# Do you feel the quaility of TalkClassical is slipping?



## Tapkaara

I do not want to be a rabble rouser or a trouble maker with this thread, but I am curious to know if any of this forum's esteemed members feel what I feel. So, the question I pose is:

Do you feel the quality of the TalkClassical forum is slipping?

I do.

I find it hard to get good conversations really going. I seem to be a semi-loner when it comes to my favorite composers, but that's OK...I do not expect everyone to like what I like. But I have tried to ressurected the thread about Khachaturian, one of my favorites, and start my "Common Thread" conversation that I thought people would be most interested, but, again, no one really seems to care. Instead, the "Pee in the Shower" thread or the "What are you thinking about Eating" thread or the "Creepy Countertenor" thread or the "Why are there no Bidets in America" thread get page upon page of responses.

There are a lot of throw-way, junk threads in this forum and and lot of throw-away, junky and jokey answers in several of the threads. Not that everything has to be serious all of the time, but I feel quite discouraged when people in a classical forum would rather talk about how they urinate as opposed to, say, Khachaturian.

I know I'll be fighting against the grain on this one and I certainly do not expect my frustrations to be the catalyst to a general sense of improvement around here. But I guess is people care more about what they may or may not eat instead of other, more music-centric subjects; as a result, perhaps the problem is me and I am in the wrong place.

Quite honestly, I find the musical discussion in at least one other forum to be more broad-based, varied, vigorous, serious and sophisticated than it is here, but I will not go to that forum because of aa certain trollish character that is now a tenured member of that site. (I am sure most of you know to whom I am making reference) But said site does have more active members, it seems, than this one, and perhaps there is a reason for that.

Anyway, again, my intention is not to rustle any feathers, though I know I will. I guess I am just longing for something that is more staisfying to my wants, needs and desires when it comes to discussing a subject that I am most passionate about. I sure would love to stay here; there are a lot of good members. But I just feel that I am wasting my time anymore and I am really losing the confidence that this forum can meet its ample potential.


----------



## Tapkaara

And I just realized I misspelled "quality" in the title of this forum. I am an awful typist. Sorry!


----------



## Polednice

I think the quality of threads is at the bottom of an abyss at the moment, but I think the quality of our contributors remains largely unchanged. What complex interactions have led to intelligent people speaking drivel, I do not know!


----------



## Rasa

I'm going to blame the poll-type threads.


----------



## Tapkaara

Rasa said:


> I'm going to blame the poll-type threads.


Actually, I think the poll threads are make for GREAT conversation when they are SERIOUS. My Sibelius vs. Strauss thread, for example, was quite serious and I set up my premise and reasoning for it from the get-go. Some great commentary has come from it, I have to say. But threads like Palestrina vs Rachmaninoff, for example, are reactionary threads that have no real value other than to be silly for silly's sake. It's poll threads like THAT one that give poll threads bad names.


----------



## Polednice

Tapkaara said:


> Actually, I think the poll threads are make for GREAT conversation when they are SERIOUS. My Sibelius vs. Strauss thread, for example, was quite serious and I set up my premise and reasoning for it from the get-go. Some great commentary has come from it, I have to say. But threads like Palestrina vs Rachmaninoff, for example, are reactionary threads that have no real value other than to be silly for silly's sake. It's poll threads like THAT one that give poll threads bad names.


Threads like the Palestrina vs. Rachmaninoff poll have been popping up lately as an ironic stab at other, actually crap polling threads. There have been a number of purportedly serious threads offering such a poll with absolutely no explanation as to the question or its purpose. I think we're getting over that phase through parody.


----------



## GoneBaroque

I voted not really sure as I do not feel I have been a member long enough to form an opinion. I do feel, however, that there could be more serious discussion of music and less disparagement of some composers or musicians because they an perceived to be not as good as our favorites. I joined the forum for the music, both to learn and hopefully to enlighten. While some of the side issues are amusing I can exercise my right not to join in the discussion on matters I do nor care about. I regard as ridiculous the attempts to find the worlds greatest composer or performer as pointless. I admit that I do not know much of Khachaturian's music and would like to become more familiar with him and many other composers. But, there is so much out there and too few hours available.

Please understand that I have no desire to offend my friends on the forum and hope no one takes my remarks personally.


----------



## Tapkaara

GoneBaroque said:


> I voted not really sure as I do not feel I have been a member long enough to form an opinion. I do feel, however, that there could be more serious discussion of music and less disparagement of some composers or musicians because they an perceived to be not as good as our favorites. I joined the forum for the music, both to learn and hopefully to enlighten. While some of the side issues are amusing I can exercise my right not to join in the discussion on matters I do nor care about. I regard as ridiculous the attempts to find the worlds greatest composer or performer as pointless. I admit that I do not know much of Khachaturian's music and would like to become more familiar with him and many other composers. But, there is so much out there and too few hours available.
> 
> Please understand that I have no desire to offend my friends on the forum and hope no one takes my remarks personally.


And just by the way, Khachaturian is just an example; I by no means expect people who don't know about him or don't like him to participate in duscussions about him just because. Just to clarify! 

But the point is, at least it's a serious musical topic worthy of this forum. Yet it gets little to no attention versus some of these other ridiculously silly threads.


----------



## norman bates

Tapkaara said:


> I find it hard to get good conversations really going. I seem to be a semi-loner when it comes to my favorite composers, but that's OK...I do not expect everyone to like what I like.


I think you're posts about Sibelius (and not only him) are some of the most useful and interesting i've found on this board.


----------



## Tapkaara

norman bates said:


> I think you're posts about Sibelius (and not only him) are some of the most useful and interesting i've found on this board.


Hahaha, I appreciate that, but please know that I do not feel that I am the only serious one here. I am not. But I am glad that someone else found what I had to say interesting.


----------



## Dodecaplex

Elephant

blame the drunk polish guy


----------



## Ukko

I voted yes, but I'm probably the 'thing' that's slipping. This is not my best time of year.


----------



## clavichorder

We've definitely reached our point of saturation in silliness in the community forum. And the polar opposites of reactive sarcasm and aggressive naivety are at war with each other. That being said, I think there are some good things happening. The silliness reached an all time high of excitement for me before its inevitable and smelly decay. And I feel that though the state of talkclassical on the whole is not as serious, it also isn't as stuffy as I originally felt upon entering last spring. People here seem more familiar and comfortable to me, but its probably partly my newish sense of community that I've developed. So my vote is an "I'm really not sure". I'm trying to stay optimistic here. 

I also think, Tapkaara, that you and I are kindred obsessional spirits in a way, and unfortunately it will be rare to find those that have the level of enthusiasm we do for our unusual choices in composers. I try not to tire people out too much with my obsessions. If I didn't think I'd annoy people, I'd experiment with all sorts of threads on Medtner.


----------



## starthrower

You can't always make quality judgements based on the lack of participation to one of your threads. Many members including myself only participate as lurkers on certain threads. Your Khachaturian thread as an example. I opened the thread and read your comments, but didn't post anything because I've never heard any of his music. So just to let you know, I appreciate your input on the subject.

There are certainly a lot of frivolous threads here, but I've found the same thing at other forums. People don't want to talk seriously all of the time, or they're just plain bored. On the other hand, when someone starts a genuinely funny and interestingly lighthearted thread, people feel the need to turn serious and start spewing their religious dogma or political views, so you can't win.


----------



## Polednice

Oh and, of course, I think I started threads that, in their own way, could have been interesting and fruitful, but some people saw fit to be utter b*****ds on them, so I stopped trying.


----------



## Nix

Yes. And it started when members became more interested in making friends then discussing music. That said, it's not my place to say that shouldn't happen... personally, I prefer meeting and talking to people in person, and prior to the community forum explosion, it was kind of nice to discuss music with people without having personal judgments. Now I feel like members personal lives are referenced in all sub-forums, and commenting has become a more social activity than an act of contributing information and opinion. Members in the political minority have either fallen by the wayside, or have adopted an antagonistic identity. Other members also seem intent on becoming recognizable through personality rather than opinion... because again this has turned into a more social atmosphere, as clavichorder said.

I realize I probably come off as some anti-social grump. Long time contributors are actually near and dear to my heart, _but only in the context of the forum._ Ultimately I'll prefer to spend time with my friends I can see and talk to, rather than those I could make on a message board. It's nothing personal, it's just how I prioritize.

Also: enough with the poll bashing already! Yes there are a lot right now, but they'll fade out, they always do. Polls have come and gone with frequency since I've been here.


----------



## Tapkaara

clavichorder said:


> We've definitely reached our point of saturation in silliness in the community forum. And the polar opposites of reactive sarcasm and aggressive naivety are at war with each other. That being said, I think there are some good things happening. The silliness reached an all time high of excitement for me before its inevitable and smelly decay. And I feel that though the state of talkclassical on the whole is not as serious, it also isn't as stuffy as I originally felt upon entering last spring. People here seem more familiar and comfortable to me, but its probably partly my newish sense of community that I've developed. So my vote is an "I'm really not sure". I'm trying to stay optimistic here.
> 
> I also think, Tapkaara, that you and I are kindred obsessional spirits in a way, and unfortunately it will be rare to find those that have the level of enthusiasm we do for our unusual choices in composers. I try not to tire people out too much with my obsessions. If I didn't think I'd annoy people, I'd experiment with all sorts of threads on Medtner.


I appreciate everything that you are saying. I really do.

I realize I am sort of "obsessed." Expecting anyone to have the same level of enthusiasm for subjects that are near and dear to me is foolish. And I do try to restrain myself as not to irrate people who simply do not care.

But being of this ilk, I can really appreciate those who have above-average enthusiam for certain composers or pieces of music. I think you should try to get threads about Medtner going. I know nothing about him, honestly. But if I encountered someone who was talking him up in a thread with such enthusiasm, I'd be curious to know what all the fuss is about. THAT should be the spirit and purpose of these forums.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

*Quite serios?*



Tapkaara said:


> Actually, I think the poll threads are make for GREAT conversation when they are SERIOUS. My Sibelius vs. Strauss thread, for example, was quite serious and I set up my premise and reasoning for it from the get-go. Some great commentary has come from it, I have to say. But threads like Palestrina vs Rachmaninoff, for example, are reactionary threads that have no real value other than to be silly for silly's sake. It's poll threads like THAT one that give poll threads bad names.


I'm so sorry...if serious = incompatible....it is quite serious.

:tiphat:

Martin


----------



## Tapkaara

starthrower said:


> You can't always make quality judgements based on the lack of participation to one of your threads.


I think I have made it very clear that I agree with you, even before you brought it up. I cannot expect anyone else in here to care, necessarily about Khachaturian. I don't care about Mozart, for example, so I do not participate in those threads. My point was simply (using the Khahcaturian thread MERELY as an example) that it's sad when one tries to get a viable thread going about a composer but nothing happens. Instead, the silly non-music thread about the lack of bidets un the US gets all of the attention.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

You're overthinking.


----------



## starthrower

Tapkaara said:


> I think I have made it very clear that I agree with you, even before you brought it up. I cannot expect anyone else in here to care, necessarily about Khachaturian. I don't care about Mozart, for example, so I do not participate in those threads. My point was simply (using the Khahcaturian thread MERELY as an example) that it's sad when one tries to get a viable thread going about a composer but nothing happens. Instead, the silly non-music thread about the lack of bidets un the US gets all of the attention.


Apparently some members are more passionate about discussing bathroom activities than music. Why anyone would want to discuss peeing in the shower on a classical music forum is beyond me? Maybe they've been watching too many Seinfeld reruns?


----------



## Tapkaara

starthrower said:


> Apparently some members are more passionate about discussing bathroom activities than music. Why anyone would want to discuss peeing in the shower on a classical music forum is beyond me? Maybe they've been watching too many Seinfeld reruns?


I am not quite sure myself.


----------



## Polednice

Nix said:


> Other members also seem intent on becoming recognizable through personality rather than opinion...


Why does it have to be either, or? Personally, I like engaging both personally and intellectually because, as 'sad' as may make me in comparison to you more sociable folks, I find it very hard to make friends in the real world and have very few.


----------



## Tapkaara

Polednice said:


> Why does it have to be either, or? Personally, I like engaging both personally and intellectually because, as 'sad' as may make me in comparison to you more sociable folks, I find it very hard to make friends in the real world and have very few.


I think our conversations can be both personally engaging and intellectually stimulating. I have no problem with that. In fact, I sincerely feel that they should be friendly.

I think what Nix is getting at is that the emphasis has been taken off of the intellectual conversation and has been shfited toward a more general atmosphere of "anything goes" around here. (Of course, correct me if I am wrong, Nix.) I agree with him, if that is his point. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with general conversation, but I think people that are more interested in that sort of thing shold hit up a more general chatroom or forum. Since music is the (supposed) focus of this forum, I'd be personally pleased to see a heavier focus on the subject at hand...classical music. if I want to engage in the occasional general conversation, I guess I can do that here. But if I want to socialize about just anything (which I do not), I would go some place esle.

I remember a few years ago I was irritated when, for some reason, a gaggle of metal music people really started to take over here. I was of the opinion that they should take their primarily metal-centric chats elsewhere. Maybe I am draconian when it comes to such things, but I feel that everything belongs in its proper place. A forum such as this one could greatly benefit by focusing on conversation that is primarily concerned with classical music. Let's face it, that's why we all joined this forum to begin with.


----------



## Chrythes

I do agree with you to some extent, but i believe that some of the topics you mentioned appeared in the Community Forums, which in its essence has to do less with music than most of the sub-forums here. 
It might be possible that your threads receive less comments because they are usually focused on less known composers, thus receiving less attention because most people are not familiar with the music.
What i do find not very interesting are actually the silly polls that appear every second day, usually in the Classical Music Discussion forum. People usually ask WHAT instead of WHY in these polls, which makes those polls usually superfluous.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

Tapkaara said:


> I think I have made it very clear that I agree with you, even before you brought it up. I cannot expect anyone else in here to care, necessarily about Khachaturian. I don't care about Mozart, for example, so I do not participate in those threads. My point was simply (using the Khahcaturian thread MERELY as an example) that it's sad when one tries to get a viable thread going about a composer but nothing happens. Instead, the silly non-music thread about the lack of bidets un the US gets all of the attention.


I've launched two threads: what kind of music do you listen more often...and another about the three Soviet giants...Nobody ansewered...No interest at all...before, my threads were so populated! Now nothing, they just ignore me...I'm wondering if I did something wrong...

Martin, sad


----------



## Philip

starthrower said:


> Apparently some members are more passionate about discussing bathroom activities than music. Why anyone would want to discuss peeing in the shower on a classical music forum is beyond me? Maybe they've been watching too many Seinfeld reruns?


My "peeing in the shower" thread was a direct response to the "bidets" thread and every other ridiculous poll, and if i recall correctly, it has culminated the appearance of these threads, which incidentally works in our favour, doesn't it?

Although, it seems some members took themselves a bit too seriously and hadn't recognized this effect.

Further, @Tapkaara, i fail to see how a thread in the seperate "not-so-serious" section can steal the attention from another thread in the 'composer' section.


----------



## Polednice

Tapkaara said:


> I remember a few years ago I was irritated when, for some reason, a gaggle of metal music people really started to take over here. I was of the opinion that they should take their primarily metal-centric chats elsewhere. Maybe I am draconian when it comes to such things, but I feel that everything belongs in its proper place. A forum such as this one could greatly benefit by focusing on conversation that is primarily concerned with classical music. Let's face it, that's why we all joined this forum to begin with.


Of course, the key difference here is that our off-topic members _do_ have a genuine interest in classical music. Why they don't want to talk about it, I don't know.


----------



## starthrower

Philip said:


> My "peeing in the shower" thread was direct response to the "bidets" thread and every other ridiculous poll, and if i recall correctly, it has culminated the appearance of those threads, which incidentally works in our favour, doesn't it?
> 
> Although, it seems some members took themselves a bit too seriously and hadn't recognized this effect.


I never bothered to open the thread, but now that I've been informed that it's a spoof, it might be worth a look!


----------



## Tapkaara

Chrythes said:


> I do agree with you to some extent, but i believe that some of the topics you mentioned appeared in the Community Forums, which in its essence has to do less with music than most of the sub-forums here.
> It might be possible that your threads receive less comments because they are usually focused on less known composers, thus receiving less attention because most people are not familiar with the music.
> What i do find not very interesting are actually the silly polls that appear every second day, usually in the Classical Music Discussion forum. People usually ask WHAT instead of WHY in these polls, which makes those polls usually superfluous.


Again, I have nothing against the general forum. But I feel there has been too much emphasis recently on using that forum instead of the primary music forums. When I log on here and see that everyone is talking about Seinfeld and bidets and these conversations are getting more attention than some of the music threads, I feel something is wrong.

Ifukube is a little-known composer. Sibelius, Khachaturian, for example, are not. I suppose people in here like these composers, but not enough to really get into a conversation about them. I do not participate in all threads about all subjects myself, but I do participate in at least some. That's all I ask. But let's keep it on the music.

The poll threads are being unfairly maligned. The SERIOUS poll threads are great. It can make for good conversation. The stupid "pardoy" polls, though are neither funny nor clever and just take up space. People are getting sick of that. So now people will say "Oh great, another poll."

And I agree with you as it pertains to people asking WHAT as opposed to WHY. I myself am against list threads. "List your top 250 favorite composers." "List your top 100 favorite works." These threads certainly ask "what" and absolutley nothing else. It's like asking me to list what's in my medicince cabinet. OK, now you know. So what?

I think we should certainly ask more "why" or "how" in here, we'd actually have something substantial and musical to talk about so we don't have to resort to this other nonsense.


----------



## Tapkaara

Philip said:


> Further, @Tapkaara, i fail to see how a thread in the seperate "not-so-serious" section can steal the attention from another thread in the 'composer' section.


I fail to see how "spoof threads" contribute anything useful to the musical conversation around here, but that's just me. My personal opinion. I realize they are "general discussion" sub-forums and people are welcome to participate in them, and people do. But I don't.

So, we can mutualy fail to understand each other.


----------



## Trout

Tapkaara said:


> And I agree with you as it pertains to people asking WHAT as opposed to WHY. I myself am against list threads. "List your top 250 favorite composers." "List your top 100 favorite works." These threads certainly ask "what" and absolutley nothing else. It's like asking me to list what's in my medicince cabinet. OK, now you know. So what?


There has been a large increase recently in these kinds of threads mainly due to a certain user (hint: begins with an 'm', ends with an 'iz'). Just like with the pole threads, these ridiculous list threads give all of them a bad name.

I can't speak for everyone, but the reason I participate in some list threads is to ultimately learn more about music. It's a way for us to share our favorite pieces and learn from each other, especially those that are not as knowledgeable as others (such as myself). I can see why more veteran listeners would find them pointless, though.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Seriously, I am not seeing this imagined "decline". There more than a few "serious" threads involving discussion and reasoned debate. Several posters, including myself, make a concerted effort to post our thoughts concerning what we are listening to on the "Current Listening" thread. There are some really great reviews and discussions on the thread devoted to Modern and Contemporary Music. The threads related to opera are among the most consistently interesting as members have discussed favorite recordings, favorite older singers, etc... One think I have learned from participation on this and other forums related to art, music, and literature is that it is far easier to bitch about what is missing in discussion/debate than it is to initiate and keep promoting that which one would like to see. When such does occur it is often the result of the concerted efforts of one or two individuals. I am thrilled to see that the "Modern and Contemporary Music" thread has taken on a life of its own after having made the effort to revive it several times. I will suggest that promoting a thread discussing a single composer such as Sibelius or Khachaturian may take a hell of a lot of effort on your part... and are ultimately limited by the limitations of the composer's oeuvres, the members truly enamored (or even familiar with) their music, and the interest of others in said composers at a given time. What of broadening the discussion to a dialog examining favorite symphonies, quartets, tone poems, choral works, conductors, performers, etc... with an expectation of sharing some thoughts about what the individual likes or dislikes in a given work?


----------



## Yoshi

I don't know what's worse: opening a pointless thread or opening a pointless thread to complain about pointless threads. :devil:


----------



## Dodecaplex

Jan said:


> I don't know what's worse: opening a pointless thread or opening a pointless thread to complain about pointless threads. :devil:


Posting a pointless reply to a pointless thread about pointless threads is even more pointless, if you ask me.


----------



## Yoshi

Dodecaplex said:


> Posting a pointless reply to a pointless thread about pointless threads is even more pointless, if you ask me.


Well posting a pointless reply to a pointless reply about... well forget it.


----------



## Rasa

[insert meta]


----------



## Dodecaplex

Jan said:


> Well posting a pointless reply to a pointless reply about... well forget it.


By the way, very nice avatar. Every time I reply to you, I feel like I'm directly speaking to Glenn Gould himself. It's weird.


----------



## Philip

starthrower said:


> I never bothered to open the thread, but now that I've been informed that it's a spoof, it might be worth a look!


Right... you never opened the thread but somehow you knew it was about Seinfeld... OK


----------



## Yoshi

Dodecaplex said:


> By the way, very nice avatar. Every time I reply to you, I feel like I'm directly speaking to Glenn Gould himself. It's weird.


Thank you, that's really interesting . 
And I hope some people don't feel like they're speaking to a troll when they reply to you.


----------



## Vaneyes




----------



## Dodecaplex

Jan said:


> And I hope some people don't feel like they're speaking to a troll when they reply to you.


Actually, avatarism and avatar discrimination are quite rampant these days. It's been very difficult for me.

I wonder what Tapkaara will think once he notices the direction this thread is taking . . .


----------



## Tapkaara

Dodecaplex said:


> Actually, avatarism and avatar discrimination is quite rampant these days. It's been very difficult for me.
> 
> I wonder what Tapkaara will think once he notices the direction this thread is taking . . .


Let's just say, I'm not surprised.


----------



## Polednice

Tapkaara said:


> Let's just say, I'm not surprised.


I would say that the equally prevalent attitude for derailing threads, whether with silly humour or not, is something that I find much more intolerable. If people want to talk crap in their own threads, then I'm all for people making topics on whatever they like. But so many discussions just degrade by the 2nd page, and I don't think it's fair to the OP.


----------



## clavichorder

Its time we redirect then. Stlukesguild makes some good points. Look in the right places, post in the right threads, and you'll find some interesting discussion, or if not discussion, standalone posts that are best read and absorbed. 

Though in Tapkaara's common thread thread, though he talked about Sibelius and Ifukube, he didn't make the premise of the thread that, which was good as it gave us opportunity to share our own ideas. That was a thread that I was hoping for more participation in. But a lot of users here also aren't that obsessed with particular composers and prefer not to have a "pantheon", so its understandable that they wouldn't have much to contribute, still there are plenty of users here that surely would love to link their composers together.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

There are bound to be good threads that interest each of us regarding genuine musical topics and interests. Many might need a decent search. But not all might have the depth of discussion one might expect. On the whole I think that's realistically good enough for a public thread that is free of monetary charge for us schmucks to come and go as we please.

Threads that do degrade quickly tend to have silly topics anyway. A good example in my opinion is the recent poll on the "greatest 30 year era for music" beginning in the 16th century increasing in 30 year increments. A silly thread deserves none other than a silly answer, to which I played my part. 

I voted "no".


----------



## Sid James

I agree with this, this is gold -



GoneBaroque said:


> ... I do feel, however, that there could be more serious discussion of music and less disparagement of some composers or musicians because they an perceived to be not as good as our favorites...


This is the issue that is important here, imo. There always seem to be a need for whipping boys or mud slinging, esp. at soft targets. 2 years or so ago when I joined, it was Schoenberg, the other atonalists, as well as any other composer who is good at making a buck and popular (esp. Philip Glass & Arvo Part). But those ideological members are now gone, some banned. Closer to now we had a phase of dissing John Cage, Xenakis and also throwing things in people's faces when it suits people who feel "cornered' in an argument. This can be about what you do or don't listen to. It's primitive and absurd, negative, idiotic, etc. So basically I'm against having whipping boys, it's childish, & yes it drags the forum down. It resulted in me ignoring a member here, a thing I have only done once before...


----------



## Sid James

Nix said:


> ...
> I realize I probably come off as some anti-social grump...


No, I think that's me, or at least the grump part  (depending what day of the week it is :lol: ).



> ...Ultimately I'll prefer to spend time with my friends I can see and talk to, rather than those I could make on a message board. It's nothing personal, it's just how I prioritize...


I agree that in person it's better to talk about music or other things, but I don't always get the chance, so it's good to have a place you can go, even if virtual/online, & just "talk" about set topics, on music. When I'm with friends or colleagues into music, it would be kind of boring to always talk about music. But that's the point of TC, it's specialised in this, so that's kind of good, easy, etc...



> ...
> Also: enough with the poll bashing already! Yes there are a lot right now, but they'll fade out, they always do. Polls have come and gone with frequency since I've been here.


I think polls are okay as long as there's some thought put behind them, whether for serious discussion or fun...


----------



## Sid James

starthrower said:


> ...Maybe they've been watching too many Seinfeld reruns?


Now are we going to have polls about what the soup nazi said or something like that? I hope not, he was funny, but I doubt he was a philosopher :lol: ...


----------



## Sid James

I read all through this thread, now that I've had some time, I agree with what Tapkaara is saying re the need for more balance. I understand it's hard to get a conversation or thread going on certain less known composers, or composers who have only a few "hits" to their name. Eg. I started a thread on Kurt Weill a few months back, and not much has happened there. There has been some renewed activity on Xenakis and Penderecki threads I started like 2 years ago, so these comes come in and out, wax and wane like the tide. But I find that if I nurture the threads I begin like a gardener, they might have more contributions/discussion. It depends. In any case, my aim is to return to the Xenakis thread and report on works by him that I'm getting my head around now after about a year of listening to recordings, and also to report on a great percussion concert of his music that happened here months back. It's all about time and I want to do it properly. I kind of appreciate every contribution as long as it adds to the discussion in some way...


----------



## Ravellian

Generally I think we can come to the Community Forum to post whatever we want, and we should try to save the quality music posts for the Classical Music Discussion board and other more specific boards. Several factors indicate that that board's quality is slipping...

- Overabundance of silly polls and vs topics, especially by newer members
- Overabundance of lists, which are fun but not very meaningful
- The same arguments rehashed over and over by the same posters (especially the 'debates' over certain contemporary composers many of us don't like). These are getting tiresome.

Things I would like to see which would make the Classical Music Discussion board a better experience:
- More topics about what you particularly like and why
- More discussion about why composers compose in a particular way, without just giving a brainless "I like this guy's style more" and how we can appreciate different styles
- More topics related to music theory and history. Example: What are typical modal progressions used by Renaissance composers?


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Sid James said:


> ... It resulted in me ignoring a member here, a thing I have only done once before...


Who is that member you are ignoring? Feel free to PM me if you prefer to disclose this member's identity, which is obviously an utterly sensitive matter to you.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

Ravellian said:


> Generally I think we can come to the Community Forum to post whatever we want, and we should try to save the quality music posts for the Classical Music Discussion board and other more specific boards. Several factors indicate that that board's quality is slipping...
> 
> - Overabundance of silly polls and vs topics, especially by newer members
> - Overabundance of lists, which are fun but not very meaningful
> - The same arguments rehashed over and over by the same posters (especially the 'debates' over certain contemporary composers many of us don't like). These are getting tiresome.
> [words words words]


I don't get these kinds posts. You're free to make any kind of thread you'd like. "Wouldn't it be great if we had more topics about...[blank]?" Well, feel free to make one.


----------



## Air

I voted "I am really not sure".

I think that a lot of what we may perceive as a "slip" in quality is seasonal. It's important to remember that many of us on the forum have busy lives - we come and go - and I only speak for myself here, but sometimes, it's just really hard to come online after a hard day and read up on the technicalities of a 6-voice Bach fugue or the musicology of tonality vs. atonality. We just want to come online for a short break, or to discuss a wonderful work that we are listening to, which is making our lives oh-so-much-better at the moment.

Anyhow, fall, especially November, is one of the busiest times of the year for everyone. It has nothing to do with a recession in the way we ourselves think, work, or in this case, post. It's just one of those things. It's not good to over think it too much and it's not necessary to chastise ourselves about it either. That's the way I see it.


----------



## science

Everything changes. My sense is that Tapkaara needs to stay out of the community forum and poll threads. 

I only open threads that interest me, so I can't say whether there's been a decline. There was never a time without a few disappointing threads, and there has not yet been a time without threads that interest me.

Based on the latter, I voted "no."


----------



## Delicious Manager

I voted 'Yes'. It has definitely slipped (and my reduction in posting is directly related to this). There are too many polls, lists and 'which is best?' posts now. It feels like kids trying to fill-up their time (shouldn't they be doing their homework?).

It's a trend among ALL the sites I subscribe to. And I'm contributing less and less to all of them...


----------



## elgar's ghost

I've been here for about a year and I can't really see any difference now to before - maybe an increase in the number of trivial polls and threads dedicated to offbeat subjects is noted more by the people who have been on here for longer than me. The one thing that does strike me is when the occasional regular member seems to suddenly fall off the map - Myaskovsky and Argus spring to mind.


----------



## Ukko

elgars ghost said:


> [...]
> The one thing that does strike me is when the occasional regular member seems to suddenly fall off the map - Myaskovsky and Argus spring to mind.


Yeah, that affects me too. I wonder if they have moved on, in one of the meanings of that phrase.


----------



## Polednice

I think that perhaps one of our less intelligent moves is to reply negatively to threads we dislike instead of just ignoring them. If we ignore them, the poster eventually gets the hint and doesn't bother. If we moan in all the stupid poll threads or make jokes, then 'any activity is good activity' and more will be made.


----------



## Tapkaara

Well, here is what I think will improve the quality of the forum:

1. Do away with unneeded joke/parody threads. They are usually not that funny and they distract from the real reason we are all here. 

2. Look at at thread that you may not normally look at. I am trying to be better about this myself. We all see threads that we never bother opening because the subject is either unknown or perhaps unappealing. But remember: the person who created that thread is trying to get attention and state a case...why not check out what he is saying, at least? Maybe it ends up being something that you are interested in. And then, hopefully, when you open a new thread, the other members will extend to you the same courtesy. We should all be supportive of other peoples' threads in this way.

3. Keep poll threads relevant. Unlike some, I think the poll threads are great...in theory, anyway. When I created my recent Sibelius vs. R. Strauss thread, I had a very reasonable and concrete premise for it and, hopefully, stated that premise with some clarity so the purpose of it makes sense. If I may say so, it stimulated some of the most interesting comments I had seen in here in a while. But I thin these tongue-in-cheek polls like Bach vs. Stockhausen, or something like that, degrade the purpose of legitimate polls. And if a real and tangible reasoning can be provided for compoaring such different composers, it should be stated clearly. If the only purpose is to be witty or funny, it should be avoided.

4. Allow negative criticism and be respectful of unpopular opinions. All composers are fair game to legitmate criticism. Also, all members have the right to hate, for whatever reason, the composer you love. Allow members to state their case against composers you like. Or musical periods. Or musical genres. Or whatever. It is OK to disagree with people who do not like the same things you do, and it is OK to state your own case in defense, but keep it respoectful and do not make it personal.

5. Do away with "What are your favorite..." threads. Listing your top 5, 10, 200, whatever this or that has been done so many times and it does not, as far as I am concerned, stimulate worthwhile conversation. It's just showing someone a list. After you show your list, I get to show mine and then someone else shows theirs. That's about all these threads amount to. Like someone else said in this thread, let's stop asking "what." Chances are we already know "what." So let's ask "why" and "how" instead. This is when conversation really begins to take off.

These are just 5 ideas off the top of my head. I am by no means suggesting that these should somehow become enforceable rules on the forom. But I think they make decent guidelines, at the very least. Maybe other have some guidelines that they think would also be god to follow.


----------



## graaf

After fair share of time spent here, we still expect this place to excite and thrill us the same way it did the first day we came here. When that doesn't happen, we percieve it as forum quality declining, instead of us getting tired of it, without anything so new to see.

For example, when you made Sibelius vs Strauss thread, Jeremy Marchant wrote great post about it, and you said "THIS is what TC should be about" - but this forum can't provide you with something like that any time you make a post, or even a thread! It seemed that way when you first came here, because the forum had already a lot of great stuff written and by the time you've read all of it, you were pretty much thrilled but you didn't realize that it was accumulated over time, not posted on request! 

Anyway, those were my 2 cents.

Also, threads about religion, politics, food and toilet will thrive in any forum.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Hilltroll72 said:


> Yeah, that affects me too. I wonder if they have moved on, in one of the meanings of that phrase.


I spoke too soon. Myaskovky is back - and with a poll, heh heh...


----------



## Polednice

Tapkaara said:


> 2. Look at at thread that you may not normally look at.


I don't have the time to waste.  If you want me to look at your thread, give it a good title which states CLEARLY what the thread is about!


----------



## TrazomGangflow

I really don't care if people post silly threads in the communtity forum because its for all things not about classical music. As long as the classical forum stays classical I'm fine with this site.


----------



## Yoshi

I don't like how serious this discussion became. In fact, I'll leave the forum for some time and hope things will calm down around here.


----------



## Guest

Speaking as the creator of the "Palestrina vs. Rachmaninoff" poll, I will say that it was originally intended as parody. However, as a result of the law of unintended consequences, I believe that it did bring information about a renaissance master to people that perhaps had no experience with him before, and may just go and listen to him, with one of the great recommendations offered in that thread, as a result of a joke.

Are joke threads so bad? Perhaps that is one of the reasons classical music is as lacking in popularity as we all say - people get this notion (Lord knows where from) that it is stodgy, tedious, serious music, and you must be sitting in a tweed jacket in a library before you can begin to speak on it - debating the finer points of conductor X's approach to obscure composer Y's work as compared to conductor Z. Quite honestly, I learn more about classical music in some of the less serious threads than I do in the umpteenth iteration of "is Cage's 4'33" really music" thread.

But the real beauty of a forum is that you get to pick and choose what topics you will spend your time with.


----------



## mleghorn

I've been seeing a lot of off topic and/or sarcastic and/or inappropriate posts on the forum lately. Like the lady who blames the poll-type threads. Sure that's a clever reply, but it's not helpful or constructive. This forum, like other forums, is a community created by the members who participate. I sense that many of the participants in this forum are not appreciative of this community.


----------



## kv466

Jan said:


> I don't like how serious this discussion became. In fact, I'll leave the forum for some time and hope things will calm down around here.


  

Well, I agree with Taapi...there's still good info provided to stoppers-by.


----------



## Andy Loochazee

I voted "yes", but I can't say that it bothers me personally one way or the other whether this forum is going uphill or downhill. This is because I don't use this forum as a way of improving my knowledge about music or anything else. I have said before that I find other sources of information far better for this purpose. Also, I have no interest in making "friends" with anyone here or trying to persuade other people of my religious or political views.

I must say though that I give Tapkaara credit for raising the topic in the first place. Given the plethora of junk threads and polls, the question certainly does need asking, and is a nice anti-dote to the usual optimistic stuff that comes trotting out from the usual quarters about how allegedly well the forum is doing. 

However, I feel that asking this kind of question is bound to produce spurious results since, by and large, most of the members who have come to feel dis-illusioned with place have presumably already cleared off. I would guess that trying to resolve the problems as suggested by the OP is a waste of time because this Forum has open doors and the moderators do not either try to or have the capacity to regulate the flow of comment unless it breaches the TOS. 

Personally, after the experience here over the past year year or so I have come to hate polls especially those which seem to go on endlessly. There's one I'm thinking of especially which is such a huge waste of space that it seems criminal to allow it to continue any longer. 

I also dislike the very chummy, personal, tell-all, threads about one's personal life. I'm not sure I believe all that is said, for starters, or at least I'm deeply suspicious. I'm also very doubtful about the wisdom of discussing personal medical issues here, and I'm even more suspicious about advice given of a medical nature. Some of it looks bogus to me.

Stupid polls, repetetious threads and all that kind of rubbish is bound to happen partly because the place is full of juveniles, and partly because people can't be bothered to check back to see what any particular topic has already been covered. Even if they try to do so, the search facility is so utterly useless that they wouldn't find anything anyway. Maybe that's the way the management here like things, since it keeps the pot on the boil so to speak with fresh threads duplicating previous ones, thus creating the illusion of a stimulating musical environment.

The only way to reform this place would be to regulate the creation of all new threads and polls, by a more pro-active style of moderation compared with the one we're used to. But I can't see this happening as it would be too demanding of moderators' time for one thing. So, Tapkaara I think you're probably wasting your time.


----------



## Tapkaara

Andy Loochazee said:


> Stupid polls, repetetious threads and all that kind of rubbish is bound to happen partly because the place is full of juveniles, and partly because people can't be bothered to check back to see what any particular topic has already been covered. Even if they try to do so, the search facility is so utterly useless that they wouldn't find anything anyway. Maybe that's the way the management here like things, since it keeps the pot on the boil so to speak with fresh threads duplicating previous ones, thus creating the illusion of a stimulating musical environment.
> 
> The only way to reform this place would be to regulate the creation of all new threads and polls, by a more pro-active style of moderation compared with the one we're used to. But I can't see this happening as it would be too demanding of moderators' time for one thing. So, Tapkaara I think you're probably wasting your time.


This makes a lot of sense to me. True, I think people should earch to see if the subject has been brought up before. I think most people would agree that redundant threads are not ideal. I agree also that the search feature here does not make researching older threads easy. I don't think it's an effort by the administrators to keep the pot on the boil to creat an illusion, but it is indicative, I think, of a general laissez-faire attitude. I definitely think this forum could be more tightly regulated. Not to monitor bad words or things like that, but to keep things clean, organized and flowing.

And no, I do not expect this discussion to rock the boat with anyone who has influence. In fact, most of the commentary in this thread seems to suggest everything is fine or there is uncertainty whether or not this place is going down the tubes even though the poll (at the time of this posting) shows a (slight) majority agrees with me. Where are these people and are they not speaking up?

Even in THIS thread, the folks that agree with me are not talking. Again, I get the strange sensation of speaking to a fellowship of classical music fans that would just rather talk about other things.

I am sure this makes me seem awfully whiny and preoccupied with something of little real importance. It's just an internet forum, right? I actually would go elsewhere but I will not due to a certain troll who hangs out in the other forums. I feel stuck here and I hope this discussion will bring certain issues to light. I guess I could just leave too, but if things can pick up I'd like to stay.


----------



## kv466

Why I am guilty of having opened a couple of threads in the 'community' section, I have always thought of opening a new thread as something that should be of some sort of importance or relevance to the community. One of the problems, it seems, is that some view the 'create thread' or whatever it says like an opportunity to just ramble on. It's sad because if such regulations were to come into effect it would make it more difficult for someone who really creates thought and discussion provoking threads.


----------



## Tapkaara

kv466 said:


> Why I am guilty of having opened a couple of threads in the 'community' section, I have always thought of opening a new thread as something that should be of some sort of importance or relevance to the community. One of the problems, it seems, is that some view the 'create thread' or whatever it says like an opportunity to just ramble on. It's sad because if such regulations were to come into effect it would make it more difficult for someone who really creates thought and discussion provoking threads.


Well. I am not against the community forum. I am really not. This thread happens to be in that forum. I don't think people shouldn't be allowed to use it.

But like somone else said: I do not come here for general socialization. I have real life friends for that. Unfortunately, I only have one real life friend (that lives close to me) who likes classical music. So, that's wh I come here...to communicate with others who share my same interest in this topic.

But it seems to me (though I have no proof other than my gut feeling) that a lot of the members of the forum would rather spend time in the community forum talking about non-music subjects. That discourages me because the focus of conversations seems to be mostly elswhere. Perhaps it's because the members are bored with the musical discussion, so they find other things to talk about.

But if they are bored with the music discussion, why?

I just want to get the focus back on music. Good conversation does take a little bit of effort. I am appealing to everyone here to put in that effort so we can live up to the potential of the forum. Perhaps that's impossible, though. Perhaps everyone is burnt out and they hang out around here ou of habit. I don't want to be burnt out but I feel I am getting to that point.

And no, I do not expect every thread to be a blockbuster. Nor every post. That's a ridiculous expectation. But we could try!


----------



## Ukko

Tapkaara said:


> [...]
> And no, I do not expect every thread to be a blackbuster. Nor every post. That's a ridiculous expectation. But we could try!


The great majority of my posts are blockbusters; and/or backbreakers... maybe not blackbusters, but nobody is perfect, eh?


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Andy Loochazee said:


> I voted "yes", but I can't say that it bothers me personally one way or the other whether this forum is going uphill or downhill.


+++ PLUS +++

2647 additional keystrokes subsequent to the opening sentence.

Which, to me, seems like a significant amount of effort 
to devote to something that doesn't "bother you personally."


----------



## Oskaar

Mayby you have talked things through. Then people come up with threads that maybe lack engagement from the originator, and then of course from the members. But I think things will change. I am quite new to the for um, and to classical music. But I have energy and determination that maybe will benifit the forum in the future. But I have short musical memory, and that is not good.
But if you are the same bunch talking about the same things, obviously the quality will fall. 
Therefore it is so neccesary to welkome new people in a galant and welcoming way. Even if they post "stupid" messages and start "stupid" threads.


----------



## Machiavel

Off course it is. When you have poll like Bach versus evryone else. Palestrina vs rachmaninoff or thread like DO you pee in the bath. I think TC is becoming a kindergarden. There is so many pointless and non-sense threads here. What is next xenakis versus monteverdi. Cage versus Telemann. Better, how many minutes till you ejaculate. It's not that far from Do I pee in the bath.


----------



## clavichorder

Ha! All of the sudden I'm starting to enjoy the forum again. Its like a downtime place for me now that I have been getting my life back on track. And maybe Tapkaara's post caused us to behave a little, who knows.


----------



## Oskaar

[QUOTE It's not that far from Do I pee in the bath.[/QUOTE]

But that is a symptome of lack of new spirit. And when people knock you down if you are posting something. Or knock you down if you are posting a new thread....You are yourself to blame. Negativism is the cancer of any forum. If you knock down a bad ettempt.. You prevent 5 good!


----------



## jhar26

As soon as we'd start deleting the 'nonsense threads' or the 'pointless polls' (and I for one have not a big enough ego to think that I have the right to decide for the rest of you guys which ones are 'worthy' and which ones are pointless) there would be as much complaining about the forum (more - in fact MUCH more) as there is now. There would be accusations of censorship, of us being too heavy-handed, of us taking ourselves too seriously, of us being snobs....

Mods don't make a forum what it is - the members do. YOU guys collectively create the forum that you want. And I think that it's a pretty good one.


----------



## Tapkaara

jhar26 said:


> As soon as we'd start deleting the 'nonsense threads' or the 'pointless polls' (and I for one have not a big enough ego to think that I have the right to decide for the rest of you guys which ones are 'worthy' and which ones are pointless) there would be as much complaining about the forum (more - in fact MUCH more) as there is now. There would be accusations of censorship, of us being too heavy-handed, of us taking ourselves too seriously, of us being snobs....
> 
> Mods don't make a forum what it is - the members do. YOU guys collectively create the forum that you want. And I think that it's a pretty good one.


Well, what about regulating repeat threads?


----------



## Oskaar

Tapkaara said:


> Well, what about regulating repeat threads?


 Good threads die down. I think the forum needs repeating threads. Simular threads simultaneously, I agree. Could be mederated. 
But it is neccesary to think that new people arrive, and give new blood. And then you need repeating threads. The most popular issues is important to hold up. And if the old bunch of guys is knocking it down,. because they have seen it before... Well... you dig your own grave.


----------



## jhar26

Tapkaara said:


> Well, what about regulating repeat threads?


What oskaar is saying....If there is a thread now about Beethoven's fifth symphony we can't say to someone who joins a year from now, "remember - no talk about Beethoven's fifth because that's already been discussed."


----------



## Polednice

Andy Loochazee said:


> I also dislike the very chummy, personal, tell-all, threads about one's personal life. I'm not sure I believe all that is said, for starters, or at least I'm deeply suspicious. I'm also very doubtful about the wisdom of discussing personal medical issues here, and I'm even more suspicious about advice given of a medical nature. Some of it looks bogus to me.


Well I'm sorry that you have such little faith in other human beings. This may be the internet, but each avatar represents a real, (usually) caring person on the end of another computer. The real world isn't so great when the people shun you.


----------



## Tapkaara

Oh well, I have said just about everything I can say on this topic. I'll give the forum one more chance. I guess if I don't like it here, the easiest thing to do is leave.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Not that I need anything to provoke me to leave, I simply can't come on here all the time anymore. I sure think our non-classical discussion forum has gone quite wild, but overall I think our classical discussions have been really neat, very interesting topics coming.


----------



## science

Machiavel said:


> Off course it is. When you have poll like Bach versus evryone else. Palestrina vs rachmaninoff or thread like DO you pee in the bath. I think TC is becoming a kindergarden. There is so many pointless and non-sense threads here. What is next xenakis versus monteverdi. Cage versus Telemann. Better, how many minutes till you ejaculate. It's not that far from Do I pee in the bath.


I thought Xenakis v. Mendelssohn would be better, and the natural antagonist to Cage is Perotin.

j/k of course

Let's have fun. Let's play with music.


----------



## Dodecaplex

Elephant

i blame the drunk polish guy
criticize this post and you'll perish
like it and you'll get a free donut


----------



## Igneous01

let us cease writing all those horrible thing on behalf of national truss.


----------



## presto

I've not been here long enough to tell if the quality is slipping, but I wasn't impressed to see a "Do you pee in the shower?" thread. It's up to us not to respond to such threads and let them die!


----------



## kv466

Machiavel said:


> What is next xenakis versus monteverdi.


*Man, and I was just going to start a Xenakis vs. Galifianakis thread! *

As far as the dude that don't like being 'chummy' and he being 'suspicious'...those seem like much more profound and underlying troubles,...lots of projection and paranoia...oh, but that is my non-medical observation as I am only a doctor of love.


----------



## Polednice

kv466 said:


> I am only a doctor of love.


When is my next injection?


----------



## science

Polednice (suggestively): When is my next injection?

_Enter three pimply, stressed-out post-docs, over-caffeinated, hands visibly shaking._

kv466: Today you'll be taken care of by our interns, who need a lot of practice in this sort of thing. _Exit kv466._

Post-doc 1 (pulling on rubber gloves): Um, you know this is going to hurt, right?

Polednice: Nooooooooooooooooo!

_The curtain falls._


----------



## Oskaar

jhar26 said:


> What oskaar is saying....If there is a thread now about Beethoven's fifth symphony we can't say to someone who joins a year from now, "remember - no talk about Beethoven's fifth because that's already been discussed."


Yes! Well put!


----------



## Ravellian

Chi_townPhilly said:


> +++ PLUS +++
> 
> 2647 additional keystrokes subsequent to the opening sentence.
> 
> Which, to me, seems like a significant amount of effort
> to devote to something that doesn't "bother you personally."


It's so cute how you type in red font when you're angry.


----------



## NightHawk

I'm not a veteran member, but I see your points perfectly, Tapkaara. Occasionally, I have posted a response that was either just an attempt to be funny over someone's post, or just a stupid, ill-thought-out response = the habit of responding when one really has nothing to add.

I love this site, I was almost panicked over the recent crash, but yes, it could be 'tighter' without being less fun. I have learned so much from so many of you, and been introduced to so many new composers and music, and I only joined this month! I have discovered many others who love my music, and I have been 'liked' by a small amount of people - just enough to keep me encouraged that my point of view is occasionally worth posting.

I hope there is no Exodus from Talkclassical.com - I am sorry to see 'Alma' (Almaviva?) go, and I miss the crusty voice and acute insights of 'Hilltroll2' (who may just be taking a break).

I pledge to all of you, to think more carefully about my posts so that I'm not guilty of adding a FACEBOOK factor. (This doesn't mean that I still won't make the occasional nitwit remark!)

Most sincerely,

NightHawk



Tapkaara said:


> I do not want to be a rabble rouser or a trouble maker with this thread, but I am curious to know if any of this forum's esteemed members feel what I feel. So, the question I pose is:
> 
> Do you feel the quality of the TalkClassical forum is slipping?
> 
> I do.
> 
> I find it hard to get good conversations really going. I seem to be a semi-loner when it comes to my favorite composers, but that's OK...I do not expect everyone to like what I like. But I have tried to ressurected the thread about Khachaturian, one of my favorites, and start my "Common Thread" conversation that I thought people would be most interested, but, again, no one really seems to care. Instead, the "Pee in the Shower" thread or the "What are you thinking about Eating" thread or the "Creepy Countertenor" thread or the "Why are there no Bidets in America" thread get page upon page of responses.
> 
> There are a lot of throw-way, junk threads in this forum and and lot of throw-away, junky and jokey answers in several of the threads. Not that everything has to be serious all of the time, but I feel quite discouraged when people in a classical forum would rather talk about how they urinate as opposed to, say, Khachaturian.
> 
> I know I'll be fighting against the grain on this one and I certainly do not expect my frustrations to be the catalyst to a general sense of improvement around here. But I guess is people care more about what they may or may not eat instead of other, more music-centric subjects; as a result, perhaps the problem is me and I am in the wrong place.
> 
> Quite honestly, I find the musical discussion in at least one other forum to be more broad-based, varied, vigorous, serious and sophisticated than it is here, but I will not go to that forum because of aa certain trollish character that is now a tenured member of that site. (I am sure most of you know to whom I am making reference) But said site does have more active members, it seems, than this one, and perhaps there is a reason for that.
> 
> Anyway, again, my intention is not to rustle any feathers, though I know I will. I guess I am just longing for something that is more staisfying to my wants, needs and desires when it comes to discussing a subject that I am most passionate about. I sure would love to stay here; there are a lot of good members. But I just feel that I am wasting my time anymore and I am really losing the confidence that this forum can meet its ample potential.


----------



## NightHawk

*So what happens if all the veteran members leave?*

This is distressing. Your OP is a tonic. If you weren't here would anyone have asked the questions?



Tapkaara said:


> Oh well, I have said just about everything I can say on this topic. I'll give the forum one more chance. I guess if I don't like it here, the easiest thing to do is leave.


----------



## NightHawk

I think good humor has its place in every corner of any discipline - well, maybe not genocide. I don't want to dread logging in for fear of a Fascist Regime enforcing _gravitas_, but in my longer post above (this page) , you'll read that I do agree with you and am glad you posted it.


----------



## NightHawk

*My apologies to all, but I just can't leave this alone.*

If this site folds I will become Howard Hughes w/o room service.

And, obviously, I see this as a 'Four Bird Problem'.


----------



## Metalkitsune

Well i like the site as it is,of course i'm more Liberal on my beliefs. Because i feel that people aren't harming others by having discussions about rock/metal music. I feel it's do your own thing as long as it harms no one.


----------



## Oskaar

I think the spirit in here have been quite refreshing the past week. Everything goes up and down. Energy fuel delivery often comes from newcomers, so it is extreemly important that we treat them well, and welcome their initiatives, even if it is repeated threads, or threads of a type we are tired of.


----------



## amfortas

I'm divided. My posts are either very serious or very silly. I get all my "likes" from the silly ones.

Not sure if I should worry about that.


----------



## Tapkaara

NightHawk said:


> I have learned so much from so many of you, and been introduced to so many new composers and music, and I only joined this month!


Allow me to introduce you to the composer Akira Ifukube.


----------



## Polednice

Some of you will have seen that I posted a thread a couple of weeks ago saying I was taking a break. It didn't last long, but it was still long enough to be a genuine break. I got some more work done; it was good.

And then I was tempted back. Why? Two reasons: I had questions to ask that I could ask no one else; and there are people here I really enjoy talking to.

But I'm going to be brutally honest and say that this forum and some of the members' tones are really starting to **** me off. I will qualify this immediately by saying that I love a fair number of you, and many others are new or I just don't know them, but there is a significant number - too many to put on an ignore list and still make sense of threads - that are starting to spoil my experience here.

I want to stay because I want to talk to my friends, but it's like trying to make conversation while a hundred whiney little morons bark their arrogant nonsense. I'm too tired to go into any more detail right now, but how about bearing a little thought in mind? If you wouldn't say it to a stranger's face, don't say it on here. And if you can't be bothered to type more than a single, flippant sentence when someone is earnestly trying to learn something, don't be a dick; shut the **** up.


----------



## Dodecaplex

^ I sincerely hope that last paragraph isn't directed at me.


----------



## Ukko

Dodecaplex said:


> ^ I sincerely hope that last paragraph isn't directed at me.


Hah. More likely at me. _Poley_ has a really hard time with the hillbilly patois. Our failures-to-communicate have reached the _ignore list_ level.


----------



## pollux

Some simple ideas:

1 - Put non-classical forums completely aside from classical ones, so that people interested must have to explicitly look for them. Why the Support and the Community forums are listed first?

2 - Force users to put their musical interests and knowledgements in their profile. I want to know who is really interested in what I'm talking about and who is simply "passing by".


----------



## amfortas

pollux said:


> 2 - Force users to put their musical interests and knowledgements in their profile. I want to know who is really interested in what I'm talking about and who is simply "passing by".


A purity test? Really?


----------



## pollux

amfortas said:


> A purity test? Really?


OK, put it the other way. I recently posted about Wagner. He's not among my favourites. So, if you could view my musical preferences in my profile, you could easily detect that I should better shut up!

Besides, a purity test should be quite appropriate when talking about Wagner! :devil:


----------



## amfortas

pollux said:


> OK, put it the other way. I recently posted about Wagner. He's not among my favourites. So, if you could view my musical preferences in my profile, you could easily detect that I should better shut up!
> 
> Besides, a purity test should be quite appropriate when talking about Wagner! :devil:


Couldn't I just detect from your post that you should better shut up? 

Anyway, I wouldn't want you to shut up, or to feel you have to prove your qualifications before speaking out.

Then I'd lose the fun of arguing against you!


----------



## pollux

amfortas said:


> Anyway, I wouldn't want you to shut up, or to feel you have to prove your qualifications before


OK, I shouldn't have used the word "knowledgements". Besides, it's not correct English. It is "knowledges", isn't it?

Accept my humble apologies.

One last question: can you tell me why wagnerian heroes never know their own names? :devil:


----------



## Polednice

Just as a little postscript to my earlier rant, I want to avoid being a hypocrite by saying that I know I have been guilty of behaving in precisely the manner that is currently annoying me so much. The thing about a forum is that silly, stupid, short remarks often get a good laugh. I've liked making people laugh with my idiocies at times, and I've laughed at others'. But even if they're inoffensive and non-trollish, they can also seem like someone deliberately shouting over the top of you when you're having an earnest conversation with someone else. It starts off funny as we get to know each other and people deliberately bend social rules as a game, but eventually it becomes attention seeking. Know when to stop.


----------



## amfortas

pollux said:


> One last question: can you tell me why wagnerian heroes never know their own names? :devil:


Hmmm . . . an interesting question. You should start a thread in the Opera Forum. And we won't even ask about your musical interests or knowledge!


----------



## Couchie

I sometimes make silly posts out of boredom because you guys insist on discussing Sibelius, Brahms, and Mahler; all of which are about as interesting to discuss as wallpaper. Where are the Wagner threads?


----------



## kv466

_Do you feel the quality of Talk Classical is slipping?_

Yeah, ever since Couchie joined!


----------



## TxllxT

Just read the title of this thread: Do not worry, TC has lots and lots of quaility, lots and lots of members quailing all the time  :lol:


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

I think the quality of Talk Classical has definitely improved a great deal since I joined ...


----------



## skalpel

Well, I've only been on here a short while but the quality seems good to me. Activity isn't totally booming so conversation can be a little slow at times but still filled with plenty of good discussion and recommendations that I've enjoyed.

Anyway, I voted 'I don't know' because for all I know it was even better before.


----------



## Oskaar

Couchie said:


> I sometimes make silly posts out of boredom because you guys insist on discussing Sibelius, Brahms, and Mahler; all of which are about as interesting to discuss as wallpaper. Where are the Wagner threads?


There have been a lot of threads about Wagner. If they die out, you cant blame the sibelius etc. lovers!  You have yourself to blame. But I bet ther are some Wagners-lovers in here, so if you make a juicy thrad about him, I am sue you will get attention!


----------



## Scarpia

Quality seems fine but the level of traffic is exceptionally low. Below the critical mass required to maintain interest. Plus, the software seems to be configured to automatically log me out after a short interval, meaning constant logging in if I actually want to post something. That puts a significant damper on interest in posting.


----------



## Oskaar

Scarpia said:


> Plus, the software seems to be configured to automatically log me out after a short interval, meaning constant logging in if I actually want to post something. That puts a significant damper on interest in posting.


That may be your own settings. I have not that problem. Occationally I am logged out, but not often. Setting your browser to remember you helps.


----------



## Ukko

Scarpia said:


> Quality seems fine but the level of traffic is exceptionally low. Below the critical mass required to maintain interest. Plus, the software seems to be configured to automatically log me out after a short interval, meaning constant logging in if I actually want to post something. That puts a significant damper on interest in posting.


[Bzz Bzz]

Well, I do my best to impede traffic. And the software never logs me out, so maybe the moderators are harassing you; I wouldn't put it past them.


----------



## Scarpia

I remembered to click "remember me" when I logged in this time, and so far I haven't been logged out yet. That's an improvement.


----------



## Couchie

kv466 said:


> _Do you feel the quality of Talk Classical is slipping?_
> 
> Yeah, ever since Couchie joined!


I saw an opportunity to make a silly post in a serious thread condemning silly posts, bashing the favorite composers of the members leading this whiny passive-agressive front, and also working in a plug for Wagner. I took it.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

I'm participating less....I won't say more.

Martin


----------



## maestro267

I don't think it's a good idea that the 'general discussion' boards are placed first on the homepage, above the music discussion boards. It is, after all, a _music_ forum.

Also, I've been put off posting here due to feeling intimidated after a certain someone posted rather rude and snobbish comments on a well-meaning Mahler poll I started around his birth anniversary last year.

Which is a shame, because I love classical music with a passion and would like to talk about it in a snob-free environment.


----------



## jhar26

maestro267 said:


> I don't think it's a good idea that the 'general discussion' boards are placed first on the homepage, above the music discussion boards. It is, after all, a _music_ forum.
> 
> Also, I've been put off posting here due to feeling intimidated after a certain someone posted rather rude and snobbish comments on a well-meaning Mahler poll I started around his birth anniversary last year.
> 
> Which is a shame, because I love classical music with a passion and would like to talk about it in a snob-free environment.


A completely snob-free environment doesn't exist. Don't stop participating because of it or else they 'win.' Besides - members here are supposed to address each other in a respectfull manner. If people are rude to you you should report them.


----------



## Rasa

Jhar, I am confused time and time again by your changed avatar. Argerich please.


----------



## jhar26

Rasa said:


> Jhar, I am confused time and time again by your changed avatar. Argerich please.


:lol: Soon, Rasa, soon. I had intended to keep the current one for just one day. But some commented that they like it (even by PM), so I thought, "ok, I'll keep it for awhile before I go back to Argerich." Unfortunately I can only have one avatar.


----------



## sospiro

jhar26 said:


> ... Unfortunately I can only have one avatar.


Why not? kv466 has two heads as his.


----------



## jhar26

sospiro said:


> Why not? kv466 has two heads as his.


kv466's knowledge is such that it doesn't fit into just one head.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

There are some prudish people...who give you "tickets" when you say something they think is unappropriate. They lack of sense of humour...and you feel in danger most of the time.

Martin


----------



## opus55

Not much to add as a relatively new infrequent visitor at TC -

I support repeated threads. If you try to limit repeated threads, new comers will be discouraged. Besides, some topics are worth discussing over and over because sometimes I just don't get tired of it. I'm sure old members seen some topics 2,546 times already but I'd say just skip then.

I also wish they move the Communities Forum to middle/bottom and move up 'Music and Repertoire' section so I don't have to scroll down a page to get to my favorite forums 

I didn't vote here but I simply ignore silly threads so they don't bother me. I do want more "serious" discussion threads though.


----------



## Polednice

opus55 said:


> I support repeated threads. If you try to limit repeated threads, new comers will be discouraged. Besides, some topics are worth discussing over and over because sometimes I just don't get tired of it. I'm sure old members seen some topics 2,546 times already but I'd say just skip then.


I'm with you on this one. I think it's a bit counter-productive to dig up old, dead threads if they have a topic you want to discuss, because it means that fresh discussion is buried x number of pages after the posts of many other members who probably aren't even here any more.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

Sometimes the _search_ is not that useful....


----------



## neoshredder

I hope not. Hopefully we get some growth of high quality posts. I hold myself to that to. It's not easy being a good poster. I guess I wasn't around during the "golden age" of this forum. Oh well. How do others feel how this forum is going? Is it growing?


----------



## clavichorder

You revived this thread eh? What's your personal opinion?

Talkclassical has changed but I don't know if its any less than it was. I don't think I was around for the "Golden Age," or was I? I don't know when likes were first introduced, which is an entirely new element and possibly the cause for things being so different. The same debates rage but there seems to be a higher volume of posts with fewer words and plenty of witty quips, this is true. There are also probably more young people and posts get churned out at a higher rate. I generally prefer it this way, its slightly closer to interactive reality and moving away from stiff music reviewing or heady discourse. We still have that stuff going on, although I admit I don't contribute as much to that kind of stuff these days. Lazier, this is my hang out place on the internet, pretty much.


----------



## Flamme

Well i can only recontruct from the fragments how was before here but comparing to some other forums quality of discussion here is on the level also maybe the only online forum where there remained a culture of dialogue common politeness which is extincted anywhere else...Also there is a humour sometimes and that kind i never came across in my life lol


----------



## Sonata

I wouldn't say the quality has slipped per se, but it's not quite the same as it used to be. Jared was always a great poster, and you could always count on St. Luke's for interesting discussion. And most of all, I still miss Lenfer. 

Still, every month I deepen my discussion or friendships with other forum members, which is certainly nice. Just the life cycle of how online forums work I think.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Ive been here on and off since May 2009 and I dont think the quality has decreased really. There are still fascinating and detailed discussions going on, they've just been diluted a bit with polls, silly threads etc...


----------



## lorelei

Haven't been here long enough to have an opinion about this, but it seems like a great place nonetheless.


----------



## Crudblud

Let us not then speak ill of our generation, it is not any unhappier than its predecessors. Let us not speak well of it either. Let us not speak of it at all.


----------

