# Retro classial music of the 21st century?



## mud (May 17, 2012)

Emulating musical styles prior to the 20th century, if you know of any...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Film scores are your best bet, I think. My knowledge of the most recent films is not as good as old things. Check out films based on Jane Austen's novels which where quite big in the 1990's, for example, Pride and Prejudice featured Melvyn Tan on piano playing a score by Carl Davis. Kind of reminiscent of early to mid 19th century music. Dunno if you can get the film score to Mozart's Sister a film from the past year, with a score in the style of the Classical era.


----------



## mud (May 17, 2012)

Film scores? So I can ignore the entire list of 21st century composers without missing anything special?


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)




----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

[sorry, wrong topic]


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

From your linked list, since you apparently want this type of music, I'd try Ludovico Einaudi. Not my cup of tea.

Far better (though with the occasional awful composition as well): John Rutter. I love his Requiem (composed in 1985).


----------



## mud (May 17, 2012)

I have a feeling this topic is a goner.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

German composer Thomas Schmidt-Kowalski (b. 1949) is said to write in a romantic style à la Schumann. I'm not familiar with his works, but I understand Naxos has released a couple of CDs of his concertos and symphonies.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

None of the 'big names' under the classical label in recent times would fit the bill that I know of, though my knowledge is limited. At most they will have some new fangled neo romanticism, lacking an intellectual rigor and precision comparable to the older music, its just as vague and pure inspiration-based process as the work of many of their less tonal counterparts since there is still looseness with functional tonal harmony. 

There are a number of 'amateurs' though, that attempt to emulate musical styles of the 18th century. 

I've been pretty active in the past in trying to have such topics discussed, but since I am a composer who likes to and aspires to(non exclusively) continue and improve in writing stylistically 17th, 18th and 19th century sounding music, I have since decided that discussions are not only discouraging based on the conflicting perspectives that in no way help me, but also because I will become inclined to discuss more and do less.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

mud said:


> I have a feeling this topic is a goner.


Its a difficult topic to get into here on TC, but you are far from being alone in wanting to get into it.


----------



## mud (May 17, 2012)

Yeah, it would take a long time to go through that list. I am not sure it is worth it (for anyone).


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

It's a lost cause. 

The talented Movie composers are our only hope. Everyone else will be crushed by atonal-serialist tyranny!


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Not a lost cause, IMO. If it can still be done, then it ought to be done. It's not like we've run out of possibilities to explore there. Barber gives us a very convincing piece here, while still breaking some conventions (most notably the interval leaps and the tonal texture).


----------



## mud (May 17, 2012)

I like that piece, but wasn't it composed in the mid 20th century? Maybe your point is that it should inspire 21st century composers, yet I would say the same about prior art (which doesn't seem to be much of an influence). It would be nice if the record industry would categorize 21st century music by its style, so we did not have to swim upstream in search of retro classical works.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

mud said:


> Film scores? So I can ignore the entire list of 21st century composers without missing anything special?


ned rorem, john adams, david amram, dominick argento, malcolm arnold, david bedford (sometime), william bolcom, michael daugherty (not always), norman dello joio, william duckworth, roland dyens, robert farnon (but he's dead in 2005), gorecki, joe hisaishi, kapustin, ennio morricone, eric whitacre, ricki ian gordon, jake heggie... actually it's a bit difficul to consider some of those composers as 21st century musicians, altough they are alive.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

mud said:


> I like that piece, but wasn't it composed in the mid 20th century? Maybe your point is that it should inspire 21st century composers, yet I would say the same about prior art (which doesn't seem to be much of an influence). It would be nice if the record industry would categorize 21st century music by its style, so we did not have to swim upstream in search of retro classical works.


Right, it's not like Barber did that very long ago. It's not like we can't continue composing music in the Renaissance style if we want. We can compose whatever we like. If they bought this, and they'll buy pop music, I'm sure someone will buy 21st century classical music. I'm sure because I will. That's right, as of today I'm supporting it. I already personally know a couple of guys who do it professionally, and will start buying their stuff if I can.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Yo, I'm a 21st Century composer, and I write tonal/modal music. I am greatly influenced by Romantic composers (and many other things), though I am still a student, and still learning how to use the plethora of compositional tools developed by the many composers that came before me. 

Also, people who think serialism is the big thing right now obviously have been ignoring classical music since the 1960s. Since then its really split off in various directions, most of which are pretty accessible. You still had the serialists/dissonant modernists and Cage's inderterminacy and fluxus, but there was also the emergence of minimalism, and the various composers influenced by ancient music such as Part and Gorecki, and then there's the new complexity, and spectralism. 

And there's still composers writing impressionistic or romantic music, whether they are writing concert music, or electronic music, or music for a rock band, or music for film or video games (how is that so inherently different than writing incidental music for a play, or music for an opera or a ballet?). 

Honestly, most classical listeners really need to do far more exploring through living composers, and they need to get off their pretentious, snobbish high-horse and listen to things outside the "classical" idiom. It isn't inherently the best musical tradition. There's tons of great rock and pop and jazz and folk and electronic music that is beautiful and amazing, and if you have no ear for atonal music, good news, most of it is beautifully modal or tonal.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Tonality is dead? I don't think so.*



norman bates said:


> ned rorem, john adams, david amram, dominick argento, malcolm arnold, david bedford (sometime), william bolcom, michael daugherty (not always), norman dello joio, william duckworth, roland dyens, robert farnon (but he's dead in 2005), gorecki, joe hisaishi, kapustin, ennio morricone, eric whitacre, ricki ian gordon, jake heggie... actually it's a bit difficul to consider some of those composers as 21st century musicians, altough they are alive.


Great list. (Note: The following have just passed away in the past few years: Malcolm Arnold (2006), Dello Joio (2008) and Gorecki (2010).

I have been working on a similar list myself. I would like to add the following living tonalist:

Richard Danielpour
Edward Gregson
Kalevi Aho
Phillip Sparke
Ron Nelson (currently 82. We are playing one of his pieces in our community band)
Aulis Sallinen
Einojuhani Rautavaara
Cindy McTee
Jenifer Higden
Joan Tower
Ellen Taaffe Zwilich
Lowell Liebermann
Donald Grantham
David Gillingham
David Maslanka
Frank Ticheli
John Corigliano (much of his music)

I could add a whole bunch more.

It seems that the anti-modernists are so obsessed with trashing atonal music that they overlook all of the great tonalist who are out there.

Maybe someone should start a thread about 21st century tonalist.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

BurningDesire said:


> Yo, I'm a 21st Century composer, and I write tonal/modal music. I am greatly influenced by Romantic composers (and many other things), though I am still a student, and still learning how to use the plethora of compositional tools developed by the many composers that came before me.
> 
> Also, people who think serialism is the big thing right now obviously have been ignoring classical music since the 1960s. Since then its really split off in various directions, most of which are pretty accessible. You still had the serialists/dissonant modernists and Cage's inderterminacy and fluxus, but there was also the emergence of minimalism, and the various composers influenced by ancient music such as Part and Gorecki, and then there's the new complexity, and spectralism.
> 
> ...


Right on!!!! :trp:

It seems that many only hear dead music.


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

Arsakes said:


> It's a lost cause.
> 
> The talented Movie composers are our only hope. Everyone else will be crushed by atonal-serialist tyranny!


Atonal-serialist tyranny will be over soon, too. And when it will be over, it will also be forgotten forever. In 21th century atonal-serialist music is already old-fashioned, the trend in this new century seem to be eclecticism. Many composers look back in the past to find inspiration and try to adapt something from there with today's techniques. Atonal/serialist stuff is still at vogue, but its influence is gradually fading away.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Movie music without the movie! Filippini's "Flames of Passion" from 2012, inspired by Conan the Barbarian and maybe a few other things.









http://www.amazon.com/Flames-of-Pas...351799720&sr=1-1&keywords=Cristiano+FILIPPINI

I listened to this. It's mind-numbingly obnoxious.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

The music for LOTR is close enough to 21st century, and is brilliant, although it is of course not Classical.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

There also seems to be a number of composers who still enjoy writing piano rags.


----------



## Carpenoctem (May 15, 2012)

Ramako said:


> The music for LOTR is close enough to 21st century, and is brilliant, although it is of course not Classical.


It's one of the best soundtracks ever made. I still listen to it and I agree, it's brilliant.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

I'm afraid the closest you might get would be in the realm of the Neoclassical style composers, or less 'retro' than just conservative late romantics.

Igor Stravinsky ~ Concerto in Eb, Dumbarton Oaks (modeled on the Bach Brandenburgs)





Manuel de Falla ~ Concerto for Flute, Clarinet, Oboe, Violin, 'Cello and Harpsichord





Prokofiev's "Classical Symphony" is very Haydnesque, without trying at all to imitate Haydn.

Anything more 'exactly' like music from earlier periods tends to be either a student model exercise, or (above stated) film scores, where something sounding like music of the period (period films, natch) was commissioned with some intent to have a sentiment appropriate to the film while sounding as if from the period.

Some pieces are written "In the Olden Style" - Gorecki ~ Three Pieces in the Olden Style. 



Again, these are as much or more 'a new take' on an older vocabulary than an attempt to replicate an old style 'to pass' as genuinely from the period.
... and others have ventured there, different composer's choice of which period 'olden style' varies 

But generally, more of interest to the composer is to use an older form or model to make something 'new' rather than something which could 'pass' as a work from an earlier time.

Here is Pavel Karmanov's "Twice a double Concerto" - very baroque-ish, including that motor drive and 'upbeat' chirpiness many expect of baroque music, while playing with a doubled ensemble of both contemporary and antique instruments and the differential between contemporary A '440 and a lower baroque 'A.' It is not, however, trying to pass as Telemann, Vivaldi, etc.





Even Karl Jenkins is not composing 'actually passable baroque music' as much as this very commercial /classical composer has pretty much made that his stock trick in trade.
Jenkins ~ Palladio




(I'll keep up my reputation as the opinionated jerk and say I think his music is not worth the paper it is written upon.)

For 'replicates,' then, it is off to film score land, where, for example, circumstances like those which brought "The Warsaw Concerto" abound. 




"The film-makers wanted something in the style of Rachmaninoff's Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini or the Second and Third Piano Concertos, but were unable to persuade Rachmaninoff himself to write a new piece or to afford to obtain the rights for any of these existing pieces." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Concerto
The work is by Richard Addinasell, the orchestration by another, Roy Douglas (in the 20th century, classical arena, not orchestrating your own work is _Just Not Done_, and its ten minute length is also due to the parameters of 'what was wanted' for use in a film. But, there ya go, a full blown retro-romantic barnstormer near parody of Rachmaninoff....


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Renaissance said:


> Atonal-serialist tyranny will be over soon, too. And when it will be over, it will also be forgotten forever. In 21th century atonal-serialist music is already old-fashioned, the trend in this new century seem to be eclecticism. Many composers look back in the past to find inspiration and try to adapt something from there with today's techniques. Atonal/serialist stuff is still at vogue, but its influence is gradually fading away.


"Atonal-serialist tyranny" ??? You must be deluded.

Tyranny? Name those who tied you up and forced you to listen, anyway, you poor put-upon soul.

There was never a tyranny, just composers and audiences caught up with an idea and a fashion. Was 'romanticism' and 'how they composed then' a Tyranny? Of course not, it was the current fashion.

As similar music from all other eras proves out, only a few at any time, regardless of the fashion, were really good / great composers. The difference, as it were, between really fine composer and passable journeyman is as similar in 'that twelve-tone crowd' as it was between Solieri and Mozart.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

> (in the 20th century, classical arena, not orchestrating your own work is Just Not Done


Nice integration of the snarky smiley into the end parentheses.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Ramako said:


> The music for LOTR is close enough to 21st century, and is brilliant, although it is of course not Classical.


I agree Howard Shore's LOTR is excellent, but I think it is classical. It is being played in concerts with the world's symphony orchestras, and its been done here in Australia with our own orchestras. The whole score that is, with the movie playing as the orchestra plays the score 'live.' So yeah, KenOC's criticism that film scores may not work without the film - well that's how its being solved.

Of course, many composers of the 20th century made suites out of their film scores. Bernstein's _On the Waterfront _and Rota's_ La Strada_ are two of my favourites. Then there's Walton, whose films have been made into Shakespeare scenarios by his arranger (the late Christopher Palmer), including narration. _Henry V_ is my favourite of those, and one of my fav works of all time! Nothing lowbrow about film music, I see it just like incidental music to plays of the past. We don't say _Peer Gynt _ by Grieg is not classical, so how can that argument hold for film music? Don't want to derail this thread but film music is part of the classical music tradition now, for many reasons (incl. being done by trained classical composers).



PetrB said:


> "Atonal-serialist tyranny" ??? you are deluded.
> 
> Tyranny? who tied you up and made you listen, anyway, you poor put-upon soul?
> 
> ...


Well young lions in the post-war era, like Boulez, where overly zealous about serialism equalling their narrative of 'the future' and all that. Call it what you will but it did shut out composers who didn't do serialism, or even those who heavily modified it for their own ends. But that attitude is largely a thing of the past now, even Boulez has changed his tune for decades (& he hardly did any 'total serialist' works himself - maybe an example of 'do what I say, not do what I do?'). But anyway, its good he changed, cos pulling down Shostakovich as Mahler rehash doesn't cut the mustard with me (sorry!) and I'm sure most people today would disagree with that overly ideological line of thinking.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

PetrB said:


> There was never a tyranny, just composers and audiences caught up with an idea and a fashion.


Well, I suspect the "audiences" part may be stretching it a bit. 

BTW, isn't this supposed to be about the _21st_ century?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Sid James said:


> I agree Howard Shore's LOTR is excellent, but I think it is classical. It is being played in concerts with the world's symphony orchestras, and its been done here in Australia with our own orchestras. The whole score that is, with the movie playing as the orchestra plays the score 'live.' So yeah, KenOC's criticism that film scores may not work without the film - well that's how its being solved.
> 
> Of course, many composers of the 20th century made suites out of their film scores. Bernstein's _On the Waterfront _and Rota's_ La Strada_ are two of my favourites. Then there's Walton, whose films have been made into Shakespeare scenarios by his arranger (the late Christopher Palmer), including narration. _Henry V_ is my favourite of those, and one of my fav works of all time! Nothing lowbrow about film music, I see it just like incidental music to plays of the past. We don't say _Peer Gynt _ by Grieg is not classical, so how can that argument hold for film music? Don't want to derail this thread but film music is part of the classical music tradition now, for many reasons (incl. being done by trained classical composers).


Yes, and ballet music is episodic, not developmental (for the most part) etc.

I do wonder if you have noticed when such a score as LOTR is performed if there is anything else remotely 'substantial' on the program that same evening, i.e. a major 'straight' classical work(s) side by side on the program? I doubt that. The comparison would not stand, the wider general audience / patron for LOTR or the suite from "Legend of Zelda" not exactly big consumers of the 'straight stuff.'

What these programs are are Pops concerts (nothing wrong with that) and calculated to pump up the orchestra's revenue in a way that an evening of orchestral works of non-film music would not. Whether it is 'pandering' or not remains to be discovered by being a fly on the wall in the board room when the music director and others of the organization decide to program such fare.

As for many 'pronouncements' by artists, well, they say what they may truly think at the moment, and they also say things they would never otherwise have said once they are in a position where journalists and readers are a certitude, merely to _épater la bourgeoisie_: as much as here I am babbling in print, I adhere to what Benjamin Britten said when he asserted that artists 'should not talk.'

Debussy once exclaimed of Ravel's 'Oiseaux Tristes' that "All music should take this form!" -- while proceeding to write exactly as he chose. Not exactly 'consistent' on Claude's part, but no one is holding him to it... or he has since been forgiven for being such an idiot....

Since you are one who 'likes to know what they were thinking' I urge you more than strongly to take all 'Artist's statements' with more than a grain of salt. Besides, Boulez said (analogy was of making olive oil) that Shostakovich was like a third pressing of Mahler. As pithy and 'dis' mean-spirited as that is, I believe it partially true - though it is a very Russian olive oil with its own distinct flavor 

ADD P.s. You speak often enough of 're-hash' and how it is for you less than interesting. When I do hear something like the LOTR soundtrack or most John Williams film scores, all I hear is re-hash of old vocabularies and other generic 'film music.' Not only do most film scores seem to be very 're-hash' to me, but if it needs the movie, the ballet, the stage work 'to work' then it is not a self-standing piece of music of much merit compared to, say 'Petruchka' or 'Le Sacre.' Fun night out, maybe, but not truly 'the classical scene' even if it happens in the same venue.

LOTR, Berlin Phil, the movie running is a concert of a film with live score, does not magically 'turn it into classical.'


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

PetrB said:


> Yes, and ballet music is episodic, not developmental (for the most part) etc.
> 
> I do wonder if you have noticed when such a score as LOTR is performed, if there is anything remotely 'substantial' on the program in the same evening, i.e. a major 'straight' classical work(s) side by side on the program? I doubt it. The comparison would not stand, the wider general audience / patron for LOTR or the suite from "Legend of Zelda" not exactly big consumers of the 'straight stuff.'...


It really depends. Of course with the example I gave, LOTR lasts 3 hours, so you can't put other things in with that. Plus its a move + concert. But the recent HD series of the Berlin Phil had Rota's suite from La Strada which I mentioned, along with things by Shostakovich, Respighi & a guy I don't know called Paul LIncke. Side by side, played at the same concert.

Let's face it, whether people like it or not, this is becoming more common. Here too in Australia as I said. Orchestras need money to survive (as you suggest). & the people I see going to much of the 'straight stuff' as you call it are like seniors, or way over that. Time for some fresh changes, and this is happening. But that's an issue for another thread, I think.



> ...
> As for many 'pronouncements' by artists, well, they say what they may truly think at the moment, they say things, once they are in a position where journalists and readers are a certitude, to _épater la bourgeoisie_, and as much as here I am babbling in print, I adhere to what Benjamin Britten said when he asserted that artists 'should not talk.' Debussy once exclaimed of Ravel's 'Oiseaux Tristes' that "All music should take this form!" -- while proceeding to write exactly as he chose...


Yes, as I said, they can and do change their minds, as Boulez has done (& many others with that young 'Messiah complex' by their older years with experience basically learn that that's not how the 'real world' works, for good or bad).



> ...
> Since you are one who 'likes to know what they were thinking' I urge you more than strongly to take all 'Artist's statements' with more than a grain of salt. Besides, Boulez said that (analogy to making olive oil) that Shostakovich was like a third pressing of Mahler. As pithy and 'dis' mean-spirited as that is, I believe it partially true - though it is a very Russian olive oil


Well yeah, but I see it as double standards. & also not very good taste (Shosty got enough trouble from the STalinists, he doesn't need another guy from the comfy West earning millions to give him ****). Anyway, I can go on. Boulez for me is one of those composers/musicians whose work I overall respect, but I don't see music as a religion, so I can do without the proseletysing. But I think its fair to say that he was not the only one doing that 'hard core' dogma. Very damaging. Its largely over but there's residue of it still around now, but not much.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Sid James said:


> So yeah, KenOC's criticism that film scores may not work without the film - well that's how its being solved.


That piece of crud I referenced wouldn't work _with _a movie!

Also WRT movie music, the "big" scores often have a lot of fat in them, just kind of backing up the action without too much musical interest. But the scores can be reduced. John Williams has done this with a couple of his scores, writing shorter suites (think Bizet) that are very effective in concert. A good one to listen to is his suite from Close Encounters of the Third Kind. It'll even make the atonalists happy, if that's possible.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> That piece of crud I referenced wouldn't work _with _a movie!
> 
> Also WRT movie music, the "big" scores often have a lot of fat in them, just kind of backing up the action without too much musical interest. But the scores can be reduced. John Williams has done this with a couple of his scores, writing shorter suites (think Bizet) that are very effective in concert. A good one to listen to is his suite from Close Encounters of the Third Kind. It'll even make the atonalists happy, if that's possible.


I'm beginning to wonder if you really know what ATONAL is and means, or if for you it is merely "that which I cannot hum or my ears are not accustomed to following."

Sure, this is a forum for all, amateur listener to professional, but really, if you keep bandying about a few musical terms you might be called upon to back them up and demonstrate a little bit of actual technical savvy.

Point us, please, to all the parts of "Close encounters of the third kind" concert suite which are atonal (inlcuding a link would help), and those which are not.

Until then, you are coming off like one of those say nothing agitprop politicians, using either the words 'liberal' or 'conservative' as if they implied something nasty, only you supplant those words with "Atonal".

One of those paper curl-out party noise-makers is more interesting than that... and a lot more fun, too.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

PetrB said:


> I'm beginning to wonder if you really know what ATONAL is and means, or if for you it is merely "that which I cannot hum or my ears are not accustomed to following."


The Suite is not available on YouTube, so sorry. If you have an opportunity to listen to the first part of the Suite, please write back. Your opinion will be a bit more valuable then. Meanwhile, as the nice lady said to Mr. Schuman, "In Macon, it's atonal!" :lol:


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

...............


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Wrong composer*



KenOC said:


> The Suite is not available on YouTube, so sorry. If you have an opportunity to listen to the first part of the Suite, please write back. As the nice lady said to Mr. Sessions, "In Macon, it's atonal!" :lol:


Ken, you first heard this story from me back in July, 2011 and it was William Schuman.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Arpeggio, you are quite correct! My memory is more and more faulty... Anyway, I have edited the original post to prevent embarrassment to all concerned, namely myself.

But still, I have to wonder...was the lady wrong, or was Schuman wrong?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> The Suite is not available on YouTube, so sorry. If you have an opportunity to listen to the first part of the Suite, please write back. Your opinion will be a bit more valuable then. Meanwhile, as the nice lady said to Mr. Sessions, "In Macon, it's atonal!" :lol:


In Macon, its also still 1942, it seems.





The first part sounds a bit like a Ligeti 'Atmospheres' imitation (without an apology, I find John Williams' music almost wholly derivative pastiche), without the sense of structure to make it last - that's film music, shorter episodes without development.... without a score, it is really difficult to say if it is formally 'atonal' or just a bit of free chromatic writing - it is also 'for effect' vs. sustained or substantial dialogue.

The fact the majority of the suite is retro-tonal movie schmaltz makes me even more think you have a great personal displeasure when you can't track or find I - IV -V, which is fine as a preference until you start bludgeoning good music which does not adhere to common practice premises simply because you don't care for it or can't follow it, which I suppose was my primary point.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

PetrB said:


> ...which is fine as a preference until you start bludgeoning good music which does not adhere to common practice premises simply because you don't care for it or can't follow it, which I suppose was my primary point.


Did I do that? Please point out my error more specifically, I'm a trifle bewildered. And BTW the Ligeti connection occurred to me as well.

Quite amazing that mentioning John Williams in connection with "atonality" can elicit such a furious response!

"...without the sense of structure to make it last." 'Atmospheres' has structure? Uh...

"...without a score, it is really difficult to say if it is formally 'atonal'..." Well, I suspect that most won't care about a "Certified Atonal" imprimatur in deciding whether they like it or not!


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Arpeggio, you are quite correct! My memory is more and more faulty... Anyway, I have edited the original post to prevent embarrassment to all concerned, namely myself.
> 
> But still, I have to wonder...was the lady wrong, or was Schuman wrong?


Ken, although I am very familiar with the music of Schuman, there are individuals here whose expertise is greater than mine. I know the answer to that question and technically speaking Schuman was correct. That was not the point of the story which I think you still do not get. I will be the first to admit that I do not have the wherewithal to explain this to you. Maybe somebody else here does.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

arpeggio said:


> I will be the first to admit that I do not have the wherewithal to explain this to you. Maybe somebody else here does.


The point (for me) is that we all live in our personal Macons. If a composer can't reach us, is that our fault? Are we 'guilty' of something? Whether Schuman was "technically" correct is not relevant. And BTW, remember that the nice lady liked the music...


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

KenOC said:


> Arpeggio, you are quite correct! My memory is more and more faulty... Anyway, I have edited the original post to prevent embarrassment to all concerned, namely myself.
> 
> But still, I have to wonder...was the lady wrong, or was Schuman wrong?


Ummm.... The lady. She was, as a matter of fact, wrong. Macon doesn't just get to decide that a technical term with a history of use in music theory suddenly means something else. It's understood in music theory and it's literature that generally what is meant by an atonal piece is a piece without a key signature.

I understand that we can all live in our own personal Macons, and it isn't the end of the world if we do, but it's still us saying 2+2=3. It doesn't make us right. Neither does it make us guilty. But what happens to be, in fact, true, is not irrelevant. The term came about for a specific purpose and has had it's use in the development of music and music theory. Our cute little definitions are not as relevant as the words and definitions that have taken a part in the course of history. What's more, everyone's Macon is more or less only relevant to them, so actually it is the Macon's that are quite irrelevant. It's just one or a few people's fancies.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

I'd like to live on my own personal macaroon.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Lukecash12 said:


> Ummm.... The lady. She was, as a matter of fact, wrong.


Was she? If she hears music as "atonal" then, to her it's atonal. The views of Mr. Schuman, you, me, or a thundering horde of well-degreed professors really don't make any difference. In short Macon can, and does, decide!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

clavichorder said:


> Nice integration of the snarky smiley into the end parentheses.


Accidental event - discovery, but thanks. Thought the Italic 'rake' brought a hair of wryness to it....


----------



## StevenOBrien (Jun 27, 2011)

I myself actually do it from time to time, because I REALLY enjoy writing in that style. I also think that studying and emulating the styles of Mozart and Beethoven has greatly improved me as a composer, and I would highly recommend it to anyone who's serious about getting into composition.

For instance:

__
https://soundcloud.com/stevenobrien%2Fsets

(I hope that didn't come across too much as self promotion )


----------



## mud (May 17, 2012)

PetrB said:


> But generally, more of interest to the composer is to use an older form or model to make something 'new' rather than something which could 'pass' as a work from an earlier time.
> 
> Here is Pavel Karmanov's "Twice a double Concerto" - very baroque-ish, including that motor drive and 'upbeat' chirpiness many expect of baroque music, while playing with a doubled ensemble of both contemporary and antique instruments and the differential between contemporary A '440 and a lower baroque 'A.' It is not, however, trying to pass as Telemann, Vivaldi, etc.


I don't hear this as new, but as a hybrid which heavily borrows its style from the rock genre. It certainly does not come across as having a baroque influence (to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee).


----------



## mud (May 17, 2012)

arpeggio said:


> Great list. (Note: The following have just passed away in the past few years: Malcolm Arnold (2006), Dello Joio (2008) and Gorecki (2010).
> 
> I have been working on a similar list myself. I would like to add the following living tonalist:
> 
> ...


This could be that thread. My use of the term retro would include such music (it is more of a guideline than a dateline). List as many as you like (or specific works, if the composers experimented with various styles or forms of music). I would be happy to check them out.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

Actually if you do not like PetrB's post you will be disappointed with any of my suggestions.

For example, Ron Nelson's _Aspen Jubilee_






What can I say. Our community band just performed the work. After rehersing it for several weeks and performing it, I thought it was a pretty decent piece. In one transitional section there is a rather tuneful tone row. Well, I am a bassoon player. We all know that bassoon players have flawed thinking. Blowing into a small reed through an eight foot long instrument cuts off the flow of oxygen to our brains.


----------



## mud (May 17, 2012)

arpeggio said:


> Actually if you do not like PetrB's post you will be disappointed with any of my suggestions.
> 
> For example, Ron Nelson's _Aspen Jubilee_...


It sounds like a cross between Copland and Milhaud. I liked some of PeterB's examples, it was just that I thought that one had crossed over into another genre in essence.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

mud said:


> It sounds like a cross between Copland and Milhaud. I liked some of PeterB's examples, it was just that I thought that one had crossed over into another genre in essence.


Classical is still not a genre o3o as much as you keep saying it, doesn't make it true.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

mud said:


> Emulating musical styles prior to the 20th century, if you know of any...


It would be a shame if Karl Jenkins' "Diamond Music" was overlooked. Beautiful music; the fact that it was used in a DeBeer's Diamond commercial has not spoiled it for me.


----------

