# Classical Pieces that Defy Explanation



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Art of Fugue = How could Bach could write a piece so complex and so amazing at the same time.. It's almost superhuman.

4'33'' = How could Cage "compose" this "music". It's a mystery that will never be explained.

What are those classical pieces that defy explanation. whether they were composed as if it came from god or because they puzzled you forever.. ;


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

4'33" is not a "composition" it is a philosophy. The music is composed by the world around us. 

*Ligeti's* _Atmosphères_ is so astounding that even god couldn't compose it. It is music of such a brilliant, otherworldly nature that you can't compare even the best works of Bach to it.


----------



## ProudSquire (Nov 30, 2011)

Hmm... I suppose for me it would have to be Mozart's 40th at the moment, of course that will no doubt change as time progresses. I'm having a hard time grasping the overall structure/mood of the piece. I have no idea what Wolfie was trying to convey with this symphony, or maybe he wasn't trying to saying anything?!!

I have narrowed it down to this for the time being, but of course I could be miles off from the truth:

*First movement*: Great urgency with a sense of restlessness, as if he was searching for something but couldn't quite find it.
*Second movement*: Defeat and a tinge of agitation. He probably was like, why bother? Such a lovely movement!! 
*Third movement*: Frustration with an imbued sense of control. Wolfie was like this isn't making any sense, arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh : trio: control yourself Wolfie.. I can see the pieces coming together...Gdi (God damn it) nothing is working!! arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!  I love this movement so much!
*Fourth movement*: **** this ****, let's go for broke! My favorite movement from this symphony.

You did it Wolfie! you've created something supreme! /applauds :tiphat:

That's my take. :}

TPS


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

TheProudSquire said:


> Hmm... I suppose for me it would have to be Mozart's 40th at the moment, of course that will no doubt change as time progresses. I'm having a hard time grasping the overall structure/mood of the piece. I have no idea what Wolfie was trying to convey with this symphony, or maybe he wasn't trying to saying anything?!!
> 
> I have narrowed it down to this for the time being, but of course I could be miles off from the truth:
> 
> ...


I have the same reaction when listening to Schubert's Quintet in C. It just blows my mind how a 31 year old dying man could compose such masterpiece that springs life and hope..


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> 4'33" is not a "composition" it is a philosophy. The music is composed by the world around us.
> 
> *Ligeti's* _Atmosphères_ is so astounding that even god couldn't compose it. It is music of such a brilliant, otherworldly nature that you can't compare even the best works of Bach to it.


Who is this Ligeti you are referring to?? Does he live in the moon?? :tiphat:


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

One of the pieces that definitely defy explanation is Rued Langgaard's Music of Spheres (1916-1918). How could this man composed something so fantastical, innovative at that time is beyond my imagination. Ligeti found himself very shocked when he saw the scores for this piece, and exclaimed that he didn't now he was a Langgaard imitator. Even if Ligeti is a genius, Langgaard was at least 50 years ahead of his time.






Here is a complete recording for those who don't know it.


----------



## MJongo (Aug 6, 2011)

Beethoven's Große Fuge.


----------



## peeyaj (Nov 17, 2010)

Gross Fugue is just double fugue written after one another.. That's it.


----------



## jani (Jun 15, 2012)

Beethovens 9th symphony. How was he able to write ode the joy after all the disappointments in his life?
How he found the mental power to go and become on of the most revolutionary composers ever, after he found out that he was going deaf?

How he was able to craft an immortal symphony from his fate motive?


----------



## Norse (May 10, 2010)

I'd say everything Beethoven wrote after he was completely deaf.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

The first time I heard Tallis' _Spem in Alium_ I was stunned. Every time I hear the work I find it an experience like none other. I have searched for works that are similar, but I know of nothing else quite like it.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Renaissance said:


> One of the pieces that definitely defy explanation is Rued Langgaard's Music of Spheres (1916-1918). How could this man composed something so fantastical, innovative at that time is beyond my imagination. Ligeti found himself very shocked when he saw the scores for this piece, and exclaimed that he didn't now he was a Langgaard imitator. Even if Ligeti is a genius, Langgaard was at least 50 years ahead of his time.


Do you know which of Ligeti's works he considered similar to Music of Spheres? Or maybe in what way Ligeti viewed his music as similar. I don't hear much similarity, but I assume I'm not comparing them in the right way.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Mozart's dissonance quartet.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Had Scriabin been able to complete the Mysterium (in a realistic way) it would have been the greatest creation of all mankind. Scriabin was tapping into primal, cosmic powers never seen before or after.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

Renaissance said:


> One of the pieces that definitely defy explanation is Rued Langgaard's Music of Spheres (1916-1918). How could this man composed something so fantastical, innovative at that time is beyond my imagination. Ligeti found himself very shocked when he saw the scores for this piece, and exclaimed that he didn't now he was a Langgaard imitator. Even if Ligeti is a genius, Langgaard was at least 50 years ahead of his time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In my opinion Langgaard was one of the most brilliant and misunderstood of the Danish composers. Unfortunately he did not help his cause by his antagonism of Carl Nielsen. I'm not sure you can say Music of the Spheres is typical Langgaard but it certainly is one of his most interesting and unusual pieces. Interesting Ligeti anecdote btw. 

Kevin


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

mmsbls said:


> Do you know which of Ligeti's works he considered similar to Music of Spheres? Or maybe in what way Ligeti viewed his music as similar. I don't hear much similarity, but I assume I'm not comparing them in the right way.


As I am not an expert, I can't figure out myself either. But the Ligeti anectode is true. Danish composer Per Nørgård spoke about how he tricked Gyorgÿ Ligeti into discovering Rued Langgaard's "Music of the Spheres". This happened two years (1968) after Ligeti published his Requiem. Here is the video and he is Per Nørgård himself 






Unfortunately, I couldn't find any details about the techniques implied.
I hope it is not considered off-topic.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> 4'33" is not a "composition" it is a philosophy. The music is composed by the world around us.
> 
> *Ligeti's* _Atmosphères_ is so astounding that even god couldn't compose it. It is music of such a brilliant, otherworldly nature that you can't compare even the best works of Bach to it.


Although I appreciate your obsessiveness over Ligeti I do find this statement offensive and inconsiderate of those who are God fearing. Ligeti was just a man and any comparison of him to God or a god is just simply blasphemous.

Kevin


----------



## MJongo (Aug 6, 2011)

Kevin Pearson said:


> Although I appreciate your obsessiveness over Ligeti I do find this statement offensive and inconsiderate of those who are God fearing. Ligeti was just a man and any comparison of him to God or a god is just simply blasphemous.


I don't know... I'd be willing to bet Ligeti could out-compose Apollo.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Kevin Pearson said:


> Although I appreciate your obsessiveness over Ligeti I do find this statement offensive and inconsiderate of those who are God fearing. Ligeti was just a man and any comparison of him to God or a god is just simply blasphemous.
> 
> Kevin


This is not the middle ages - we atheists can say what we want about your fantasy man in the sky.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Mozart - dissonance quartet.
Suerly for the time it was written - no critic has been able to fathom the meaning or purpose of the intro.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)




----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Renaissance said:


> One of the pieces that definitely defy explanation is Rued Langgaard's Music of Spheres (1916-1918). How could this man composed something so fantastical, innovative at that time is beyond my imagination. Ligeti found himself very shocked when he saw the scores for this piece, and exclaimed that he didn't now he was a Langgaard imitator. Even if Ligeti is a genius, Langgaard was at least 50 years ahead of his time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I haven't heard all of it yet, but from what I have heard, the piece seems much more set in tonality than *Ligeti's* micropolyphonic works but it definitely gets the same effect. It's a little less colourful than works such as _Melodien_ but it is still very innovative. I was surprised that it was written in the 1910s, but it didn't surprise me as much as some of the works by Luigi Russolo.


----------



## Kevin Pearson (Aug 14, 2009)

stomanek said:


> This is not the middle ages - we atheists can say what we want about your fantasy man in the sky.


I'm sorry But tolerance and respect are not one way as you atheists would like it. I respect your right to not believe in God but don't disrespect my faith. It's called courtesy, respect and consideration for others. You atheists claim you want tolerance of your belief system but tolerance in your world is one sided. (and yes atheism is a belief in no God because the premise cannot be proved and thus requires faith to accept it). Sorry for getting this thread off track.

Kevin


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm sorry But tolerance and respect are not one way as you atheists would like it. I respect your right to not believe in God but don't disrespect my faith. It's called courtesy, respect and consideration for others. You atheists claim you want tolerance of your belief system but tolerance in your world is one sided. (and yes atheism is a belief in no God because the premise cannot be proved and thus requires faith to accept it). Sorry for getting this thread off track.
> 
> Kevin


If you really want an apology, I'm sorry. I only wanted to describe the greatness of *Ligeti's* music and had no intention of insulting anyone about their religion.


----------



## Lisztian (Oct 10, 2011)

The Berlioz requiem. I can't understand how this piece was even conceived - especially in the mid 1830's! Berlioz was a genius.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm sorry But tolerance and respect are not one way as you atheists would like it. I respect your right to not believe in God but don't disrespect my faith. It's called courtesy, respect and consideration for others. You atheists claim you want tolerance of your belief system but tolerance in your world is one sided. (and yes atheism is a belief in no God because the premise cannot be proved and thus requires faith to accept it). Sorry for getting this thread off track.
> 
> Kevin


You are misinformed.
No we atheists do not claim we want tolerance - who claimed that? You can critique or make fun of my non acceptance of god to your hearts content - it doesn't bother me at all - as long as you don't kill me or imprison me you can say what you want. 
There's really nothing to laugh at. Atheism is no more a belief system than - not not accepting the reality of Santa Clause, fairies, elves, pixies can be called a belief system on your basis that you need a kind of faith not to accept their existence. That's nonsense - you don't need faith to accept that Santa Clause does not exist. What atheism is - is a rejection of theist claims that god exists - on the basis of lack of evidence. Atheism also does not prescribe people how to live and has no ancient scripture that we hold up as divine truth. Faith is believing in the absence of evidence. Atheism is rejection of the proposition that god (whatever definition you propose) exists due to lack of evidence. It is a position on one matter and one matter only. Demonstrate to me god's existence and I will convert - that is all I ask _ I will go down on my knees and say a thousand hail marys. You can't demonstrate anything. All you have is feelings, a hunch, intuition, wishful thinking.
As for respect - sorry - no I don't respect religeon. According to Christianity I will burn in hell for eternity for my rejection of your god - how should I respect that? 
If your feelings get hurt because people like me point out that your beliefs have no basis in reality - I suggest you find something to believe in that is not so easily ridiculed.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

*That's Santa _Claus_

Is this thread going off topic? I'm not surprised since Peeyaj started it.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> *That's Santa _Claus_
> 
> Is this thread going off topic? I'm not surprised since Peeyaj started it.


Now that does hurt my feelings - caught out on a spelling mistake.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> 4'33" is not a "composition" it is a philosophy. The music is composed by the world around us.


At least SOMEONE else gets it!


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

My nomination is Stravinsky's "Circus Polka", composed for an elephant ballet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circus_Polka

I should also probably mention Messiaen's bird music which I find both very strange and very fascinating.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

Kevin Pearson said:


> I'm sorry But tolerance and respect are not one way as you atheists would like it. I respect your right to not believe in God but don't disrespect my faith. It's called courtesy, respect and consideration for others. You atheists claim you want tolerance of your belief system but tolerance in your world is one sided. (and yes atheism is a belief in no God because the premise cannot be proved and thus requires faith to accept it). Sorry for getting this thread off track.


I don't believe that those with faith should be ridiculed, but I do believe that they should be able to stand their ground and justify their beliefs to others and themselves. This applies with anybody on any issue, not just religion. Nonetheless, I accept that people have the right to choose or continue their beliefs based on no logic whatsoever. People make worse decisions all the time including, one might suggest, the decision to exercise good manners or not. Most people are also crappy with money, or with being on time. It is silly, however, to create conflict and strife over any of these things. Religions have many virtues, even if they are false. I know that militant atheists will cite religious strife and hatred, but this is a result of being ill-educated, not intrinsic in religion itself. More wars have been fought over money than religion, or over national identity than religion. Greed and pride are more worthy foes to human happiness than any religion. In fact, all religions I know preach against both!

Also, although Richard Dawkins quite effectively shows why human being have evolved to have religion, he fails to explain why those evolutionary instincts no longer apply.


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

What religion or atheism has to do with music?. And why this post has degenerate to this theme?


----------



## poconoron (Oct 26, 2011)

I would put Die Zauberflote (Magic Flute) in this category. How Mozart could create such sublime, towering and transcendent music for what is essentially a somewhat silly libretto for a fairy tale in the last year of his life, while fatal illness was setting in, is quite incomprehensible to me.


----------



## rrudolph (Sep 15, 2011)

peeyaj said:


> 4'33'' = How could Cage "compose" this "music". It's a mystery that will never be explained.


No mystery at all. It's simply the logical conclusion of his argument that the experience of an artistic work cannot be seperated from the conditions within which it is experienced. He made his point by removing any composer-produced content and demonstrating that there will still be sounds and events that can be experienced artistically by a willing audience. If he didn't "write" this piece, someone else would have.

I myself perform and listen to the piece (without the piano-which makes it the 0'00" version) almost every night sitting quietly in my back yard.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Schoenberg's Pierrot lunaire. A 100 years later it still sounds eerily contemporary.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

elgars ghost said:


> Schoenberg's Pierrot lunaire. A 100 years later it still sounds eerily contemporary.


Pffft you're kidding right?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

crmoorhead said:


> I don't believe that those with faith should be ridiculed, but I do believe that they should be able to stand their ground and justify their beliefs to others and themselves. This applies with anybody on any issue, not just religion. Nonetheless, I accept that people have the right to choose or continue their beliefs based on no logic whatsoever. People make worse decisions all the time including, one might suggest, the decision to exercise good manners or not. Most people are also crappy with money, or with being on time. It is silly, however, to create conflict and strife over any of these things. Religions have many virtues, even if they are false. I know that militant atheists will cite religious strife and hatred, but this is a result of being ill-educated, not intrinsic in religion itself. More wars have been fought over money than religion, or over national identity than religion. Greed and pride are more worthy foes to human happiness than any religion. In fact, all religions I know preach against both!
> 
> Also, although Richard Dawkins quite effectively shows why human being have evolved to have religion, he fails to explain why those evolutionary instincts no longer apply.


Schubert's unfinshed.

Religeon may be in our genes - true - an instinct to believe may even be useful, in Darwinian terms - but that has nothing to do with the truth behind those beliefs and as for Dawkins - modern atheists also have this instinct to believe - but rational thought and consideration of the evidence tells us that religeons are false. I accept that people do not need to prove their beliefs - they believe in the face of zero evidence and do not care if their beliefs are true - if they did care - they would properly hold them up to scrutiny. I also accept that religeons have some good in them - but most of what is good in Christianity - the morals (such as the folly of greed and pride) - were already part of accepted wisdom in many cultures before - we just don't need religeon to teach us anything. In truth people need comfort - they are afraid of death - so religeon gives them some hope and seems to answer questions which give us all a big headache. The promise of an afterlife is Christianity's biggest selling point.

Back on thread - Mozart's choral masterpieces - the requiem and mass in c minor - they defy explanation - given that there is no god.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

stomanek said:


> Back on thread - Mozart's choral masterpieces - the requiem and mass in c minor - they defy explanation - given that there is no god.


Of course, you must be actually talking about *Ligeti's* _Requiem_ and/or _Lux Aeterna._

PS Have you heard Mozart's _Misericordias Domini_ yet? I'm sure you will enjoy it.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Kevin Pearson said:


> Although I appreciate your obsessiveness over Ligeti I do find this statement offensive and inconsiderate of those who are God fearing.* Ligeti was just a man and any comparison of him to God or a god* is just simply blasphemous.
> 
> Kevin


Jews and Muslims might say that about *Jesus*, no? You ought to be more respectful of other religions if you want respect in return, such as my religion, *Wagnerism*.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Odnoposoff said:


> What religion or atheism has to do with music?. And why this post has degenerate to this theme?


There's plenty of religeon in music - chruch music for example.
For many atheists - like me - music is like a religeon - you get that beautiful spiritual feeling that theists link to god - without having to lug the baggage.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Pffft you're kidding right?


Not at all, but that's only how it sounds to me - I think had I been told on hearing it for the first time that Pierrot lunaire had been composed far more recently than c.1912 my reaction would not have been 'Jeez, this sounds dated...'


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

elgars ghost said:


> Not at all, but that's only how it sounds to me - I think had I been told on hearing it for the first time that Pierrot lunaire had been composed far more recently than c.1912 my reaction would not have been 'Jeez, this sounds dated...'


Well Schoenberg has been criticised of being rather conventional, romantic and rather _conservative_ in his compositional style. Upon hearing his _A Survivor From Warsaw_ the musical language and technique wouldn't have sounded out of place in 1915-1920.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

stomanek said:


> This is not the middle ages - we atheists can say what we want about your fantasy man in the sky.


Sometimes atheists seem more obsessed with god than believers.

But to stay on-topic, I will quickly name Schnittke, second violin sonata.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

stomanek said:


> There's plenty of religeon in music - chruch music for example.
> For many atheists - like me - music is like a religeon - you get that beautiful spiritual feeling that theists link to god - without having to lug the baggage.


Check your inbox. I have decided to move the discussion out of this thread. 

With regard to spiritual feeling, it is an appreciation of the world as it exists through the exploration of the auditory senses and the mathematical relationships (or comparative lack of them) between the combination and progrssion of sounds. In programme music, it also stimulates the brain's inbuilt ability to follow stories (an important evolutionary trait) and assign non-physical (imaginary?) traits to different timbres and instruments. Music also stimulates the brain's ability to recognise and remember patterns, also another important evolutionary trait. Furthermore, this analysis takes place against a backdrop of cultural conditioning with which we compare new experiences.

Of course, all this is completely illogical and a waste of time. The world might get on better and more efficiently without music, but I really wouldn't change it.


----------



## beetzart (Dec 30, 2009)

Obviously Beethoven's 9th, as mentioned earlier. The opening movement gets in my blood and crosses the blood-brain barrier to send me into a trance like state. It is so powerful, and I wonder what I look like when wondering down the road with it playing in the earphones. How someone can remain original after so many years and to find an endless amount of opportunities with motifs and diminshed 7ths is anyone's guess! I remember hearing once that the opening of the movement sounds as if it had been playing for an infinite time before we happened join in and listen. 

I'll also include his 5th and 3rd symphonies also.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

beetzart said:


> Obviously Beethoven's 9th, as mentioned earlier.


When I listened to the finale of the 9th in its full glory for the first time, I knew I was having a life-changing experience. Is it any wonder it was adopted as the anthem of nations? I can't think of any music so intense or life-affirming. Some people don't like it for that reason, but discovering it for the first time was a special moment for me.


----------



## beetzart (Dec 30, 2009)

In a way being able to construct a piece of music, within the constraints of form but continually striving for originality, hundreds of years ago and for it to still be played and published today is quite something. I wonder if Haydn thought his symphonies would still be performed and revered to this day and for many more years to come, as an example? 

I am an amateur pianist, well I just play for my own pleasure, and have tried to compose music in sonata form but it is so difficult. But maybe that's just me!


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

stomanek said:


> This is not the middle ages - we atheists can say what we want about your fantasy man in the sky.





stomanek said:


> As for respect - sorry - no I don't respect religeon. According to Christianity I will burn in hell for eternity for my rejection of your god - how should I respect that?
> If your feelings get hurt because people like me point out that your beliefs have no basis in reality - I suggest you find something to believe in that is not so easily ridiculed..





stomanek said:


> Religeon may be in our genes - true - an instinct to believe may even be useful, in Darwinian terms - but that has nothing to do with the truth behind those beliefs and as for Dawkins - modern atheists also have this instinct to believe - but rational thought and consideration of the evidence tells us that religeons are false.


May I respectfully suggest that you stop insulting other members with your uncalled for adverse comments about religion, as evidenced above, and stick them where one hopes they might feel more at home.

I refer of course to the "Community Forum" where you will see that there is possibly a welcome awaiting your request to have the opportunity to raise an anti-religion thread so that you can tell us all about something we've already heard a million times over before your recent arrival, or possibly NOT as the case may be.

In case you are unaware, the kind of pro-atheistic discussion you seem so keen to flaunt in this thread, with very little if any justification, caused this Forum a lot of trouble a few months ago, when it became pianfuly obvious that several members were using this place primarily as a platform to promote their pro gay rights, liberal politics, and anti-religion stance whilst pretending to be here for musical discussion.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

Very Senior Member said:


> I refer of course to the "Community Forum"


If you'll pardon the expression, "where angels fear to tread".  I have transferred this discussion to PM so as to not hijack the thread any further.



> In case you are unaware, the kind of pro-atheistic discussion you seem so keen to flaunt in this thread, with very little if any justification, caused this Forum a lot of trouble a few months ago, when it became pianfuly obvious that several members were using this place primarily as a platform to promote their pro gay rights, liberal politics, and anti-religion stance whilst pretending to be here for musical discussion.


Trouble?! :O I have been on other websites before and never understood why people who originally came for discussion end up outstaying their welcome on a community board. Do people do that here? Given the nature of the internet, I suspect so, but I won't be heading over there to find out. As for provocation, I probably wouldn't have responded in such a way, but I also wouldn't have chastised someone for 'blasphemy'. I think we should probably aim to be completely neutral buy, hey, sometimes discussions happen. Unfortunately we don't have the same freedom to discuss ideas on a message board as we do in public. I'm not going to play a free speech card, as I think that is usually quite silly, but I also think that people should behave as they do in real life. A little bit of civility and tolerance on both sides wouldn't go amiss.


----------



## Very Senior Member (Jul 16, 2009)

^ My main point was meant to be that religious type discussions are supposed to be proposed for consideration in the Community Forum, but what we-ve seen above is a back-door method of having an anti-religion diatribe in the context of a music discussion. If anyone cares to delve back through some of the relevant past relgion threads they will see that it's all been said before ad nauseam, and usually such threads all end up in tears one way or the other. I'm not trying to play the innocent here, as I have received my share of penalties for breaching the rules. I'm just trying to warn others who are new that though they may think they're safe in commenting on other people's religious views in whatever way they see fit, things can turn out to the contrary quite quickly.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Very Senior Member said:


> May I respectfully suggest that you stop insulting other members with your uncalled for adverse comments about religion, as evidenced above, and stick them where one hopes they might feel more at home.
> 
> I refer of course to the "Community Forum" where you will see that there is possibly a welcome awaiting your request to have the opportunity to raise an anti-religion thread so that you can tell us all about something we've already heard a million times over before your recent arrival, or possibly NOT as the case may be.
> 
> In case you are unaware, the kind of pro-atheistic discussion you seem so keen to flaunt in this thread, with very little if any justification, caused this Forum a lot of trouble a few months ago, when it became pianfuly obvious that several members were using this place primarily as a platform to promote their pro gay rights, liberal politics, and anti-religion stance whilst pretending to be here for musical discussion.


Yes I accept most of that.
If you see my contributions on this board - they are on topic - but it galls me when theists start complaining that someone hurt their feelings with what looked to me a good comment taken in context.
I am sorry but if a righteous theist pops his head up when I am around - it is likely to get shot off.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

Not until Jimi Hendrix, anyway :lol:



DeepR said:


> Had Scriabin been able to complete the Mysterium (in a realistic way) it would have been the greatest creation of all mankind. Scriabin was tapping into primal, cosmic powers never seen before or after.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

Actually, there is a great deal of good information about the 'dissonance' of the C major Quartet No. 19 - here is a quote from Charles Rosen (great American musical mind and performer of many differing styles):

_If we stop the famous chromatic introduction to the String Quartet in C major, K. 465 at any point and play the chord of C major, we find that not only have Mozart's complex and weirdly disquieting progressions established the key from the outset without once actually sounding the tonic chord, but they never leave that key: the chord C major will appear always as the stable point around which every other chord in these measures revolves._ THE CLASSICAL STYLE: HAYDN, MOZART, BEETHOVEN, Charles Rosen, 1971, W.W. Norton, p. 186. This fantastic book won the 1972 National Book Award for Arts and Letters.

Haydn, for whom the quartet was dedicated along with the other 5 'Haydn' Quartets of Mozart, liked occasionally to start a piece in the wrong key and then after a few bars or staves reveal the true key. Mozart may have been referencing this in the _slow intro_, another feature common to Haydn but not to Mozart.



stomanek said:


> Mozart - dissonance quartet.
> Suerly for the time it was written - no critic has been able to fathom the meaning or purpose of the intro.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

stomanek said:


> You are misinformed.
> No we atheists do not claim we want tolerance - who claimed that? You can critique or make fun of my non acceptance of god to your hearts content - it doesn't bother me at all - as long as you don't kill me or imprison me you can say what you want.
> There's really nothing to laugh at. Atheism is no more a belief system than - not not accepting the reality of Santa Clause, fairies, elves, pixies can be called a belief system on your basis that you need a kind of faith not to accept their existence. That's nonsense - you don't need faith to accept that Santa Clause does not exist. What atheism is - is a rejection of theist claims that god exists - on the basis of lack of evidence. Atheism also does not prescribe people how to live and has no ancient scripture that we hold up as divine truth. Faith is believing in the absence of evidence. Atheism is rejection of the proposition that god (whatever definition you propose) exists due to lack of evidence. It is a position on one matter and one matter only. Demonstrate to me god's existence and I will convert - that is all I ask _ I will go down on my knees and say a thousand hail marys. You can't demonstrate anything. All you have is feelings, a hunch, intuition, wishful thinking.
> As for respect - sorry - no I don't respect religeon. According to Christianity I will burn in hell for eternity for my rejection of your god - how should I respect that?
> If your feelings get hurt because people like me point out that your beliefs have no basis in reality - I suggest you find something to believe in that is not so easily ridiculed.


On Topic: 
I think Satie's Trois Gymnopedies, published in 1888 in a limited private edition amid the absolute height of the late romantic era (just five years after the death of Wagner) are about as 'unbelievable' as it gets in how much of a 'different drummer' Satie possessed.

Off Topic:
I was (truly) more offended when you brought up Apollo in the same context - which is still a sacrilege if not 'blasphemy.'

Atheism certainly is an "ISM," which is a formal declaration in itself. I've always thought of 'an Athiest' as someone not quite over reacting to any and all formal religions - that is, if one were truly 'over it' or just did not think it important at all, one would not be an 'IST' about any matters of the businesses of faith, but instead would just be going on about their business.

Public declarations of any faith(s), or rejection of faith, including someone having been 'offended' by either its mention or absence of mention are all the same to me -- _the offended party grabbing the chance to display their faith, the quasi-apologist seizing the opportunity to display their intellectual belief = spiritual and intellectual vanity_ -- all strikes me as simultaneously rude and boring. Be rude, be boring, then you're really offensive

Best leave all deities out of these discussions.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I can't conceive of creating something as massive as the Ring... Then writing the story backwards and the music forwards. Mind boggling.


----------



## drpraetorus (Aug 9, 2012)

I would also say the Ring. What's also inconceivable is the infinite number of ways to really screw it up. I would add the Passacaglia and fugue in C minor by Bach. A work of infinite profundity. It's like having a long converstion with C minor and plumbing it's inmost secrets. The Art of the Fugue was mentioned at the first of this thread. Whta's even more astounding is that Bach was blind when he dictated it to his son. Try keeping 4 independant lines of music straight in your head. It's hard enough doing it on paper.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

PetrB said:


> On Topic:
> I think Satie's Trois Gymnopedies, published in 1888 in a limited private edition amid the absolute height of the late romantic era (just five years after the death of Wagner) are about as 'unbelievable' as it gets in how much of a 'different drummer' Satie possessed.
> 
> Off Topic:
> ...


I agree about that to an extent - but when believers push claims into your face - what to do? Smile politely and walk away? Or challenge? As an atheist myself - I tend to keep my mouth shut unless pushed - the problem is, silence in the face of a religious assertion can be taken as acceptance. I am also inclined to challenge people who claim humanity was kick started by alien visitors - who back it up with ancient cave art. The problem is - if nobody ever challenges people who make claims that are not backed up by proper research, peer review etc - people might just start making life decisions based on false belief - and worse still - you might find those people in positions of power.


----------



## etkearne (Sep 28, 2012)

Even ten years after first hearing it, I am shocked and mildly disturbed when I hear Bartók's "Piano Concerto no. 1, Mvt. II" and realize that this was written in 1926. It is more psychedelic sounding than any LSD-inspired music I have ever heard. I really wonder what was going on in his mind considering he was a relatively stable person and that specific movement sounds like it was written from a very troubled mind.


----------



## Ramako (Apr 28, 2012)

crmoorhead said:


> When I listened to the finale of the 9th in its full glory for the first time, I knew I was having a life-changing experience. Is it any wonder it was adopted as the anthem of nations? I can't think of any music so intense or life-affirming. Some people don't like it for that reason, but discovering it for the first time was a special moment for me.


How did I not see this before to like it?

Beethoven 3 5 and 9 just seem amazing to me. Most other pieces you can see that a very talented musician can write them. By these I am just blown away.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

PetrB said:


> Off Topic:
> I was (truly) more offended when you brought up Apollo in the same context - which is still a sacrilege if not 'blasphemy.'
> 
> Atheism certainly is an "ISM," which is a formal declaration in itself. I've always thought of 'an Athiest' as someone not quite over reacting to any and all formal religions - that is, if one were truly 'over it' or just did not think it important at all, one would not be an 'IST' about any matters of the businesses of faith, but instead would just be going on about their business.
> ...


If someone believes there is no god or gods, then he or she is an atheist by default, whether they care about what others believe it or not. Its not about labelling oneself as actively opposing organised religion, its about a simple definition of what the word atheist means.

Interesting that this thread was revived for what seems to be mainly a response to the off-topic section of the discussion. Advice about leaving deities out of the discussion is all fine and good, but perhaps advice about attempting to revive discussions that really shouldn't be revived should also be heeded? Let sleeping dogs lie, and all that, you know?


----------



## drpraetorus (Aug 9, 2012)

give it a rest


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

I hadn't the faintest clue that people came to TC solely to flood the community forum with leftish propaganda... a bit hypocritical to act like people with opposite view points didn't advocate their beliefs as well. Either way, I imagine if you all keep bickering at this rate that this thread will soon be closed. Therefore, please refrain from continuing on about this and take it to profile/private conversations if you wish. 

I have to agree that I find the shift from the likes of Mahler and Wagner to Satie to be quite interesting.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Wagner. 

His music sounds so simple and repetitive and short if you think about it, short in the sense that truly continuous music in his operas i.e. music in which all the notes are dependent on each other and only intelligible when played together like the tightly knit first movement of Brahm's Second Piano Concerto or Siegfried's Funeral March never lasts more than 8 minutes, as his so called endless melody is only endless because they are joined together by the thinnest of melodic and harmonic associations, yet in so many ways his greatest moments are unsurpassed in all of music.

The first movement of Brahm's Violin Concerto is infinitely more developmentally intricate and unified than Wotan's Farewell, which gives the impression that it's over at the 3 1/2 minute mark with a conclusive sounding climax but lingers on for another 7.

"Accommodations to the popular demands became even more imperative when Wagner's evolution of harmony expanded into a revolution of form. While preceding composers and even his contemporary, Johannes Brahms, Repeated phrases, motives and other structural ingredients of themes only in varied forms, if possible in the form of what I call developing variation, Wagner, in order to make his themes suitable for memorability, had to use sequences and semi-sequences, that is, unvaried or slightly varied repetitions different in nothing essential from first appearnae, except that they are exactly transposed to other degrees." - Schoenberg - Criteria for Evaluation of Music


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

I've never really heard music that defies explanation (unless you count all the crap folks dance to in clubs these days) so I'll post _someone_ who defies explanation: Happy Birthday, again, Glenn!


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

Cnote11 said:


> Therefore, please refrain from continuing on about this and take it to profile/private conversations if you wish.


I had already transferred this discussion to a PM between stomanek and myself because I didn't think it was appropriate to this thread. This thread was inactive for 2 months.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

etkearne said:


> Even ten years after first hearing it, I am shocked and mildly disturbed when I hear Bartók's "Piano Concerto no. 1, Mvt. II" and realize that this was written in 1926. It is more psychedelic sounding than any LSD-inspired music I have ever heard. I really wonder what was going on in his mind considering he was a relatively stable person and that specific movement sounds like it was written from a very troubled mind.


Try some futurism. I was amazed.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

crmoorhead said:


> If someone believes there is no god or gods, then he or she is an atheist by default, whether they care about what others believe it or not. Its not about labelling oneself as actively opposing organised religion, its about a simple definition of what the word atheist means.
> 
> Interesting that this thread was revived for what seems to be mainly a response to the off-topic section of the discussion. Advice about leaving deities out of the discussion is all fine and good, but perhaps advice about attempting to revive discussions that really shouldn't be revived should also be heeded? Let sleeping dogs lie, and all that, you know?


PetrBs reply came some time ago and did not revive this thread.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

crmoorhead said:


> I had already transferred this discussion to a PM between stomanek and myself because I didn't think it was appropriate to this thread. This thread was inactive for 2 months.


You mean 2 _weeks_. I wasn't referring to your old posts from July. Silly me though  not looking at the dates.


----------

