# Great controversy!



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

In Italy a great controversy erupted on contemporary classical music, because of this young composer, Giovanni Allevi.
With an album of his symphonic compositions came in third place of the hit parade, and the world of classical music has exploded! 

Here he's conducting "Whisper"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp7e4x4dQCI

I think it's cool.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

What do you think about?


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

I think you are either his cousing either himself, because to advertise such friable music you have be related to it's author.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Is the controversy over whether or not it should be called music?


----------



## TresPicos (Mar 21, 2009)

I really like his music, but I'm tempted to call it "borderline" classical, especially after listening to some of the piano pieces. If you make classical music this accessible, of course it will climb the charts.


----------



## Jaime77 (Jun 29, 2009)

sounds like film music.. good luck to this guy anyway


----------



## James clerk (Jan 28, 2010)

It's a pop song being played by an orchestra. An ugly pop song.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I like it. It has engaging rhythms. Also I don't think accessible is a dirty word.

However an orchestra playing it doesn't make it classical any more than playing a Malagueña on an electric guitar would be rock. 

This actually sounds like proto-progressive rock to me, just without the drum kit, hammond organ and synthesizer. Anyway, I'm sure he has quite a future ahead of him, whatever you wish to call it.


----------



## jurianbai (Nov 23, 2008)

what's the new thing here?


----------



## JAKE WYB (May 28, 2009)

I can only manage a few seconds of that without shrivelling up


----------



## Artemis (Dec 8, 2007)

It doesn't appeal to me one tiny bit.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Just a question: Giovanni Allevi composes classical music or not? But still: What is classical music? I would describe his music as contemporary classical. Is it not a good definition?


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

I think it's alright. Not exactly groundbreaking but it's quite listenable.

I hear a big Copland influence in there, maybe some Bernstein as well.

Some pretty harsh opinions being thrown around here.



> It's a pop song being played by an orchestra. An ugly pop song


Some perspective is needed here. THIS is an ugly pop song. If any of you make it even a minute into that song, I'll be both impressed and quite worried about your hearing. I managed 30 seconds. Now compare that to the 'Whisper' piece.


----------



## Artemis (Dec 8, 2007)

PeterW said:


> Just a question: Giovanni Allevi composes classical music or not? But still: What is classical music? I would describe his music as contemporary classical. Is it not a good definition?


Why don't you clarify what you mean in your opening post when you refer to a "_a great controversy erupted on contemporary classical music, because of this young composer, Giovanni Allevi."_

What is the controversy?

Perhaps you might also tell us who you are. Are you his agent?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I managed about 7 seconds of that video  But then, I only managed around 62 seconds of the video in the OP because I thought it was intensely boring. :/


----------



## TresPicos (Mar 21, 2009)

Argus said:


> Some perspective is needed here. THIS is an ugly pop song. If any of you make it even a minute into that song, I'll be both impressed and quite worried about your hearing. I managed 30 seconds. Now compare that to the 'Whisper' piece.


10 seconds. 

Yes, that one put things into perspective.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

James clerk said:


> It's a pop song being played by an orchestra. An ugly pop song.


But.... where is the singer? the guitar and drums? Where is the original pop song, that now is being played by an orchestra?
It's not a pop song.
A pop song in 5/8 and 7/8?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

It would probably be best if you told us why you think this qualifies as 'classical music'...


----------



## Artemis (Dec 8, 2007)

Polednice said:


> It would probably be best if you told us why you think this qualifies as 'classical music'...


And also please answer my questions at post 14.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

*Here I'am!*

First of all…presentations!
I'm Pietro, a student in composition at the "Giuseppe Verdi" Conservatory in Milan (Italy). (Sorry for my bad English).
My teacher hates Allevi's music , like many of his colleagues. For them, Music ends with Schoenberg, Stockhausen and Berio, but my favorite composers are Gershwin, Copland, Bernstein, Barber, the minimalists Terry Riley, Glass and Steve Reich.
Italy is a very conservative country  and can not accept that music evolves, perhaps due to the weight of tradition. I admire the American creativity, which instead seems to be more free and open to the present.
As you can imagine, I love Allevi's music.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

*For Poldenice*



Polednice said:


> It would probably be best if you told us why you think this qualifies as 'classical music'...


Ok, Poldenice. I'll try to summarize two years of discussion! 
There is a definition that says that Classical Music is the one of the great geniuses of the past. If you want to write something new, your work may be recognized between two centuries! 
Allevi (which is not exactly a small boy, aged 40, is also a musicologist and has published books on music), says instead that "classical music is a language which, through written notation, develop more complex forms. The forms, established in tradition, create "classical music". Then you can write classical music today, strictly following forms (Symphony, Studio, Toccata, Nocturne, Prelude, Sonata, Symphonic Suite, Concerto for .... and so on), tool regardless of feedback from the public or the critics."
(I hope you understand my english). 
Do you agree?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

PeterW said:


> Ok, Poldenice. I'll try to summarize two years of discussion!
> There is a definition that says that Classical Music is the one of the great geniuses of the past. If you want to write something new, your work may be recognized between two centuries!
> Allevi (which is not exactly a small boy, aged 40, is also a musicologist and has published books on music), says instead that "classical music is a language which, through written notation, develop more complex forms. The forms, established in tradition, create "classical music". Then you can write classical music today, strictly following forms (Symphony, Studio, Toccata, Nocturne, Prelude, Sonata, Symphonic Suite, Concerto for .... and so on), tool regardless of feedback from the public or the critics."
> (I hope you understand my english).
> Do you agree?


I'm not so sure I follow what you're saying. Are you saying that Allevi believes that, so long as you write in a well-established form (e.g. a Sonata), then what you create is automatically 'classical music'? What does he think of contemporary music that doesn't use such structures?


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Polednice said:


> I'm not so sure I follow what you're saying. Are you saying that Allevi believes that, so long as you write in a well-established form (e.g. a Sonata), then what you create is automatically 'classical music'?


That would be right, it is only reasonable way to define classical genre.



> What does he think of contemporary music that doesn't use such structures?


That is difficult question. I think that contemporary "classical" music has to be an extension of those classical structures, come straight from them, it can't completely stand out. Then it will be considered classical music.

It is possible that this consideration will appear wrong after some time, but most of music that fits these conditions will soon, along with it's new structures, be absorbed by classical genre, so these structures will be considered classical as well. The genre expands like the universe.


----------



## dmg (Sep 13, 2009)

I see nothing wrong with this music, nor do I see any reason to not call it 'classical'. Also, 'film music' is not a genre...


----------



## Scott Good (Jun 8, 2009)

PeterW said:


> Ok, Poldenice. I'll try to summarize two years of discussion!
> There is a definition that says that Classical Music is the one of the great geniuses of the past. If you want to write something new, your work may be recognized between two centuries!
> Allevi (which is not exactly a small boy, aged 40, is also a musicologist and has published books on music), says instead that "classical music is a language which, through written notation, develop more complex forms. The forms, established in tradition, create "classical music". Then you can write classical music today, strictly following forms (Symphony, Studio, Toccata, Nocturne, Prelude, Sonata, Symphonic Suite, Concerto for .... and so on), tool regardless of feedback from the public or the critics."
> (I hope you understand my english).
> Do you agree?


I think I agree with this...in part.

The idea of "classical" music, for me at least, doesn't require notation, but without notation would necessitate immense ear training. For instance, India has a vibrant and ancient classical music heritage, but is based on improvisation over notation.

It is form, measurement, and variation that are at the heart of classical music for me. On the other side of the polarity is folk music, which uses strophic, repetitive like forms, has little or no variation between strophes (except in lyrics, thus slightly effecting rhythm). The music is not measured except in it's regularity, and the modal quality remains intact through the composition.

Much of the classical traditions are built upon measured qualities - for much of western music, it comes from the quadrivium, in which music was approached as a science. This is where the pure intervals were established, and the beginnings of the harmonic language were experimented with. Gregorian chant is a great example of these roots - the beginnings of motivic development, and the capacity for freedom in form, and measurement of a variety of parameters (in particular melodic contour and rhythm).

Most, if not all music exists between these polarities (with Gregorian chant as an example of the "purest" of classical music). And both have been continuously learning from each other. Yes, I would call this music classical mainly because of the form (the meter - a fast 10/16 divided 3 3 2 2, or 6+4, interesting as it is, is not so unusual in many kinds of folk music from Serbia/Croatia and Greece). And, I would even suggest that this kind of meter is learned from the practice of folk music more so than classical). Also, the harmonic/modal and melodic variations indicate going outside of folk music into classical.

So, my vote is that this is classical music strongly influenced by folk traditions. Near the middle of the polarities, but still firmly in the camp of classical.

For my taste, the music is fine. But, the conducting is not so good - honest emotion but hard to follow.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

*Thanks!*

Dear friends, thank you for your thoughts, really interesting!
Before responding to them, I have to translate well and find the right words. 
But I am really pleased with your interest. A really nice forum! 
Peter


----------



## hlolli (Dec 31, 2006)

Reminds me of typical goodwill movie soundtrack.

I do like some of minimalism and new age but this is neither. Just pop, Beatles are more classical than this.


----------



## Moldyoldie (Apr 6, 2008)

As to OP PeterW's submission, it's pleasant enough, like ice water...and just as substantial. If silence was akin to thirst, I'd swallow it. (I'm not sure I can say the same for Argus's example, however.)

I've always found classifying or categorizing new music to be a silly exercise; i.e., something for marketing departments. Wouldn't it be adequate to merely call it "orchestral"?


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Scott Good said:


> For my taste, the music is fine. But, the conducting is not so good - honest emotion but hard to follow.


You're right! Sometimes Allevi look's like a monkey while conducts the orchestra! But I think that the act of a conductor has to be judged on musical result, which, in this case, seems excellent. 
The day after the concert, a critic wrote: "The orchestra played very well ... despite Allevi" Hahahaha!


----------



## rojo (May 26, 2006)

Well, the composer must be doing alright if he can get an entire orchestra to be paid to play and perform his work in an expensive video. It doesn't really matter if we think it's classical or not, does it? Would he care at this point? Maybe the "is it classical or not" debate was just to create some "buzz" for the work. lol


Argus said:


> I think it's alright. Not exactly groundbreaking but it's quite listenable.
> 
> I hear a big Copland influence in there, maybe some Bernstein as well.
> 
> ...


Well, you're now guilty of throwing out some pretty harsh opinions yourself. 
Would this be a good occasion to post Jay Z's song D.O.A.?


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

rojo said:


> Well, the composer must be doing alright if he can get an entire orchestra to be paid to play and perform his work in an expensive video. It doesn't really matter if we think it's classical or not, does it? Would he care at this point? Maybe the "is it classical or not" debate was just to create some "buzz" for the work. lolWell, you're now guilty of throwing out some pretty harsh opinions yourself.
> Would this be a good occasion to post Jay Z's song D.O.A.?


Excuse me again for the bad english.
Perhaps I failed to explain good that Allevi, as a composer, has not created a simple "buzz", but a real earthquake! The academic world, in newspapers and on television, has repeatedly said that the real contemporary music is atonal, and accused Allevi's audience to be a mass of ignorant people. He replied that Glass is the most innovative of Schoenberg! And we students are in confusion!!! 
Meanwhile, the Italian Mozart Association, with all the European delegations, awarded Allevi with the "Gold Star" and defined him the "2000 Mozart", for having brought hundreds of thousands of young people to follow a new symphonic music.
We all know that the value of a composer is not measured by the success of the public. But is it really true?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

PeterW said:


> Excuse me again for the bad english.
> Perhaps I failed to explain good that Allevi, as a composer, has not created a simple "buzz", but a real earthquake! The academic world, in newspapers and on television, has repeatedly said that the real contemporary music is atonal, and accused Allevi's audience to be a mass of ignorant people. He replied that Glass is the most innovative of Schoenberg! And we students are in confusion!!!
> Meanwhile, the Italian Mozart Association, with all the European delegations, awarded Allevi with the "Gold Star" and defined him the "2000 Mozart", for having brought hundreds of thousands of young people to follow a new symphonic music.
> We all know that the value of a composer is not measured by the success of the public. But is it really true?


I don't doubt what you're saying, I just find it surprising because I live in a culture where this kind of thing would not be covered in newspapers and on television - even if tucked away in little academic corners - because all people seem to want to read about is crap reality TV and how MPs are ********.

Still, it would seem to me that people on both sides are wrong, or at least too extreme. The notion that contemporary music should be atonal (as some of us have been discussing on other threads) is frankly naive and narrow-minded, so Allevi should not be judged on that basis. All the same, far be it from me to be able to judge whose music will last and whose will not, but I _really_ believe that this is quite poor, populist stuff. It certainly didn't mean anything to me if it was trying to be art. Even if I have misunderstood a great composer, it's certainly going a bit too far to call him a modern Mozart!

EDIT --- And though he is being praised for his style of music that is apparently bringing a mass of people to this kind of music, I fear that all he is doing is increasing the sales of film-scores. I very much doubt that these people are going to start exploring music from the Classical and Romantic periods, let alone the 20th Century.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Dear Poldenice, I greatly appreciate your speech, always measured.
It 'true that people reason with the emotions, and often in the controversy, express extreme opinions, whether positive or negative.
It 'also true that in Italy, thanks to Allevi, everyone talks about classical music everywhere, and has created a new young audience.
Just about film music ...

 www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM-V5Fejvxk&feature=related

I have yet to respond to your interesting post!


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

By the way, though I know that Wikipedia is an awful source to use, I thought I'd just bring some perspective to the discussion by noting that Wiki considers his genre to be 'Crossover' and 'New Age'


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

*...*



Scott Good said:


> I think I agree with this...in part.
> 
> The idea of "classical" music, for me at least, doesn't require notation, but without notation would necessitate immense ear training. For instance, India has a vibrant and ancient classical music heritage, but is based on improvisation over notation.
> 
> ...


Form, measurement, and variation, for me, reach the perfection through written language. This happens in the European classical tradition. The difference between classical and folk, can not stay in the repetition, otherwise minimalist experience has not to be taken into account. The difference is not even in the simplicity of listening. Mozart is sometimes very easy. There are historical periods in which the composers have sought the complexity, others in which, in reaction, they wanted simplicity, as in our days. I still think that the difference lies only in form, not in the content.
Moreover, as the philosopher Aristotle says, even that which is formless, has a form!


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

PeterW said:


> Form, measurement, and variation, for me, reach the perfection through written language. This happens in the European classical tradition. The difference between classical and folk, can not stay in the repetition, otherwise minimalist experience has not to be taken into account. The difference is not even in the simplicity of listening. Mozart is sometimes very easy. There are historical periods in which the composers have sought the complexity, others in which, in reaction, they wanted simplicity, as in our days. I still think that the difference lies only in form, not in the content.
> Moreover, as the philosopher Aristotle says, even that which is formless, has a form!


Does something not exist because we can't experience it?

Anyway, I don't think this guy contributes at all to the legacy of western classical music.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

mueske said:


> Does something not exist because we can't experience it?
> 
> Anyway, I don't think this guy contributes at all to the legacy of western classical music.


May you tell me why? What do you mean with "contribute to the legacy fo music?"


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

PeterW said:


> May you tell me why? What do you mean with "contribute to the legacy fo music?"


I can't imagine anyone being emotionally affected by this piece, does nothing new or original. It feels soulless.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

PeterW said:


> In Italy a great controversy erupted on contemporary classical music, because of this young composer, Giovanni Allevi.


Junk noise.


----------



## Nagamori (Jan 13, 2010)

What's so great about this piece? It sounds like something I'd hear in a movie. Who cares about whether this qualifies as being "classical"? It's bad.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

*I suppose this is a little off-topic, but...*



PeterW said:


> Moreover, as the philosopher Aristotle says, even that which is formless, has a form!


Naw, it's the other guy.

Philosophy is arguably one of my weaker subjects, but the "Theory-of-the-Forms" is the work of Plato.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Naw, it's the other guy.
> 
> Philosophy is arguably one of my weaker subjects, but the "Theory-of-the-Forms" is the work of Plato.


I know. May you tell me more about Plato's "Theory-of-the-Forms", in reference to music?

And a very IMPORTANT QUESTION for you all. The public success of a composer... is it important? In Italy, the major music critics say the opposite! More music appeals to audiences mean low quality. But the great composers of the past, they were also much loved by the audience, or not? 

See this link where you can see the amazinge success that Allevi receives from young audiences.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WVKEStyXb4


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

PeterW said:


> I know. May you tell me more about Plato's "Theory-of-the-Forms", in reference to music?
> 
> And a very IMPORTANT QUESTION for you all. The public success of a composer... is it important? In Italy, the major music critics say the opposite! More music appeals to audiences mean low quality. But the great composers of the past, they were also much loved by the audience, or not?
> 
> ...


Hardly... Bach was hardly known in his own time. Mozart enjoyed success, but also much criticism. Same for Beethoven, his more conventional pieces were popular, while his more revolutionary pieces were also criticised.

And that's the same for mostly all the great and revolutionary composers. Respect for their talent always came after their death, in new generations.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I think public success is important, but only retrospectively, probably after many decades, once a composition can be more clearly assessed in the context of other cultural and artistic developments. As for the media, it's just snobbishness to suggest that accessibility immediately means low quality.


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

Polednice said:


> I think public success is important, but only retrospectively, probably after many decades, once a composition can be more clearly assessed in the context of other cultural and artistic developments. As for the media, it's just snobbishness to suggest that accessibility immediately means low quality.


Ten years ago, that would have been true, but these days? When something is popular these days, it's more than likely not of any value. A quick glance at the music industry, film industry and gaming industry in particular confirm that. That's not snobbish or elitist at all.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

mueske said:


> Ten years ago, that would have been true, but these days? When something is popular these days, it's more than likely not of any value. A quick glance at the music industry, film industry and gaming industry in particular confirm that. That's not snobbish or elitist at all.


I think accessibility means something quite different from popularity - at least, I meant it to when I used the word. If something is massively popular with audiences hardly acquainted with classical music, then I agree, the chances are that it's probably crap (as in Allevi's case). But, by accessibility, I meant to suggest that contemporary music needn't be utterly esoteric and difficult to grasp in the first instance in order to be of quality.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

*Genius?*

...and what do you think is a musical genius?


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

Either this is written solely to make money (by appealing to a large number of people) or the composer is genuinely afraid of his own creativity and orginality and needs to suppress it by playing the role of "composer" rather than being one. And of course the second answer may be the cause of the first ("I must be a good composer because people are buying my CD").

However, if people find it entertaining, fine. Personally, I feel Michael Torke does this sort of thing rather better.


----------



## anacrusis (Mar 21, 2010)

I found it pretty boring.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

It starts off with an interesting rhythm but seems to go on a bit the idea not so interesting and not developed. The section where the woodwind comes in adds some interest, some of that dialogue sounds interesting at least (at bit in the style of Sibelius or Mahler) but then it goes into a rather trite sounding theme around 2.00. Then around 2.50 onwards it starts to work itself towards a bit of a climax which isn't badly done, the end is ok with the return of the opening rhythm (which now reminds me of Mars from Holst's Planets). Hopefully he can develop into better stuff and maybe get better melodic ideas which he can develop.


----------



## Nix (Feb 20, 2010)

I wouldn't classify this as pop or anything... it's more like a blend of genres (including classical) used in a completely classical setting. I don't think it merits the harsh criticism, though it doesn't really appeal to me at all.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Great success of my favorite composer in China!!!


意大利天才钢琴家Giovanni Allevi:穿T恤帆布鞋演出(组图)


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Ops!!! 

Here it is!

http://news.xinmin.cn/rollnews/2010/06/04/5101757.html


----------



## Earthling (May 21, 2010)

PeterW said:


> Here he's conducting "Whisper"
> 
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp7e4x4dQCI


This is, at best, "pleasant" music-- it might work well as soundtrack music, but on its own merit, I'm not sure what the big deal is. And basically other composers (notably Bernstein and Copland) have done this sort of thing before, except _much better_.

Why would someone merely want to recycle a less inspired version of Bernstein (who at least knew how to really write a melody!): 




I'm not saying that this composition "Whisper" is _bad _music, but it isn't _good _classical music either, and certainly far from _great_. Which makes me wonder _why _anyone would think this is something fantastic...?


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

...because his music is more "contemporary" is a manifestation of this present time, and, because of it, it has a strong impact on young people. If I listen to Copland and then Allevi, I feel that almost a century is passed.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

PeterW said:


> ...because his music is more "contemporary" is a manifestation of this present time, and, because of it, it has a strong impact on young people. If I listen to Copland and then Allevi, I feel that almost a century is passed.


My advice to you would be to listen to more contemporary music.

Where are these young people that it has a strong impact upon? Most teenagers over here seem to prefer music by Ke$ha or Kanye West but maybe things are different in Italy.


----------



## Earthling (May 21, 2010)

PeterW said:


> ...because his music is more "contemporary" is a manifestation of this present time...


I suppose "vacuity" could be a "manifestation of the present time"...

You suggest Copland is just "old" and yet here he is copping his licks! If this young composer wisens up, maybe in 20 years he might start composing something worth listening to that won't be a mere passing fad, but this is _show biz_.

Have you listened to any other contemporary composers? (and I don't mean movie soundtracks or video game music): John Adams, Rautavaara, Taverner, Gorecki, Silvestrov, Schnittke, Corigliano, Glenn Branca, Arvo Part, Gareth Farr, Somei Satoh, Psathas, John Zorn?


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Kanye West is a rapper, if I'm not wrong....

Dear Earthling, what show biz are you talking about?
I talk about a Symphonic Suite, conducted in front of 12.000 young people.

I also listened John Adams, Rautavaara, Taverner, Gorecki, Silvestrov, Schnittke, Corigliano, Glenn Branca, Arvo Part, Gareth Farr, Somei Satoh, Psathas, John Zorn...
great composers!

But Allevi is cooler


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

PeterW said:


> Kanye West is a rapper, if I'm not wrong....


Correct. And, to use your terms, he is also more contemporary and has a far larger impact on the youth of today than Allevi could ever dream of.



> I also listened John Adams, Rautavaara, Taverner, Gorecki, Silvestrov, Schnittke, Corigliano, Glenn Branca, Arvo Part, Gareth Farr, Somei Satoh, Psathas, John Zorn...
> great composers!
> 
> But Allevi is cooler


Fair enough, you like this guy better than those composers, but in terms of coolness John Zorn and Glenn Branca are in another dimension of cool. Performing free jazz and influencing Sonic Youth is just a bit cooler than writing new age/crossover music.


----------



## janne (Apr 13, 2010)

How about telling exactly whats so bad or good about this piece instead of just classifying it great or crap and throwing **** in each others faces? This forum has a general problem with this i believe and it's sad to read all opinions without arguments.
Starry is the only one with a bit of analysis so far.

The returning rythm is keeping this piece of music together, reminds me of ritornello form (anyone agree ?) It's like a returning theme and adds a sense of clear structure, and thats a good thing to me. This isn't just different rythms linked together.

The problem is that the excursions from the rythm are not very original or interesting and i feel two things about them:
1. I have heard them all before. I dont know where but i dont think he made them up himself.
2. They are composed like he ripped them out of some popular tv-series or tv-talkshow. They sound cheap and childish indeed. Perhaps a different instrumentation could get rid of this problem.

I wont comment on his conducting style...


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Maybe it's gonna take putting some popular influence in classical works (such as what Gershwin did), in order for classical music to live on and keep evolving. I think that when composers immediately went to total dissonance, it was a dead end. I think some composers need to work backwards a little so that they can actually move forwards. What will "classical" styled music sound 100 years from now? Will it still be as dissonant? Will it be even worse? I hope not.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Regrettably the present day, the value of an artist depends on the numbers: the number of records sold, number of spectators at concerts. Let us not pretend it is not so!
These days, Allevi is having an extraordinary success, especially in China, Japan, Korea and Italy. I no longer believe the fable of the composer, which is important because four critics have agreed, and passes to the history of music, even if no one has ever heard a note!


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

PeterW said:


> These days, Allevi is having an extraordinary success, especially in China, Japan, Korea and Italy. I no longer believe the fable of the composer, which is important because four critics have agreed, and passes to the history of music, even if no one has ever heard a note!


China, Japan and Korea are perfect market for worthless, grotesque kitsch like Allevi's music. Succeeding mainly there is good evidence that he is dowdy. If you want get some positive feedback do like your hero did - register on some Naruto internet board and advertise his music there, not on classical music forum.


----------



## MJTTOMB (Dec 16, 2007)

Who gave that monkey a baton?


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

The piece is well executed and competently orchestrated.
It is however, like a lot of what the general public often think of as 'classical', empty and vacuous.
It is indeed pop/film music with pretensions of being more.
It is inoffensive and easy listening but anyone who calls it 'contemporary classical' doesn't know what composers for the last 600 years have been doing.

Given a good orchestra it's hard to make anything sound bad.

He'll probably go far and make money and good luck to him.

@ Argus: Nothing wrong with that track you linked to. Perfectly acceptable pop/dance track.


----------



## janne (Apr 13, 2010)

Aramis said:


> China, Japan and Korea are perfect market for worthless, grotesque kitsch like Allevi's music. Succeeding mainly there is good evidence that he is dowdy. If you want get some positive feedback do like your hero did - register on some Naruto internet board and advertise his music there, not on classical music forum.


As long as you don't tell exactly whats grotesque the only thing worthless is your post.


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Young people are going crazy for Allevi. Here performs a composition entitled "Bach's dream", where combines fusion music and contrappunto in two items.
The St. Cecilia Concert Hall (Rome) was sold out a month before the concert, with 3000 seats. 
A genius!


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

PeterW said:


> Young people are going crazy for Allevi. Here performs a composition entitled "Bach's dream", where combines fusion music and contrappunto in two items.
> The St. Cecilia Concert Hall (Rome) was sold out a month before the concert, with 3000 seats.
> A genius!


He is a very talented musician and if people like it , great.

As a 'classical' composition in the lineage of the masters it is meaningless, meandering, drivel.

Please listen to the Firth of Fifth by Genesis in the 70s. It had no pretensions of being a 'classical' piece for the concert hall but is many times better as composition.

Anyone who holds this guy up against the masters has a very shallow understanding.

That doesn't stop it being entertaining on it's own terms but it is NOT art music.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> As long as you don't tell exactly whats grotesque the only thing worthless is your post.


What I see as grotesque is middle-aged guy dressed like teen Iron Maiden fan pretending to be conducting and actually having listeners that consider him to be great classical composer, despite the obvious fact that his music is second-rate crossover/new age or whatever you call it.


----------



## janne (Apr 13, 2010)

Aramis said:


> What I see as grotesque is middle-aged guy dressed like teen Iron Maiden fan pretending to be conducting and actually having listeners that consider him to be great classical composer, despite the obvious fact that his music is second-rate crossover/new age or whatever you call it.


Ok, and then you could perhaps tell me in exactly what way his music is second-rate. (I agree on this point and have explained it earlier, so perhaps could you also do that)


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

janne said:


> Ok, and then you could perhaps tell me in exactly what way his music is second-rate. (I agree on this point and have explained it earlier, so perhaps could you also do that)


What is this, argumentation exercise? His music is second-rate because (among other reasons) it's craftsmanship is compareable to C category movies soundtracks + it excels in the low tastes; he clearly wants it to easily fall into unsophisticated listener's ear.


----------



## janne (Apr 13, 2010)

Aramis said:


> What is this, argumentation exercise? His music is second-rate because (among other reasons) it's craftsmanship is compareable to C category movies soundtracks + it excels in the low tastes; he clearly wants it to easily fall into unsophisticated listener's ear.


It's no argument exercise. But it's very cheap to throw words like "second rate" or "grotsque" around without any explanation why. Perhaps you don't agree but thats my opinion anyway.
I feel the same about people who writes "that's a great recording!!" or "Symphony no. 234 in f minor by John Smith is so cool".

But now you have explained your statements and I agree . The music sounds like its coming directly from a television talk show (although i spot rondo form in it so it's not completely free from craftsmanship).


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

This is the argument:
marvellous music. Classic style with Rock Progressive influence!


----------



## PeterW (Feb 8, 2010)

Here he is not the new Mozart, but the new Chopin!

Listen at 2.00






People get crazy at Allevi's concerts.


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

PeterW said:


> Here he is not the new Mozart, but the new Chopin!


Yeah, like some 3rd rate daytime soap actor is the new De Niro!

Or take a bottle of cheap white wine, stick some bubbles (CO2) in it and serve it up as fine Champagne to people who can't tell the difference.

Snob? Me?


----------



## janne (Apr 13, 2010)

PeterW said:


> This is the argument:
> marvellous music. Classic style with Rock Progressive influence!


So instead of just saying "marvellous" you could perhaps tell a bit more what exactly is so marvellous about all this ? I still dont understand what you see in Allevi that should make skeptics change their minds. And posting more youtube videos and telling how "marvellous" they are will not help unless you can do a proper analysis.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

janne said:


> Ok, and then you could perhaps tell me in exactly what way his music is second-rate. (I agree on this point and have explained it earlier, so perhaps could you also do that)


Because there is nothing original. He takes no risks. He invents nothing new. He shows nothing of himself. He strongly gives the impression he is playing to the widest possible audience (which regrettably has as little education in music as it has in science and much else of value).

The composer who, in my experience, sails close to this wind and _just about_ gets away with it is Michael Torke. At his best (_Book of Proverbs_) his music rates as high as John Adams (not a high hurdle), but even _Javelin _has a degree of wit and real energy missing form the current composer under discussion.


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

i like it. sounds like two really refined burglars robbing a bank while doing ballet.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

I don't think it sounded like a pop song. And what's wrong with sounding like that anyway? Didn't many composers use folk tunes to make their pieces (ex. Dvorak, Russian composers, Bartok, and so many more) ?


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I don't think it sounded like a pop song. And what's wrong with sounding like that anyway? Didn't many composers use folk tunes to make their pieces (ex. Dvorak, Russian composers, Bartok, and so many more) ?


Are you implying pop music has become our folk music?


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Even the musicians seem bored. They are probably thinking - why in the hell am I playing this _thing?_


----------



## Toccata (Jun 13, 2009)

I would like to know why the "conductor" has a perpetual inane looking grin on his face, why he is dressed so inappropriately vis-a-vis the members of the orchestra, and where he learned his ludicrous looking conducting style. I absolutely hate the "music" with a vengeance.


----------



## wingracer (Mar 7, 2011)

PeterW said:


> It's not a pop song.
> A pop song in 5/8 and 7/8?


While rare, it has been done. Rush and Soundgarden immediately come to mind.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

The composer is wonderfully _Italiano_. There's a place for this in the world, and controversy is good for music or it dies. The orchestra plays beautifully. How many listeners lifted a finger to hear more than one thing from this hugely attended concert? The atmosphere is emotionally charged, and Giovanni Allevi is not without talent.


----------



## SCSL (Apr 7, 2018)

Goodness. A modern composer who creates music that actually sounds pleasant to the ear. He must be (insert your preferred pejorative here). Let’s all hope he fails. Then we can go back to nails on the chalkboard, no-note concertos, and circus acts.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

Larkenfield said:


> The composer is wonderfully _Italiano_. There's a place for this in the world, and controversy is good for music or it dies. The orchestra plays beautifully. How many listeners lifted a finger to hear more than one thing from this hugely attended concert? The atmosphere is emotionally charged, and Giovanni Allevi is not without talent.


Although I have to agree that the earlier works of his that were posted weren't something I'd ever want to listen to, this wasn't bad. I certainly wouldn't buy the CD but listening to it once it kept me interested although it seemed a bit overdone at parts and relied on a couple musical cliches.

Regardless I don't think anyone's arguing that you have to be highly dissonant to be a 'real' composer but just orchestrating what is essentially pop music does not qualify as classical music (at least from my understanding of the term).


----------



## LezLee (Feb 21, 2014)

Unfortunately, it’s louder than a ‘Whisper’. 
Tedious.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

SCSL said:


> Goodness. A modern composer who creates music that actually sounds pleasant to the ear. He must be (insert your preferred pejorative here). Let's all hope he fails. Then we can go back to nails on the chalkboard, no-note concertos, and circus acts.


Allevi is a circus act, an absolute clown.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

As others here have indicated or implied this is just orchestrated pop music.

And as conductor/violinist has stated: “Allevi's success is the triumph of relativism.”

And his conceit is laughable as he defines his music as a "visionary project" for "establishing the basis for a new cultured contemporary music."

Yeah, right...


----------

