# The direction of contemporary music



## Napodano (Sep 18, 2017)

As a newbie, I have been recently listening to a lot of contemporary music online at https://www.francemusique.fr/programmes/oeuvres-diffusees/la-contemporaine

I come from a free-jazz listening background and the advanced harmonies of the contemporary music attract me (not knowing the scene).

I am seeking your views on the trends and direction of contemporary music.

Listening to unknown (to me) pieces and composers, I had a daring thought:
- are contemporaries focusing on sound dynamics in music, like in a way Beethoven started doing in the past (the last string quartet pieces), moving away from harmony and melodyc completely? 
- I start to understand the ones who say that contemporary compositions are more like sound sculptures (BTW who said that?).

In free jazz (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_jazz) there has been a trend towards large-ensemble pieces, while my recent listening experience with contemporary music has been with 'chamber' pieces and a kind of minimalism. Can you point me to must-listen pieces of contemporary music for large ensemble?

Sorry if I sound confused and juxtaposing thoughts, but this is why I am seeking your views.


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

Look for ensemble pieces by Enno Poppe, Brian Ferneyhough, Beat Furrer, Michael Finnissy, Rebecca Saunders, Hector Parra, Pelle Gudmundsen-Holmgreen, and Elliott Carter.

This CD in particular, I suspect, is right up your alley:


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Also, check out this thread:

21st Century Listening Chain


----------



## Napodano (Sep 18, 2017)

Andolink said:


> This CD in particular, I suspect, is right up your alley:


Sounds interesting indeed (from youtube soundbites). I will explore all of them. Thank you Andolink!


----------



## Napodano (Sep 18, 2017)

Art Rock said:


> Also, check out this thread:
> 
> 21st Century Listening Chain


WOW, a treasure trove! Valgeir Sigurðsson's Ghosts, I love it!


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Napodano said:


> A
> 
> I am seeking your views on the trends and direction of contemporary music.
> 
> ...


It seems like that is the logical progression of Western classical music. To make a generalized statement, from the 300s until 1600, the focus was on melody (eventually getting up to 40 melodies going at one time). From the 1600s to about 1900 the focus was on harmony. Since the 1900s the focus has been on sound.

This isn't to say that compositions based on melody and harmony aren't still being created; it's just that the direction is going toward sound (with movement being provided by units of time instead of melodic progression or harmonic progression). I think that gives some background to John Cage's 4'33": is the next step silence?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

I think "classical" music is dead - flapping the wind without direction, without a future. It all started about 100 years ago, but after WWII when a lot of music headed to the academy, when serialism, atonalism and other -isms took over, when melody and pleasing harmony was ridiculed, the future was clear: there wasn't one. Just last night I was at a completely enjoyable, exciting concert featuring Debussy, Stravinsky (early) and the rarely heard Symphony no. 4 by Glazunov. What a beautiful, exciting work it is. And it went through my mind "there is not a composer alive today that could compose a symphony with such beautiful tunes, so skillfully orchestrated and so exciting". Nope, now they write ugly, loud, vulgar as if it means something. It's all for naught. Composers today pale by comparison to previous generations and they know it. If you doubt me, answer this: what is the LAST piece of music added to the standard repertoire? Tough to answer, isn't it? Maybe Spartacus by Khachaturian from 60 years ago? There is almost nothing from the 12-tone ugly school that is there: maybe the Berg violin concerto. Despite all the hype, the music of people like John Adams, Philip Glass and the rest cannot stand up to the masters like Beethoven, Dvorak, Tchaikovsky, Brahms. It has to infuriate them, but it's the truth. It's not that there's nothing left to write, it's just that the current generation of composers has nothing to say that is worth listening to, by and large. There are exceptions. I think that Arturo Marquez is a genius, but so far hasn't tackled the large forms. Valentin Silvestrov is interesting, but no Tchaikovsky. Arvo Part is quite good, but quite a niche item. Where are the great symphonists to challenge the masters of the past? There aren't any. Shostakovich was the last. Thankfully, there's a huge library of music bequeathed to us; I hope we're wise enough to listen.


----------



## cimirro (Sep 6, 2016)

mbhaub said:


> Composers today pale by comparison to previous generations and they know it. If you doubt me, answer this: what is the LAST piece of music added to the standard repertoire? Tough to answer, isn't it?


You mention something interesting here - but the problem is "who" decides the music to be played in orchestras today, they select their "friends" and/or composers who are full or marketing around them - a kind of "mafia" - same goes for soloists by the way... so it is not about quality...



mbhaub said:


> Where are the great symphonists to challenge the masters of the past?


I answer with a question: Where a new composer can show his symphonic works today without paying from U$ 30.000 to U$ 80.000 (for 5 rehearsals, one concert and one day of recording)? (I'm not rich, so i'm unable to find another way for this)

I'm an example, I have 4 Symphonic Poems, 2 small symphonic works, a Fantasy for piano, orchestra and chorus, a Piano Concerto, and none of them were played anywhere! And, believe or not, this is not related to the quality of my work. I could easily be heard and enjoyed as an "after Shostakovich" for your taste. But how can you hear my music if I have no access to a decent orchestra interested in new repertoire?

By the way, orchestras are not really open to new repertoire, and when they "invite" new composers via competitions, one of the first rules is "to be playable in 2 to 5 rehearsals" which is far from a decent rehearsal for a premiere of a new work - I can't imagine how would Wagner deal with such reallity today...

best
Artur


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2017)

All those things you mention do indeed provide limitations on the kinds of new works to be presented to the public. But, equally, composers of the past were constrained too - just in different ways. Beethoven's music was trumped by the public's interest in Rossini (God forbid!) in Vienna and this is another reason why the many operas Schubert wrote couldn't get a hearing. So, today's composers are in a similar dilemma for slightly different reasons.

I've heard a bit of contemporary music by Haas and others when I lived in Vienna and these were played by the Vienna Philharmonic and one or two other orchestras if memory serves, possibly the Amsterdam band. And the audiences were patient, warm and generous with their encouragement and interest. We *do* need works which reflect our own times, unquestionably, but I've heard few I'd like to hear again and which don't sound like film music and the kind of atmospheric music which provides both ambience and cues to feeling and emotion (eg. fear, anger etc.) in the cinema experience.

Then there's the avant garde (which is not really under discussion here, I guess) which brilliant feminist scholar and public intellectual Camille Paglia (USA) argues convincingly died out after Dali and others leaving what is now mostly "low brow and philistine". I think that mainly applies to visual art, from what I can tell.


----------



## cimirro (Sep 6, 2016)

CountenanceAnglaise said:


> All those things you mention do indeed provide limitations on the kinds of new works to be presented to the public. But, equally, composers of the past were constrained too - just in different ways. Beethoven's music was trumped by the public's interest in Rossini (God forbid!) in Vienna and this is another reason why the many operas Schubert wrote couldn't get a hearing. So, today's composers are in a similar dilemma for slightly different reasons.


No doubts.



CountenanceAnglaise said:


> I've heard a bit of contemporary music by Haas and others when I lived in Vienna and these were played by the Vienna Philharmonic and one or two other orchestras if memory serves, possibly the Amsterdam band. And the audiences were patient, warm and generous with their encouragement and interest.


Sure there are orchestras playing new works. The problem is the kind of new repertoire mostly are playing exactly as you pointed ("few you would like to hear again"...) and as mbhaub mentioned too.



CountenanceAnglaise said:


> We *do* need works which reflect our own times, unquestionably, but I've heard few I'd like to hear again and which don't sound like film music and the kind of atmospheric music which provides both ambience and cues to feeling and emotion (eg. fear, anger etc.) in the cinema experience.


I understand. I strongly believe a composer can use any kind of idiom if knows how to deal with this artistically and not only commercially (specially concerning movies). My 1st and my 8th CDs were dedicated to my own compositions (since I'm a pianist this makes everything easier in some senses) and some of my works deal with tonalism (4 Romantic Pieces Op.12, Meridional Seasons Op.30), anyway, the "cinema styles" you mentioned are not my cup of tea too...



CountenanceAnglaise said:


> Then there's the avant garde (which is not really under discussion here, I guess) which brilliant feminist scholar and public intellectual Camille Paglia (USA) argues convincingly died out after Dali and others leaving what is now mostly "low brow and philistine". I think that mainly applies to visual art, from what I can tell.


I strongly believe "avant garde" today is a music for 3 ice pops, 2 and a half helicopters and a mute piano called "bAgatelle in a liqUid ozone forM" :lol:
not my cup of tea too...

best
Artur


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2017)

cimirro said:


> No doubts.
> 
> Sure there are orchestras playing new works. The problem is the kind of new repertoire mostly are playing exactly as you pointed ("few you would like to hear again"...) and as mbhaub mentioned too.
> 
> ...


As Dr. Paglia says, "lowbrow" and "philistine" are words which can describe a lot of the avant garde since the 20s. No doubt you could also say the same about *sound design*, but some people like it and as long as it doesn't affect me.....well, whatever floats their boats. I always think of low expectations with a lot of that pretty ephemeral stuff. But I acknowledge that it has a small and loyal band of followers and groupies (in the 50s they were curiously referred to as "long hair"!!) but they are perfectly entitled to their choices. I'd find it difficult to keep a straight face when hearing a lot of it, but I'm your garden variety iconoclast.


----------



## cimirro (Sep 6, 2016)

CountenanceAnglaise said:


> As Dr. Paglia says, "lowbrow and philistine" are words which can describe a lot of the avant garde since the 20s. No doubt you could also say the same about sound design, but some people like it and as long as I don't have to put up with it...well, whatever floats their boats. I always think of the soft bigotry of low expectations with a lot of that stuff. But I acknowledge that it has a small band of followers and they are perfectly entitled to their choices.


Indeed!
Actually I'm far from being a conservative musician, I'm open to any sound possibilities made by someone who know what is doing. As I already mentioned "I strongly believe a composer can use any kind of idiom if knows how to deal with this artistically and not only commercially"

On the other hand, I have seen some people who hardly have any idea of what was made in the last centuries and call themselves "composers" based in a weird personal taste and the lucky of being "monkey-like trained" by their repeated listening and eventually by their not-cultivated/studied-playing in an instrument.

I'm totally against the anti-intellectualism that floats around more and more since last century - We have too much charlatanism in art these days.

Of course, we know what a blowfly can eat. 
But, no matter how many they are, that doesn't mean I must call its food "good"... :tiphat:

Best
Artur


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2017)

I see I edited my comments after you had initiated your reply. I added the comment about humour afterwards and I did find myself amused by a performance in the Wiener Konzerthaus and a piece called "Clocks Without Hands" by Olga Neuwirth where the percussion section was literally *running* from one 'instrument' that banged, clanged, ticked or tinged to another. It was a cacophony and conducted bravely and admirably by Daniel Harding. I wouldn't have called it avant garde, though; just a novel idea about sounds made by a conventional orchestra.

What you say about people who refer to themselves as "composers"...welcome to the world of postmodernism where anybody can be anything they claim to be. Doesn't mean I have to swallow any of that whole and I have some great inspirational intellectuals like Professor Jordan Peterson to confirm most of my views on the subject of postmodernism.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

cimirro said:


> Indeed!
> Actually I'm far from being a conservative musician, I'm open to any sound possibilities made by someone who know what is doing. As I already mentioned "I strongly believe a composer can use any kind of idiom if knows how to deal with this artistically and not only commercially"
> 
> On the other hand, I have seen some people who hardly have any idea of what was made in the last centuries and call themselves "composers" based in a weird personal taste and the lucky of being "monkey-like trained" by their repeated listening and eventually by their not-cultivated/studied-playing in an instrument.
> ...


Have you played any Feldman? Would you be interested? For Bunita Marcus? Triadic Memories?


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2017)

Napodano said:


> Listening to unknown (to me) pieces and composers, I had a daring thought:
> - are contemporaries focusing on sound dynamics in music, like in a way Beethoven started doing in the past (the last string quartet pieces), moving away from harmony and melodyc completely?
> - I start to understand the ones who say that contemporary compositions are more like sound sculptures (BTW who said that?)


I don't know the modern CM "scene" well enough to detect the kind of broad trends that might justify a judgement that it is either thriving or declining.

What I can say is that through my limited exposure to new pieces (BBC Proms, for example, and through composers whose work has been used for cinema like Jóhann Jóhannsson and Max Richter) there is some to enjoy - and more than once - and some that I won't return to.

The democratisation of music production and distribution makes potential composers of anyone with a PC - that's most of us I guess - and that's no bad thing. It does mean that the market for music is very crowded and the boom in pop/rock has led to an unprecedented dominance of the short form melody/rhythm work. Genres continue to bleed one into another and create combinations that probably have historical precedent (someone else can fill in the background I'm sure) and offer a future that is only bleak for those who want their music to be undiluted traditional CM.

I'm currently listening to the soundtrack from _Arrival _which includes performances by Theatre of Voices.

It can only be a good thing, looking at their repertoire, that tastes are broadening, and they seek what interests them from present and past composers.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

mbhaub said:


> I think "classical" music is dead - flapping the wind without direction, without a future. It all started about 100 years ago, but after WWII when a lot of music headed to the academy, when serialism, atonalism and other -isms took over, when melody and pleasing harmony was ridiculed, the future was clear: there wasn't one. Just last night I was at a completely enjoyable, exciting concert featuring Debussy, Stravinsky (early) and the rarely heard Symphony no. 4 by Glazunov. What a beautiful, exciting work it is. And it went through my mind "there is not a composer alive today that could compose a symphony with such beautiful tunes, so skillfully orchestrated and so exciting". Nope, now they write ugly, loud, vulgar as if it means something. It's all for naught. Composers today pale by comparison to previous generations and they know it. If you doubt me, answer this: what is the LAST piece of music added to the standard repertoire? Tough to answer, isn't it? Maybe Spartacus by Khachaturian from 60 years ago? There is almost nothing from the 12-tone ugly school that is there: maybe the Berg violin concerto. Despite all the hype, the music of people like John Adams, Philip Glass and the rest cannot stand up to the masters like Beethoven, Dvorak, Tchaikovsky, Brahms. It has to infuriate them, but it's the truth. It's not that there's nothing left to write, it's just that the current generation of composers has nothing to say that is worth listening to, by and large. There are exceptions. I think that Arturo Marquez is a genius, but so far hasn't tackled the large forms. Valentin Silvestrov is interesting, but no Tchaikovsky. Arvo Part is quite good, but quite a niche item. Where are the great symphonists to challenge the masters of the past? There aren't any. Shostakovich was the last. Thankfully, there's a huge library of music bequeathed to us; I hope we're wise enough to listen.


I don't so much disagree with this as just have a very different perspective.
The way I see it, there are two things called "classical music". One of them refers to the body of music composed over a period of about 250 years, and I agree that this music is indeed dead; it ended roundabout the 1950s, I'd say. But the other is the much bigger body of music that stretches as far back into the past to include the likes of Hildegard von Bingen, and forward into the present day. To me, criticising today's composers for not being great symphonists is about as sensible as criticising Hildegard for the same thing. Music has always evolved, but for many people the music written between about 1700 and 1950 is "the" classical music, and further evolution has been unwelcome.
As I've noted before, Reich at his best couldn't come close to Beethoven's _Eroica_, but Beethoven at his best couldn't come close to _Music for 18 Musicians_. Personal opinion, of course. But this whole "music is dead because composers don't do what I want them to" thing gets a bit tedious. I mean, I don't like flying, but that doesn't mean I go round claiming that long-distance transport is dead because ocean liners aren't a thing anymore.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I happen to love the music of many composers that flourished after 1950. It's not ugly to my ears. And it is more than tedious to read comments dismissing the music of the past 100 years.


----------



## cimirro (Sep 6, 2016)

Mandryka said:


> Have you played any Feldman? Would you be interested? For Bunita Marcus? Triadic Memories?


I do not understand the nature of such question, but I can answer anyway
I know both Feldman's works you mention and some others (meaning "including non-piano music")
I would say the "idiom" he uses is not a problem to me. but the result of the final work (the composition itself) has not interested me in any way for adding in a concert nor for a recording nor for playing at home nor for listening twice the same work.
Having the score in hands I say there is nothing special *to my eyes* there - this is my opinion. So no, I never "played" nor had any plans of "playing" any Feldman, but I got the scores and "studied" the composer.

For more contemporary idioms, I enjoyed Ferneyhough's Lemma Icon Epigram while reading the score. Not sure if I'll work seriously on this work but I already made the "first reading" at the piano - that means it is possible for a future.
Unfortunately I have not recorded too much contemporary idioms, maybe the good example for today is my recording of Messiaen's Mode de Valeurs et d'intensités:




And I have already planned Boulez 2nd Sonata for a near future - probably with the Messiaen missing etudes... why not.

Anyway my "sound preferences" normally stops in Sorabji and hardly goes beyond when the focus is my playing.
On the other hand, as a composer I pay attention to any contemporary musical score which appears in front of me (if made for musical instruments, of course)

Hopes this answers your question well, and I'm curious to hear what you have to say about that 
and, if I may ask, why do you think I should play Feldman?

Best
Artur
P.S.: despite of being a project focused in public domain works (because of copyrights etc) my "youchoose music project" is a prove that I'm open to any kind of repertoires, anyone can "ask" for a recording of mine if sponsoring the minimum necessary for a studio recording. http://opusdissonus.com.br/youchoose.htm


----------



## Joe B (Aug 10, 2017)

This thread is concerning itself with contemporary classical music played on instruments, but I'd like to say something about contemporary classical choral music.

I believe the new generation of classical choral composers and their works is outstanding. Paul Mealor, Eriks Esenvalds, Alexander L'Estrange, Eric Whitacre, Will Todd, Ola Gjeilo along with more senior members John Rutter, Karl Jenkins, etc. are writing incredible, fabulous choral music. I don't think there's a problem with contemporary classical choral music other than, from my perspective, it's not coming fast enough.

I wonder if the lure to a more lucrative career scoring film music hasn't derailed some really good composers who could have gone down the traditional classical path.


----------



## cimirro (Sep 6, 2016)

Joe B said:


> This thread is concerning itself with contemporary classical music played on instruments, but I'd like to say something about contemporary classical choral music.
> 
> I believe the new generation of classical choral composers and their works is outstanding. Paul Mealor, Eriks Esenvalds, Alexander L'Estrange, Eric Whitacre, Will Todd, Ola Gjeilo along with more senior members John Rutter, Karl Jenkins, etc. are writing incredible, fabulous choral music. I don't think there's a problem with contemporary classical choral music other than, from my perspective, it's not coming fast enough.
> 
> I wonder if the lure to a more lucrative career scoring film music hasn't derailed some really good composers who could have gone down the traditional classical path.


Indeed there are great new works for choral!
again, having the chance to find a choral interested in such repertoire is not that easy. but of course, easier than finding orchestras.

Concerning your last sentence, I don't know, if it was me, I would be able to compose film music in few days while working also in a symphony or any other "traditional" works - but maybe it is not that easy to all... (?) really don't know...


----------



## Joe B (Aug 10, 2017)

cimirro said:


> Indeed there are great new works for choral!
> again, having the chance to find a choral interested in such repertoire is not that easy. but of course, easier than finding orchestras.
> 
> Concerning your last sentence, I don't know, if it was me, I would be able to compose film music in few days while working also in a symphony or any other "traditional" works - but maybe it is not that easy to all... (?) really don't know...


Some of the best choral groups have actually commissioned works from these young, contemporary composers. Choral directors like Charles Bruffy (Kansas City Chorale, Phoenix Chorale), Nigel Short (Tenebrae), Stephen Layton (Polyphony), Kent Tritle, taking over the reins from Richard Westenburg (Musica Sacra) are proactive in seeking out new, contemporary choral works for their programs. I don't know if the market place is more conducive for this or if there are other factors at play, but I honestly believe choral music has never been better.

My last sentence was pure conjecture.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

cimirro said:


> I do not understand the nature of such question, but I can answer anyway
> I know both Feldman's works you mention and some others (meaning "including non-piano music")
> I would say the "idiom" he uses is not a problem to me. but the result of the final work (the composition itself) has not interested me in any way for adding in a concert nor for a recording nor for playing at home nor for listening twice the same work.
> Having the score in hands I say there is nothing special *to my eyes* there - this is my opinion. So no, I never "played" nor had any plans of "playing" any Feldman, but I got the scores and "studied" the composer.
> ...


I just have been enjoying listening to those late Feldman pieces, that's all. I know Lemma Icon Epigram. From those British composers, one which you may be interested in is by Finnissy, called Snowdrift. I think it's nice, it reminds me of Carter's Night Fantasies. I think Finnissy's more serious about piano than Ferneyhough. I don't know the Boulez second sonata as well as the third -- there's a part of the third which I like, called Constellation-Miroir (I'm not so sure about the rest!)

I've never heard any Sorabji.

I enjoyed your Messiaen etude. I'm not normally a great Messiaen fan, though not without trying! The bird catalogue I find elusive, I lose concentration.

Oh I've just thought of one you may enjoy discovering, the Barraqué sonata. I used to be addicted to it, though lately I've been enjoying other stuff.


----------



## cimirro (Sep 6, 2016)

Mandryka said:


> I just have been enjoying listening to those late Feldman pieces, that's all. I know Lemma Icon Epigram. From those British composers, one which you may be interested in is by Finnissy, called Snowdrift. I think it's nice, it reminds me of Carter's Night Fantasies. I think Finnissy's more serious about piano than Ferneyhough. I don't know the Boulez second sonata as well as the third -- there's a part of the third which I like, called Constellation-Miroir (I'm not so sure about the rest!)
> 
> I've never heard any Sorabji.
> 
> ...


Thank you for the tips and explanation.

I have some reservations concerning Finnissy compositions, I spent some time on his music around 2006/7/8 (including English Country Tunes, Song 9, etcetc) and the result was disappointing in some senses specially after listening some interpretations with score (including his own interpretations of E.C.T.) - on the other hand Ferneyhough, who often is mentioned as being from the same "school" (new complexity) seems more serious to my view.
Anyway, the idiom in Finnissy is not bad, the idea behind the textures, but the work often is not so interesting as the "look" of the score

Barraque is very interesting - the Sonata is the only work still available by him if I'm not wrong (all were destroyed by him!), His sonata is in my piano room for a loooong time... 

I don't know if there is a new really "complete" edition of the third sonata by Boulez, I shall check it. I have only a manuscript version which probably is not the final version.

Sorabji is great, to my taste, and his compositions are really very well done! Not always well played... that is true... :lol:
Please, keep one eye around my news, there will be a great surprise around his name in the next days 

All the best
Artur


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Last night I heard a live blowout featuring eastern and western jazz musicians gathered by tabla player Zakir Hussain, and afterward thought how unsupportive classical music communities can be about such adventures in music. Jazz also has a reactionary base as well, but shows like last nights show that these obstacles to musical evolution are losing their foothold, and that the music has a lot to gain from it.


----------



## PeterFromLA (Jul 22, 2011)

Music continues to go in interesting directions... some composers are more noise-oriented, and delight in exploring the threshold between nose and music; others delight in studying the past, and figuring out how to recycle past techniques in new sonic contexts; still others are interested in marrying digital technologies to musical architectures... there's a lot to explore, I'm happy to say.


----------

