# The Most Epic Work Ever Composed



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Which are the most epic works ever composed? Works that also truly great.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

The most "epic" would probably be Wagner's Ring cycle.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Mahler: Symphony no.8 
Verdi: Requiem


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I picked The Ring Cycle, Mahler's Symphonies (several of them), and "None of the Above" for the Leningrad Symphony.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

If you expect me to hear Der Ring des Nibelungen with a much astonishment and awe for epicness as various symphony cycles as Mahler, Bruckner, Sibelius, you are mistaken.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

The most obvious one has been missed off the list. Bach's St Matthew Passion, maybe the greatest single musical work ever written by anybody. I was interested to read the Wagnerian Georg Solti's comment: 'It is among the greatest masterpieces ever written. The musical descriptions of Christ surpass any of Wagner's musical descriptions; maximum dramatic effects are achieved with the simplest orchestration.'


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> Which are the most epic works ever composed? Works that also truly great.


Without a doubt the most epic truly great work ever composed is Stockhausen's Licht cycle of seven operas.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Mandryka said:


> Without a doubt the most epic truly great work ever composed is Stockhausen's Licht cycle of seven operas.


This?


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

For me it is Britten's War Requiem, a powerful and emotionally overwhelming warning for us all.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

janxharris said:


> This?


This

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licht


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> This
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licht


29 hours of Stockhausen. Think I'll pass on that!


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

"An epic is a long poem or _other work of art_ celebrating heroic feats. Epic can be used as an adjective to describe something _historically important, lasting and complex_."

Going by that definition: Wagner's Ring.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Handelian said:


> 29 hours of Stockhausen. Think I'll pass on that!


Wimp!

Em.,c ex,m dc m,


----------



## Skakner (Oct 8, 2020)

*Wagner - Der Ring des Nibelungen*.

Nothing more epic than this!


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> Wimp!
> 
> Em.,c ex,m dc m,


Just sane and want to remain that way!


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

It's a long work, but so are complete symphony cycles, and they're labeled chapter 1-10.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Wagner's *Ring cycle *is more epic than anything ever composed. It is built around Germanic legends and consistently has hair raising music. It is an endurance test to sit through the whole thing but, until 2020, people from around the world went to Bayreuth to do just that. I took German with a couple people learning it to go there for the Wagnerfest.

If you don't know it and want to, start with Siegfried which is probably the best of the four operas and the most accessible to a newcomer.

The only compositions I can think of that compare are Bach's *St. Matthew Passion* or possibly Haydn's *Creation* since they deal with Christ's crucifixion and resurrection and the creation of the world, respectively. But they are both over in a couple hours.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

From the options, Bach's _Mass in B minor_, Beethoven's _Choral symphony_ and Wagner's _Ring_. I think that no works I know by any other composer reach the heights of these legendary masterpieces.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

ArtMusic said:


> Which are the most epic works ever composed? Works that also truly great.


I would suggest that a lot here depends upon one's definition of "epic", and on the definition of "truly great", both of which will prove likely impossible to get unanimous agreement on. Especially the latter.

Literarily speaking, "epic" generally relates to a type of "rhythm" that proposes (1) the circular nature of life (a return to the beginning), (2) man's closeness to the cycles of the Earth, (3) distinctive roles for men and women (neither superior to the other, but different) in their societal and work roles, and in their identification with bodily fluids (blood shedding for men, tears/weeping for women), (4) a celebration of "the mother," whether it be a human mother or Mother Earth, (5) repetition, (6) a consideration of the power of certain numbers: 3, 7, 12, 40 ..., and other concepts. One sees these "themes" evident in works such as the ancient Sumerian _Epic of Gilgamesh_, Homer's _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_, Virgil's _Aeneid_, the Old English _Beowulf_ poem, and in more recent times J.M. Synge's _Riders to the Sea_, Garcia Lorca's _Blood Wedding_, and Hemingway's _The Old Man and the Sea_. (If you haven't read the opening lines of the Hemingway novelette recently, take another look at it, and reflect upon each of the numbers mentioned, all of which tie into the epic numbers and is one way Hemingway is telling us to read the story as an epic, not as a tragedy, comedy, satire, or some other form.)

A second meaning of "epic" is, of course, "largeness" or "profundity".

To write a large, overblown and bombastic musical work might qualify as creation of an "epic", but it makes no guarantee about quality or lastingness. There is a great deal of epic garbage out there.

To create a piece of music adhering somewhat to literary epic demands might entail concepts such as utilization of 7 or 12 movements, each of which utilizes repetitive passage writing, distinctive "male" and "female" suggestive themes, and a circular nature that ends where it began.

An "epic" work that is simply large may not hit upon the definitions of "epic" as a rhythm, and thus may not necessarily be considered an "epic" work but merely a "long" or "large" work.

As for what is "truly great"? It seems there are plenty of posts on this Forum contesting any such designation being validly assigned outside of some sort of "general consensus", which it must likely always remain.

Thus, I refrain from voting. (Too, the selection seems rather arbitrary and meaningless at best. Alas ....!)


----------



## Classical Playlists (Jan 26, 2020)

What about Scriabin's 'Mysterium'?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Classical Playlists said:


> What about Scriabin's 'Mysterium'?


The best that could be said about "Mysterium" is that it was an epic in the making that was never made.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

An option I also consider valid: Havergal Brian's Gothic Symphony. But in terms of true epicness, I'll go with Wagner's The Ring as well.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> The best that could be said about "Mysterium" is that it was an epic in the making that was never made.


This aspect is very interesting, and unique:



> Scriabin intended the performance to be in the foothills of the Himalayas in India, a week-long event that would be followed by the end of the world and the replacement of the human race with "nobler beings".


Stockhausen can't hold a candle to Scriabin.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

consuono said:


> The most "epic" would probably be Wagner's Ring cycle.


First work that came to my mind as well.

And then it occurred to me that "Most" epic and "favorite" epic might likely be different works. What about "best" epic.

*Most Epic*: John Cage's composition for organ ORGAN2/ASLSP - As SLow aS Possible
*Best Epic*: Wagner: Der Ring des Nibelungen
*Favorite Classical Epic*: Holst: The Planets
*2nd Favorite Classical Epic*: Mussorgsky: Pictures at an Exhibition (orchestral)
*Favorite Popular Music Epic*: Yes: Tales from Topographic Oceans


----------



## mparta (Sep 29, 2020)

Schubert string quintet


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Nevermind.

sdkjf kfddkf


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

pianozach said:


> First work that came to my mind as well.
> 
> And then it occurred to me that "Most" epic and "favorite" epic might likely be different works. What about "best" epic.
> 
> Most Epic: John Cage's composition for organ ORGAN2/ASLSP - As SLow aS Possible


Except that in all likelihood, Cage would frown on the Halberstadt project that will take 639 years. Although he stipulated "as slow as possible" he always intended for his works to be performed during a concert, by one performer, or group.



> Sadly, however, the Halberstadt project means quite a bit, and the cultural work it performs has the most alarming consequences with respect to Cage's own practice. For one thing, he almost always viewed his music as intended for performance in real time by human beings. When in 1981 Paul Zukofsky told him that the latest of his Freeman Etudes was unplayable, Cage abandoned work on them until the English violinist Irvine Arditti played the existing etudes with such virtuosity that he was inspired to finish the series.
> 
> And while it is possible to imagine that a group of performers could be assembled to perform Organ 2 for 639 years, it is more difficult to imagine Cage sanctioning anyone to spend that much time on a work from his past: he was always thinking of the present and the future, and it seemed clear that he thought excessive attention devoted to the past solved no real social problems.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

pianozach said:


> Most Epic: John Cage's composition for organ ORGAN2/ASLSP - As SLow aS Possible


Because it's long? There are longer -- John Finer's Longplayer lasts 1000 years. 
https://longplayer.org/



SanAntone said:


> he always intended for his works to be performed during a concert, by one performer, or group.


That seems a shame, and a limitation in his thinking. I wonder what he would have said about Rzewsky's The Road or Mandfred Werder's Stuck (with an umlaut- stueck)


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Ethereality said:


> If you expect me to hear Der Ring des Nibelungen with a much astonishment and awe for epicness as various symphony cycles as Mahler, Bruckner, Sibelius, you are mistaken.


I am not mistaken because I don't really care for what you listen to.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

SONNET CLV said:


> I would suggest that a lot here depends upon one's definition of "epic", and on the definition of "truly great", both of which will prove likely impossible to get unanimous agreement on. Especially the latter.
> 
> Literarily speaking, "epic" generally relates to a type of "rhythm" that proposes (1) the circular nature of life (a return to the beginning), (2) man's closeness to the cycles of the Earth, (3) distinctive roles for men and women (neither superior to the other, but different) in their societal and work roles, and in their identification with bodily fluids (blood shedding for men, tears/weeping for women), (4) a celebration of "the mother," whether it be a human mother or Mother Earth, (5) repetition, (6) a consideration of the power of certain numbers: 3, 7, 12, 40 ..., and other concepts. One sees these "themes" evident in works such as the ancient Sumerian _Epic of Gilgamesh_, Homer's _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_, Virgil's _Aeneid_, the Old English _Beowulf_ poem, and in more recent times J.M. Synge's _Riders to the Sea_, Garcia Lorca's _Blood Wedding_, and Hemingway's _The Old Man and the Sea_. (If you haven't read the opening lines of the Hemingway novelette recently, take another look at it, and reflect upon each of the numbers mentioned, all of which tie into the epic numbers and is one way Hemingway is telling us to read the story as an epic, not as a tragedy, comedy, satire, or some other form.)
> 
> ...


I enjoyed reading your post. Thank you.

Do any of the works listed in the poll appeal to you?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> ...and it seemed clear that he thought excessive attention devoted to the past solved no real social problems.


Who says music is supposed to solve social problems?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

consuono said:


> Who says music is supposed to solve social problems?


John Cage was interested in that potential aspect of art. Does that bother you?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

SanAntone said:


> John Cage was interested in that potential aspect of art. Does that bother you?


John Cage should've run for office then. Yeah, the art-politics mix does bother me.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

consuono said:


> John Cage should've run for office then. Yeah, the art-politics mix does bother me.


Cage was apolitical and resisted being involved in political messaging. He was interested in social change of a more cultural nature, opening minds to thinking differently about music/art, emphasizing the removal of ego from the creative process. Thoreau was one name he listed as important figure to his development and he embraced the idea of that "the best government is the least government." He referred to himself as an anarchist, but did not join any group, nor did he do anything overt in this regard. Buckminster Fuller and Marshall McLuhan were two like-minded men with whom he shared ideas about social change, harnessing resources and working to eliminate poverty.

However, his ideas about how to incorporate music to further these goals was rather amorphous.


----------



## staxomega (Oct 17, 2011)

I'm not saying this *is* the most epic work ever composed but for me one of them is Faure's Requiem. I chose to end 2020 with that piece!

edit: for a piano piece, since I do oh so love the piano, listening to Feldman's For Bunita Marcus in the dark at a good clip is pretty epic.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

SanAntone said:


> ...He referred to himself as an anarchist ...


Well then I can guess his politics.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> I don't really care for what you listen to.






What a stylish comment.. I've come across many of your old posts in this forum; they're great. Come to the forum more often. Your avatar's adorable, btw.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

hammeredklavier said:


> What a stylish comment.. I've come across many of your old posts in this forum; they're great. Come to the forum more often. Your avatar's adorable, btw.


Thank you.  That's very nice of you.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> John Cage was interested in that potential aspect of art. Does that bother you?


The vast majority of artists/composers educated in that same period as Cage did will display that philosophy. It's all the middle-aged artists today that will say art, music, film etc. must reflect today's social-political-economical agendas. Most people do care for that but not in the arts and music. It usually distracts and doesn't achieve anything. None of Cage's music have any long lasting value and barley anyone knows him, compared with John Williams.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

consuono said:


> Well then I can guess his politics.


Right wing I suppose, anarchy is an Alt Right thing I think.

I think the idea that music and politics overlap is interesting at the performer level, when people come together to make music, that encounter embraces things which are found in society writ large, they have to find a way for each to flourish in the whole.


----------



## Prodromides (Mar 18, 2012)

I'm listing what I think instead:

Oratorio: Bohuslav Martinů's *The Epic of Gilgamesh*
Ballet: *Baldr* by Jón Leifs
Opera: Luigi Dallapiccola's *Ulisse*
Symphonies: Reinhold Gliere's *Ilya Muromets*, *Saga Symphony* by Jón Leifs + Meyer Kupferman's *Symphonic Odyssey*

... and since I love and collect Italian soundtracks from the 1960s, I'll toss in Carlo Savina's score for the '63 peplum *Ursus nella terra di fuoco*.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

hammeredklavier said:


> What a stylish comment.. I've come across many of your old posts in this forum; they're great. Come to the forum more often. Your avatar's adorable, btw.


Cute comment. Likes and swipe right.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I would add Beethoven's Missa Solemnis, but of course the poll only lets you have so many selections.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

What about Berlioz's _Grande Messe des Morts_? What does a guy gotta do to get on an epic list? Have 18 timpani?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> Right wing I suppose, anarchy is an Alt Right thing I think.
> 
> .


Not to get into a political debate, but is there an "alt left"? I thought the alt right are fascists, which would be the opposite of anarchism.

Anyway I would rank Bach's St Matthew Passion over everything else mentioned *but* to my mind and sensibilities it isn't "epic".


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> None of Cage's music have any long lasting value and barley anyone knows him, compared with John Williams.


Do you have any reliable stats. to back up your claim?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

ArtMusic said:


> The vast majority of artists/composers educated in that same period as Cage did will display that philosophy. It's all the middle-aged artists today that will say art, music, film etc. must reflect today's social-political-economical agendas. Most people do care for that but not in the arts and music. It usually distracts and doesn't achieve anything. None of Cage's music have any long lasting value and barley anyone knows him, compared with John Williams.


I don't want to argue with you about Cage, everyone chooses what to like or dislike. But it is a fact attested to by his publisher that interest in his work has grown steadily from the last decade of his life, and growing more since his death. If you don't value his music, why not just keep with that. What is it with the anti-Cage faction's need to make these hyperbolic negative announcements?

To sum up: I enjoy Cage, and am not interested in John Williams. Apparently, you feel the opposite. Is that about right?



Mandryka said:


> Right wing I suppose, anarchy is an Alt Right thing I think.
> 
> I think the idea that music and politics overlap is interesting at the performer level, when people come together to make music, that encounter embraces things which are found in society writ large, they have to find a way for each to flourish in the whole.


I would not consider Cage "rightwing," as I said he was apolitical. And Cage was strongly opposed to linking political issues and messages with music or art, he certainly did not join, even when asked/pressured, to participate in those kinds of event by his friends and colleagues. I've read about this happening, but don't have the references handy.

My understanding is that he was attracted to the idea of a self-sustaining society without much government, i.e. people relying on each other and working out a communal life on a ad hoc basis. Buckminster Fuller, for one, wrote about this vision for our planet, and Cage was a fan of his books and ideas. Very utopian and given geo-political realities, completely unattainable, so he was not an active "anarchist."

Henry David Thoreau, Buckminster Fuller, and Erik Satie (along with his Indian gurus) inspired Cage with their iconoclastic ideas and lives.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> Do you have any reliable stats. to back up your claim?


I don't, but then I don't have any reliable stats that say the Mass in B Minor is a great work either and will be remembered long after today's avant garde are forgotten. But...I feel secure in saying it, stats or no stats.

But speaking of stats, are there any that indicate that Cage is listened to as frequently as Williams or Arvo Pärt?


----------



## mparta (Sep 29, 2020)

Prodromides said:


> I'm listing what I think instead:
> 
> Oratorio: Bohuslav Martinů's *The Epic of Gilgamesh*
> Ballet: *Baldr* by Jón Leifs
> ...


If Ilya Muromets is epic... I actually heard a performance, which not many can claim, of all things Ormandy with the Chicago Symphony!! utterly forgettable. My epic amnesia I guess


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

consuono said:


> Not to get into a political debate, but is there an "alt left"? I thought the alt right are fascists, which would be the opposite of anarchism.
> 
> Anyway I would rank Bach's St Matthew Passion over everything else mentioned *but* to my mind and sensibilities it isn't "epic".


There's a lot of rhetoric being thrown around, and a great deal of it by people that don't understand the meanings of the terminology they are vociferously objecting to.

Fascism
anarchism
socialism
communism
Progressive Rock
Epic


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

pianozach said:


> There's a lot of rhetoric being thrown around, and a great deal of it by people that don't understand the meanings of the terminology they are vociferously objecting to.
> 
> Fascism
> anarchism
> ...


Well that's true, I've been called a fascist (in the spirit of "everybody I don't like is Hitler") whereas I'm more of an apolitical libertarian. :lol:


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

The reason I see anarchy as a right wing thing is that, as far as I know, anarchists believe that the role of the state should be limited to protecting citizens from theft of their goods and money, and protected them from violence.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> The reason I see anarchy as a right wing thing is that, as far as I know, anarchists believe that the role of the state should be limited to protecting citizens from theft of their goods and money, and protected them from violence.


I thought that with anarchists the role of the state is to be non-existent.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

consuono said:


> I thought that with anarchists the role of the state is to be non-existent.


OK maybe -- that makes them even more right wing. At the heart of leftist thinking is the idea that the role of the state is to take goods from those who have more than they need and give goods to those who have less than they need. Anarchists, like Alt Right, see this as a violation of your right to decide what to do with the goods you legitimately own.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> OK maybe -- that makes them even more right wing. At the heart of leftist thinking is the idea that the role of the state is to take goods from those who have more than they need and give goods to those who have less than they need. Anarchists, like Alt Right, see this as a violation of your right to decide what to do with the goods you legitimately own.


The problem with leftist thinking is that in practice they tend to take goods off everyone and give them t o those at the centre of power


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> OK maybe -- that makes them even more right wing. At the heart of leftist thinking is the idea that the role of the state is to take goods from those who have more than they need and give goods to those who have less than they need. Anarchists, like Alt Right, see this as a violation of your right to decide what to do with the goods you legitimately own.


Maybe we should avoid simplistic terms like "alt right", "fascists", "communists" and "leftists" without some degree of precision. Anyway this is getting into territory that I'm sick of.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> Do you have any reliable stats. to back up your claim?


John Williams is known to people at large, Cage isn't. Period.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

Attempting to move back onto topic...

I guess if I think of the word "Epic", I would generally think of a narrative. Something with a tale to be told in which case I would probably think of several operas of which The Ring might be at the forefront just due to it's sheer length, size and scope.

Taken as a generic "Epic" as in "Impressive" I would classify most any of the popular works that have lasted for over a hundred years and are continually performed each year by orchestras around the world to fall into that category. 

I can't say that Bach's Mass In B Minor is more impressive than Beethoven's 9th or more impressive than Mahler's 3rd, etc. All bring out mental and emotional responses that are extremely deep and personal. I may prefer to hear one over the other at certain times, but again that's just personal preference.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

We had several dozen individuals strongly dedicated in creating their Top 50 favorite pieces of all time, and Mahler's 2nd came out as the #2 greatest overall. I think many are voting Der Ring des Nibelungen because they don't want to compare equal lengths, ie. I voted for the complete Mahler symphony cycle. The similar themes inherent in Mahler himself tie these chapters together more stunningly and epicly than most things I've heard. In fact this can be said of many groups of workings by composers.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

ArtMusic said:


> John Williams is known to people at large, Cage isn't. Period.


I'll agree with that assessment.

The average person might be able to cite one (maybe two, but I doubt it) works by *John Cage* (and one of them will always be 4'33").

The average person will likely be able to cite a half dozen or more films that *Williams* has scored.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

> Originally Posted by ArtMusic
> John Williams is known to people at large, Cage isn't. Period.


John Williams was involved with one of the most popular movie franchises in history, Star Wars. Of course people will have heard his name. What is your point?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> John Williams is known to people at large, Cage isn't. Period.


Good to know, but that doesn't explain why Cage has more entries in classical music record catalogs than Williams.

As is your usual mode of operation, you take your personal preferences and assume they apply to most others.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> John Williams was involved with one of the most popular movie franchises in history, Star Wars. Of course people will have heard his name. What is your point?


Write great Art music that people can listen to.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> Good to know, but that doesn't explain why Cage has more entries in classical music record catalogs than Williams.


"It's not only artists who are at fault; it is equally the fault of the so-called art community: the museum heads, gallery owners, and the critics who encourage and financially enable the production of this rubbish. It is they who champion graffiti and call it genius, promote the scatological and call it meaningful. It is they who, in reality, are the naked emperors of art, for who else would spend $10 million dollars on a rock and think it is art."


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> ...
> As is your usual mode of operation, you take your personal preferences and assume they apply to most others.


That doesn't mean personal preferences are irrelevant. When you have an overlap or combining of many individual personal preferences a consensus is formed. Personal preferences would seem to indicate that the avant garde is not particularly favored.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> I would not consider Cage "rightwing," as I said he was apolitical. .


Have you seen this interview?

https://www.beckmesser.info/interview-with-john-cage-about-music-and-politics/


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> Good to know, but that doesn't explain why Cage has more entries in classical music record catalogs than Williams.
> 
> As is your usual mode of operation, you take your personal preferences and assume they apply to most others.


Having more record entries doesn't necessarily mean anything, maybe it is loosing money for the record companies who have mistakenly backed the wrong horse. What does matter here are recognition by music awards and so forth, which Williams has undeniably received innumerably. This includes two Honorary Doctor of Music degrees from Boston College in 1993 and from Harvard University in 2017.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> "... for who else would spend $10 million dollars on a rock and think it is art."


I don't know what a rock is worth, but I think I do know when a rock is art.









But even if I had the extra $10 million lying about, I'm not sure it would be enough to buy this rock. Though I'd like to be able to make the bid.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

ArtMusic said:


> Having more record entries doesn't necessarily mean anything, maybe it is loosing money for the record companies who have mistakenly backed the wrong horse. What does matter here are recognition by music awards and so forth, which Williams has undeniably received innumerably.


I didn't know you had equestrian interests. Anyways, both the recording industry and award sources have significance.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

ArtMusic said:


> Write great Art music that people can listen to.





ArtMusic said:


> Having more record entries doesn't necessarily mean anything, maybe it is loosing money for the record companies who have mistakenly backed the wrong horse. What does matter here are recognition by music awards and so forth, which Williams has undeniably received innumerably. This includes two Honorary Doctor of Music degrees from Boston College in 1993 and from Harvard University in 2017.


John Cage has written art music that people listen to, and won awards, and is considered by many to be among the most important composers of the 20th century. I can't help but wonder why you persist in denying the obvious. Record companies don't keep releasing product unless they expect to make money. And Cage sells. Despite your trollish denials, his music is successful.

If you enjoy John Williams, that is fantastic. I wish for you many years of happiness listening to his music. Maybe the enjoyment you get from John Williams' music will cause you at some point to become less bitter about a composer like John Cage.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> Have you seen this interview?
> 
> https://www.beckmesser.info/interview-with-john-cage-about-music-and-politics/


Thanks, interesting. I'd not seen it before. This quote I found especially noteworthy:



> Power is not the question. That was the question in harmony and counterpoint, where you have good things and bad things and you make rules. That is what the white people did to the blacks: They made rules. So we need a situation in which we don't have rules, in which things are not more powerful than in other things, but in which each thing is what it is. Which we already have in music.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

I don't get why are John Williams and John Cage presented together so much. They were not even really from the same generation... (b. 1932 vs b. 1912)

Williams' contemporaries are/were Morricone (b. 1928), Goldsmith (b. 1929), Gubaidulina (b. 1931), Penderecki (b. 1933), Pärt (b. 1935)...

Cage's contemporaries were Shostakovich (b. 1906), Carter (b. 1908), Herrmann (b. 1911), Britten (b. 1913) etc.

Being 20 years apart, the times of their generations overlapped, but I still find the fixation strange.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Fabulin said:


> I don't get why are John Williams and John Cage presented together so much. They were not even really from the same generation... (1932 vs 1912)


Both named "John"?

I also don't know why or how Cage was brought into a discussion of John Williams. It happens sometimes when I enter a thread, since I have spoken about Cage positively, it seems I have become a lightening rod about Cage and what he represents.

Some posters on TC appear to be threatened by something Cage represents, and they make these negative posts, alleging hyperbolic claims about his worthlessness, and predictions that he will finally be found out to be a fraud and all of us who bought into his career to be fools.

It is very odd behavior, IMO.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

How about the epic narrative about the man who had it all, money, fame, power, women, celebrity friends, a popular TV show; but lost it all after going into politics, becoming president, and through his own selfishness and dishonesty alienating everyone around him except his family and his most fanatical followers up until the time he leaves his office in disgrace?

I'm just waiting for John Adams to compose the opera.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Coach G said:


> How about the epic narrative about the man who had it all, money, fame, power, women, celebrity friends, a popular TV show; but lost it all after going into politics, becoming president, and through his own selfishness and dishonesty alienating everyone around him except his family and his most fanatical followers up until the time he leaves his office in disgrace?
> 
> I'm just waiting for John Adams to compose the opera.


Trump=Wotan

Smsmsmsmsm


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

I made my way through the comments, and all I can think is who in their right mind could compare John Williams with John Cage? I'm not talking about preferences, but what they aspire(d) couldn't be more different. My god, I've been lurking this forum for a year and only recently started commenting and posting more, but I've noticed that when someone talks positively about a so called avant-garde composer outside of a specific thread about modern/contemporary/avant-garde or non tonal music there's always going to come someone to completely **** on that composer and the commenter that speaks about him/her. There's always a grunchy "tonal music is the only music, papa Bach is my only friend" bickering and being disrespectful, it's possibly the only bad thing about this place, I don't get it, it's quite sad.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> I made my way through the comments, and all I can think is who in their right mind could compare John Williams with John Cage? I'm not talking about preferences, but what they aspire(d) couldn't be more different. My god, I've been lurking this forum for a year and only recently started commenting and posting more, but I've noticed that when someone talks positively about a so called avant-garde composer outside of a specific thread about modern/contemporary/avant-garde or non tonal music there's always going to come someone to completely **** on that composer and the commenter that speaks about him/her. There's always a grunchy "tonal music is the only music, papa Bach is my only friend" bickering and being disrespectful, it's possibly the only bad thing about this place, I don't get it, it's quite sad.


"Question of the day"


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

pianozach said:


> "Question of the day"


Hey, nice idea for a poll.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> I made my way through the comments, and all I can think is who in their right mind could compare John Williams with John Cage? I'm not talking about preferences, but what they aspire(d) couldn't be more different. My god, I've been lurking this forum for a year and only recently started commenting and posting more, but I've noticed that when someone talks positively about a so called avant-garde composer outside of a specific thread about modern/contemporary/avant-garde or non tonal music there's always going to come someone to completely **** on that composer and the commenter that speaks about him/her. There's always a grunchy "tonal music is the only music, papa Bach is my only friend" bickering and being disrespectful, it's possibly the only bad thing about this place, I don't get it, it's quite sad.


To prove your point, I submitted your post to a random word shuffle, which gives the traditional prose statement a kind of Cage-ian aleatory interpretation, which, for my money is just as interesting and just as meaningful, in its own way. Let the bickerers bicker; I enjoy both tonal and non-tonal music. And tonal and non-tonal prose, for that matter.

Here it is:

started right couldn't forum thing the recently could There's the composer it's talking to lurking about a through music the someone don't quite in speaks my and only what and more, that sad. talks is but that to commenting positively or year it's a god, so and "tonal non place, outside for someone I've with compare way mind I when made completely is get I'm the only John been they specific going disrespectful, modern/contemporary/avant-garde their grunchy Williams a papa My music, **** avant-garde and commenter this can there's on always who bickering possibly I've about think noticed John that about Bach only about be tonal him/her. aspire(d) about music and Cage? comments, it, of being I more a is this different. thread preferences, all not called my only bad friend" I but posting composer come always


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

SONNET CLV said:


> Let the bickerers bicker; I enjoy both tonal and non-tonal music. And tonal and non-tonal prose, for that matter[/FONT]


I agree completely, hence my profile name 

That random text could be made into a poem, it's beautiful, but I won't praise it too much, don't want to be called an idiot for liking literature made after Shakespeare and Cervantes


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> ... but I've noticed that when someone talks positively about a so called avant-garde composer outside of a specific thread about modern/contemporary/avant-garde or non tonal music there's always going to come someone to completely **** on that composer and the commenter that speaks about him/her. There's always a grunchy "tonal music is the only music, papa Bach is my only friend" bickering and being disrespectful, it's possibly the only bad thing about this place, I don't get it, it's quite sad.


And that, folks, is what's known as a "straw man". I love Arvo Pärt; like some Philip Glass and John Adams; even some Schoenberg, Webern and Berg; a lot of Bartók; some Penderecki. There are some here who will occasionally dump on Papa Bach and Beethoven but I don't go into polemical rage over it or whine about the "disrespect". Oh, and don't even bring up Wagner. Sweet old Chopin even gets dumped on from time to time. I and others have criticized Tchaikovsky. I don't know why the atonal fans have to be so insecure and prone to butthurt or why modern composers should be immune to being disliked, sometimes even strongly disliked. It's as if we're all under some kind of obligation to love every single note written after 1970 under the aegis of "serious music", or else keep a respectful silence when it's being discussed. Art has never worked that way, as far as I can tell. You can't really elevate a genre or style by forbidding criticism of it. Won't work.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> My god, I've been lurking this forum for a year and only recently started commenting and posting more


Are you [Enthusiast] by any chance? You talk a lot like him. Your stance regarding avant-garde music is quite similar to his as well.


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

hammerdklavier, no i'm not!


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

consuono said:


> It's as if we're all under some kind of obligation to love every single note written after 1970 under the aegis of "serious music", or else keep a respectful silence when it's being discussed. Art has never worked that way, as far as I can tell. You can't really elevate a genre or style by forbidding criticism of it. Won't work.


It has become obvious to me that you are misunderstanding what some of us are saying. We are, or at least I, am not trying to "elevate a genre or style by forbidding criticism of it." We are asking for "respectful silence" since, by now, we all know who likes or dislikes avant-garde classical music. It becomes gratuitous if you never miss an opportunity to repeat the same opinion/criticism and beating this poor horse whenever John Cage or Pierre Boulez comes up.

Btw, I can't stand the music of Philip Glass and John Adams, but I refrain from ridiculing them or their audience for liking their work.


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

consuono said:


> And that, folks, is what's known as a "straw man". I love Arvo Pärt; like some Philip Glass and John Adams; even some Schoenberg, Webern and Berg; a lot of Bartók; some Penderecki. There are some here who will occasionally dump on Papa Bach and Beethoven but I don't go into polemical rage over it or whine about the "disrespect". Oh, and don't even bring up Wagner. Sweet old Chopin even gets dumped on from time to time. I and others have criticized Tchaikovsky. I don't know why the atonal fans have to be so insecure and prone to butthurt or why modern composers should be immune to being disliked, sometimes even strongly disliked. It's as if we're all under some kind of obligation to love every single note written after 1970 under the aegis of "serious music", or else keep a respectful silence when it's being discussed. Art has never worked that way, as far as I can tell. You can't really elevate a genre or style by forbidding criticism of it. Won't work.


Well, I don't know about you, again I'm quite new, but one thing is fair criticism (i don't like every single note written neither after Perotin... I don't like every single note from any period of music, there's always been good and bad music and no music is exempt from criticism because nothing is perfect and objectivity doesn't exist), and another completely different story is being disrespectful to people who like post 1950s music and the people who wrote it. Yes, sure people criticize in less than respectful terms all sorts of composers, but I haven't seen it as much, or on the same level, as towards musicians and enthusiasts of the music of the past 70 years. And unfair and harsh criticism towards 19th century composers in their own time also existed, so there's always going to be an idiot who says that you have to be insane, deaf or completely dumb to like certain type of music. That doesn't mean it's not sad to see it in a forum such as this, that is all. 
The discussion around Cage and Williams was carried out not with arguments as to the merits and demerits of Cage's music, but around his persona, the supossed avant-garde movement post WWII and preconceived notions about what "modern" music is and how its supporters act. And from what I've seen that's mostly the case when composers such as Cage are discussed. It is as if some people (here, there and everywhere ) think that music is a monolith, and also they should decide what shape the monolith should be and what people can enjoy and what not.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

consuono said:


> And that, folks, is what's known as a "straw man". I love Arvo Pärt; like some Philip Glass and John Adams; even some Schoenberg, Webern and Berg; a lot of Bartók; some Penderecki. There are some here who will occasionally dump on Papa Bach and Beethoven but I don't go into polemical rage over it or whine about the "disrespect". Oh, and don't even bring up Wagner. Sweet old Chopin even gets dumped on from time to time. I and others have criticized Tchaikovsky. I don't know why the atonal fans have to be so insecure and prone to butthurt or why modern composers should be immune to being disliked, sometimes even strongly disliked. It's as if we're all under some kind of obligation to love every single note written after 1970 under the aegis of "serious music", or else keep a respectful silence when it's being discussed. Art has never worked that way, as far as I can tell. You can't really elevate a genre or style by forbidding criticism of it. Won't work.


The fact of it is, the childhood concept of "agree to disagree" is somehow a foreign concept to some people on this forum. (General statement, not targeted at anyone specific)


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> Well, I don't know about you, again I'm quite new, but one thing is fair criticism (i don't like every single note written neither after Perotin... I don't like every single note from any period of music, there's always been good and bad music and no music is exempt from criticism because nothing is perfect and objectivity doesn't exist), and another completely different story is being disrespectful to people who like post 1950s music and the people who wrote it. Yes, sure people criticize in less than respectful terms all sorts of composers, but I haven't seen it as much, or on the same level, as towards musicians and enthusiasts of the music of the past 70 years. And unfair and harsh criticism towards 19th century composers in their own time also existed, so there's always going to be an idiot who says that you have to be insane, deaf or completely dumb to like certain type of music. That doesn't mean it's not sad to see it in a forum such as this, that is all.
> The discussion around Cage and Williams was carried out not with arguments as to the merits and demerits of Cage's music, but around his persona, the supossed avant-garde movement post WWII and preconceived notions about what "modern" music is and how its supporters act. And from what I've seen that's mostly the case when composers such as Cage are discussed. It is as if some people (here, there and everywhere ) think that music is a monolith, and also they should decide what shape the monolith should be and what people can enjoy and what not.


Maybe, but if someone's free to express their dislike of Bach-Beethoven-Mozart-whoever -- as they should be -- then I should be free to express my dislike for the avant garde. Come up with some defense other than "leave modern music alone, you close-minded philistine meanie!!!"


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

consuono said:


> Maybe, but if someone's free to express their dislike of Bach-Beethoven-Mozart-whoever -- as they should be -- then I should be free to express my dislike for the avant garde. Come up with some defense other than "leave modern music alone, you close-minded philistine meanie!!!"


why are you fixated on yourself if you think what I said about people being disrespectful doesn't apply to you? I did come up with something better, talk about the music and avoid prejudice and insult!


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> why are you fixated on yourself if you think what I said about people being disrespectful doesn't apply to you? I did come up with something better, talk about the music and avoid prejudice and insult!


We're all fixated on ourselves. It's a forum where opinions are given. I'm not the hall monitor trying to force or cajole everyone into liking exactly what I like or else shut up. One person's "prejudice and insult" could simply be "I don't like that composer/piece/conductor/style".


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I'm going with Xanadu by Rush.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

consuono said:


> We're all fixated on ourselves. It's a forum where opinions are given. I'm not the hall monitor trying to force or cajole everyone into liking exactly what I like or else shut up. One person's "prejudice and insult" could simply be "I don't like that composer/piece/conductor/style".


I find it so odd how so often people need to preface statements here with 'music is subjective and everyone's entitled to their own opinion'. Shouldn't that just go without saying? After all, we all enjoy music and it's nothing to get self righteous about.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> I find it so odd how so often people need to preface statements here with 'music is subjective and everyone's entitled to their own opinion'. Shouldn't that just go without saying? After all, we all enjoy music and it's nothing to get self righteous about.


What's weird is it's all subjective until you criticize composers/styles that they like, or when someone talks a composer/style that they don't like.


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

consuono said:


> We're all fixated on ourselves. It's a forum where opinions are given. I'm not the hall monitor trying to force or cajole everyone into liking exactly what I like or else shut up. One person's "prejudice and insult" could simply be "I don't like that composer/piece/conductor/style".


you got my comment completely wrong


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> I find it so odd how so often people need to preface statements here with 'music is subjective and everyone's entitled to their own opinion'. Shouldn't that just go without saying? After all, we all enjoy music and it's nothing to get self righteous about.


Agreed! But initially I wasn't talking about opinions, I was refering to certain types of behavior.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

consuono said:


> What's weird is it's all subjective until you criticize composers/styles that they like, or when someone talks a composer/style that they don't like.


One thing I've seen crop up between posters are certain lapses in communication or getting too caught up in the semantics of someone else's post (after all, doesn't that go for human interaction in general?). Another, which pertains to sensitivity to criticism of the avant-garde, is that the enjoyer of avant-garde feels like the criticizer is just dismissing it out of hand and not acknowledging the merits before stating they dislike it. When you're on the outside looking in, it's easier to see what people are actually getting worked up over or whether the two parties are actually going around in circles arguing the same thing (on this forum and in real life)


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> the enjoyer of avant-garde feels like the criticizer is just dismissing it out of hand and *not acknowledging the merits before stating they dislike it*.


A confession of faith?

That assumes an objective existence of "merits", and that said existence should be taken on faith from... "your nearest distributor of truth", I presume. Either that, or the merits can be empirically experienced by a reasonable listener.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Fabulin said:


> That assumes an objective existence of "merits", and that said existence should be taken on faith from... "your nearest distributor of truth", I presume. Either that, or the merits can be empirically experienced by a reasonable listener.


I would argue that to an extent, there is an objective existence of merits. If you listen to a sloppily made string quartet with parallel fifths and awkward voice leading then compare it to Haydn, you'll obviously see that the Haydn is better crafted. If the listener prefers the former, more power to them.

Now of course, when conservative minded posters and people who enjoy avant-garde butt heads on here, the situation obviously deals with music that's at the very least well crafted on both ends. I don't really like the Stockhausen and Boulez I've heard, but it's not the musical equivalent of a three year old banging on a piano, there's effort and craftsmanship that went into it. I find a number of Mozart pieces boring, but to deny his impeccable technique and mastery of his craft is ludicrous.



Fabulin said:


> A confession of faith?


I do enjoy avant-garde music and do believe it has merits the same way its musical predecessors do, if that's what you're getting at. However, I'm an impartial observer when it comes to the arguments in question, as I could honestly care less either way and am not emotionally invested in it.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> Agreed! But initially I wasn't talking about opinions, I was refering to certain types of behavior.


What's the difference? If someone is dismissive of avant garde art, that's taken to.be hostile, ugly behavior.


GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> Now of course, when conservative minded posters and people who enjoy avant-garde butt heads on here, the situation obviously deals with music that's at the very least well crafted on both ends. ...


I don't think any style of music is *obviously* well crafted unless that craftsmanship can be demonstrated or at least felt by more than a handful. That's part of the problem: those who are wary of the avant garde are required to concede at the outset that avant garde music is of high quality. But with the avant garde the standards of craftsmanship shift from composer to composer and so therefore any avant garde piece is by definition well crafted and beyond criticism. There's the problem.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> I don't really like the Stockhausen and Boulez I've heard, but it's not the musical equivalent of a three year old banging on a piano, there's effort and craftsmanship that went into it.


It's not an equivalent, but if the sheet music looks like good ol' Rimsky Korsakoff, only the sound is garbage, I can hardly "admire" the effort.

Oh wow, a new inferior chord. And then another one. And then more until the end. Huh. If it was so simple, those pitiful fools like Mendelssohn and Brahms wouldn't have struggled to find the right notes. Shoudda have pressed the other ones, like Boulez! Neeeew...


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Fabulin said:


> It's not an equivalent, but if the sheet music looks like good ol' Rimsky Korsakoff, only the sound is garbage, I can hardly "admire" the effort.


And that's your call. Like Consuono's been saying, I don't think any reasonable person should hold that against you for holding that opinion.

I, for one genuinely enjoy a lot of objectively bad music completely without merit, as my username would show


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

consuono said:


> What's the difference? If someone is dismissive of avant garde art, that's taken to.be hostile, ugly behavior.
> I don't think any style of music is *obviously* well crafted unless that craftsmanship can be demonstrated or at least felt by more than a handful. That's part of the problem: *those who are wary of the avant garde are required to concede at the outset that avant garde music is of high quality. But with the avant garde the standards of craftsmanship shift from composer to composer and so therefore any avant garde piece is by definition well crafted and beyond criticism. *There's the problem.


I get arguments from both sides, and this is one example I get from the conservative side. CONS (conservative) feels that the judgement of quality enters a wishy-washy territory where it's harder to determine good from bad. To use my example of judging common practice music with the Haydn and the sloppy SQ with the parallel 5ths, it's _very_ clear cut which one is superior.

The part I get from the AV-G side is that artists use different methods of expression and are communicating in a different musical language and vocabulary than common practice or even serialism and 'edgier' 20th century music, and that CONS should judge the artist's intent and what they are trying to create and communicate from that perspective.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> I don't really like the Stockhausen and Boulez I've heard, but it's not the musical equivalent of a three year old banging on a piano, there's effort and craftsmanship that went into it.


GucciMane, I could take that three year old's banging on the piano and dress it up in some really nice, intricate notation. I'm really not into Augenmusik.


GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> CONS (conservative) feels that the judgement of quality enters a wishy-washy territory where it's harder to determine good from bad.


It's not just "harder", it's not allowed.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

consuono said:


> GucciMane, I could take that three year old's banging on the piano and dress it up in some really nice, intricate notation. I'm really not into Augenmusik.
> It's not just "harder", it's not allowed.


I'm actually at work right now so I'll respond to this in a bit. I'm wasting company time


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

consuono said:


> What's the difference? If someone is dismissive of avant garde art, that's taken to.be hostile, ugly behavior.


No, at least not by me. And words used in a forum such as this are much more clearer than music, so when someone is hostile and thinks they're inherently superior it is quite clear.



consuono said:


> I don't think any style of music is *obviously* well crafted unless that craftsmanship can be demonstrated or at least felt by more than a handful. That's part of the problem: those who are wary of the avant garde are required to concede at the outset that avant garde music is of high quality. But with the avant garde the standards of craftsmanship shift from composer to composer and so therefore any avant garde piece is by definition well crafted and beyond criticism. There's the problem.


Well, first off, no piece of art should be a popularity contest, IMO, if it were, almost any composer discussed here would pale in comparison to... John Williams, not just John Cage. 
Then, why would you be required to concede that all and any avant-garde music is of high quality, well crafted and beyond criticism? Of course standards vary between composers, and that's a good thing, because it means that there is no code to adhere to, there's no rulebook, and most important of all: there are no guarantees, and that's not something that started in the second half of the 20th century either. The search for the glorious individual (in a personal way) masterpiece that started with Beethoven kicked that whole thing off. And precisely because of that music is vulnerable to any external criticism, criticism that should be made considering a lot of variables, but always in respect to the music.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> ...There's always a grunchy "tonal music is the only music, papa Bach is my only friend" bickering and being disrespectful, it's possibly the only bad thing about this place, I don't get it, it's quite sad.


Who has said that?


> Then, why would you be required to concede that all and any avant-garde music is of high quality, well crafted and beyond criticism?


Because if you say otherwise then you're going to get screeds telling you how disrespectful and hostile and small-minded you are, and how artistic expression is such a personal thing that it can't possibly be criticized. You either have to nod along in assent or else be silent. Ive never typed a word in the 21st century listening thread. But yet avant garde fans can pass judgement on John Williams? Who's more hostile and trollish? Why weren't you in there sticking up for Williams fans?


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

consuono said:


> Who has said that?


Precisely what I meant by saying "why are you fixating on yourself?" I was speaking about a situation, not an individual, I do not know the names of the people who issued this or that comment in other threads, neither in this one. I found the tone of the discussion rather disrespectful like I've seen in other threads and was just commenting on that. Never meant to direct it at you at any point. And besides, it's something that happens outside of this forum and I was also commenting on that.



consuono said:


> Because if you say otherwise then you're going to get screeds telling you how disrespectful and hostile and small-minded you are. You either have to nod along in assent or else be silent. Ive never typed a word in the 21st century listening thread. But yet avant garde fans can pass judgement on John Williams? Who's more hostile and trollish?


Are you speaking generally or about me? Because again, I did not direct my comment at you. Also, anyone can pass judgement on anyone, this is after all a quite public forum and as far as I know there is no censorship here, so why do you feel so threatened to speak positively about John Williams? In fact, there is a poll on another thread about williams v cage, and williams last I checked was winning easily. As long as the discussion isn't based on insults, why should someone refrain from expressing their views?
The thing is, I noticed here and before that sometimes when modern music is discussed sometimes people say really offensive things, and unfounded at that too. It's disrepectful and rather off-putting. And yeah sure you could say there are bad people on both sides


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> Precisely what I meant by saying "why are you fixating on yourself?" I was speaking about a situation, not an individual, I do not know the names of the people who issued this or that comment in other threads, neither in this one.


In other words, you haven't seen it. In other words, it's a caricature. A straw man. Meanwhile I can find threads with quotes to back up what I've said. It's not caricature.


> Because again, I did not direct my comment at you...


And those criticizing a.g. music weren't talking to you. Why do you have to make it about yourself?


> As long as the discussion isn't based on insults...


The only personal insults I've seen was when I was called a fascist sympathizer, simple-minded, trollish, haranguing, harassing, whatever else. And that was from the super-subjective avant garde camp.


> Also, anyone can pass judgement on anyone, this is after all a quite public forum and as far as I know there is no censorship here, so why do you feel so threatened to speak positively about John Williams?


Here's the question: why would you or anyone else take it so personally if I speak negatively about John Cage? I don't care about criticism of Williams, as long as it's not coming from someone who says that I can't criticize their Sacred Cow. I'm not particularly a John Williams fan, actually.


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

What are you on about? When did I make this about myself? I could collect evidence too, you know, it's just not interesting to me to call out names, nor am I a victim nor do I like to play victim, not saying you are tho, but you seem to have a few issues with the subject. So I'll leave it here, hope to see you in another more joyful thread.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

consuono said:


> GucciMane, I could take that three year old's banging on the piano and dress it up in some really nice, intricate notation. I'm really not into Augenmusik.
> It's not just "harder", it's not allowed.


I'm not into Augenmusik either, but hear me out here: I think when people say about Boulez or Feneyhough, "how can they play a wrong note? No one will notice" they're not taking into account that a different musical language and vocabulary are being employed. Or as Fabulin said earlier 'Why did Mendelssohn and Brahms take painstakingly effort to find the right notes when Boulez can spill note-soup all over the page". I get it where you're both coming from, it makes perfect sense. However, what Boulez (just using him as a placeholder, substitute him with whomever you like) is doing is manipulating sound to create unique soundscapes, sonorities, and creating an entirely new pallette the same way a an avant-garde painter uses the same colors Monet did to paint water lilies. Same materials, different implementation, the common goal is to create and express/communicate.

And also another point I want to stress is not all avant-garde is Augenmusik or note soup (not putting those words in your mouth Consuono). For example, you can tell George Crumb is very painstaking in what notes and timbres he selects and it communicates a very distinct, clearly defined sound than a jumbled Augenmusik (though his scores are certainly something to look at!). I happen to prefer Crumb much more than Boulez for that reason.

These are just my 2 cents, my job's not to evangelize you into the avant-garde and maybe shed more light on a great debate that sadly gets too weighted down by people's emotional investmemt in the subject and isn't as constructive as it could be.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

*What in the world is AUGENMUSIK?*

The term "augenmusik" is a German work that means literally, "eye music" or music to be appreciated visually. *Composers have been notating visually intriguing musical scores for many centuries.*

Perhaps one of the most well-known examples is the chanson, "Belle, Bonne, Sage" by Baude Cordier (ca. 1380 - ca. 1440). The musical score is shaped like a heart and has red notes to indicate rhythmic alterations. A smaller heart made of musical notes hangs like a pendant within the musical score.






In the 16th century, Italian madrigalists (song writers) often used different note values to indicate specific words that were either dark or light words. For example, black notes might be used for the words "death" or "night" and whole notes and half notes to express words like "light" and pale". In composer Luca Marenzio's work, "senza il mia sole" (1588), black notes are used for the phrase, "chiuser le luci" (close their eyes)."

During the Baroque period, Telemann's "Gulliver Suite" uses meter and note values to distinguish between "Lilliputian" and "Brobdingnagian." (The two islands in the book the music is based).






Many recent composers (20th and 21st centuries) have composed augenmusik. George Crumb's composition, "Makrokosmos, Vol. I" for amplified piano, includes pieces depicting a cross, a circle and a spiral galaxy. These shapes were chosen to indicate different signs of the zodiac.






****************************************

I'm into it.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> ****************************************
> 
> I'm into it.











Sergey Zagny's _Metamusica_ consists of Webern op 27 with all the notes removed. This is augenmusik.

http://conceptualism.letov.ru/sergei-zagny/Scores/008-Metamusica.pdf


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Some scores by John Cage

Fontana Mix









Piece for solo piano









Score for Twelve Haiku, 1978









Cage also published a book, _Notations_, which included many graphic scores contributed by other composers, "Cage's 1969 book collecting pieces of scores by 269 different composers and accompanying them with short texts."

_Notations_, which also includes scores from the Beatles, Leonard Bernstein, Paul Bowles, Charles Ives (from whose archive Cage picked a blank piece of song paper), Gyorgy Ligeti, Yoko Ono, Nam June Paik, Steve Reich, Igor Stravinsky, Toru Takemitsu, and many others, inspired a more recent follow-up project called _Notations 21_:













> Notations 21 stands as a testament to Cage's enduring influence as not just a composer but as the promoter of a worldview all about harnessing the forces of chance to enrich our lives, and to put us in a clearer frame of mind to see what comes next. "Musical notation is one of the most amazing picture-language inventions of the human animal," Ross Lee Finney writes in the text of the original Notations. "It didn't come into being of a moment but is the result of centuries of experimentation. It has never been quite satisfactory for the composer's purposes and therefore the experiment continues."


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> What are you on about? When did I make this about myself? I could collect evidence too...


OK, let's see it.


----------

