedipus_ play with students. I've used several different video productions in my classes. I recall showing the play up to the point where Oedipus is about to walk out of the palace with his blinded eyes (a scene revealed to us a moment before by the MESSENGER from the palace in that beautiful, detailed, gory monologue we term "the scene of suffering" speech in Greek drama). Then I would shut off the video, amid student groans, while remarking something like: "I can't show you this entrance, it's too gory." But the students clammer that they want to see it. Some have been waiting the entire film to see it. Some of the same students who would have told me days earlier that they don't like Greek tragedies.

During my teaching career I often introduced "classical" music into literary situations. I also introduced terms such as "fugue", "rondo", and "sonata allegro form" by analyzing pieces by Bach and Mozart, among others. The understanding of "form" is critical to arts comprehension, where "form is meaning." Too, I would encourage students to utilize various "forms" when planning writing assignments. How might a certain musical form, for instance, help you to structure a personal narrative or expository essay?

I have had students ask about a piece of music I incorporated into a poetry reading, or as background music for a play scene we might rehearse. I have had a mother of a student come to me requesting where she could purchase a box set of Mozart music for a Christmas present since her son had shown interest in the composer since hearing something by Mozart in my classroom. 

Sometimes it is a matter of exposure. I am somewhat guilty of the same sin as my students. I don't like "rap music". But then, I know very little such music. I don't much listen to it on my own. I recall having only a single rap record in my vast collection -- "Rappers Delight" by the Sugarhill Gang, released in 1979. Apparently, rap has come a long way since 1979, but I still remain largely ignorant of the genre. Unlike the student, perhaps, I actually_ have_ attempted hearings here and there of the music, and of the "poetry", just to see, or rather to hear, maybe, if it was really as bad as I thought it was. Any time I have undertaken such a listening attempt, I've come away unconvinced and so still define the genre as "swearing over a drum beat." But I'm open to being convinced.

In the meantime, I have thirteen centuries worth of "classical" music to listen to, a wide diversity is that. Too, I deeply enjoy a century worth of jazz music, and a good half century plus a decade of "rock-n-roll". So I have plenty of music of great variety to occupy my time without needing another genre. Still, if that genre comes along and piques my interest both emotionally and intellectually, I'll be glad to listen to more.

The important thing is to keep all options open so that one might just stumble into something he or she has never experienced before and come to be intrigued by the prospect, sort of like when I was a junior high schooler who loved his AM radio pop music till he heard Tchaikovsky's_ Capriccio Italien_ in a mandated Music Appreciation class, and my life was changed. And let's not discourage our youth by maligning their art appreciation habits, however limited they may be. We all know that "way leads to way", often in unexpected ways. I suspect there is more than one rap music fan out there who has turned to the poetry of such masters as Claude McKay, Paul Laurence Dunbar, Langston Hughes, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, e. e. cummings, Nikki Giovanni, Amanda Gorman or Dylan Thomas! -- and maybe even Walt Whitman, Emily Dickinson, William Wordsworth, Lord Byron, William Blake, William Shakespeare, and/or Dante....

They say that "art is for everybody". Let's encourage that idea.


----------



## advokat (Aug 16, 2020)

SONNET CLV said:


> They say that "art is for everybody". Let's encourage that idea.


...and sing Kumbaya. I rather insist on that.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

A general reminder: some of the older posts are of a political nature. Please refrain from introducing politics into this discussion - in line with the Talk Classical rules. Thanks.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

advokat said:


> No. Right now I am about to put on the disc of Tchaikovsky's S.6 by Fricsay on DG. I have bought it this summer in a second-hand section of Foyles on Charing Cross Road. The section is carefully curated and always has some out of print gems. The disc is Made in Japan, and is of a superb quality. And I have some very nice Albariño. Why should I waste my only life on something called ice cube when I have that?


Since I am not a fan of Tchaikovsky, I could ask the same question about listening to his music. But I won't since I recognize that Tchaikovsky is a widely respected composer with a large audience who enjoy his music. The same can be said of Ice Cube and other rap composers.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

It does not take anything away from your love of classical music to also acknowledge that others who prefer rap are following their bliss and finding something of value in the music that they love, just as you find value in the music of Tchaikovsky.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

It’s maybe best to concentrate on the music you do like rather than the music you don’t like. That’s what I learned to do.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

The thread is temporarily closed due to inappropriate comments having nothing to do with the thread OP. Several posts were deleted including posts that replied to other deleted posts.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

The thread is now open again.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Yes, classical music is great, but there are as good music in all other genres, except maybe a few.
> As a professional composer with quite a few years of experience, a lot of music education, latest being a masters degree in composing for film, I very much believe that the only two types of music there is, very broadly speaking, as it is obviously a spectrum, is good and bad...





pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Yeah well about 99% of modern pop music is kinda noise.. However, there is that 1% left that is worth checking out…


Original message seemed to be: enjoy other genres of music. Immediately, I thought, ‘Yes, I’ve enjoyed popular music almost as long as I have classical music.‘

And then I read the message just above and realized what a big mistake I’ve made all these years.  Still, I’m not sure what ‘modern pop music’ is. Couldn’t find it defined in this thread. Is there a cutoff date such as pop music good before 2000, but bad after 2000? Maybe I missed it.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

OP perception of other members here









reality


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Bwv 1080 said:


> OP perception of other members here
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not missing out on anything musical, but I am missing out on the "ultimate groom" product for men that's currently being advertised in the U.S. Even David Hurwitz would benefit from an ultimate groom.


----------



## lextune (Nov 25, 2016)

advokat said:


> I shudder to think what a "good" Gangsta Rap sounds like.


That's just it! It's SUPPOSED to make you shudder!






NSFW


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

DaveM said:


> Original message seemed to be: enjoy other genres of music. Immediately, I thought, ‘Yes, I’ve enjoyed popular music almost as long as I have classical music.‘
> 
> And then I read the message just above and realized what a big mistake I’ve made all these years.  Still, I’m not sure what ‘modern pop music’ is. Couldn’t find it defined in this thread. Is there a cutoff date such as pop music good before 2000, but bad after 2000? Maybe I missed it.


Firstly, i never said there is an equal ratio of good and bad music within each genre. Some genres produce way more crap than others. Modern pop is mostly crap, MOSTLY! There are great stuff there, which is my original point was all about. Where the cutoff date for "modern pop" can definitely be debated. When i use the term, i basically mean whatever is in the spotlight at the present moment and maybe a few years back. Cardi B, ******* Drake, That god awful track Dance Monkey (or should i say "DENS MONKEE!"), those countless tone deaf hip hop kids that care more about bragging about doing drugs than create actual music, and others. Good pop that is right now is mostly Billie Eilish stuff, to my knowledge (Though i am sure there are more). She has quite a few very good tunes.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

lextune said:


> That's just it! It's SUPPOSED to make you shudder!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thats dope


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

Bwv 1080 said:


> OP perception of other members here
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Talk Classical members get together event be like:


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Modern pop is mostly crap, MOSTLY!


which means


pianoedvard_b93 said:


> it is not "advanced" enough for my SUPERIOR musical mind!"


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus (Aug 8, 2020)

So, the dogma is...

1. You must not only listen to classical music.
2. You must not think classical music is superior to other forms.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Bulldog said:


> I'm not missing out on anything musical, but I am missing out on the "ultimate groom" product for men that's currently being advertised in the U.S. Even David Hurwitz would benefit from an ultimate groom.


Never underestimate styling products! I think there is a scene or plot twist in "O brother, where art thou" when the Clooney character's insistence on "Dapper Dan" instead of an "inferior" pomade saves his style butt.
This movie is an example where I thoroughly enjoy the music but I would listen to the soundtrack alone at most once a year and probably skip some tracks because not all have sufficient interest for me outside the "Gesamtkunstwerk" of that movie and I'd probably rather watch the movie once a year.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

hammeredklavier said:


> which means


Saying something of that kind about some of the most brainless music there is was never something that i had any issue with, lol. I do however see through the ******** when pretentious wannabe musical geniuses rips on objectively great music because of their reasons, as i caricatured in the OP. If you are saying some music, that is ACTUALLY braindead crap, is not advanced enough for you, then yeah, me too bro. When you claim music, that is in fact great, is crap and "not advanced enough for you", then you are a clueless pretender! Simple as that, man!


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

Wilhelm Theophilus said:


> So, the dogma is...
> 
> 1. You must not only listen to classical music.
> 2. You must not think classical music is superior to other forms.


You must think good music is superior to bad music. Claiming a whole genre is superior comes from a clueless perspective.


----------



## pjang23 (Oct 8, 2009)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Talk Classical members get together event be like:
> 
> 
> View attachment 175940
> ...


More like a depiction of the OP's own superiority complex. He is more than desperate to affirm a caricature he produced in his own head regardless the reality of this community and spends the whole day talking down to positions that aren't even common here.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

pjang23 said:


> More like a depiction of the OP's own superiority complex. He is more than desperate to affirm a caricature he produced in his own head regardless the reality of this community and spends the whole day talking down to positions that aren't even common here.


Holy moly you are uptight! You are basically doing a good job of affirming my initial caricature, which i OBVIOUSLY knew was not an actual accurate representation. But the fact that you took such offence to the obvious non-serious joke comment you are replying to is making me think you might fit the caricature better than most.


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus (Aug 8, 2020)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> You must think good music is superior to bad music.


Not sure what to make of this statement. Not sure if there's a joke I'm missing or something.

If you believe there is such a thing as good music and bad music, then you are saying one is superior.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Why are these non-


pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Saying something of that kind about some of the most brainless music there is was never something that i had any issue with, lol. I do however see through the ****** when pretentious wannabe musical geniuses rips on objectively great music because of their reasons, as i caricatured in the OP. If you are saying some music, that is ACTUALLY braindead crap, is not advanced enough for you, then yeah, me too bro. When you claim music, that is in fact great, is crap and "not advanced enough for you", then you are a clueless pretender! Simple as that, man!


In case you haven't figured out these obvious facts of life yet, and from what you've posted it sounds like you haven't, one person's "objectively great music" is another person's "brain-dead crap"; Some people need more novelty in their musical diet than others, and for them, predictable music of any kind is uninteresting; If someone finds the music you like uninteresting, and from the non-classical you cited among your favorites, I am one of them, it doesn't necessarily mean they're pretentious, it just means they have different tastes than you.

I'm curious where your anger and the judgmental inclination that has you hurling insults at imaginary pretenders and snobs comes from. Did some bad highly educated person hurt your feelings and make you feel inferior?


----------



## SoloYH (8 mo ago)

Garbage post. There is literally no point whatsoever and you are sharing your opinion as a fact. Also extremely judgemental? Like let people enjoy their music.

There is music so bad that it will be iconic, such as Friday. Then there is music so good that it lasts an eternity until the end of space and time.

You can hear both at the same time and only be drawn to one, not the other. Then let it be. Don't force things, enjoy what you like and what you find beautiful.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

I know a lot of people here who are very open about music and have a lot of interest beyond classical, let alone people outside this forum.

I think you're excessively looking for a fight, OP.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

hammeredklavier said:


> I do, I only listen to European classical music. But why/how would that be dogmatic?


Why only European? Do you refuse American classical music?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Philidor said:


> Please, could you help me? What are the criteria for deciding objectively, i. e. not being confused by any kind of individual taste, whether music is good or bad "in the end"?





eljr said:


> How can music be objectively good or bad?


This is an interesting question.

Wouldn't you say that this piece...






... is objectively better than this one?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

eljr said:


> I'll take a guess here. I think it refers to why you only listen to a certain type of music.
> It would be dogmatic if your reason was because it was superior.
> It would not be dogmatic if it were simply a preference and no claim to superiority were made.,


However you can say that your expectations of music are XY and that in a determined genre of music XY is developed better than in other genres. So, you might say that given the expectation XY, classical music is objectively better than other genres.

One example. If you don't like this kind of things, with classical music you are safe.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

advokat said:


> This discussion (with a few small variations) reappears on this site with a monotonous regularity. It seems that there is a deep-seated craving on the part of certain individuals to drag CM down to the level of pop and rap. No doubt, forms part of the Gestalt of the modern left. It is facilitated by a ludicrous liberal myth that all men are born equal. By extension, no type of music is inherently superior to another.


The liberal theory says that all individuals have the same rights, not that all individuals are equals. "Equal rights" doesn't mean "equal intelligence", "equal skills in XY" or whatever.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> This is an interesting question.
> 
> Wouldn't you say that this piece...
> 
> ... is objectively better than this one?


No I wouldn't. I'd ask: "Better for what purpose?" If the answer were "Better for teaching rhythmic notation to beginning recorder players," I'd say the second was better. If the answer were "Better for achieving aesthetic gratification," I'd say: "I guess it depends on how much one values simplicity."


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

EdwardBast said:


> No I wouldn't. I'd ask: "Better for what purpose?" If the answer were "Better for teaching rhythmic notation to beginning recorder players," I'd say the second was better. If the answer were "Better for achieving aesthetic gratification," I's say: "I guess it depends on how much one values simplicity."


Yes, but I was clearily speaking about the artistic perspective, not about the pedagogical perspective.

From the artistic perspective, I wouldn't say that more elaboration necessarily means "better", but I would say there is somewhere a line above which we can say that a piece has at least a decent elaboration.
"Decent elaboration" IMO means that there is at least a decent progression in one of the ingredients of music (melody, harmony, rythm, instruments, the way the instruments are played,...).

With a very basic theme you can only produce a piece of 30-60 seconds: it can not sustain e decent length.


The aesthetic perspective is still an other perspective in respect to the artistic one.
Obviously, you can aesthetically prefer a basic theme in respect to a more elaborated piece for the simple fact that you don't like the themes of the more elaborated piece.

However, if you like a basic theme, then wouldn't you want that someone (the original composer or someone else) uses that theme to produce something a bit more elaborated?
If I like a basic theme, I usually search for a complication of it in youtube... and it's usually easy to find something.

For example, if you like the theme of "Twinkle twinkle little star" then you might enjoy this piece of Mozart more than a 30 seconds piece or than a piece who repeats the basic theme for 14 minutes.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

HansZimmer said:


> This is an interesting question.
> 
> Wouldn't you say that this piece...
> 
> ...


no


----------



## Wilhelm Theophilus (Aug 8, 2020)

We must deny the obvious at all costs!


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

HansZimmer said:


> Wouldn't you say that this piece...





HansZimmer said:


> ... is objectively better than this one?


Good for whom? In which context?

In the context of a concert with an audience with much experience with classical music?

Or in the context of a first year's piano lesson?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Philidor said:


> Good for whom? In which context?
> 
> In the context of a concert with an audience with much experience with classical music?
> 
> Or in the context of a first year's piano lesson?


From an artistic perspective.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

HansZimmer said:


> From an artistic perspective.


Piano lessons are artistic.


----------



## Highwayman (Jul 16, 2018)

HansZimmer said:


> From an artistic perspective.


What is artistic?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Highwayman said:


> What is artistic?


IMO, in music:
- Gives a deep and strong emotion (happyness, sadness, melancholy, horror,...) in a very effective way
AND/OR
- Tells a story in a very effective way
AND/OR
- Sends a serious message in a very effective way
AND/OR
- Introduces an EFFECTIVE novelty (technique/sound) in the field of music
AND/OR
- Experiments an already existing musical technique in an extensive and EFFECTIVE way


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

HansZimmer said:


> Yes, but I was clearily speaking about the artistic perspective, not about the pedagogical perspective.
> 
> From the artistic perspective, I wouldn't say that more elaboration necessarily means "better", but I would say there is somewhere a line above which we can say that a piece has at least a decent elaboration.
> "Decent elaboration" IMO means that there is at least a decent progression in one of the ingredients of music (melody, harmony, rythm, instruments, the way the instruments are played,...).
> ...


This post along with your post #137 make an effective argument that music cannot be objectively good or bad. Basically an objective determination would require agreement on the metrics used for evaluation and in addition agreement on the weighting for each metric. Is melody weighted the same as harmony, 20% higher, 50% less, etc.?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> From an artistic perspective.


Well then it just sounds like a frivolous question, not an interesting one.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

HansZimmer said:


> IMO, in music:
> - Gives a deep and strong emotion (happyness, sadness, melancholy, horror,...) in a very effective way
> AND/OR
> - Tells a story in a very effective way
> ...


and herein lies the problem, by this criteria pop music wins over classical and it's not even a contest. 

These was a study done by a university posted here a few years ago that showed "objectively" that classical music was better than pop music. 
It was a joke be cause I can set objective criteria to render any answer I want in such matters. 

Why does one genre need to be superior to any other? I'll tell you why. Ego. Nothing else. Peace


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

eljr said:


> and herein lies the problem, by this criteria pop music wins over classical and it's not even a contest


Why?

At the base of the above list there is a point that I didn't mention because it must be considered implicit: the craftmanship.
Craftsmanship doesn't bring necessarily to art, but at the base of any art there is always craftmanship, because the latter is the base of the former.

That said, have you ever seen such embarassing situations in classical music?






Not only what you see in the video is considered acceptable in pop music, but it's even the routine, the normality.

In order to compete with classical music in the field of art, pop music should have first of all the same seriousness in craftamnship.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> Why?
> 
> A the base of the above list there is a point that I didn't mention because it must be considered implicit: the craftmanship.
> Craftsmanship doesn't bring necessarily to art, but at the base of any art there is always craftmanship, because the latter is the base of the former.
> ...


Why do you seek out this stuff? Do you really listen to it?


----------



## Hogwash (5 mo ago)

HansZimmer said:


> That said, have you ever seen such embarassing situations in classical music?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Hogwash said:


>


I don't understand the point of your reply. In these videos there are errors and technical failures, while in the video I posted above there are cases of PLAYBACK failures. The point of my video are not the errors, but the use of PLAYBACK during concerts.
The problem here goes beyond the pure question of craftmanship: it's a scam (an therefore an ethic problem), because you pay the price of the concert ticket and you are cheated. Usually, the scammers suffer legal problems and I don't know why in music such things are considered acceptable.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Bulldog said:


> Why do you seek out this stuff? Do you really listen to it?


I don't understand your question.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

EdwardBast said:


> Why are these non-
> 
> 
> In case you haven't figured out these obvious facts of life yet, and from what you've posted it sounds like you haven't, one person's "objectively great music" is another person's "brain-dead crap"; Some people need more novelty in their musical diet than others, and for them, predictable music of any kind is uninteresting; If someone finds the music you like uninteresting, and from the non-classical you cited among your favorites, I am one of them, it doesn't necessarily mean they're pretentious, it just means they have different tastes than you.
> ...


But if a person calls great music "brain-dead crap", it is HE who is brain-dead, musically. 
There is no "one person's objectively great music", there is just objectively great music. Whether you like Rachmaninoff or Cardi B, Michelin star quality food or Mcdonalds, good or bad, comes down to your ability to comprehend music. If you comprehend music well, it comes down to personal taste, but then usually the picks are between the objectively good music. If you have musical comprehension, you simply do not like crap music, unless it is for a different reason than finding the music actually good, like an association to some pleasant time or moment, for example.

Where is the anger? And "hurling insults"?? Get real, dude.
No, no "bad highly educated person" has hurt my feelings or made me feel inferior. I tend to mostly agree with the highly educated or accomplished musical minds, actually.

Get this. There are two types of music: Good music, and bad music. And everything in between, still in one of those two categories. If someone finds bad music good, then they like bad music. Just like when someone likes Mcdonalds, they like bad food. Mcdonalds is bad food regardless of whether you personally like it or not, just like Cardi B is bad music whether you like it or not.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Wilhelm Theophilus said:


> Not sure what to make of this statement. Not sure if there's a joke I'm missing or something.
> 
> If you believe there is such a thing as good music and bad music, then you are saying one is superior.


I believe that what @pianoedvard_b93 is trying to say is that in popular music there is bad music as well as good music. He simply says to make a distinction between good and bad music and to not bash popular music as a whole.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> But if a person calls great music "brain-dead crap", it is HE who is brain-dead, musically.
> There is no "one person's objectively great music", there is just objectively great music. Whether you like Rachmaninoff or Cardi B, Michelin star quality food or Mcdonalds, good or bad, comes down to your ability to comprehend music. If you comprehend music well, it comes down to personal taste, but then usually the picks are between the objectively good music. If you have musical comprehension, you simply do not like crap music, unless it is for a different reason than finding the music actually good, like an association to some pleasant time or moment, for example.
> 
> Where is the anger? And "hurling insults"?? Get real, dude.
> ...


I'm not sure that the food of Mc Donalds is so bad. You have to check what it's true and what it's not true about the legends that circulate about Mc Donalds.
It's not that I'm saying that it's gourmet food, but the food you eat at Mc Donalds is not necessarily worse than the food you buy at the supermarket and cooked clumsily at home (there are persons who use 2 litres of oil when cooking).

That said, the problem is that with food you can use the "health indicators" to establish which food is objectively good and which one is objectively bad*, while in music there is not something that damages the health.

There could be, however, music that damages the brain.
Someone might support the idea that the modern popular culture damages the brain of people and that the mainstream popular music is thought to be harmonious with the rest.


*Keep in mind that no one says that you must not eat in Mc Donalds, but that you must not eat at Mc Donalds daily (the body also needs a little fat).


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> Where is the anger? *And "hurling insults"?? Get real, dude.*


"Pretentious" and "snob" are insulting. You really don't understand that?

And when you figure out the criteria for objectively great music, please enlighten us instead of just bludgeoning us with a vague abstraction.


----------



## mahler9 (9 mo ago)

Over decades, I've immersed myself in Classical, Jazz and most genres of Popular music. My conclusion is: Classical is the greatest and the "best", at least partly because of the expansive time periods it covers. Yes "classical" can refer to late 18th C music, but using the term more generically it covers Medieval - 21st C 'art music' (or whatever term you prefer). There is also the larger scale found in many 'classical' works (typically symphonies) which popular music only approaches in musical theater and some jazz compositions. I'm sure some will call me a snob, but at this point in life I don't care.


----------



## Fritzb43 (Mar 29, 2020)

advokat said:


> I shudder to think what a "good" Gangsta Rap sounds like.


Rap is not music, because it contains neither melody or harmony.


----------



## Ravn (Jan 6, 2020)

Fritzb43 said:


> Rap is not music, because it contains neither melody or harmony.


Neither does Varèse’s «Ionisation». Do you consider that piece music? I certainly do.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

EdwardBast said:


> "Pretentious" and "snob" are insulting. You really don't understand that?
> 
> And when you figure out the criteria for objectively great music, please enlighten us instead of just bludgeoning us with a vague abstraction.


And i never called any one person or persons as such. If you take offense to it, it must be because you felt i hit a nerve or something, because i never insulted anyone specific. If i were to say something like "people who listen to classical music are snobs" i would be calling myself a snob. Or "people who think classical music is mostly better are snobs." I would also be calling myself one. If you felt hit i can't see it any other way than you felt it applied to you somehow. That's not on me.

To say all the things that together makes for objectively good music would require a hundreds of pages long paper with in depth analysis of all the elements that great music inherits. Had it been simple, anyone could have made great music. However, almost no one are able to create great music. So it is not simple and it is completely impossible to easily explain what makes music great in short terms. The easy way of knowing is having an in depth comprehension of music in general, which i do in fact claim to have, being a professional composer and multi instrumentalist, with a masters degree in composing, and a bachelors in music production. A piece of only ONE note can even be great music if done tastefully, as Desplat showed not too long ago. Great music is great, whether you or I like it. Whether it is called K-pop or Bach. Bad music is bad, even if many people like it. They like bad music, just like people like bad food. Bahd Bhabie is **** music. Absolute objective CRAP, no matter how many people like it. There really should be no debate among people who claim to understand music on that one.


----------



## pianoedvard_b93 (4 mo ago)

HansZimmer said:


> I'm not sure that the food of Mc Donalds is so bad. You have to check what it's true and what it's not true about the legends that circulate about Mc Donalds.
> It's not that I'm saying that it's gourmet food, but the food you eat at Mc Donalds is not necessarily worse than the food you buy at the supermarket and cooked clumsily at home (there are persons who use 2 litres of oil when cooking).
> 
> That said, the problem is that with food you can use the "health indicators" to establish which food is objectively good and which one is objectively bad*, while in music there is not something that damages the health.
> ...


See the documentary "super size me". Mcdonalds is BAD, dude... 
And yeah if you make crappy food at home, it is still crappy, as you say. But there is good quality food, and there is bad quality, we cannot deny that. There are different criteria that make for bad or good food, but the food will end up in one of those two categories.

And there has actually been multiple big scale science reports on the effect of music on the brain which has shown that bad music does in fact make people less intelligent. And opposite, that great music makes people more intelligent. I am sure if you search you will find loads of reports on this.


----------



## Monsalvat (11 mo ago)

This is just the same old subjectivist/objectivist debate, which has been discussed on this forum at length before. It has never changed anyone's mind.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Fritzb43 said:


> Rap is not music, because it contains neither melody or harmony.


False. It would be a bit difficult to insert the themes of classical music in rap songs if there was no melody.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> And i never called any one person or persons as such. *If you take offense to it, it must be because you felt i hit a nerve or something,* because i never insulted anyone specific. If i were to say something like "people who listen to classical music are snobs" i would be calling myself a snob. Or "people who think classical music is mostly better are snobs." I would also be calling myself one. If you felt hit i can't see it any other way than you felt it applied to you somehow. That's not on me.


I didn't take offense or feel personally insulted. I assumed from the start that the pretentious snobs you mentioned are just avatars for some internal constructs with which you are struggling (or something). There's a lot of that going on here lately, although I'm confused by why these issues related to non-classical music have to be worked out on the Classical Discussion Forum.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

EdwardBast said:


> have to be worked out on the Classical Discussion Forum.


There's a place called Area 53...


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

pianoedvard_b93 said:


> ..And there has actually been multiple big scale science reports on the effect of music on the brain which has shown that bad music does in fact make people less intelligent. And opposite, that great music makes people more intelligent. I am sure if you search you will find loads of reports on this.


If there are loads of reports, since you brought it up, why not enlighten us with the sources of some well-designed studies, not anecdotal reports.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

Strange premise for this thread. The assumption that people only listen to classical music because it happens to be a classical music forum. I wonder if on the jazz forums there is someone exhorting them to set aside their Cannonball Adderley and consider some Wagner? And isn't there actually a thread (or two) here where members discuss non-classical music?
Well anyway... I do like jazz, a lot. I also like 70s disco, Serge Gainsbourg, Deep purple, Kraftwerk, Amy Winehouse and indeed a list so long it would be absurd to write it out. I reckon there must be a few such people here. We are saved.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Wilhelm Theophilus said:


> So, the dogma is...
> 
> 1. You must not only listen to classical music.
> 2. You must not think classical music is superior to other forms.


In a nutshell, yes. And that would be right.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I thought there was no right or wrong beyond personal taste? How can one claim both that personal taste be the ultimate and only arbiter of everything but then that it is somehow "better" that one should listen to different genres of music? Why should "broad taste" be "better" and in what sense?

Not sure I ever encountered similar positions with visual art or literature. I don't think I have encountered the demand that one should better watch horror movies or romantic comedies in addition to mainly James Bond style action or whatever because narrow movie preferences would be somehow bad.
Or demanding from comic book fans they should please read Milton and Goethe or vice versa. Or demanding one should eat at a fast food chain at least once a week because there was good food in all kinds of restaurants...


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Kreisler jr said:


> I thought there was no right or wrong beyond personal taste? How can one claim both that personal taste be the ultimate and only arbiter of everything but then that it is somehow "better" that one should listen to different genres of music?


The belief that "personal taste" should be the only arbiter of what is "good" is not incompatible with the belief that, on the basis of personal taste, we can make pronouncements on what is "good" and what is to be recommended as a course of action so that all can enjoy "good".


----------



## perempe (Feb 27, 2014)

Zaiko Langa Langa - Kumbulu. Good example for diverse Congolese soukous music with great guitar solos. I used to listen it a lot before classical music.


----------



## Andrew Kenneth (Feb 17, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> (...
> Not sure I ever encountered similar positions with visual art or literature. I don't think I have encountered the demand that one should better watch horror movies or romantic comedies in addition to mainly James Bond style action or whatever because narrow movie preferences would be somehow bad.(...)


On the DVD Beaver website I found an interesting editorial that makes a distinction between "Art" films and "Escapist" cinema.

quote => "*The most notable distinction between these two divisions of film seems to be the length of time that any impact lingers. Cinema as “Art” can cause reflection for days, weeks, even years after initial viewing. It can be said to have life-altering precepts. It can cause so much philosophical introspection that it can effect day-to-day behavior...how one views the world around us, how we interact with each other etc.. "Escapist" cinema can often be so fleeting as to be forgotten about before one departs the theatre. As my friend Albert states about such a cinema experience: "It barely touches the skin". Combining erupting snippets of drama "Escapist Cinema" has achieved its goal and given you a quick sanitized thrill. It can be compared to watching MTV with its explosive sound bytes, flashes of imagery and whirlwind cinematography. Before you are aware, it ends as a wafer-thin moment in time, without depth, quickly forgotten, the next thrill experience already being contemplated. "*

link => Article - Two Types of Cinema Viewer by Gary W. Tooze


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

NoCoPilot said:


> Examples? I'll admit almost complete virginity.


. You can hear folk music form all these regions on youtube . Just put the music of any of these regions on the youtube search engine and you'll find plenty of it .


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

While I personally _do _think classical music is "superior" to other forms, I _do not _expect or require others to agree with me. If rap speaks more to their circumstances and moves them to a greater degree, more power to them. Ditto Jazz, Rock, Pop, Funk, Gospel, Klezmer, Polka, throat singing, Native American chant, whatever.

As far as listening goes, I do listen to other genres (rock, pop, and Jazz), but my listening is at least 80% classical. Why wouldn't it be, if it moves me more than other genres? I listened to all sorts of stuff for decades before I dove deeply into CM. I don't think I'm willfully excluding things. Rap and auto-tuned R&B does nothing for me. I hear it out int he world all the time, enough to know that it's not my bag.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Andrew Kenneth said:


> On the DVD Beaver website I found an interesting editorial that makes a distinction between "Art" films and "Escapist" cinema.
> 
> quote => "*The most notable distinction between these two divisions of film seems to be the length of time that any impact lingers. Cinema as “Art” can cause reflection for days, weeks, even years after initial viewing. It can be said to have life-altering precepts. It can cause so much philosophical introspection that it can effect day-to-day behavior...how one views the world around us, how we interact with each other etc.. "Escapist" cinema can often be so fleeting as to be forgotten about before one departs the theatre. As my friend Albert states about such a cinema experience: "It barely touches the skin". Combining erupting snippets of drama "Escapist Cinema" has achieved its goal and given you a quick sanitized thrill. It can be compared to watching MTV with its explosive sound bytes, flashes of imagery and whirlwind cinematography. Before you are aware, it ends as a wafer-thin moment in time, without depth, quickly forgotten, the next thrill experience already being contemplated. "*
> 
> link => Article - Two Types of Cinema Viewer by Gary W. Tooze


An article that starts promisingly, but can't resist typing those who like escapist cinema as inferior. The writer does at least acknowledge that



> I have made observations that I certainly believe to hold at least a grain of truth in regards to the two dipolar extremes of film fan types. However, the article will not be long enough to include the multiple varieties floating in the vast sea between these two general and opposite categories.


The number of us who enjoy escapism _and "_art" is substantial enough for us not to have to worry that we might never be catered for. The problem with typing viewers by the films they enjoy is that it presupposes an accurate division of films into "art" and "escapism" in the first place.


----------



## PeterKC (Dec 30, 2016)

A truly pointless discussion.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

PeterKC said:


> A truly pointless discussion.


But fascinating reading .


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Something I'd like to add this to the talk on 'objectively great' and 'superior'. A common criteria of 'superior' for pro-Classical fans is that Classical is structurally more complex in form, or larger in scope musically. In that light, Classical is no doubt superior to Pop and rock if you pick typical examples, and even some non-typical ones. I feel something else that gets thrown into the mix is when psychological impact, social commentary or message gets included in the criteria for 'superior', or 'complex' or 'profound' by Popular music fans. 

Here's an illustration, Pachelbel's Canon in D vs. Dylan's Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall. Pachelbel's obviously (or should be obvious) has more craft musically, than a repetitive melody over a few chords, even though some may (unsuccessfully) argue the melody and chord interaction of the Dylan song is very profound. Message-wise, obviously the Dylan song is more complex or profound, since he's talking about stuff much more than contained in the music. Is the Canon just light-weight music or is the Dylan song just bloated rambling from a negative view of either? That's where value judgements comes in and the argument becomes subjective.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

I sing in church choir and at other times in my life sang in choirs in grade school, high school, college, at work and in a choral society. Of those only the choral society used only classical music. 

Ergo my life has been spent singing many forms of music ... but almost everything that isn't classical is a strophe or stropic: a relatively simple form with a repeated subject and sometimes with a variant thrown in the third time. I have never performed or sung non-clasical music written in sonata format though I have heard it as a listener. The rock group Cream, for example, used sonata format in many of their concert recordings in pieces named Toad, Traintime, NSU, etc. Some of these went on 15 minutes or longer.

I would agree people who only know classical music are missing something. Whether or not that matters or is relevant to them is another issue not so easily resolved. A person that loves only classical music can go a lifetime and be happy without other forms.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

larold said:


> I sing in church choir and at other times in my life sang in choirs in grade school, high school, college, at work and in a choral society. Of those only the choral society used only classical music.
> 
> Ergo my life has been spent singing many forms of music ... but almost everything that isn't classical is a strophe or stropic: a relatively simple form with a repeated subject and sometimes with a variant thrown in the third time. I have never performed or sung non-clasical music written in sonata format though I have heard it as a listener. The rock group Cream, for example, used sonata format in many of their concert recordings in pieces named Toad, Traintime, NSU, etc. Some of these went on 15 minutes or longer.
> 
> I would agree people who only know classical music are missing something. Whether or not that matters or is relevant to them is another issue not so easily resolved. A person that loves only classical music can go a lifetime and be happy without other forms.


Cream never used sonata form, certainly not in Toad, Traintime, or NSU. I doubt that Clapton, Bruce, or Baker could even have described the form. They did extended improvisations on short strophic patterns, like virtually every rock or jazz ensemble, but this has no relation to sonata form.


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

Additional information on Cream and the question of their usage of sonata form...

At 16, Jack Bruce won a scholarship in cello and composition to what was then the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama and spent the years between 1958 and 1961 there.

Ginger Baker can read music - Self-taught - "A lot of people don’t realize I studied. I can write music. I used to write big band parts in 1960, ‘61. I felt that if I was a drummer, I needed to learn to read drum music. I was so good at sight reading, a guy in one of the big bands told me to get two books. I studied them at the same time. One was about the rules of basic harmony, the other how to break them all [laughs].

Eric Clapton can't read a note of music.

Bruce knows what sonata form is, Baker might, and Clapton most likely has never even heard of it.

"Toad" was written by Baker - The original tune is 5:09 in length with approximately 90% of that being a drum solo. In concert, it would last for 15 minutes with 99% of that being a drum solo.

Bruce has a writing credit for "Traintime" which he first recorded with the Graham Bond Organization - It's based on a vintage blues tune by "Memphis Slim" - John Len Chapman - The Cream tune consists entirely of Baker's fast shuffle beat, Clapton riffing on slide, with Bruce alternating on harmonica and vocals.

"N.S.U." was written by Bruce - the title stands for "non-specific urethritis" - Bruce later described it as "an early punk song" and commented - "I used to say it was about a member of the band who had this venereal disease. I can't tell you which one... except that he played guitar." - It's a vintage '66 example of proto-psychedelic rock.


----------



## 4chamberedklavier (12 mo ago)

Monsalvat said:


> This is just the same old subjectivist/objectivist debate, which has been discussed on this forum at length before. It has never changed anyone's mind.


This is the TalkClassical version of Godwin's Law. But with objectivity/subjectivity instead of Hitler,
_
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."_


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Monsalvat said:


> This is just the same old subjectivist/objectivist debate, which has been discussed on this forum at length before. It has never changed anyone's mind.


I think that's because it's possible to be completely objective (as unrewarding as that is for most music fans), while it's so difficult to be completely subjective.


----------

