# Is the new music the best music?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Some, secretly, may doubt it. This is nothing new. Here's a poem by Po Chü-i from about 1,200 years ago, translated by Arthur Waley and set for voice and guitar in Britten's "Songs from the Chinese":

*The Old Lute*

Of cord and cassia-wood is the lute compounded;
Within it lie ancient melodies,
Ancient melodies weak and savorless,
Not appealing to present men's taste.
Light and color are faded from the jade stops;
Dust has covered the rose-red strings.
Decay and ruin came to it long ago,
But the sound that is left is still cold and clear.
I do not refuse to play it, if you want me to;
But even if I play people will not listen.
How did it come to be neglected so?
Because of the Ch'iang flute and the zithern of Ch'in!


----------



## Arsakes (Feb 20, 2012)

Based on the comments I've read on this forums, Yes.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

New music is the only music worth listening to. Good music stays new forever.


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

The idea that new music was superior to old lasted for quite a long time. 1830 or so. Some isolated hold outs throughout the century. By 1870, though, the new idea that old music is superior to new was pretty well set.

Some isolated exceptions to that have popped up from time to time, but no overwhelming trend back to the traditional idea about music....

(That's one of my favorite Four Tops songs, by the way.:tiphat


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

some guy said:


> The idea that new music was superior to old lasted for quite a long time. 1830 or so. Some isolated hold outs throughout the century. By 1870, though, the new idea that old music is superior to new was pretty well set.


it doesn't seems to me that one way of thinking is better than the other.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I would say that new music is not superior to old nor old music superior to new. Obviously some people vastly prefer one to the other. There are 3 issues that make the question more complex.

1) There is vastly more old music. 
The "best" of the 400 year period 1550-1950, for example, is likely to include much more good music than the "best" of the past 60 years. When one listens to music, in general one hears "the very best of" past music rather than a sampling of decent music. There is probably more reason to record "average" recent music than "average" old music. 

2) There are more good composers today than ever before.
I don't know any way of demonstrating that today's composers are better, in general, than during any earlier period, but I assume there are more people trained in composition than ever before. There are many more people living today, and today's living standards are much higher allowing more people to gain access to good training. Furthermore, it is much easier to hear a wide range of music than ever before. Unless for some reason, much of the best musical talent does not go into music composition, there ought to be more good (and great) composers. Of course, some may argue these composers are often entering pop, film, or other genres (if that matters).

3) Musical progress produces better music. (I personally don't believe this)
Music has changed throughout its history. Although the complexity has waxed and waned over time, I think many would argue that modern music is often more complex than earlier music. To the extent that more complexity gives rise to the possibility of better music, one could argue that modern music can be better. If one has a general view that progress produces better things (as many mistakenly do with evolution), perhaps modern music is better. As I indicated, I do not believe music has progressed to better music, but the argument is not obviously false.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

mmsbls said:


> I don't know any way of demonstrating that today's composers are better, in general, than during any earlier period, but I assume there are more people trained in composition than ever before.


Hard to say indeed! Greatness is not an attribute of any composer or music. It is a reflection of how strongly and deeply music resonates in the mind and soul of the listener. Would Beethoven's music be "great" if it didn't have an audience, then or since, that was ready for his conception of music? I'm sure that members of this forum, if that were the case, would answer "no."

For all we know, there are composers writing now, or in the past, more talented than Bach or Mozart. But without the listener side of the equation, their music isn't and maybe never will be "great."


----------



## Guest (Oct 30, 2012)

Well, since I don't want to run the risk of norman's tiresome reinterpretation of what I said to become lodged in people's minds as what I did say, I'll go on record here as saying that I never said that either of those is superior or inferior to the other. Simply that they have a history.

And the history of the idea that new is better than old (in music) was the traditional idea and it lasted until about 1830.

The new idea, that old music is better than new, was not completed entrenched until around 1870, but since then, it's been pretty well set.

I too think that both views are too limiting.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Lovely poem, from a culture who most value an arch conservatism of keeping all as it is, where both change and progress are looked at most suspiciously. So of course, the sentiment....

But that old music spoken of in the poem was new once, and as another here said, if it remains pertinent, it is in a way 'still new.'

Don't overreact to contemporary hype in general, including hype in and about the arts, and you'll find plenty of great value from the more recent past and your own time now.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

PetrB said:


> Lovely poem, from a culture who most value an arch conservatism of keeping all as it is...


A famous British naval toast from Napoleonic times: "Let nothing new arise!"


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

in dying genres like classical music the old is best. but than there is no new.

with thriving genres the new is best.


----------

