# What makes a piece of music crappy? What are your all time least favorites?



## Lyricus (Dec 11, 2015)

Besides, of course, not have any actual music notes.

This is half in jest, but half in seriousness. What makes a piece "shallow" or "flat" (to use a term recently thrown at modern music), lackluster or boring?

Personal opinions welcome.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

This is :








:lol:


----------



## Lyricus (Dec 11, 2015)

I'm hoping that maybe we can move beyond personal instincts and more into observations, but maybe you're right!


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

The main thing that makes a piece of music "crappy" for me is the use of tired old cliches in the same tired old ways. 

Cliches can actually be used interestingly, however, when employed ironically or for the purpose of deliberatlely making a comment on prior stylistic modes.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Lyricus said:


> Personal opinions welcome.


Well, that's _all_ you're going to get, unless crappiness can now be evaluated objectively.

I long ago gave up on trying to come up with "rules" about what makes me dislike something, because I found that no matter what rule I came up with, there was always something I really liked that broke that rule. There are too many uncontrollable external factors to why we like or dislike things.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith (Mar 25, 2016)

Nereffid said:


> Well, that's _all_ you're going to get, unless crappiness can now be evaluated objectively.


It can! It's called the Bristol stool chart.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Overuse of anything (which I suppose is about the same thing as cliche) can drive me away and make me feel a piece of music is -- "less than stellar" would be my preferred terminology.

I love the ideas and exploration of music in the 20th century, but especially in the latter half, suddenly all composers found the woodblock to be a real edgy modern sound. So almost all 20th century orchestral music from about 1950 onward has to have a clippy-clop percussive sound that just makes me roll my eyes. "Daaaaaaaa- da deee [Clippy clop!] Deeeeee da- dum [Clop tu-tock!]" Oh just knock if off for pity sake!

In a similar way, in the 19th century certain composers liked a kind of rah rah (usually nationalist, anthemic or martial) homophonic orchestration where everything is blasting away mostly on the same note accompanied by cymbal crashes at the beginning of almost every phrase. I love Dvorak's music but he is especially guilty of this. A little of it goes a long way, but unfortunately it's all over music from the romantic era.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

One thing for me: composers deciding that if a certain phrase is dramatic, repeating it verbatim once or twice more makes the passage sound even more dramatic.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Everything about this:





It's repetitive, poorly formed, dull, laughable, bombastic, silly...


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

What bugs me is any kind of music composed for TV or movies that tries to be "authentic", but falls flat on its face. Much of it is thinly-disguised Bach or Handel anyway, so I don't know why they don't use the real thing.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> What bugs me is any kind of music composed for TV or movies that tries to be "authentic", but falls flat on its face. Much of it is thinly-disguised Bach or Handel anyway, so I don't know why they don't use the real thing.


Answer: They're idiots.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> Everything about this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How do you pronounce the composer's name? Does it sound like "BORE" in English?


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

SONNET CLV said:


> How do you pronounce the composer's name? Does it sound like "BORE" in English?


Something like "Bur-huh", with an un-rolled "r", I expect.


----------



## Hildadam Bingor (May 7, 2016)

Andolink said:


> Cliches can actually be used interestingly, however, when employed ironically or for the purpose of deliberatlely making a comment on prior stylistic modes.


^ Trouble is, this is itself a modernist cliché.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Weston said:


> Overuse of anything (which I suppose is about the same thing as cliche) can drive me away and make me feel a piece of music is -- "less than stellar" would be my preferred terminology.
> 
> I love the ideas and exploration of music in the 20th century, but especially in the latter half, suddenly all composers found the woodblock to be a real edgy modern sound. So almost all 20th century orchestral music from about 1950 onward has to have a clippy-clop percussive sound that just makes me roll my eyes. "Daaaaaaaa- da deee [Clippy clop!] Deeeeee da- dum [Clop tu-tock!]" Oh just knock if off for pity sake!
> 
> In a similar way, in the 19th century certain composers liked a kind of rah rah (usually nationalist, anthemic or martial) homophonic orchestration where everything is blasting away mostly on the same note accompanied by cymbal crashes at the beginning of almost every phrase. I love Dvorak's music but he is especially guilty of this. A little of it goes a long way, but unfortunately it's all over music from the romantic era.


Obviously there's Metastaseis and it crops up quite a bit in Messiaen, but are there some other notable woodblock examples I'm missing? Probably lots that would make me slap my forehead in dismay...


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Having listened to a variety of composed art music that are considered as classical to modern contemporary composed music, I would say the critical element is whether it speaks to me or it does not. I can identify the artistic structure more often than not, but more importantly whether it was composed purely as its own sake to entertain the composer ONLY or whether the intention was a little or more broader than that.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Gruppen has clippy-clop wood drums.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Things that make a crappy piece of music? Let's see...I'm sure you all know by now that the only composer I know of that I seriously, actively dislike the music of is Karl Jenkins... Let's take a look at some of the qualities of his music that repel me like nothing else.

The hokey is strong with this one:






What is this? The genre of the Requiem meets cheesy action movie score?






Ya we get it, you heard the Waltz from Masquerade Suite and you wanted to make a version with "eerie" voices...






Ya know, come to think of it, in all seriousness, I think that's the thing that annoys me the most about Jenkin's music. Besides all the ridiculously comical attempts at drama or inspirational sounding tripe, it's the fact that all the music I've heard by him sounds like some other composer, but not nearly as deep or committed. It's like he only took the most superficial elements of all his inspirations and combined them together instead of digging around and really discovering what makes those composer's music great. Like, Palladio, an obvious nod to Vivaldi with none of the brilliance, just a hollow, superficial imitation.

After screening those three examples, I think I need to ask my doctor for an insulin shot, Blech.


----------



## Dim7 (Apr 24, 2009)

I can't say that I have often the feeling that a piece of classical music sounds even semi-objectively "crappy" or "poorly done". However outside of classical, some "neoclassical" "shred" meta like this on the other hand... 




"Uh, so I'm going to make this piece to show of my shred skillz, but guess I have to come up with a melody as well... Whatever, I'll just alternate between two notes and add much vibrato, so emotional, such feelz...." Then comes this mechanical, textbook type "neoclassical" scale pattern. After a while, a random tempo/key change out of nowhere with pointless arpeggios played up and down. More and more uninspired unrelated stuff arbitrarily strung together (mostly just ridiculously fast played scales and arpeggios) without anything to connect them naturally to each other. Literally sounds like my laziest guitar pro (a guitar tabulature program) experiments put one after another, the ones I had made to test what a scale/arpeggio/mode/whatever sounds like.

The main point of this is obviously to show off the technical skills of the performer, but if you're going to do just that and nothing more, I'd just upload a video to youtube with title "Me shredding around".


----------



## Rhombic (Oct 28, 2013)

No development, the motifs leading nowhere, no perspective of the music going anywhere beyond the present sounds. While most music does not have this, some contemporary composers appear to enjoy placing 18 minutes of a non-evolving, almost static sound mass instead of an engaging musical structure.


----------



## sloth (Jul 12, 2013)

What about Allevi and Einaudi? They're rather popular here in Italy...











The most disturbing thing is the high self-esteem these two guys show every time the are interviewed
(if I remember well once Allevi said that if Mozart had lived in XXI century he would probably have written pieces like the ones he writes... )

pretentious useless music at best.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Cliches will reduce a piece of music to pastiche. If it acknowledges that then it is not crappy but if the music seems to take its cliches seriously then it is (very) crappy. And music that uses noisy and overtly emotional climaxes without the composer putting the work in to make the climax a genuine one (one that seems to resolve a tension or present a revelation) .. well, if it is just gratuitous climaxes for no real purpose then the music is crappy. I also have something about pretty or beautiful music but can't quite phrase what it has to do to avoid crappiness. And ideas?


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

Philip Glass's many imitators, especially those composing sound tracks for films


----------



## geralmar (Feb 15, 2013)

violadude said:


> Things that make a crappy piece of music? Let's see...I'm sure you all know by now that the only composer I know of that I seriously, actively dislike the music of is Karl Jenkins... Let's take a look at some of the qualities of his music that repel me like nothing else.
> 
> The hokey is strong with this one:
> 
> ...


The reviewer for The Spectator agrees with you:

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/karl-jenkins-get-away-crappy-music/


----------



## acitak 7 (Jun 26, 2016)

*crappy?*

I suppose Hooked On Classics may be a good call,but I am partial to them.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

What makes a piece of music crappy is my ear. So it depends which set of ears I'm wearing. I have heavy metal ears, professional ears, disco-frenzy-style and long ears. Better not mix them up.


----------



## acitak 7 (Jun 26, 2016)

your right beauty or otherwise is in the ear of the beholder


----------



## ilysse (Jul 10, 2016)

I think it's all subjective and one could argue that there is no such thing as crappy music. Certainly some of the stuff my kids listen I consider crappy and vice versa. Also, I think tastes have a tendency to change and an appreciation can be acquired. Personally I do not have an ear for the likes of Xenakis. This doesn't mean I discredit the music or style. Certainly, I can understand why some would like this and I can appreciate the complexity but to my own ears it's too chaotic. I need less chaos in my life. I may go back at a future date and listen again or maybe someone with an appreciation for such can lead me...I never expected to enjoy some the music my kids listen to but I'll find myself turning up the volume and singing along if I'm in the mood.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

There are too many kinds of crap for this question to be answered quickly. There's clicheed crap, incompetent crap, frivolous crap, pretentious crap, sentimental crap, boring crap, degenerate crap, and the very latest really important crap. Ninety-seven percent of everything is crap. Or is it ninety-eight now.


----------



## geralmar (Feb 15, 2013)

In North America we have a freshwater fish called the "crappie." Good eating, I understand. So I have to do a quick mental adjustment when someone says "crappie" anything.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

acitak 7 said:


> Your right beauty or otherwise is in the ear of the beholder


Just like .......taste.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

violadude said:


> Things that make a crappy piece of music? Let's see...I'm sure you all know by now that the only composer I know of that I seriously, actively dislike the music of is Karl Jenkins... Let's take a look at some of the qualities of his music that repel me like nothing else.
> 
> The hokey is strong with this one:
> 
> ...


Thank you for introducing me to a compiler...I mean, a composer who had thus far escaped my contempt... I mean, my notice. The only musical Jenkins I was familiar with was Florence Foster Jenkins:






Her renovation of Mozart is much more moving and thought-provoking than his renovations of everyone else. When I'm in a Jenkins mood, it'll be Flo all the way.


----------



## techniquest (Aug 3, 2012)

Aww Weston - you're being far too harsh on the humble wood-block when the real culprit of 20th century clipy-clop sound is the evil temple block!
Violadude - yes! Karl Jenkins is probably the worlds' leading exponent of utter pap.


----------



## acitak 7 (Jun 26, 2016)

You are correct, but remember of the 98% that is crap, millions of people think is great.One mans Neil Diamond is another mans Ray Stevens. So to speak.(although I like both artists).


----------



## acitak 7 (Jun 26, 2016)

*Taste*

Very true indeed.


----------



## MJongo (Aug 6, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> When I'm in a Jenkins mood, it'll be Flo all the way.


I prefer John Jenkins:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MJongo said:


> I prefer John Jenkins:


Ah yes. Just in the nick of time. Florence was wearing me down.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

What makes a piece of music crappy? Short answer : bad writing, lousy acoustics, poor musicianship, inebriated conductor, drunk engineer, sneezing/coughing audience, flat beer, stale chips, and being served with a subpoena by one’s wife or girlfriend before the concert. It would take a Furtwängler to overcome that.


----------



## laurie (Jan 12, 2017)

Larkenfield said:


> What makes piece of music crappy? Short answer : bad writing, lousy acoustics, poor musicianship, inebriated conductor, drunk engineer, sneezing/coughing audience, flat beer, stale chips, and* being served with a subpoena by one's wife or girlfriend **before the concert.* It would take a Furtwängler to overcome that.


! Is this a true story?


----------



## SCSL (Apr 7, 2018)

Simply one opinion: “Crappy”, to me, is trying so hard to be edgy and avant-garde (and the vigorous defense thereof) that it no longer sounds like what one might traditionally describe as Music.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

One listener's crap is another listener's steak .


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

superhorn said:


> One listener's crap is another listener's steak .


I hope that I am never served that steak.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

SCSL said:


> Simply one opinion: "Crappy", to me, is trying so hard to be edgy and avant-garde (and the vigorous defense thereof) that it no longer sounds like what one might traditionally describe as Music.


I think it is a bad habit to ascribe a motive for why someone created something you don't like. Better to tell us what it is in the music (rather than your imagination) that you dislike.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

violadude said:


> Things that make a crappy piece of music? Let's see...I'm sure you all know by now that the only composer I know of that I seriously, actively dislike the music of is Karl Jenkins... Let's take a look at some of the qualities of his music that repel me like nothing else.
> 
> The hokey is strong with this one:
> 
> ...


I agree with you regarding the Dies Irae and Song Of The Spirit but I think the first piece is excellent - I don't see it as hokey at all. I would rather have cited Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff as guilty of such and even my favourite composer Sibelius in his early symphonies...like the finale of his second.

Just saying...


----------



## David Phillips (Jun 26, 2017)

Music which insults the intelligence. When I listen to Andrew Lloyd-Webber and hear well-known bits of Puccini and Faure in his 'original' musicals, I think how does he have the nerve to bilk the public like this?


----------



## Biffo (Mar 7, 2016)

Mahlerian said:


> Everything about this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Apologies for reviving bad memories but I have only just seen this revived thread.

Several years ago the Boehe Odysseus was enthusiastically recommended in another forum. I was intrigued and so bought Vol 1 (as a fairly inexpensive download). Reporting back that I found the work dull I was told by the enthusiast that Vol 2 was really the one to have. Judging by Mahlerian's comment I was right not to bother with it.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

"Crappy music" - has anyone done the Das Lied von der Merde joke yet?

More seriously, although I probably wouldn't apply that adjective to music, I would like to know why some music completely fails to engage me. Even in genres of music that I don't choose to listen to (pre-Baroque, 2nd Viennese...) I think I can hear a difference in quality between the real thing and the crap. And that second category seems to be defined in terms such as monotonous, predictable, same old same old, unimaginative. 

Cyril Scott is a good example. I will listen to almost any solo piano music, but after very few minutes of Scott's something clicks in my brain and says "No, that's enough, this is going nowhere". Others talk about him as 'The English Debussy', but D's music is seldom predictable and often takes unanticipated turns of harmony, tempo or thematic material. Scott's doesn't. 

I'm not sure I agree with the earlier comment about Late Romantics repeating the same material with more and more of the orchestra involved. Just yesterday I was listening to Borodin's In the Steppes of Central Asia, and realised just how little thematic material it has: basically two 'tunes' that are batted around then intertwined then unpeeled again. It should be crap, but it's (to my tastes, anyway) one of the finest tone-poems ever written. 

I'll stop now and await the incoming deluge of Scott-supporting, Borodin-dissing replies!


----------



## geralmar (Feb 15, 2013)

For me, any work that includes a slide whistle.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

If it has a harp and sounds French, that's a strike against it. If it has a wordless women's chorus....yer out!


----------



## waldvogel (Jul 10, 2011)

KenOC said:


> If it has a harp and sounds French, that's a strike against it. If it has a wordless women's chorus....yer out!


Hmmm... tomorrow I'll be attending a concert which will include Debussy's Nocturnes. I guess I won't see you there!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I'll be there, but leave before the last bit. Works for Holst too!


----------



## waldvogel (Jul 10, 2011)

I haven’t the courage to actually look for it, but if Stockhausen wrote a piece for piccolo, xylophone, and taped concrete sounds, that would be the mount Everest of manure, the Tokyo sewage lagoons, the unregulated waste disposal system of a million hog farms.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

Biffo said:


> Apologies for reviving bad memories but I have only just seen this revived thread.
> 
> Several years ago the Boehe Odysseus was enthusiastically recommended in another forum. I was intrigued and so bought Vol 1 (as a fairly inexpensive download). Reporting back that I found the work dull I was told by the enthusiast that Vol 2 was really the one to have. Judging by Mahlerian's comment I was right not to bother with it.


I thoroughly disagree. Dull is the last word that would come to my mind.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

waldvogel said:


> I haven't the courage to actually look for it, but if Stockhausen wrote a piece for piccolo, xylophone, and taped concrete sounds, that would be the mount Everest of manure, the Tokyo sewage lagoons, the unregulated waste disposal system of a million hog farms.


Sheesh, Stockhausen kick your dog or something? :lol:


----------



## St Matthew (Aug 26, 2017)

waldvogel said:


> I haven't the courage to actually look for it, but if Stockhausen wrote a piece for piccolo, xylophone, and taped concrete sounds, that would be the mount Everest of manure, the Tokyo sewage lagoons, the unregulated waste disposal system of a million hog farms.


Why are you so vicious towards Stockhausen? 
He was a man of God and he gave his life to his art, he created masterpieces that the world will probably never be able to achieve again. Like Messiaen, Stravinsky and Beethoven before them - we stand in a giant shadow of their music, a void that may never be able to be filled again in art.


----------



## St Matthew (Aug 26, 2017)

Blancrocher said:


> I hope that I am never served that steak.


Green Eggs And Ham


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

St Matthew said:


> Why are you so vicious towards Stockhausen?
> He was a man of God and he gave his life to his art, he created masterpieces that the world will probably never be able to achieve again. Like Messiaen, Stravinsky and Beethoven before them - we stand in a giant shadow of their music, a void that may never be able to be filled again in art.


I've heard Gruppen but I'm still not convinced it's anything more than organised chaos...but certainly interesting.

One would a expect a masterpiece to garner some degree of popularity don't you think?


----------



## St Matthew (Aug 26, 2017)

janxharris said:


> I've heard Gruppen but I'm still not convinced it's anything more than organised chaos...but certainly interesting.
> 
> One would a expect a masterpiece to garner some degree of popularity don't you think?


The door is that way sir 

Are you trying to say Gruppen isn't a popular (modern) work? :lol:

I've spent a long time with _Gruppen_, it is in every sense of the possible definitions of the word: a Masterpiece. 
I am not here to convince you of anything but I can't see your line of thought, there is nothing chaotic or random about it, period. If you want to be like one of those romantic chaps who take a Beethoven (or Brahms or whatever) score, listen to the piece on their record player and read along with the score, in front of a nice warm fire - then do it!

Get familiar with the piece if you are so certain that it is quote/unquote "organised chaos".

But it takes one to know one. You can go around calling it any demeaning thing you like but you'll always be in the same situation of nativity with any works of a similar complex nature. I'm surprised so many people worship Bach in contrary, for the same reason you speak. 
Your problem may be one of aesthetic familiarity for all I know but your judgement is entirely unreasonable (with reservations if you can tell me something really specific to show me you know the work  )


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

St Matthew said:


> Are you trying to say Gruppen isn't a popular (modern) work? :lol:


Yes, I am saying it isn't popular. Am I wrong?



> I've spent a long time with _Gruppen_, it is in every sense of the possible definitions of the word: a Masterpiece.
> I am not here to convince you of anything but I can't see your line of thought, there is nothing chaotic or random about it, period.


I said 'organised chaos'. I didn't say random.
I'm not convinced that changing a vast number of the pitches and rhythms used would make much difference to the overall effect.



> If you want to be like one of those romantic chaps who take a Beethoven (or Brahms or whatever) score, listen to the piece on their record player and read along with the score, in front of a nice warm fire - then do it!
> 
> Get familiar with the piece if you are so certain that it is quote/unquote "organised chaos".


I pretty familiar with the first half of the piece.



> But it takes one to know one. You can go around calling it any demeaning thing you like but you'll always be in the same situation of nativity with any works of a similar complex nature. I'm surprised so many people worship Bach in contrary, for the same reason you speak.
> Your problem may be one of aesthetic familiarity for all I know but your judgement is entirely unreasonable (with reservations if you can tell me something really specific to show me you know the work  )


Nativity?
People worship Bach in contrary???

All I am saying is that without some degree of popularity then it's hard to substantiate the masterpiece label.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

St Matthew said:


> The door is that way sir
> 
> Are you trying to say Gruppen isn't a popular (modern) work? :lol:
> 
> ...


I certainly think I can hear some patterns at the beginning of the piece. It remains very intriguing.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Boredom, formula, lack of inspiration. One of the pieces of music I always heard was terrific which I found among the most formulaic compositions I know is Bartok's *Concerto for Orchestra*. I never hear any inspiration, just note spinning based on sonata format in a formula that everything can be heard. It is among the most overrated pieces of music I know.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

larold said:


> Boredom, formula, lack of inspiration. One of the pieces of music I always heard was terrific which I found among the most formulaic compositions I know is Bartok's *Concerto for Orchestra*. I never hear any inspiration, just note spinning based on sonata format in a formula that everything can be heard. It is among the most overrated pieces of music I know.


Wait, what? Concerto for orchestra crappy music? Formulaic? You must be kidding.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

St Matthew said:


> Why are you so vicious towards Stockhausen?
> He was a man of God and he gave his life to his art, he created masterpieces that the world will probably never be able to achieve again. Like Messiaen, Stravinsky and Beethoven before them - we stand in a giant shadow of their music, a void that may never be able to be filled again in art.


This comment made me crack up laughing so hard, thanks for the laugh! :lol:


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

ArsMusica said:


> This comment made me crack up laughing so hard, thanks for the laugh! :lol:


I can hear the Helicopters warming up now


----------



## St Matthew (Aug 26, 2017)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> I can hear the Helicopters warming up now


He's Trapped inside the helicopter and can't get out, Laughter is all he darn got left


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I think Beecham had the final word on Stockhausen.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Nothing that a good shoeshine couldn't fix


----------



## Beet131 (Mar 24, 2018)

As good as Bruch's Violin Concerto is, his symphonies don't cut it. If Brahms had been invited over to dinner at Max's house, he would have found those symphonies and said, "Max, you really don't need these. Why don't you start over. Let me see, we could keep the fire going a little longer if we just put these on with one more log. Shall we drink on it? Here's to better music ahead!"


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Beet131 said:


> As good as Bruch's Violin Concerto is, his symphonies don't cut it. If Brahms had been invited over to dinner at Max's house, he would have found those symphonies and said, "Max, you really don't need these. Why don't you start over. Let me see, we could keep the fire going a little longer if we just put these on with one more log. Shall we drink on it? Here's to better music ahead!"


His symphonies are indeed not outstanding, but apart from his most famous violin concerto, his second and third violin concerto, the double concerto, the Scottish fantasy, the octet, Kol Nidrei and the string quartets are excellent stuff.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Lyricus said:


> Besides, of course, not have any actual music notes.
> 
> This is half in jest, but half in seriousness. What makes a piece "shallow" or "flat" (to use a term recently thrown at modern music), lackluster or boring?
> 
> Personal opinions welcome.


Sometimes "shallow" elements, such as predictable harmonic progressions, can be offset by exemplary playing. This is true of Vivaldi by Giuliano Carmignola.

If the bad elements outweigh the good, it's a fail.

If an element of the music is deemed as "shallow" or a fail, then it might be due to subjective factors. Perhaps the listener is not interested or impressed by those particular elements, while another listener might see it as genius. This could exclude whole blanket aspects of music, such as harmonic, aural, expressive, melodic, textural, so it is certainly not an accurate assessment of the actual music, since it has many "blind spots."


----------



## Beet131 (Mar 24, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> His symphonies are indeed not outstanding, but apart from his most famous violin concerto, his second and third violin concerto, the double concerto, the Scottish fantasy, the octet, Kol Nidrei and the string quartets are excellent stuff.


Yes, you are so right. There is much to appreciate of Max Bruch.


----------

