# Constant topics



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

We have an endless appetite for discussion but, it sometimes seems, a limited repertoire of topics. What, in your view, are the most popular and often revisited discussion topics on this forum?


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2013)

Probably better--more useful, more enlightening, more intellectually stimulating--to try to expand the repertoire, eh?


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

topics like Mozart vs. Beethoven or 'who's the greatest', etc. .


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Wagner/Nazi topics. Even of a Wagner thread doesn't begin like that, it always ends up like that.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

There are repeated topics, often by people new to here. It is possible to search for threads rather than just start the discussion all over again. And that is useful to those new here as they could then see previous discussion on a topic rather than sometimes just sitting there wondering why their new thread has been relatively ignored.

Also some people will keep going back to some pet hate or opinion they have, without really adding anything new to it or be willing to discuss it in any way. 

The best way if you are tired of something though is just to ignore it, reward threads that are fresher by posting to them instead.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Definitions of music/discussion of musical systems? These engage a small number of combatants & usually involve *one* against *the rest*. But the one is a veritable *Scarlet Pimpernel *- they seek him here, they seek him there - a genius at eluding capture.

I start off by reading the threads, content to admire the skill of the tourneyers even though I haven't the foggiest idea about jousting - then, when they start shouting '*Have at you, varlet*!' I go off and make a cup of tea.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Who's the greatest and Nazi topics are ones I usually avoid. I've also given my opinions and stated my likes/dislikes on enough polls, so those no longer grab my interest ;-) Dissonance-bashing seems to be an oft-repeated theme that I find tiresome: it's no good, unmusical, lacks emotions, un-Godly, etc.

I like Current Listening. I know it's a bit lame, but it is popular. I try to add a bit by saying why I like (or dislike) the album/works I'm listening to. To see what others are listening to, and to read a bit about what makes it meaningful for them, has already enticed me into making a number of purchases and considering composers I had previously felt to be less interesting.

I like some guy's suggestion. One of the reasons I participate on this forum is to expand my knowledge about classical music. I like to read about interesting works and what makes them great, what makes some performances average and others stellar, etc. Obviously, this can stray into the area where "dragons dwell," as I believe Hilltroll72 said on another recent thread, but it is not always just a favourites game. Admittedly, I don't have the desire to write essays, nor to read them, but I do enjoy reading "intellectually stimulating" threads.

There have been quite a few threads about 'when did you start to like classical music'. These can be pretty interesting, as they show where we each are in relation to our knowledge of and interest in classical music, but I have stated my own story so many times that I am not really motivated to do so again ;-)


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

starry said:


> There are repeated topics, often by people new to here. It is possible to search for threads rather than just start the discussion all over again. And that is useful to those new here as they could then see previous discussion on a topic rather than sometimes just sitting there wondering why their new thread has been relatively ignored.
> 
> Also some people will keep going back to some pet hate or opinion they have, without really adding anything new to it or be willing to discuss it in any way.
> 
> The best way if you are tired of something though is just to ignore it, reward threads that are fresher by posting to them instead.


Trouble is twofold - searching for a topic can be difficult because you're never quite sure what words were used and secondly, people do change their minds. OK if you get an old chestnut - tonality and atonality - where the battle lines are clearly drawn, positions are entrenched and it's a bloody war of attrition. But sometimes you get a simple thought and although it's been done before, it's about six pages back and there are different active members on and (possibly) different opinions so it's easier to start afresh. That way people can change their minds without somebody being (easily) able to say "but on 21 January 2011 you said ....".


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

Some people don't even bother searching though. But really I'm sure some of us must question after having posted a thought in another very similar thread whether it's worth posting the exact same thing all over again, and again etc

I don't think strong opinions have to be a bad thing, but it's about respect and trying to understand and read carefully what somebody is saying. It's very easy to read what you want into what somebody is saying. And I also think that someone feeling strongly about something isn't necessarily them trying to convert others, they might simply want that opinion represented strongly in a discussion. Maybe some do want to convert others, but I'm not convinced it's that many, certainly among more veteran posters who surely should know it's foolhardy to try. And making something a war of attrition like it's one team against another seems just petty. I much prefer people to think as individuals with their own angle and ideas rather than just using music as a means of team identity. Breaking down the barriers is better for discussion I think than just setting up polemical camps. And that brings us to politics and music, I just find politics pretty boring anyway, culture somehow can seem more universal to me and less limited than things like economics, law or even religion which can seem agents of politics. Politics is built to set up divisions and conflict.


----------



## Wood (Feb 21, 2013)

starry said:


> Some people don't even bother searching though. But really I'm sure some of us must question after having posted a thought in another very similar thread whether it's worth posting the exact same thing all over again, and again etc
> 
> I don't think strong opinions have to be a bad thing, but it's about respect and trying to understand and read carefully what somebody is saying. It's very easy to read what you want into what somebody is saying. And I also think that someone feeling strongly about something isn't necessarily them trying to convert others, they might simply want that opinion represented strongly in a discussion. Maybe some do want to convert others, but I'm not convinced it's that many, certainly among more veteran posters who surely should know it's foolhardy to try. And making something a war of attrition like it's one team against another seems just petty. I much prefer people to think as individuals with their own angle and ideas rather than just using music as a means of team identity. Breaking down the barriers is better for discussion I think than just setting up polemical camps. And that brings us to politics and music, I just find politics pretty boring anyway, culture somehow can seem more universal to me and less limited than things like economics, law or even religion which can seem agents of politics. Politics is built to set up divisions and conflict.


Economics has universal laws which have no more to do with politics than culture has, and certainly doesn't need to be boring.


----------



## LindnerianSea (Jun 5, 2013)

I do not think it necessarily a bad thing to start new threads of old topics. Even if one manages to find an old thread which is related to the new one, the chances are that it's quite unlikely that people actually go through the whole thing. And the more complex and exciting the topic, naturally the longer the threads get. On the other hand, by starting new threads, recurring ideas will be brought up again yet without all the unnecessary babbles that were present in the older ones. Although this assumes that people who have taken part in the past discussions would have to be present in the new one, I don't think it is a difficult condition to fulfill. 

Best,
LS


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

LindnerianSea, I agree. A lot of old threads have been dug up recently. Hands up all those who went back to the beginning & read all the posts.

Actually it is difficult to find threads even when you *know* they exist, once they've dropped out of sight. I am currently searching for 'Composers you have recently discovered' & even when I type that into the search engine, it doesn't seem to pop up.

Maybe .... ooh ... maybe Computer *doesn't like me*?


----------



## LindnerianSea (Jun 5, 2013)

Ingenue said:


> LindnerianSea, I agree. A lot of old threads have been dug up recently. Hands up all those who went back to the beginning & read all the posts.
> 
> Actually it is difficult to find threads even when you *know* they exist, once they've dropped out of sight. I am currently searching for 'Composers you have recently discovered' & even when I type that into the search engine, it doesn't seem to pop up.
> 
> Maybe .... ooh ... maybe Computer *doesn't like me*?


No you're not alone Ingenue... the search engine in TC really isn't the best out there. And why do they have that 30 seconds rule that must be kept between consecutive searches ? Not that I am so impatient (otherwise, how would I call myself an enthusiast of Mahler and Bruckner ??)...but it's just really annoying whenever I am in a rush to find few things really quickly.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

starry said:


> There are repeated topics, often by people new to here. It is possible to search for threads rather than just start the discussion all over again. And that is useful to those new here as they could then see previous discussion on a topic rather than sometimes just sitting there wondering why their new thread has been relatively ignored.
> 
> Also some people will keep going back to some pet hate or opinion they have, without really adding anything new to it or be willing to discuss it in any way.
> 
> The best way if you are tired of something though is just to ignore it, reward threads that are fresher by posting to them instead.


Members don't even look through the thread they are actually engaged with much less searching through old ones.
How often have you seen what you've said repeated all over again three or four posts on ?


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Ingenue said:


> LindnerianSea, I agree. A lot of old threads have been dug up recently. Hands up all those who went back to the beginning & read all the posts.
> 
> Actually it is difficult to find threads even when you *know* they exist, once they've dropped out of sight. I am currently searching for 'Composers you have recently discovered' & even when I type that into the search engine, it doesn't seem to pop up.
> 
> Maybe .... ooh ... maybe Computer *doesn't like me*?


Give it a few likes--I would.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Anti-atonal vs pro-atonal. :lol:


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

Noise crap versus classical music; what is music, what is not; highbrow versus lowbrow ....

Hitler and Wagner and Richard Strauss .....


----------



## Garlic (May 3, 2013)

The worst is anything that attempts to demonstrate that music people enjoy is bad, degenerate, unmusical, pretentious, etc., or that mistake personal taste for objective properties about music. It wouldn't be so bad if they had any new arguments at all, but it's always the same old tedious stuff that reactionaries have been farting out since the days of Beethoven or before.

I don't mind the X vs Y composer threads as much, at least they sometimes generate interesting discussions.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

If we are not to go back over old ground then why bring up anything about composers from long ago? Surely everything that can be said about them has already been said somewhere on the web. I vote we confine our discussion to composers born after 1900.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

LindnerianSea said:


> No you're not alone Ingenue... the search engine in TC really isn't the best out there. And why do they have that 30 seconds rule that must be kept between consecutive searches ? Not that I am so impatient (otherwise, how would I call myself an enthusiast of Mahler and Bruckner ??)...but it's just really annoying whenever I am in a rush to find few things really quickly.


Use Google - Not the most intuitive but search for 'Composers you have recently discovered' site:talkclassical.com and you get this screen. If you're sure about the title, put it in quotes, otherwise just put the words. Usual shorthand rules apply e.g. if you put Composers + discovered site:talkclassical.com you get this screen. Notice how the search terms are highlighted and how it includes synonyms such as "found".


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Weston said:


> If we are not to go back over old ground then why bring up anything about composers from long ago? Surely everything that can be said about them has already been said somewhere on the web. I vote we confine our discussion to composers born after 1900.


No, no. We know everything about them. The later it gets, the more they're on things like faceback or tweeter or whatever. Concentrate on the Baroque and earlier where new things are being discovered all the time. Besides, the music's better!


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

If you're addicted to this site, it doesn't really matter much. After all, if you had to be sure that everything you post has never been posted before......

The participant numbers are so strong that almost any topic (even an old chestnut reheated several times) is going to generate some response. And, if people are really tired of the topic, it may die its own ignominious death.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Burroughs said:


> Wagner/Nazi topics. Even of a Wagner thread doesn't begin like that, it always ends up like that.


roll on 2014! honestly, I'm amazed people aren't tired of this one. I'm so tired my eyes are about to fall off from too much rolling.


----------



## LindnerianSea (Jun 5, 2013)

Vesteralen said:


> The participant numbers are so strong that almost any topic (even an old chestnut reheated several times) is going to generate some response. And, if people are really tired of the topic, it may die its own ignominious death.


I sense the theory of evolution lurking there in the corner somewhere...


----------



## LindnerianSea (Jun 5, 2013)

Taggart said:


> Use Google - Not the most intuitive but search for 'Composers you have recently discovered' site:talkclassical.com and you get this screen. If you're sure about the title, put it in quotes, otherwise just put the words. Usual shorthand rules apply e.g. if you put Composers + discovered site:talkclassical.com you get this screen. Notice how the search terms are highlighted and how it includes synonyms such as "found".


ah, what revelation ! you are the hermit of the deep deep forests of TC Taggart !


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Weston said:


> If we are not to go back over old ground then why bring up anything about composers from long ago? Surely everything that can be said about them has already been said somewhere on the web. I vote we confine our discussion to composers born after 1900.


If you want to have a forum to belong to forget that idea. Do you know everything about "old" music---I would doubt it.
They can live together,but you can stick to post 1900 stuff I'm sure.


----------

