# In the future, what will be the NEXT development for classical music?



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

What do you think would be the next *exciting* development for classical music?

So far we have the

1. Renaissance

2. Baroque

3. Classical

4. Romantic

5. 20th century

6. Modern

Do you think Modern music would be more common place in the future or it will be still the same? What will be the technological advances that will make classical music more exciting? Is there will be a blockbuster classical composer that will surface like Beethoven or innovative ones like Schoenberg?
*
What do you want to see in the future of classical music? Share your thoughts.. *


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

1. Renaissance

2. Baroque

3. Classical

4. Romantic

5. 20th century

6. Modern

7. Alien Music (music of extraterrestrials, maybe planet Uranus)


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

Neo-tonal.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

People are going to play cars. They have a guy running the engine, a guy beeping the horn, four guys on locks, and one guy on tambourine to keep the beat.


----------



## StevenOBrien (Jun 27, 2011)

A resurgence of not only tonality, but diatonicism. A second wave of neo-classicism that uses modernist, atonal and minimalist aesthetics in the context of classical forms and diatonic contrast. An emphasis on drawing the listener in with drama will be encouraged, and slow, building introductions for pieces will be discouraged in favor of just throwing the listener straight into a fast, dramatic movement.



HarpsichordConcerto said:


> 7. Alien Music (music of extraterrestrials, maybe planet Uranus)


I hear they wrote some incredible tuba concertos.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

The genres are breaking down completely. At a certain level you can't tell whether something is classical or jazz or tango or world fusion or what, and it's only getting better ("worse" to conservatives). The category of "art music" is rapidly swallowing all our precious divisions and definitions.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

A giant merger of every art form that exists.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

the polystylist qualities of Schnittke, Ives, Zappa, Albarn, Bjork, Kajiura, Uematsu, and Oldfield will only expand further and further until the distinctions between genres become beyond arbitrary and fall apart completely, and new ways of describing music will develope that are far more descriptive. Or something completely different.

Personally I have no idea what will come, but I think a tendency toward eclectic mixing of different things is most likely. We can see it in rock, pop, jazz and classical music.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

You can see it in the kind of stuff that Kronos Quartet does with Wu Man, Asha Bhosle, Astor Piazzolla, John Zorn, Tan Dun - they don't care. You've got Yo-Yo Ma and Joshua Bell and so on playing Appalachian music with Bela Fleck, who plays with Chick Corea. It's a free-for-all. There is no longer bluegrass, jazz, tango, or classical. That is all history. Now there is just music.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

and you have Damon Albarn of Blur and Gorillaz (which is another glorious example of polystylism) composing operas for orchestras that consist of strings, brass, electric/rock instruments, Chinese instruments, rare instruments like the ondes martenot and toys like Casio keyboards and the Suzuki Omnichord (think a plastic electronic autoharp). And you had Frank Zappa basically using his rock band to play the complex instrumental music he was writing (including transcriptions of his chamber and orchestral material) alongside traditional rock and jazz and any other kind of music he wanted to write. I think a good way of looking at the future is that artists will be far more difficult to shoehorn and stereotype with images of styles. 

Polystylism probably isn't a good word to use, because despite the huge array of kinds of music Schnittke, Ives, Zappa, and Albarn have composed, their own personal styles come through. Its not like they're writing in the voice of somebody else, even when they quote others' music. I'm not good at making up terms though, so just know when I say polystylism, I mean more that they use a variety of techniques and tropes in an eclectic, imaginative mix. :3


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

science said:


> It's a free-for-all. There is no longer bluegrass, jazz, tango, or classical. That is all history. Now there is just music.


I hate to be seen as some kind of reactionary, but does anyone else see this as kind of a unwanted and potentially dangerous new trend in music making?


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

SottoVoce said:


> I hate to be seen as some kind of reactionary, but does anyone else see this as kind of a unwanted and potentially dangerous new trend in music making?


hows it dangerous?


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> hows it dangerous?


Because distinctions between music genres form aesthetic criteria and coherency in their given genres. Pop music and art music tend to have different deep seated conceptions of what music is and how it should fit in culture/society (pop music much more imbedded and art music much more distinct from "market forces"). I've been reading Adorno lately and while he might not be the best person to go to when it comes to eclecticism, I think he's to be considered when we consider these kind of questions. I'm sure it's stupid to completely separate both pop and art music, but I think throughout history they've had a distinction for a reason. It may just be my bias, I just don't really rest easy with it.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

violadude said:


> A giant merger of every art form that exists.


Been there done that.


----------



## Ravndal (Jun 8, 2012)

7. Minimalism


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

SottoVoce said:


> Because distinctions between music genres form aesthetic criteria and coherency in their given genres. Pop music and art music tend to have different deep seated conceptions of what music is and how it should fit in culture/society (pop music much more imbedded and art music much more distinct from "market forces"). I've been reading Adorno lately and while he might not be the best person to go to when it comes to eclecticism, I think he's to be considered when we consider these kind of questions. I'm sure it's stupid to completely separate both pop and art music, but I think throughout history they've had a distinction for a reason. It may just be my bias, I just don't really rest easy with it.


Well "pop music" is pretty recent development, unless we're gonna call all folk music prior to it "pop". To me, its a very pretentious, arrogant distinction to divide them. It implies that there's less artistic intent or integrity in the pop music world, and that just simply isn't true, just as being part of the "classical" realm doesn't give you inherently more integrity as an artist. I like the idea of these barriers falling because I think all music deserves to be able to be taken lightly and less seriously, and it also deserves a degree of integrity and respect.


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

That being said, I agree with the neo-tonal prediction of future classical music. I think Schoenberg's later works, where he combined an atonal vocabulary while still retaining the triadic relationships of tonal harmony (Ode to Napoleon Bonaparte, Second Chamber Symphony) would lead to a very creative and accessible way of music making.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

In the future, "classical music" would not be "classical" rather a mix of other genres. Is that everyone is saying?? I don't like it.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

peeyaj said:


> In the future, "classical music" would not be "classical" rather a mix of other genres. Is that everyone is saying?? I don't like it.


What a tragedy D:

You'll still have plenty of people writing things like solo piano pieces and symphonies  Just you may see things like electric and electronic instruments in the orchestras, and instead of waltzes and mazurkas you may see skanks and moshes :3


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Well "pop music" is pretty recent development, unless we're gonna call all folk music prior to it "pop". To me, its a very pretentious, arrogant distinction to divide them. It implies that there's less artistic intent or integrity in the pop music world, and that just simply isn't true, just as being part of the "classical" realm doesn't give you inherently more integrity as an artist. I like the idea of these barriers falling because I think all music deserves to be able to be taken lightly and less seriously, and it also deserves a degree of integrity and respect.


I would be considered folk music pop music, because that was considered the dividing factor of art music back in the day. They communicated with eachother, but there was a sharp distinction from there. The point is, they don't need to be blurred together in order to be seen as equally legitimate; pop and art music are just different and we should treat it as such. This doesn't mean that we have to look down on pop music, but it also doesn't mean that we have to completely do away with barriers just to make ourselves feel like they're one and the same. Both can be respected and still be seen as pop music and art music. How would that be pretentious?


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

SottoVoce said:


> I would be considered folk music pop music, because that was considered the dividing factor of art music back in the day. They communicated with eachother, but there was a sharp distinction from there. The point is, they don't need to be blurred together in order to be seen as equally legitimate; pop and art music are just different and we should treat it as such. This doesn't mean that we have to look down on pop music, but it also doesn't mean that we have to completely do away with barriers just to make ourselves feel like they're one and the same. Both can be respected and still be seen as pop music and art music. How would that be pretentious?


Well what is your reasoning for the separation anyway?


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

BurningDesire said:


> Well what is your reasoning for the separation anyway?


Haha didn't I just post that on my first post? I fear we might be going in circles here.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

In the future, the "dinosaurs" (like COAG mentioned) would become extinct. That would be tragic.


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> In the future, the "dinosaurs" (like COAG mentioned) would become extinct. That would be tragic.


The only hope I have for the future is that maybe people won't see the revolutions in the Modernist/Postmodernist era as this huge catalysmic crashing point anymore; they will see it as an extension of the classical tradition, whether you're writing tonally or atonally. Classical music has been through this before (Monteverdi and the Early Baroque's conversion from modality to a tonal system) and I think it can go through it again, as long as we find some kind of new common practice that can provide a common harmonic vocabulary.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

SottoVoce said:


> The only hope I have for the future is that maybe people won't see the revolutions in the Modernist/Postmodernist era as this huge catalysmic crashing point anymore; they will see it as an extension of the classical tradition, whether you're writing tonally or atonally. Classical music has been through this before (Monteverdi and the Early Baroque's conversion from modality to a tonal system) and I think it can go through it again, as long as we find some kind of new common practice that can provide a common harmonic vocabulary.


Very erudite response. You have a good point. Let's just hope that classical listeners in the near future would be more "open-minded" in the incoming change.


----------



## Krisena (Jul 21, 2012)

I, for one, love the idea of all the musical genres melting down into a sea of LCL. I also think this is likely to happen, in the end.

Let the distinctions between tonality and atonality; medieval, baroque, classicism, romanticism, modernism, post-modernism and meta-modernism/new sincerity; academic music and folk music dissappear. Musical instrumentality, go, go, go!


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

The next great developement will be the advent of Baconism. All music in the baconist style will be written for and played on instruments constructed from bacon, with new textures that I call "baconophonic" textures.


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

dog music probably


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

In th future we will have music beyond our imagination.


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

SottoVoce said:


> Because distinctions between music genres form aesthetic criteria and coherency in their given genres.


I would not be averse to new aesthetic criteria and new conceptions of coherency.



SottoVoce said:


> I'm sure it's stupid to completely separate both pop and art music, but I think throughout history they've had a distinction for a reason.


By the same token, if in the future the distinction between pop and art music dissolves, might it not be that this would happen for a reason too?


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

BurningDesire said:


> The next great developement will be the advent of Baconism. All music in the baconist style will be written for and played on instruments constructed from bacon, with new textures that I call "baconophonic" textures.


Such music would probably begin to employ the baconotonic scale, until the next Schoenberg comes along and emancipates the bacon.


----------



## Niki (Jul 30, 2012)

Crudblud said:


> People are going to play cars. They have a guy running the engine, a guy beeping the horn, four guys on locks, and one guy on tambourine to keep the beat.


Here's to people "playing with cars!":


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

An orchestra of robots.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I hate to be seen as some kind of reactionary, but does anyone else see this as kind of a unwanted and potentially dangerous new trend in music making?

AS in a giant, generic, McDonald's of music? Yes... I am not at all for that. I believe that the greatest art has always benefited from a cultural cross-pollination, which is one of the reasons that the arts always flourished in those major cities where contact with other nations thrived... whether through trade, immigration, or military conquest. But I am not all too thrilled with the idea of cultures losing their distinct individual "flavors" in trade for some generic cultural universalism.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Crudblud said:


> People are going to play cars. They have a guy running the engine, a guy beeping the horn, four guys on locks, and one guy on tambourine to keep the beat.


We can be the driving force behind that movement :3


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

There seems to be a tacit assumption that the "next big development," whatever it is, is going to cause old developments to disappear. Surely no one believes this is the case? Even if some cross-pollinating trend comes along that blurs the lines between jazz, classical, and pop (assuming that hasn't already happened a while ago), it's not like all other musicians will cease writing and performing "pure" jazz and classical and pop. After all, it's not like atonality killed tonality, electronic music killed instrumental music, etc. Everyone's current listening habits and preferences, whatever they may be, are not under threat. If there is a next big development, it's going to be an addition, not a replacement, to what we already have.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Eschbeg said:


> There seems to be a tacit assumption that the "next big development," whatever it is, is going to cause old developments to disappear. Surely no one believes this is the case? Even if some cross-pollinating trend comes along that blurs the lines between jazz, classical, and pop (assuming that hasn't already happened a while ago), it's not like all other musicians will cease writing and performing "pure" jazz and classical and pop. After all, it's not like atonality killed tonality, electronic music killed instrumental music, etc. Everyone's current listening habits and preferences, whatever they may be, are not under threat. If there is a next big development, it's going to be an addition, not a replacement, to what we already have.


Just with more bacon :3


----------



## Eschbeg (Jul 25, 2012)

BurningDesire said:


> Just with more bacon :3


I hope so. When it comes to baconism, let's just say I have a Brucknerian appetite.


----------



## Praeludium (Oct 9, 2011)

I think that we can't predict what the music will be, for two reason :
1) There are just so many very different things done at the same time that could be considered classical music. It goes in a lot of directions.
2) Unless one of our member is a prescient creative genius, we're not aware of what the next major new thing could be. We can only say roughly how what we know sound... I how was supposed to sound the music of the future for people living in the court of Versailles at the end of the XVIIth century.


----------

