# Who also knows similar music to the following minimalism/neoclassic new age pieces?



## supersonic68 (Dec 25, 2019)

I search for good minimalisitc, neoclassical new age oder ambient music like the following. You can give recommendations to one of the three following categories or more.

Dramatic, strong melodies:

René Aubry: 





Yann Tiersen: 





Quiet, feelful melodies:

Max Richter: 





Ludovico Einaudi: 





And music from Szymon Brzóska. He is very unknown but I love his music very much.


----------



## samm (Jul 4, 2011)

Nah, I don't think 'neo-classic' is a real genre.


----------



## supersonic68 (Dec 25, 2019)

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/neoclassic

neoclassicor ne·o-clas·sic[ nee-oh-klas-ik ]SHOW IPA

*adjective*
(sometimes initial capital letter) belonging or pertaining to a revival of classic styles or something that is held to resemble classic styles, as in art, literature, music, or architecture.

(usually initial capital letter) *Fine Arts*. of, relating to, or designating a style of painting and sculpture developed principally from the mid-18th through the mid-19th centuries, characterized chiefly by an iconography derived from classical antiquity, a hierarchical conception of subject matter, severity of composition and, especially in painting, by an oblique lighting of forms in the early phase and a strict linear quality in the later phase of the style.
Architecture. of, relating to, or designating neoclassicism.

(sometimes initial capital letter) *Literature*. of, relating to, or designating a style of poetry or prose, developed chiefly in the 17th and 18th centuries, rigidly adhering to canons of form that were derived mainly from classical antiquity, that were exemplified by decorum of style or diction, the three unities, etc., and that emphasized an impersonal expression of universal truths as shown in human actions, representing them principally in satiric and didactic modes.

Neoclassicism is real genre in classical music neoclassic is an adjective not a genre.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

samm said:


> Nah, I don't think 'neo-classic' is a real genre.


Obviously, the works he has posted belong to a genre and are similar to one another. It may not be known to you or I as neoclassical, but apparently, people are calling it that, especially in Germany, it seems.

@OP. As for similar works, maybe try this:


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

'classic' is far more vague a term than 'classical music'. It's used in jazz, rock, pop.














Give me examples of today's music that are not 'neo-classic' by your definition.


----------



## supersonic68 (Dec 25, 2019)

I am very confused about your post.



> 'classic' is far more vague a term than 'classical music'. It's used in jazz, rock, pop.


Why do you tell me this, I did not say the opposite nor did I use the term classic. But nevertheless I try to explain it to you.

There is the term classic and than there is classical music which is a very huge difference. Classical music is the kind composed by Beethoven, Bach, Mozart you know this I don´t have to tell you.

Classical tends to refer to something in the very long past, or something modern done in a very old style.

So one might say of a building "It's in a classical roman style".

Classical also tends to mean grand or refined too.

Classic has a nuanced meaning. A "classic car" could either be a car that is relatively old and attracts attention because of its age, or it could be a car that is (or was) the pinnacle of an era, or a piece of technology, or a car that best illustrates a particular driving style.

The word classical in music is used in terms of relating to music of the late 18th and early 19th centuries characterized by an emphasis on balance, clarity, and moderation or

of, relating to, or being music in the educated European tradition that includes such forms as art song, chamber music, opera, and symphony as distinguished from folk or popular music or jazz. So using the term classical for jazz or popular music is false since it is not from the very long past (classical refers also to ancient greek and rome, therefore a few thousand years back in the past) and they have different forms.

The term classic can be used for jazz, popular music etc. since it just means that it is judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind or very typical of it´s kind and a recognized and established value.

So to sum it up in easy words classic is to say about the quality and classical about the time-prestige.



> Give me examples of today's music that are not 'neo-classic' by your definition.


Why do you asking me this? 
I did not say anything about neoclassic beside that it is not a genre but an adjective. But not every genre is called neoclassical there are just 4 types of music that use the term and that is neoclassical new age (a subgenre of new age music), neoclassicism (a musical movement of the 20th century particularly popular in the period between the two World Wars), neoclassic metal (a subgenre of heavy metal music influenced by classical music), and neoclassical dark wave (a genre of darkwave music). And here we are at the above definition. The etymology of the in 1877 first used word neoclassical is a link between neo (which means new, in a new and different form or manner, new and different period or form of) and an adjective relating to, or constituting a *revival* or *adaptation* of the classic*al* especially in literature, music, art, or architecture. And since we learned that classical and classic is not the same the word neoclassical is used more generally to describe any piece of art or architecture, from the 18th Century onwards, which takes inspiration from Classic*al* culture: whether that means using motifs and ideas from Classical art, or outright copying it and not from ANY music pinnacle. So it is not necessarily neoclassicism but relating to it, as neoclassic new age music overlaps with classical music.

I hope I could help you further.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

flamencosketches said:


> Obviously, the works he has posted belong to a genre and are similar to one another. It may not be known to you or I as neoclassical, but apparently, people are calling it that, especially in Germany, it seems.


It is music that probably won't appeal to too many people who enjoy classical music but will appeal to people who are ignorant of the use the term neoclassical has been put to. These people can demand that we accept the terminology they have created and forget the terminology that we have used to communicate with each other for decades but I don't think that means we have to accept it unless it becomes much more widely used for this new purpose than is currently the case. To me their use of term represents a transparent desire for intellectual respectability through listening to music that lacks rigour and content (in comparison with genuine classical music, most jazz, most alternative/indie rock and most hip hop!). As we have seen it is accompanied by knocking classical music as too confusing. Personally, I would place this entire thread in the non-classical section.


----------



## supersonic68 (Dec 25, 2019)

Enthusiast please tell what about this lacks content.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ I tried but got bored and eventually gave up after 10 (heroic!) minutes. It just seemed to my ears to fiddle (and I'm not using the word to mean violin) with bits of more purposeful Vivaldi spliced in and then given a few twists. I suppose it doesn't help that Vivaldi's original is a work I have probably heard too many times in my life and I may not need to listen to it again! Or that many musicians and composers had already messed around with (Richter calls it "re composing") it before Richter came to do this. Hey, I don't even greatly enjoy Glass or Bryars so I'm probably the wrong person to ask.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

supersonic68 said:


> Enthusiast please tell what about this lacks content.


How anyone can listen to that is beyond comprehension. Max Richter is a businessman and a pretty good one, I don't know how he realized that people would like this.


----------



## supersonic68 (Dec 25, 2019)

His new-interpretation is genius and many parts are better than the original. 

Richter is classically trained, having graduated in composition from the Royal Academy of Music and studied with Luciano Berio in Italy. 

Richter also composes music for stage, opera, ballet and screen. He has also collaborated with other musicians, as well as with performance, installation and media artists. He has recorded eight solo albums and his music is widely used in cinema.

Where have you graduated, from whom have you learned, how many stages, operas, ballets and screens have you composed, with how many musicians and artists have you collaborated and who uses your music in cinema to degrade him to a businessman? You notice something? Hopefully you do. I am very sorry to say this but your view is very infantile and has nothing to do with reality.


----------



## Guest (Jan 5, 2020)

1996D said:


> How anyone can listen to that is beyond comprehension. Max Richter is a businessman and a pretty good one, I don't know how he realized that people would like this.


So, in your opinion, this music is unlistenable, but you simultaneously praise Richter's business sense for finding something that people would listen to?

It may be beyond your comprehension, but perhaps your comprehension is just limited.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

What constitutes "classical" music nowadays is so ill-defined that I think it's pointless to argue about the works presented here. "Classical" has become a historical category, or rather two categories : "Classical" in the specific sense of the period preceding the Romantic, and in the general sense of music written out in permanent form by classically trained composers for concert performance. With the limitless experimentation of the 20th century and the departure from all stylistic traditions, the second category of "classical music" has broken down to such an extent that it can include almost any sort of music, and "classical" music is now probably best identified as music that doesn't fit into any other known genre.

I have to say that most of the musical examples in this thread strike me as akin to what we might hear as background music in films and TV, intended to provide atmosphere but otherwise pretty insubstantial.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

supersonic68 said:


> Enthusiast please tell what about this lacks content.


Why would anyone want to turn a terrific piece of music into something so monotonous and dreary? There isn't even much skill involved in it, much less creativity.


----------

