# Why do people seem to hate classical music?



## beetzart

That is what I have observed throughout life. It is as this music seriously offends them! 
I work with two people and I have to listen to crappy commercial radio stations all day, blearing out all the latest hits, over and over again. But, while the three of us where sitting in our van yesterday one of them started flicking through the preset channels on the radio. He came across Radio 3 and Classic FM. Playing on Radio 3 was a Mozart Opera and he turned it up really loud to take the ****. The said 'I've had enough of that ****!'. They don't know I love classical music and never will. The reason behind this is why should I get abuse for something I have spent the last 22 years studying and enjoying because people are so ignorant to something they don't understand.


----------



## Polednice

I don't think they hate it because it offends them or anything like that, I think it is purely because they don't understand it. Most people grow up with stereotypes drummed into them about how boring, ancient and irrelevant classical music is, and so, without being exposed to it properly, they form a prejudice that they don't realise is utterly stupid. As well as that, I think it extends to a much larger issue about 'Art' of all kinds. Even though mass media has brought art to a much wider portion of society than in past centuries, it is still _very_ much viewed as an esoteric, exclusive and elitist medium. The 'ordinary man' (not that such a thing exists, and I hate using the phrase, but I'm sure you know what I mean) feels that he cannot relate to music/literature/visual art _etc._ that so openly and emotionally addresses such fundamental questions about humanity. It also wouldn't surprise me if men were more hostile to the arts than women, as I believe the arts also have a reputation for femininity.


----------



## Iveforgottenmyoldpassword

beetzart said:


> That is what I have observed throughout life. It is as this music seriously offends them!
> I work with two people and I have to listen to crappy commercial radio stations all day, blearing out all the latest hits, over and over again. But, while the three of us where sitting in our van yesterday one of them started flicking through the preset channels on the radio. He came across Radio 3 and Classic FM. Playing on Radio 3 was a Mozart Opera and he turned it up really loud to take the ****. The said 'I've had enough of that ****!'. They don't know I love classical music and never will. The reason behind this is why should I get abuse for something I have spent the last 22 years studying and enjoying because people are so ignorant to something *they don't understand.[*/QUOTE]
> its just that. they dont understand it.


----------



## Head_case

beetzart said:


> That is what I have observed throughout life. It is as this music seriously offends them!
> I work with two people and I have to listen to crappy commercial radio stations all day, blearing out all the latest hits, over and over again. But, while the three of us where sitting in our van yesterday one of them started flicking through the preset channels on the radio. He came across Radio 3 and Classic FM. Playing on Radio 3 was a Mozart Opera and he turned it up really loud to take the ****. The said 'I've had enough of that ****!'. They don't know I love classical music and never will. The reason behind this is why should I get abuse for something I have spent the last 22 years studying and enjoying because people are so ignorant to something they don't understand.


Lol. Actually, I'd feel the same way if someone blasted arias and operas at me 

Are your mates buying into a stereotype, that classical music is something only 'posh' people listen to, and commercial radio is more down to earth?

I'd take that one step further and suggest that commercial radio is too rich to listen to; all it does is try to sell some kind of empty materialism and make it seem ubiquitous and ubiquitously acceptable. The air waves are filled with too much of the obvious.....

PS - you could always tell your colleagues that they've really gone and hurt your feelings 
Of course, they will probably just look down on you as some poor offended nancy boy.

Well, I guess 'freedom to take the ****', constitutes their freedom of expression too, just as appreciating classical music is yours.

Yours is healthier than theirs though


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

They don't understand it, and or they were brought up listening to other types of music/popular music. These are the main reasons. People are also different and have different tastes.

But even amongst us Classical music "lovers" here, most of us have a dislike of a particular period or two, for example.


----------



## Polednice

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> They don't understand it, and or they were brought up listening to other types of music/popular music. These are the main reasons. People are also different and have different tastes.
> 
> But even amongst us Classical music "lovers" here, most of us have a dislike of a particular period or two, for example.


People have different tastes and evident dislikes, but I've never seen anyone on here tell another person that the music they listen to is utter crap to be derided.


----------



## David58117

Ditto on the "they don't understand it" remark, but also I think classical music itself is partly to blame. Jumping straight to the point, the average classical music piece is much longer, sprawling, intricate and requires more patience, and sometimes a forceful desire to understand it, before you can appreciate it. This is why it's so rewarding and beautiful once it sinks in. However, not everyone desires to commit to it, and unless there's some immediate attention catching melody a nonlistener likes...why should they care or be bothered by it? Sometimes a 4 minute song is precisely what the person/situation needs. It doesn't make one side any better or more enlightened than the other, and it would be foolish to think any joy we may extrapolate from a piece is any more than what they get out of their selection. 

Am I really going to show my wife (who loves to sing along to music in the car) the Libretto to a Bach cantata when she asks, "How can you possibly enjoy that, it doesn't have anything for you to sing!" And no, I don't speak German.


----------



## Aramis

Who hates classical music? Where do you live? 

People, at least those which I've meet don't hate classical music. They don't touch it, they see that they are not musical enough to listen to more demanding music, but they also respect it. I can't recall reading in newspaper "Director of our philharmonic beaten on the street for conducting Beethoven" or "Youth anti-classical militia blew up bus of touring orchestra, all first violins are dead".


----------



## David58117

Aramis said:


> Who hates classical music? Where do you live?
> 
> People, at least those which I've meet don't hate classical music. They don't touch it, they see that they are not musical enough to listen to more demanding music, but they also respect it. I can't recall reading in newspaper "Director of our philharmonic beaten on the street for conducting Beethoven" or "Youth anti-classical militia blew up bus of touring orchestra, all first violins are dead".


LOL, that's hilarious!


----------



## jurianbai

LOL. Isn't the opposite behaviour that exist more? The classical fans that hate everything non classical. 

I myself is a metal converted to classical (not really, since metal still a daily menu). But from what I remember the reason it got rejected is, the overall impression about classical music as high class, hard to understand, anti social and ... boring. all of the reasons we all know is not true. But then most of their knowledge is about Mozart (identic to pregnant women) or easy listening pieces. Once they concentrate on specific piece like Beethoven's symphony, they may chance their mind. I agree other's say accessibility being a factor.


----------



## Polednice

I think we should draw a distinction between some classical fans' dislike of other periods/genres, and people who actively deride classical music as utter crap and try to offend those who listen to it. :/


----------



## Il Seraglio

The only people I know who actively hate classical music are the people who hate music in general (Robbie Williams fans). Most people on the other hand just don't have the time to take an interest in it.


----------



## Jaime77

too long and too much space for them and for their minds to wander


----------



## TresPicos

beetzart said:


> *Why do people seem to hate classical music?*


I'll give you a hint: "In which Scottish 1980s rock band did Jim Kerr feature on lead vocals?"


----------



## jhar26

Most people aren't interested enough in music in general for them to like classical music. Half of them probably don't even know what classical music is. But most people are clueless about music other than classical also. They all know who Beyonce is, but mention Lucinda Williams and some will probably think that she's just won the Australian Open tennis championships.


----------



## Head_case

jhar26 said:


> But most people are clueless about music other than classical also. They all know who Beyonce is, but mention Lucinda Williams and some will probably think that she's just won the Australian Open tennis championships.


Beyond - who?

Lucinda Williams playing tennis? Lol. That's a thought. I loved her World of Tears album and Essence 

Well classical music has a dowdy old kinda 'yer grand parents and their grand parents must've listened to it, so it can't be cool' sort of image. Back on the school bus, most kids listened to heavy metal music with open headphones or earplugs, to let everyone else know what they were listening to. Classical music kids listened with closed headphones so that they wouldn't get beaten up or jeered


----------



## Mr Chewie

Aramis said:


> Who hates classical music? Where do you live?
> 
> People, at least those which I've meet don't hate classical music. They don't touch it, they see that they are not musical enough to listen to more demanding music, but they also respect it. I can't recall reading in newspaper "Director of our philharmonic beaten on the street for conducting Beethoven" or "Youth anti-classical militia blew up bus of touring orchestra, all first violins are dead".


This is what I experience as well. And if people find out, they typically answer with "Oh, so what instrument do you play?"


----------



## Harmonie

People hate classical music because they are not open-minded enough to look into it and find what's to like.

I know that sounds so simple, but it's one thing I've realized in life.

The truth is it can be an acquired taste. A lot of it takes some warming up to, but gosh I find that true with a lot of the so-called "popular music" as well. A lot of it is boring and just annoying the first time you hear it. There have been very few times where I've heard a piece or song and loved it to pieces the first time I've heard it.

So yes, people will hear one piece of classical music, think it's boring, and since they have no interest in it they'll never look back. Therefore they'll go around claiming that it sucks like they're some kind of expert at it.

In the end it's the most ignorant of people who make the biggest deal out of hating something. lol


----------



## scytheavatar

http://www.talkclassical.com/6009-do-you-like-metal.html

The exact same reason why some of the guys in that topic hate metal: because they never tried liking it. See all the comments about how metal is noise? To some people, classical music is noise too. Or to be more exact, boring elevator music.

The same could be said too about Jazz, Hip Hop or any genre of music: if you tell yourself that you hate that genre, you will hate that genre.


----------



## Lukecash12

Hmmm... Because it sucks


----------



## TWhite

Well, how about because in school music classes, teachers don't want to seem 'uncool' by exposing the kids to it?

I accompany and co-direct several choirs at a Catholic boy's school. Some six years ago, after a discussion with the choral director we went into class with a recording of Carmina Burana, put it on the speaker system and before we played it, said, "We're going to learn this." Then we put on "O Fortuna." The guys went nuts, because they'd heard it on God knows how many commercials and in God knows how many movies. So we learned about four pieces from Carmina Burana for our Spring Concert. They were frothing at the mouth. They literally sang the Hell out of it, had a great time. 

Okay, Carmina Burana isn't the Bach B-Minor Mass by a long shot, but then I started introducing them to some pretty serious choral works transcribed for male choir. Mozart. Palestrina. Some of the Copland Old American Songs. It was a gradual thing, but as we went along and improved, the guys over the years came to EXPECT that we'd be doing a lot of Classical choral works in our concerts. 

This year, we've revived Carmina Burana for our Spring Concert. For our Fall Concert, we did Palestrina and one of the pieces from the Rachmaninov Vespers along with our usual Christmas goodies. Okay, we do 'pop' stuff also, and they're darned good at it. But the director and myself have gotten them to the point where if we DON'T do something 'serious', they wonder why they took the class in the first place, LOL!

If you catch people right, you can bring them around. It's not difficult. Once they realize that it's not "Dull Stuff Written By Dead People", they can learn to enjoy it. I've found that if you catch them with something more 'familiar' that they'll listen to it. Or at least pay partial attention at first. Then you work up from there. 

Frankly, you'd be amazed at how well the classical pieces WE might think of as 'overdone' will get the attention of a person who says they don't 'like' Classical music. Someone might screw up their faces when you put on the Rachmaninov Paganini Rhapsody, but if you hit them with the Eighteenth Variation right at first, they'll just smile. THEN you can hit them with the rest of it. 

I've had a rocker friend of mine blink when I put on the third movement of the Brahms Fourth Symphony and say, "Hey, isn't that a Rock tune?" Well, yah--some years back a rock group did it. Weirdly, but they DID it. And the Brahms Fourth is CERTAINLY not the symphony I'd introduce anyone to Brahms with, LOL! Same thing with the third movement of the Rachmaninov Second Symphony. "Oh yah, that was a pop song a few years ago--'Never Gonna Fall In Love Again'" 

Like I said, if you're patient and hit them right, they'll realize that they don't HATE Classical music. They might not listen to it like WE do, but at least they'll start to realize where we're coming from. 

And, oh yes--my choir is doing more Copland this Spring for the concert. Along with the six-year 'annual' revival of Carmina Burana, LOL! Hey--you have to keep them happy with rowdy Medieval Latin Drinking Songs!

Tom


----------



## Scott Good

I really like this message. 



TWhite said:


> Well, how about because in school music classes, teachers don't want to seem 'uncool' by exposing the kids to it?


Is this true? It is sad if it is...very sad to deprive the children of this wonderful art form to "save face". I'm tempted to call this pathetic and irresponsible.



TWhite said:


> I accompany and co-direct several choirs at a Catholic boy's school. Some six years ago, after a discussion with the choral director we went into class with a recording of Carmina Burana, put it on the speaker system and before we played it, said, "We're going to learn this." Then we put on "O Fortuna." The guys went nuts, because they'd heard it on God knows how many commercials and in God knows how many movies. So we learned about four pieces from Carmina Burana for our Spring Concert. They were frothing at the mouth. They literally sang the Hell out of it, had a great time.


Children can make great music - the best of music.

I bet they were frothing! I still froth and get chills when I play this music. Often, as I play trombone, we sit right in front of the Baritones - yaaa!!!! high fives man, time to bring the noise. PLaying music like this, with massive forces can create such a great sense of community and group achievement. Also, that great sense of being alive and living now.



TWhite said:


> Okay, we do 'pop' stuff also, and they're darned good at it. But the director and myself have gotten them to the point where if we DON'T do something 'serious', they wonder why they took the class in the first place, LOL!


Children should not be treated like idiots. Children have great depth of emotion, and their brains are advancing at astounding rates. They know when they are being pandered too. Challenge them, but with love. Then, watch the magic. They will be grateful to you for the respect you give to their potential. (obviously, this is what you believe - I'm just being rhetorical!)



TWhite said:


> And, oh yes--my choir is doing more Copland this Spring for the concert. Along with the six-year 'annual' revival of Carmina Burana, LOL! Hey--you have to keep them happy with rowdy Medieval Latin Drinking Songs!


Variety is the spice and flavour. Life is dull if it is always the same. The classical music tradition offers so very much, but so does all music. I'd also recommend traditional south African music - a thousands year old musical tradition, or music from Ghana. Barber shop is lots of fun as well.

Great work! Thank you. It is what you are doing that helps most with this post's issue.

Scott


----------



## Lukecash12

> Great work! Thank you. It is what you are doing that helps most with this post's issue.


Now you just make me feel guilty for not contributing anything


----------



## anrobval

Hello. I joined so I can say something in this thread. Hopefully this is the first step in my journey to liking classical music 

My first experience with classical music started in high school. We studied various periods through history, their corresponding artists, characteristics of music of a certain period...
Most people I know don't like (hate is too harsh a word) classical music because it is linked to school. School is a chore to most people. School is not fun. School is something that you have to do, something that stands in the way of you playing video games and watching TV all day.
I think that is a big part of the reason most people dislike classical music.

PS: so, i want to listen to classical music. How do I do that? What to start listening to?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

People don't hate classical music. They're just jealous of our classical music listeners' taste and knowledge of it. But they are smart enough to know that if these "classical music haters" get caught listening to classical music and enjoying it they'll get ridiculed and embarrassed by their "friends who also hate classical music" for the rest of their lives!


----------



## UberB

IMO part of the reason why classical music is dismissed by a large portion of the populace is the difficulty of finding good recordings. There are lots and lots of good recordings; it's just that it's impossible for the layman to make an informed decision because of the lack of helpful, informed reviews, i.e. lots of Amazon reviews are really bad and many professional critics are biased. Imagine if the first Beethoven piano sonatas set you listened to was the Alfred Brendel set or the Richard Goode set. I would probably hate the music too.


----------



## aphyrodite

anrobval said:


> Hello. I joined so I can say something in this thread. Hopefully this is the first step in my journey to liking classical music
> 
> My first experience with classical music started in high school. We studied various periods through history, their corresponding artists, characteristics of music of a certain period...
> Most people I know don't like (hate is too harsh a word) classical music because it is linked to school. School is a chore to most people. School is not fun. School is something that you have to do, something that stands in the way of you playing video games and watching TV all day.
> I think that is a big part of the reason most people dislike classical music.
> 
> PS: so, i want to listen to classical music. How do I do that? What to start listening to?


Welcome to the forum anrobval  Glad to know you do want to increase your interest in classical music. Me too, actually, that's why I joined this forum. I come from a current group of friends or community who doesn't really talk or listen to classical music so yeah I'm happy I joined here. You can PM me if you want recommendations or just anything classical music related, I don't mind.

And I think you're right. Most students dislike classical music because it's related to the syllabus they are learning. I understand and accept opinions of people who don't like them, and I don't really care if I'll be called an old-school or something. I listen to other genres too anyway.


----------



## DavidMahler

People learn to hate what they cannot understand - what they have no connection with. The majority of people can accept that there are great things which they see little to no value in. This is why a person can say Mozart was a genius and yet in their lifetime, never voluntarily put on anything by Mozart. It's also why at the slightest sound of Fur Elise, a lot of people will think their 9 year old child studying piano, is inching their way to the concert hall. 

People don't understand it. To them it is an elitist music, and ultimately, it may even make them feel lacking that they are unable to connect with it. I believe most people can at least enjoy the exterior of good classical music, but most can't see it for anything but background music because it has no words they can relate to, or no steady tempo to dance to.


----------



## DavidMahler

In terms of the real youth...

We live in a culture that thinks anything from yesterday is only half as good as what was made today. 

The concept that music from 200 years ago can sustain any value at all, when their favorite song from last year is considered old and dated. I remember overhearing a highschooler last month..... "Omg I can't believe they are playing this song on the radio! It's so old!" The song was released in January of 2010, and it was only August.


----------



## Hermanberntzen

I think it has something to do with their sudden thougth of something which is boring and dull. Ive made some of my friends to like some pieces, i made one girl love Faurè's Opus.50 Pavan, but who doesn't like it?


----------



## moody

David58117 said:


> LOL, that's hilarious!


Please tell me what LOL means--it's sending me nuts.


----------



## moody

Bassoonist said:


> People hate classical music because they are not open-minded enough to look into it and find what's to like.
> 
> I know that sounds so simple, but it's one thing I've realized in life.
> 
> The truth is it can be an acquired taste. A lot of it takes some warming up to, but gosh I find that true with a lot of the so-called "popular music" as well. A lot of it is boring and just annoying the first time you hear it. There have been very few times where I've heard a piece or song and loved it to pieces the first time I've heard it.
> 
> So yes, people will hear one piece of classical music, think it's boring, and since they have no interest in it they'll never look back. Therefore they'll go around claiming that it sucks like they're some kind of expert at it.
> 
> In the end it's the most ignorant of people who make the biggest deal out of hating something. lol


Why SHOULD people look into it and find what's to like? You say then say they will hear one piece of classical music, think it's boring and they'll never look back. So they are never going to hear another piece, one that they might like ?
You can't make people find their level , they have to find their own. By the way I've heard lots of pop music that I like, but as for loving it to pieces that's a bit much--it's only there for enjoyment you know. By the way your last sentence answers it all, it IS the most ignorant people who make a big deal out of hating any type of music.There are much bigger and much worse things to hate in this world.


----------



## Crudblud

Probably because people associate it with snobs and elitists, and, based on some meetings with fellow classical music fans, it's not hard to see why.


----------



## moody

Hate is a very strong word mostly used by the young. I have been listening to classical music for a very long time and have never experienced such a sentiment. What I have noticed is bewilderment and a complete lack of comprehension. My parents had no interest in serious music whatsoever, but they did go up to London's West End to a lot of musicals and musical reviews which were performed in a way recognisably similar to opera or operetta. Even the pop stars of the day such as Bing Crosby, Al Jolson and Frank Sinatra, etc, produced their sounds in a way closely related to opera singers.The gap between the two genres has widened to a chasm and the sound now produced on either side has become pretty well alien one to the other. I remember playing an aria by Tagliavini, quite a high tenor, in the presence of some of my childrens' friends and one said: " Is he "funny" , men don't sing like that!" Also it is percieved by some that young people who like art are "Geeks" to be laughed at, but that ends at a certain stage once young men are at an age where they don't need to be macho. When I was a Sergeant-Major in the army I was provided with separate accomodation that went with my rank. I used to play classical records and often soldiers would ask to listen. but time and again they told me that if they tried to listen at home or in front of their friends they would be given a hard time. These boys were mostly from what is known as the working class, so I suppose this points to environment and education. Now it may be sad that people don't know what they're missing but is that true? Because apart from the usual popular pieces , my children aren't interested. They will go to the "Nutcracker" with their kids or "Carmen" but that is about the limit and goodness knows they had plenty of chances to hear the stuff when they were small. I never forced it down them by the way, that is entirely non-productive. Perhaps it is a matter of horses for courses so don't feel isolated or make yourself isolated by working up too much fuss. After all I've never had anybody try to force me to listen to pop music, of course it can be annoying when played noisily. But then anything is annoying when it's too loud and we live in a very loud world now--everything appears to be blasted directly at you. be careful not to act as if you're of a higher intellect and are looking down on those not interested in your music. ..just get on with it along with the friends that you have who are similarly inclined.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

Well, teenagers do not like classical music, I suppose because they think it is not cool, it for old farts.

A lot of grown-up people are not better then teenagers. They do not read books, do not listen to music, just sit in office and go to some beach on holidays. I think that at least in my country, a lot of people of the young generation (and I am 28) have very narrow interests in life, they just work as some "managers" and then go to Egypt or Turkey on holidays. How boring!

And then these grown-ups decide to have children. They do not read books to them at home, and then they ask a teacher: "Why my kid do not like to read books?". And so the next generation will be the same. The same is with classical music, I suppose.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Moscow-Mahler said:


> Well, teenagers do not like classical music, I suppose because they think it is not cool, it for old farts.
> 
> A lot of grown-up people are not better then teenagers. They do not read books, do not listen to music, just sit in office and go to some beach on holidays. I think that at least in my country, a lot of people of the young generation (and I am 28) have very narrow interests in life, they just work as some "managers" and then go to Egypt or Turkey on holidays. How boring!
> 
> And then these grown-ups decide to have children. They do not read books to them at home, and then they ask a teacher: "Why my kid do not like to read books?". And so the next generation will be the same. The same is with classical music, I suppose.


Ahem
...
Who said teenagers don't like classical music?


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

Well, in fact a friend of mine brang one day a recording of Halleluja! chorus from the Messiah. They children were excited. Maybe, teenagers are not so bad.

My own early musical memories include an LP of Brahms' Hungarian Dances (5 y.o). 

But btw, I have never hated SCHOOL also! I hated only two things:
1) to wake up early (and still hate). 
3) to clean the classroom


But I've always heard that situation in Europe and the USA is better. There are some people, who work in banks or corporations and play flute as a hobby. Is it true??? It's very rare in Russia, if not impossible.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Moscow-Mahler said:


> Well, in fact a friend of mine brang one day a recording of Halleluja! chorus from the Messiah. They children were excited. Maybe, teenagers are not so bad.
> 
> My own early musical memories include an LP of Brahms' Hungarian Dances (5 y.o).
> 
> But btw, I have never hated SCHOOL also! I hated only two things:
> 1) to wake up early (and still hate).
> 3) to clean the classroom
> 
> But I've always heard that situation in Europe and the USA is better. There are some people, who work in banks or corporations and play flute as a hobby. Is it true??? It's very rare in Russia, if not impossible.


It's true.  How would it be impossible?


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

I mean, it is so _in_frequent that it's _im_possible to imagine!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Moscow-Mahler said:


> I mean, it is so _in_frequent that it's _im_possible to imagine!


Oh. Hmmmmmm.... Strange that it would be infrequent then.


----------



## Polednice

I would be much slower than a few people here to say that teenagers default to hating classical music because they can't or don't understand it. I think this sets up a rather antagonistic them-and-us, superior/infrerior dynamic that is good for nobody. The problem is not that they can't or don't understand, but they don't see why they should bother _trying_ to understand it in the first place. Our job, as with any people who are passionate about a relatively esoteric interest and who want to introduce it to others, is to talk about the unique facets and achievements of classical music and what a person can get out of it. _Not_ about how great the music intrinsically is, and how stupid people who dislike it are - the focus needs to be on what the listener can get from the experience compared to other kinds of music.


----------



## Stargazer

Like many others here have said, I think alot of people simply equate classical music with old/boring and never give it a chance. However, since classical music encompasses such a wide range and variety of styles and sounds, I am very skeptical of anyone who says they don't like classical at all, if they indeed like some other type of music. That said, I know that if I told most of the people I know how much I love classical, they would laugh in my face lol. However if I said I was a huge Bon Jovi fan (I'm not btw), I'd end up in an hour long conversation about how phenominal his music is. Also, I think that classical music is largely designed to evoke emotion, but I think that the majority of people don't want that...they would much rather simply have "music they can dance to", or the oft-mentioned "phat beats" lol. 

In a way I can speak from experience because I used to be that way only a few years ago. All I really knew of classical music was a couple over popularized excerpts such as "Ride of the Valkyres" and "O Fortuna", and I thought that this encompassed all of classical music, and therefore never bothered to explore it more. 

Or it could be that today's popular music artists are simply so much more talented musically than all of the great composers, that all of this "classical" stuff pales in comparison! (I kid, of course...please don't hurt me!!)


----------



## Chrythes

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Oh. Hmmmmmm.... Strange that it would be infrequent then.


It might have something to do with the fact people in Russia or Eastern Europe need to work a lot more to make a living. After working 50 hours a week with a wage that can barely hold you alive I doubt many would find time or the devotion/desire for playing an instrument. Of course, it's only one reason. I've never really read any statistics about how many citizens in a given country play an instrument at least once a week.


----------



## Vaneyes

Being that this thread's been dredged from two years ago and the world's not much different, I'll pull out my stock answer...but preface it with a borrowing from Alfred E. Neuman. 

"What, me worry?"

Money and time are spread too thin these days. They have been for a long time. No e-devices three hundred years ago. Prior to 1950, not many had TV. 

Too many distractions. Classical Music (and all its subsections) is just one victim of many. I say enjoy your niche, and don't worry too much about how many are "following".


----------



## Manok

I don't think it's hate either, I think its more a misunderstanding of the music, or they just weren't given the right exposure to it when younger. I've always liked classical music myself, and it was my first love as far as music goes, and will always be what I listen to the most often. It could also just be that people don't have the time to sit down and enjoy something like Beethoven's 5th, which does admittedly take more time to listen to than say a song by Linkin Park.


----------



## neoshredder

I used to not like classical music due to its close acquaintence with what I thought were band nerds. Of course I listened to Green Day in those days. I really didn't have appreciation for good music at 12-14. But by my late teens, I really started getting into it. Yngwie Malmsteen definitely intrigued me with his interesting scale selections on his early albums of the 80's In particular, Rising Force. Then, I heard Vivaldi and Paganini. There is still some classical music I don't like. But I've learned to concentrate on the stuff I like.


----------



## Dodecaplex

Polednice said:


> I would be much slower than a few people here to say that teenagers default to hating classical music because they can't or don't understand it.





Polednice said:


> I don't think they hate it because it offends them or anything like that, I think it is purely because they don't understand it.


What? :lol:


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

Chrythes said:


> It might have something to do with the fact people in Russia or Eastern Europe need to work a lot more to make a living. After working 50 hours a week with a wage that can barely hold you alive I doubt many would find time or the devotion/desire for playing an instrument.


Well, sure. I was speaking mostly about Moscow, not Russia. The problem is not that they have to work, but their work is mostly routine. The people of older genertions at last was able to do physics or mathematics. Most younger people are just managers.

Unfortunately, I don't have any musical education myself.


----------



## Ralfy

Reminds me of

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1405449.stm


----------



## TrazomGangflow

Society simply trains people to be prejudiced toward classical music. Pop culture simply makes classical music look unattractive. If classical music is mentioned in a TV show it is often in a joke about how boring it is. Most people have seen Lord of the Rings and Star Wars but how many of them really that classical music is playing in the background? 

If people didn't have a stereotype against classical music and realized its beauty what percentage of today's generation would listen top 40 garbage? I'm sure it would be a lot less.


----------



## Crudblud

There's classical music in Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings? Did Lucas fall out with Williams and release yet another version, this time all set to Beethoven?


----------



## LordBlackudder

because they dont like it


----------



## djdarkone

the biggest problem as i see it with classical music that leads to hate is when you have bodys like the dwp that have a 30 secont lupe of that awfull hold music for 45 min , it just makes me want to kill someone and i usaly end up screaming at whoever answers the phone for torchring me with it , and this is one of the things that lead to the hate ,


----------



## violadude

djdarkone said:


> the biggest problem as i see it with classical music that leads to hate is when you have bodys like the dwp that have a 30 secont lupe of that awfull hold music for 45 min , it just makes me want to kill someone and i usaly end up screaming at whoever answers the phone for torchring me with it , and this is one of the things that lead to the hate ,


I really hope English is not your first language.


----------



## wiganwarrior

I think it revolves around accessibility - and reaching out to people. Similar argument as to whether TV, violent games etc either REPRESENT the society we live in, or are causal & actually AFFECT it. Celebrity culture is a prime example. It's a circle & it's difficult to know where it begins or ends.
In classical music terms, does little or no coverage on TV etc reflect the relative disinterest in society or does it actually affect it. I strongly believe it is the latter and we (Classical music passionates) all need to do something about it. Amazing how Classic FM brought nearly 7 million listners out of the shadows - once they knew it was there.


----------



## Crudblud

violadude said:


> I really hope English is not your first language.


Many of my fellow countrymen cannot claim to speak English as a first language. It's quite sad.


----------



## Kryten

The last time I visited the big HMV store in Birmingham, their meagre classical section was in a room of its own, separated with a big, glass door; almost as if it was segregating those who can appreciate classical music from the rest of society. I half expected an alarm to sound every time someone opened that door, alerting the hip tweens and twenty-somethings to the presence of someone who liked "seriously old music" 

_"Oi, wot u dooin' gooin' in theer - when wuz the last time Tcaikovsky wuz in the Top 10, eh!?"_ (Brummie accent exaggerated)

I think part of why people hate classical music in the UK is a mixture of ignorance, impatience, peer pressure and aggressive marketing: people don't want to try it, they haven't got the time to try it, their friends share the same opinion on it and the music industry isn't really promoting anything without Myleen Klass on it.


----------



## Itullian

beetzart said:


> That is what I have observed throughout life. It is as this music seriously offends them!
> I work with two people and I have to listen to crappy commercial radio stations all day, blearing out all the latest hits, over and over again. But, while the three of us where sitting in our van yesterday one of them started flicking through the preset channels on the radio. He came across Radio 3 and Classic FM. Playing on Radio 3 was a Mozart Opera and he turned it up really loud to take the ****. The said 'I've had enough of that ****!'. They don't know I love classical music and never will. The reason behind this is why should I get abuse for something I have spent the last 22 years studying and enjoying because people are so ignorant to something they don't understand.


It has to do with instant gratification and short attention spans that popular culture ingrains and nurtures in us. Classical music needs more and returns more for the investment.
However, there is a percentage of people who are grabbed by it inately and will gravitate to it.


----------



## wiganwarrior

Hi Kryten,
Same experience in HMV. Although they have a deal with Classic FM to promote their top 100 CD's, the few that were actually in stock were moved a few weks ago from under the section titled "Classical" to "World Music" - and over Christmas to a completely un-titled section, half overlapping "Jazz".
In my ealier post I said we should all take action together to promote classical music. Not suggesting "Occupy wall street" or anything but if you complain this week to the Manager in your area, I will in mine. If you give him the choice to settle things locally or have a written complaint to Head Office (& possibly 2 from different geographical areas) you never know -particularly when HMV are going bust & badly need the cash. Maybe some others on this great site will complain as well. Revolution, my friend!


----------



## Klavierspieler

Everybody loves Classical Music.

Some people just don't realize it yet.


----------



## Kryten

Klavierspieler said:


> Everybody loves Classical Music.
> 
> Some people just don't realize it yet.


I now have visions of surly, shell-suited teenagers hanging around in bus shelters discussing Shostakovich, playing him full blast over a mobile phone speaker whilst sharing their 3-litre bottle of White Lightning.

A pipe dream, but we live in hope


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Kryten said:


> I now have visions of surly, shell-suited teenagers hanging around in bus shelters discussing Shostakovich, playing him full blast over a mobile phone speaker whilst sharing their 3-litre bottle of White Lightning.
> 
> A pipe dream, but we live in hope


Haha! Sounds like the tram stop outside my school!


----------



## Chrythes

Just out of interest - as every genre has its own "sell out" or commercial artist, which one would it be of the classical genre?


----------



## Kryten

Chrythes said:


> Just out of interest - as every genre has its own "sell out" or commercial artist, which one would it be of the classical genre?


Do we count Mantovani as classical?


----------



## jalex

Chrythes said:


> Just out of interest - as every genre has its own "sell out" or commercial artist, which one would it be of the classical genre?


Einaudi is the biggest sell-out I can think of. He started out studying under Berio, about as good a musical education as one can get anywhere; now he writes pop-esque music of such astonishing banality that it almost makes the efforts of Richard Clayderman look positively bursting with colour.


----------



## violadude

jalex said:


> Einaudi is the biggest sell-out I can think of. He started out studying under Berio, about as good a musical education as one can get anywhere; now he writes pop-esque music of such astonishing banality that it almost makes the efforts of Richard Clayderman look positively bursting with colour.


Just listened to some of his stuff...everything he wrote reminds me of Pachabel's Canon....everything!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

violadude said:


> Just listened to some of his stuff...everything he wrote reminds me of Pachabel's Canon....everything!


----------



## eorrific

From what I've observed :
-Some people are lead to believe that every classical piece are relaxing and hence boring.
-All that non-sense about classical music being the music of the elitists and snobs.
-Not enough exposure. CD stores where I live usually have a classical music section that comprises of 50% albums titled "Mozart Effect" and its variants, the other 40% are compilation albums of sell-out performers and overly popular pieces. For vocal performances, they only had Bocelli and The Three Tenors albums. 
-"I'm not that smart, I can't possibly enjoy classical music!" Some people really close-minded. *sigh* Although, this is sometimes good to hear because that person you're talking to must think you're as a smart person! 
-It's not something you can headbang to and there aren't many catchy melodies.
-No lyrics. You can't karaoke to it!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

eorrific said:


> From what I've observed :
> -Some people are lead to believe that every classical piece are relaxing and hence boring.


When people tell _me_ classical music is boring, my response is always:






And that particular performance because it is done too fast. :lol:


----------



## pioudine

By ignorance.. and because classical music refers to a specialized domain and to "culture".. a kind of "has been" mood ..


----------



## Kryten

Can anyone photoshop a picture of J.S. Bach so that he's wearing a hoodie and waving a gang sign _"cuz dat powda wig just ain't cuttin' it wiv da kids, man!"_


----------



## brianwalker

People always hate what's more highbrow than they are.

For example regular pop listeners detest the "indie hipster", "metalheads", etc.


----------



## samurai

Kryten said:


> I now have visions of surly, shell-suited teenagers hanging around in bus shelters discussing Shostakovich, playing him full blast over a mobile phone speaker whilst sharing their 3-litre bottle of White Lightning.
> 
> A pipe dream, but we live in hope


*A* *Clockwork* *Orange, *Anyone? :devil:


----------



## starthrower

If teenagers were blasting Shostakovich conspicuously, I'm sure some people here would find reason to hate Shostakovich rather than rejoice. And BTW, I've never encountered a person who openly shared any hatred for classical music. Except of course, at this forum!


----------



## brianwalker

In I am a strange loop, Douglas Hofstadter writes.

"I have to admit that I have always intuitively felt there was another and quite different yardstick for measuring consciousness, although a most blurry and controversial one: musical taste. I certainly cannot explain or defend my own musical taste, and I know I would be getting myself into very deep, hot, and murky waters if I were to try, so I won't even begin. I will, however, have to reveal a little bit of my musical taste in order to talk about Albert Schweitzer and his musical profundity."

In another passage he wrote, after detailing his failed attempt to love Bartok's Second Violin Concerto.

"I need not go on and on, because I am sure that every reader has experienced chemistries and non-chemistries of this sort - perhaps even relating to the Bartók and Prokofiev violin concertos in exactly the reverse fashion from me, but even so, the message I am trying to convey will come across loud and clear. Music seems to me to be a direct route to the heart, or between hearts - in fact, the most direct. Across-the-board alignment of musical tastes, including both loves and hates - something extremely rarely run into - is as sure a guide to affinity of souls as I have ever found. And an affinity of souls means that the people concerned can rapidly come to know each other's essences, have great potential to live inside each other."

The general public knows, implicitly and at the back of their heads, that classical music is generally more "complex" and "deep" than the music they listen to, and they know that they cannot comprehend it, so their contempt is a defense mechanism against the realization of their own inferiority.

This is a forum where my online identity is completely separate from my real identity, so I'm not afraid of landing myself in hot, murky waters. It I can't express my indefensible beliefs here, where can I?

If you can't appreciate The Jupiter Symphony or Opus 131, that shows a deficiency on your part, not the work's.

My biggest vice is a lack of appreciation for Handel, I can't get into his operas, but I'm making progress.

Before the passage above he wrote this.

"Having painted myself into a corner in the preceding section, I'll go out on a limb and make a very crude stab at such a distinction. To do so I will merely cite two ends of a wide spectrum, with yourself and myself, dear reader, presumably falling somewhere in the mid-range (but hopefully closer to the "high" end than to the "low" one). At the low end, then, I would place uncontrollably violent psychopaths - adults essentially incapable of internalizing other people's (or animals') mental states, and who because of this incapacity routinely commit violent acts against other beings. It may simply be these people's misfortune to have been born this way, but whatever the reason, I class them at the low end of the spectrum. To put it bluntly, these are people who are not as conscious as normal adults are, which is to say, they have smaller souls. I won't suggest a numerical huneker count, because that would place us in the domain of the ludicrous. I simply hope that you see my general point and don't find it an immoral view. It's not much different, after all, from saying that such people should be kept behind bars, and no one I know considers prisons to be immoral institutions per se (it's another matter how they are run, of course). What about the high end of the spectrum? I suspect it will come as no surprise that I would point to individuals whose behavior is essentially the opposite of that of violent psychopaths. This means gentle people such as Mohandas Gandhi, Eleanor Roosevelt, Raoul Wallenberg, Jean Moulin, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, and César Chávez - extraordinary individuals whose deep empathy for those who suffer leads them to devote a large part of their lives to helping others, and to doing so in nonviolent fashions. Such people, I propose, are more conscious than normal adults are, which is to say, they have greater souls. Although I seldom attach much weight to the etymologies of words, I was delighted to notice, when preparing a lecture on these ideas a few years ago, that the word "magnanimity", which for us is essentially a synonym of "generosity", originally meant, in Latin, "having a great soul" (animus meaning "soul"). It gave me much pleasure to see this familiar word in a new light, thanks to this X-ray. (And then, to my surprise, in preparing this book's rather fanatical index, I discovered that "Mahatma" - the title of respect usually given to Gandhi - also means "great soul".) Another appealing etymology is that of "compassion", which comes from Latin roots meaning "suffering along with". These hidden messages echoing down the millennia stimulated me to explore this further."

He makes a sloppy attempt at articulating what makes a person "great souled", but this is sloppy and sentimental, because there are merely figures who have accomplished things he deems heroic, fitting in with his conception of the political good, etc Trying to align "great souled" with morality is difficult because different worldviews judges world historical figures differently. This directly contradicts his thesis on the link between good taste in music and "great souled-ness" because Hitler and Stalin also had good taste in music (Hitler worshiped Wagner, Stalin's favorite piece of music was Mozart's 20th Piano Concerto, Lenin was moved by Beethoven's Appassionata Sonata to tears, etc, not to mention that Wagner himself was a blackguard, shamelessly seducing the wives of his friends, etc).










It's the hardest being middlebrow, those with merely "good", "decent" taste; you have to fend off those with genuinely great taste above you, and the hoards below you. See image.

These middlebrow people are the most vicious, the most inhuman, the most cruel and most hypocritical.

The same people sending not-sure-if-serious death wishes to Rebecca Black are the same people who would bash anyone who championed Wagner in public as a "hoary hipster".


----------



## Boogieman

Classical music is by far and away the most depressing, soul destroying, and pretentious horseshit that could infest the ears of anyone on this planet. I'll happily and proudly admit to anybody that I utterly loathe and despise it. However, the question did say "why?", and although I've given three good and valid answers within the first sentence, I'll expand on them.

Music is food for the soul, and we're alll individuals. Nobody knows, when each of us begins at an early age to listen to music, exactly who or what is going to hit the spot; it varies from person to person, and we wait merely for an event for the spark to be lit. With me, it was two occurences that happened very close to one another. I'd had to sit for years, enduring my families appalling selection of various Tchaikovsky, Mozart, Brahms and Schubert works. An awful dirge of hideous violins, dreadful cellos that sound like a lawyer reading a will, and wishy washy piano concertos, all designed, and suceeding towards producing stupifying depression; highlighted on Sundays by the airing on the radio of a programme hosted by Sam Costa; a truly bowel-loosening drudge of classical crap entitled, with brilliant irony, Merry Melodies. But then, salvation was at hand,....

....as, one very wet day when, at school, we were not allowed out, but had to stay in the classroom with a teacher to watch over us. The teacher was Mrs Hopkirk, and to quieten the class down, she approached the old piano that stood against the back wall. We expected the usual Puff The Magic Dragon or some such (I was 8 at the time). Wrong!! She gave a spellbinding display of boogie-woogie that had us all enthralled. A spark had been lit. The flame was touched off at about the same time when I watched Jimi Hendrix on the TV (rare to see in those days) give an electric, in more ways than one, performance of Johnny B. Goode that had me bouncing around the room. I had discovered, by sheer good fortune, the overridng and overwhelming JOY that music can bring. I like that word, so I'll say it again. JOY. That's happiness. Feeling good. Upbeat. Light. Optimistic. Well. Content. JOYfull. Victor Kiam might have been so impressed that he bought the company, but I bought the music, by the score. A wonderful, happy journey that took me to Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Hendrix, Led Zep, Vintage (60s era) Clapton, Albert Ammons, Ten Years After, Deep Purple, AC/DC, Motorhead, Sex Pistols and latterly The Answer and Buckcherry. I even bought the guitar and have enjoyed playing for many years now. No ballads, no depressing stuff, no ********. I can survive the blips of Indie (dirge), Rap (just bloody awful), techno and boy bands (talentless twaddle), and shrug off the wimp-outs (Bowie, Queen, Status Quo, Robert Plant, Richie Blackmore, Green Day) because I've got an arsenal of pure adrenalin that spans about 80 years. Classical buffs can go back further than that of course, but theres no cranked up, distorted electric guitars, and no JOY there either. Just mindless, depressing, drudgery; each helping going on and on, seemingly without end. If being down floats your boat, then that's great, but please spare the rest of us this pap about somehow missing out on some hidden quality, which, let's face it, isn't there and never has been. I do admit though to a bewildered admiration for classical fans, as well as those of it's ******* child, opera. Ever watched the proms on the BBC? You really have to marvel at the ingenuity of those who charge a small fortune to enable people to sit through that stuff. Entrepeneureal accumen at it's finest; and the people pay it too. One evening after another of tear jerking misery, miraculously wiped away by "Rule Brittania" and "Jerusalem". I honestly admire the stamina of anyone who agrees to be tormented like that. And who gets the credit? Not the musicians, but some bloke who's spent the performance nodding his head and waving a chopstick about. I don't know what Richard Dawkins makes of it, but it mesmerizes me, in behavioural terms. The icing on the proverbial cake is when classical fans snootily diss Simon Cowell and his X-Factor nobodies, but come on- are you really so different? Are any of us? The world is a big place, and there's room enough for all of us. You labour under the illusion that your music has somehow given you superior status above the rest of us mere mortals. It hasn't, because it doesn't have superior status itself. 

I don't like funk, soul, reggae, ska, hip-hop or whatever the bloody hell it's called, Latin, African or jazz either. In fact I loathe jazz also, more pretentious twaddle that goes nowhere although it does go faster than classical, I'll give it that. Most things do. Yet should any of the above happen within earshot I can ignore them; the mere sound of a classical piece makes my teeth itch, as none of the above are as stupifyingly monotonous as classical; neither have their associated fans regarded me as the pond life that classical composers, musicians and fans do. I may indeed occasionally wear black underpants, but I don't drink blood or eat other peoples children. I'm a 52 year old man who rejoices in fast and furious rock n' roll with as much love of the genre that I have always had. God forbid that I'll ever be reduced to sobbing along to one of Bruckner's interminable "melodies".

Trusting that this answers the OP's question, good manners dictate that I also offer you my thanks for the opportunity for writing, so - thanks. Now give yourselves a treat and beg, borrow or steal AC/DC's "Powerage" allbum and get the feel-good factor in your lives. If your not moving to that, call a doctor.

Kind regards, B


----------



## Chrythes

Yes, we are depressed, suicidal, pretentious, self loathing morons without a sparkle of joy in our life.

But seriously, how is possible to say that classical music lacks joy? 
You said that your parents were listening to CM, maybe you had a rough time with your parents, so classical music became a reminder of an unpleasant experience, hence your hatred towards it?!


----------



## jalex

Boogieman said:


> x







Cheer up, bud


----------



## Philip

Boogieman said:


> Classical music is by far and away the most depressing, soul destroying, and pretentious horseshit that could infest the ears of anyone on this planet. I'll happily and proudly admit to anybody that I utterly loathe and despise it. However, the question did say "why?", and although I've given three good and valid answers within the first sentence, I'll expand on them.
> 
> Music is food for the soul, and we're alll individuals. Nobody knows, when each of us begins at an early age to listen to music, exactly who or what is going to hit the spot; it varies from person to person, and we wait merely for an event for the spark to be lit. With me, it was two occurences that happened very close to one another. I'd had to sit for years, enduring my families appalling selection of various Tchaikovsky, Mozart, Brahms and Schubert works. An awful dirge of hideous violins, dreadful cellos that sound like a lawyer reading a will, and wishy washy piano concertos, all designed, and suceeding towards producing stupifying depression; highlighted on Sundays by the airing on the radio of a programme hosted by Sam Costa; a truly bowel-loosening drudge of classical crap entitled, with brilliant irony, Merry Melodies. But then, salvation was at hand,....
> 
> ....as, one very wet day when, at school, we were not allowed out, but had to stay in the classroom with a teacher to watch over us. The teacher was Mrs Hopkirk, and to quieten the class down, she approached the old piano that stood against the back wall. We expected the usual Puff The Magic Dragon or some such (I was 8 at the time). Wrong!! She gave a spellbinding display of boogie-woogie that had us all enthralled. A spark had been lit. The flame was touched off at about the same time when I watched Jimi Hendrix on the TV (rare to see in those days) give an electric, in more ways than one, performance of Johnny B. Goode that had me bouncing around the room. I had discovered, by sheer good fortune, the overridng and overwhelming JOY that music can bring. I like that word, so I'll say it again. JOY. That's happiness. Feeling good. Upbeat. Light. Optimistic. Well. Content. JOYfull. Victor Kiam might have been so impressed that he bought the company, but I bought the music, by the score. A wonderful, happy journey that took me to Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Hendrix, Led Zep, Vintage (60s era) Clapton, Albert Ammons, Ten Years After, Deep Purple, AC/DC, Motorhead, Sex Pistols and latterly The Answer and Buckcherry. I even bought the guitar and have enjoyed playing for many years now. No ballads, no depressing stuff, no ********. I can survive the blips of Indie (dirge), Rap (just bloody awful), techno and boy bands (talentless twaddle), and shrug off the wimp-outs (Bowie, Queen, Status Quo, Robert Plant, Richie Blackmore, Green Day) because I've got an arsenal of pure adrenalin that spans about 80 years. Classical buffs can go back further than that of course, but theres no cranked up, distorted electric guitars, and no JOY there either. Just mindless, depressing, drudgery; each helping going on and on, seemingly without end. If being down floats your boat, then that's great, but please spare the rest of us this pap about somehow missing out on some hidden quality, which, let's face it, isn't there and never has been. I do admit though to a bewildered admiration for classical fans, as well as those of it's ******* child, opera. Ever watched the proms on the BBC? You really have to marvel at the ingenuity of those who charge a small fortune to enable people to sit through that stuff. Entrepeneureal accumen at it's finest; and the people pay it too. One evening after another of tear jerking misery, miraculously wiped away by "Rule Brittania" and "Jerusalem". I honestly admire the stamina of anyone who agrees to be tormented like that. And who gets the credit? Not the musicians, but some bloke who's spent the performance nodding his head and waving a chopstick about. I don't know what Richard Dawkins makes of it, but it mesmerizes me, in behavioural terms. The icing on the proverbial cake is when classical fans snootily diss Simon Cowell and his X-Factor nobodies, but come on- are you really so different? Are any of us? The world is a big place, and there's room enough for all of us. You labour under the illusion that your music has somehow given you superior status above the rest of us mere mortals. It hasn't, because it doesn't have superior status itself.
> 
> I don't like funk, soul, reggae, ska, hip-hop or whatever the bloody hell it's called, Latin, African or jazz either. In fact I loathe jazz also, more pretentious twaddle that goes nowhere although it does go faster than classical, I'll give it that. Most things do. Yet should any of the above happen within earshot I can ignore them; the mere sound of a classical piece makes my teeth itch, as none of the above are as stupifyingly monotonous as classical; neither have their associated fans regarded me as the pond life that classical composers, musicians and fans do. I may indeed occasionally wear black underpants, but I don't drink blood or eat other peoples children. I'm a 52 year old man who rejoices in fast and furious rock n' roll with as much love of the genre that I have always had. God forbid that I'll ever be reduced to sobbing along to one of Bruckner's interminable "melodies".
> 
> Trusting that this answers the OP's question, good manners dictate that I also offer you my thanks for the opportunity for writing, so - thanks. Now give yourselves a treat and beg, borrow or steal AC/DC's "Powerage" allbum and get the feel-good factor in your lives. If your not moving to that, call a doctor.
> 
> Kind regards, B


Good first post... but what are you doing here if you don't like classical music?


----------



## Vaneyes

I like classical music critique, but dislike classical music criticism.

View attachment 3524


----------



## larryfeltonj

Very few people "hate" classical music. Most people listen to the music which gets distributed in the popular media of their time. Bach was the improvisational jazz musician of his place and era. The question should probably be "why do most people not put the sufficient thought into their musical choices which might lead them to appreciate Gabrieli, Verdi, Bach, or Stravinski?"

Personally I'm a big fan of the composers I've mentioned, plus (in no chronological order), Duke Ellington, Scott Joplin, Frank Sinatra, Patsy Cline, the Kinks, Philip Glass, Frank Zappa, Diana Ross, Elvis Costello, Jimi Hendrix, Miles Davis, Ornette Coleman, the Seekers (God did Judith Durham have one of the best voices of all time!!!), Woody Guthrie, and hundreds of other composers, artists, and songwriters.

If you were to poll the enthusiasts for any of the people I've mentioned above about music from other genre, you might get the general consensus of "Yewwww. How can you listen to that stuff?".

If you want to proselytize for your own musical enthusiasm, there are two important things you can do.

First, fund those sources which distribute and highlight classical music.

Second, expose your friends to it at every opportunity.


----------



## violadude

Boogieman said:


> the mere sound of a classical piece makes my teeth itch, as none of the above are as *stupifyingly monotonous* as classical;


This is so incredibly laughable...


----------



## Argus

Boogieman said:


> Classical music is by far and away the most depressing, soul destroying, and pretentious horseshit that could infest the ears of anyone on this planet. I'll happily and proudly admit to anybody that I utterly loathe and despise it. However, the question did say "why?", and although I've given three good and valid answers within the first sentence, I'll expand on them.
> 
> Music is food for the soul, and we're alll individuals. Nobody knows, when each of us begins at an early age to listen to music, exactly who or what is going to hit the spot; it varies from person to person, and we wait merely for an event for the spark to be lit. With me, it was two occurences that happened very close to one another. I'd had to sit for years, enduring my families appalling selection of various Tchaikovsky, Mozart, Brahms and Schubert works. An awful dirge of hideous violins, dreadful cellos that sound like a lawyer reading a will, and wishy washy piano concertos, all designed, and suceeding towards producing stupifying depression; highlighted on Sundays by the airing on the radio of a programme hosted by Sam Costa; a truly bowel-loosening drudge of classical crap entitled, with brilliant irony, Merry Melodies. But then, salvation was at hand,....
> 
> ....as, one very wet day when, at school, we were not allowed out, but had to stay in the classroom with a teacher to watch over us. The teacher was Mrs Hopkirk, and to quieten the class down, she approached the old piano that stood against the back wall. We expected the usual Puff The Magic Dragon or some such (I was 8 at the time). Wrong!! She gave a spellbinding display of boogie-woogie that had us all enthralled. A spark had been lit. The flame was touched off at about the same time when I watched Jimi Hendrix on the TV (rare to see in those days) give an electric, in more ways than one, performance of Johnny B. Goode that had me bouncing around the room. I had discovered, by sheer good fortune, the overridng and overwhelming JOY that music can bring. I like that word, so I'll say it again. JOY. That's happiness. Feeling good. Upbeat. Light. Optimistic. Well. Content. JOYfull. Victor Kiam might have been so impressed that he bought the company, but I bought the music, by the score. A wonderful, happy journey that took me to Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Hendrix, Led Zep, Vintage (60s era) Clapton, Albert Ammons, Ten Years After, Deep Purple, AC/DC, Motorhead, Sex Pistols and latterly The Answer and Buckcherry. I even bought the guitar and have enjoyed playing for many years now. No ballads, no depressing stuff, no ********. I can survive the blips of Indie (dirge), Rap (just bloody awful), techno and boy bands (talentless twaddle), and shrug off the wimp-outs (Bowie, Queen, Status Quo, Robert Plant, Richie Blackmore, Green Day) because I've got an arsenal of pure adrenalin that spans about 80 years. Classical buffs can go back further than that of course, but theres no cranked up, distorted electric guitars, and no JOY there either. Just mindless, depressing, drudgery; each helping going on and on, seemingly without end. If being down floats your boat, then that's great, but please spare the rest of us this pap about somehow missing out on some hidden quality, which, let's face it, isn't there and never has been. I do admit though to a bewildered admiration for classical fans, as well as those of it's ******* child, opera. Ever watched the proms on the BBC? You really have to marvel at the ingenuity of those who charge a small fortune to enable people to sit through that stuff. Entrepeneureal accumen at it's finest; and the people pay it too. One evening after another of tear jerking misery, miraculously wiped away by "Rule Brittania" and "Jerusalem". I honestly admire the stamina of anyone who agrees to be tormented like that. And who gets the credit? Not the musicians, but some bloke who's spent the performance nodding his head and waving a chopstick about. I don't know what Richard Dawkins makes of it, but it mesmerizes me, in behavioural terms. The icing on the proverbial cake is when classical fans snootily diss Simon Cowell and his X-Factor nobodies, but come on- are you really so different? Are any of us? The world is a big place, and there's room enough for all of us. You labour under the illusion that your music has somehow given you superior status above the rest of us mere mortals. It hasn't, because it doesn't have superior status itself.
> 
> I don't like funk, soul, reggae, ska, hip-hop or whatever the bloody hell it's called, Latin, African or jazz either. In fact I loathe jazz also, more pretentious twaddle that goes nowhere although it does go faster than classical, I'll give it that. Most things do. Yet should any of the above happen within earshot I can ignore them; the mere sound of a classical piece makes my teeth itch, as none of the above are as stupifyingly monotonous as classical; neither have their associated fans regarded me as the pond life that classical composers, musicians and fans do. I may indeed occasionally wear black underpants, but I don't drink blood or eat other peoples children. I'm a 52 year old man who rejoices in fast and furious rock n' roll with as much love of the genre that I have always had. God forbid that I'll ever be reduced to sobbing along to one of Bruckner's interminable "melodies".
> 
> Trusting that this answers the OP's question, good manners dictate that I also offer you my thanks for the opportunity for writing, so - thanks. Now give yourselves a treat and beg, borrow or steal AC/DC's "Powerage" allbum and get the feel-good factor in your lives. If your not moving to that, call a doctor.
> 
> Kind regards, B


This post can be summarised as follows:

You like Buckcherry
You dislike David Bowie

That's all I needed to know anyway.


----------



## Dodecaplex

Boogieman said:


> I had discovered, by sheer good fortune, the overridng and overwhelming JOY that music can bring. I like that word, so I'll say it again. JOY.


I'll say it too, but in German: FREUDE.


----------



## norman bates

Boogieman said:


> *Sex Pistols*
> 
> Classical buffs can go back further than that of course, but theres no cranked up, distorted electric guitars, and no *JOY* there either.


God save the queen
We mean it man
And there is no future
In England's dreaming

No future, no future,
No future for you
No future, no future,
No future for me



Boogieman said:


> *Robert Plant*









Boogieman said:


> Classical buffs can go back further than that of course, but theres no cranked up, distorted electric guitars, and no *JOY* there either.


yeah, a lot of joy with nevermind the ******** or led zeppelin's no quarter. Naturally i know i'm generalizing (though a lot of rock'n'roll actually is nihilistic and depressive music). It seems that you are not aware that you are generalizing too.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

Boogieman said:


> words


Wow dude. You got a lot of learning to do.

Kind regards, Bill Cosby


----------



## regressivetransphobe

Did I fall for a troll? Oh well I ain't even mad


----------



## jhar26

I for one find that post rather amusing. Not that I agree with it of course, but it has entertainment value for sure.


----------



## norman bates

jhar26 said:


> I for one find that post rather amusing. Not that I agree with it of course, but it has entertainment value for sure.


well, at least it must be said that it's a perfect example of the perception of classical music that a lot of people (a lot of people withouth a great knowledge) have of it. I think that in the middle of a lot of ********* and prejudices there's also some point that is true (rock is often - not always - more adrenalinic and a lot more physical than classical music).


----------



## bigshot

I love all kinds of music, including classical, but I do have to admit that I don't care for a certain kind of fan of classical music, particularly those who just listen to classical music and nothing else. They tend to be dogmatic and have horse blinders on to anything outside their limited frame of reference. Certainly, classical music is broad and rich enough to spend a whole life listening to and not have time for anything else, but that isn't why these fans focus on it. They do it for proprietary reasons so they can lord it over "the rabble". It's a status thing rooted in Aspergers. I have no time for people like that. The internet has too many of them already.


----------



## Philip

Boogieman said:


> ....as, one very wet day when, at school, we were not allowed out, but had to stay in the classroom with a teacher to watch over us. The teacher was Mrs Hopkirk, and to quieten the class down, she approached the old piano that stood against the back wall. We expected the usual Puff The Magic Dragon or some such (I was 8 at the time). Wrong!! She gave a spellbinding display of boogie-woogie that had us all enthralled. A spark had been lit. The flame was touched off at about the same time when I watched Jimi Hendrix on the TV (rare to see in those days) give an electric, in more ways than one, performance of Johnny B. Goode that had me bouncing around the room. I had discovered, by sheer good fortune, the overridng and overwhelming JOY that music can bring. I like that word, so I'll say it again. JOY. That's happiness. Feeling good. Upbeat. Light. Optimistic. Well. Content. JOYfull. Victor Kiam might have been so impressed that he bought the company, but I bought the music, by the score. A wonderful, happy journey that took me to Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Hendrix, Led Zep, Vintage (60s era) Clapton, Albert Ammons, Ten Years After, Deep Purple, AC/DC, Motorhead, Sex Pistols and latterly The Answer and Buckcherry. I even bought the guitar and have enjoyed playing for many years now. No ballads, no depressing stuff, no ********. I can survive the blips of Indie (dirge), Rap (just bloody awful), techno and boy bands (talentless twaddle), and shrug off the wimp-outs (Bowie, Queen, Status Quo, Robert Plant, Richie Blackmore, Green Day) because I've got an arsenal of pure adrenalin that spans about 80 years. [...]


Classic rock enthusiasts who dislike David Bowie, Queen, may be uncomfortable with their own sexuality.

Dr Philip


----------



## Dodecaplex

Philip said:


> Dr Philip


Is this a new meme that I'm not aware of?


----------



## AlexD

My mum doesn't like classical music because it doesn't give her what she wants. She likes "happy music" which translates as mostly three or four minute pop songs that one can jig around to - and (to my recent surprise) 50's jazz such as the Birth of the Cool & Charles Mingus. She doesn't want to sit and contemplate a symphony and finds the overblown nature of opera too much- it's simply not what she wants from music. 

Music, like many things come down to personal taste.


----------



## Wandering

Good question with a simple yet confounding answer. Why do people hate classical? The answer is that most people are simply a mass of tastless, materialistic, never questioning drones I'd rather kill my self then be part of. The confounding part of the answer is trying to fathom the horrible tragedy of being in their shoes and the abominableness of why it's like this. The world's itself is the greatest horror film imaginable, Freddy Kruger is Thumbellina in comparison.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

larryfeltonj said:


> Very few people "hate" classical music. Most people listen to the music which gets distributed in the popular media of their time. Bach was the improvisational jazz musician of his place and era. The question should probably be "why do most people not put the sufficient thought into their musical choices which might lead them to appreciate Gabrieli, Verdi, Bach, or Stravinski?"
> 
> Personally I'm a big fan of the composers I've mentioned, plus (in no chronological order), Duke Ellington, Scott Joplin, Frank Sinatra, Patsy Cline, the Kinks, Philip Glass, Frank Zappa, Diana Ross, Elvis Costello, Jimi Hendrix, Miles Davis, Ornette Coleman, the Seekers (God did Judith Durham have one of the best voices of all time!!!), Woody Guthrie, and hundreds of other composers, artists, and songwriters.
> 
> If you were to poll the enthusiasts for any of the people I've mentioned above about music from other genre, you might get the general consensus of "Yewwww. How can you listen to that stuff?".
> 
> If you want to proselytize for your own musical enthusiasm, there are two important things you can do.
> 
> First, fund those sources which distribute and highlight classical music.
> 
> Second, expose your friends to it at every opportunity.


A few days ago I put on a recording of the opening movement Beethoven's fifth symphony (Vienna Phil/Carlos Kleiber) for someone who never pays much attention to classical music at all and they sat down and concentrated on the entire seven minutes and twenty-two seconds of the first movement (probably because they recognised the opening bars) and told me that they enjoyed it and asked me to play another classical piece for them.

So what larryfeltonj here says would probably be true. I don't know anyone at all who hates Beethoven's symphony no. 5, but I know a whole heap of people who would listen to more of the music that they're exposed to in the world of popular culture.


----------



## Argus

Philip said:


> Classic rock enthusiasts who dislike David Bowie, Queen, may be uncomfortable with their own sexuality.
> 
> Dr Philip


I'd like Boogieman's opinion on the New York Dolls before I'd make such a critical judgement.



Clovis said:


> Good question with a simple yet confounding answer. Why do people hate classical? The answer is that most people are simply a mass of tastless, materialistic, never questioning drones I'd rather kill my self then be part of. The confounding part of the answer is trying to fathom the horrible tragedy of being in their shoes and the abominableness of why it's like this. The world's itself is the greatest horror film imaginable, Freddy Kruger is Thumbellina in comparison.


You sound like a fun, down-to-earth kinda guy.



Composer of AvantGarde said:


> A few days ago I put on a recording of the opening movement Beethoven's fifth symphony (Vienna Phil/Carlos Kleiber) for someone who never pays much attention to classical music at all and they sat down and concentrated on the entire seven minutes and twenty-two seconds of the first movement (probably because they recognised the opening bars) and told me that they enjoyed it and asked me to play another classical piece for them.


The problem with the fifth is it shoots its load too early. The first movement eclipses the rest of it. The sixth has a better spread of interesting material with the beginning and ending both being top class.


----------



## kv466

Hmm,...I'm glad no one I come across truly hates classical if even a little bit...if anything, they'll have that distant respect that they know it's something they don't like nor understand but they would feel dumb if they said they hated it because it's 'supposed' to be good.


----------



## science

kv466 said:


> Hmm,...I'm glad no one I come across truly hates classical if even a little bit...if anything, they'll have that distant respect that they know it's something they don't like nor understand but they would feel dumb if they said they hated it because it's 'supposed' to be good.


That's my experience too.


----------



## science

Argus said:


> The problem with [Beethoven's] fifth is ... [the] first movement eclipses the rest of it.












Yeah? Well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.


----------



## Argus

science said:


> Yeah? Well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.


It's an empirically objective fact relayed to me by an infallible source.


----------



## jalex

Argus said:


> The problem with the fifth is it shoots its load too early. The first movement eclipses the rest of it.


Que?

The second movement is the perfect antidote to the first. I find that the last movement has the most immediate visceral impact, not the first.


----------



## science

Argus said:


> It's an empirically objective fact relayed to me by an infallible source.


My best guess is that, as so often, She has been misunderstood.


----------



## Argus

science said:


> My best guess is that, as so often, She has been misunderstood.


_''_A new born child has no teeth."-"A goose has no teeth."-"A rose has no teeth."-This last at any rate-one would like to say-is obviously true! It is even surer than that a goose has none.-And yet it is none so clear. For where should a rose's teeth have been? The goose has none in its jaw. And neither, of course, has it any in its wings; but no one means that when he says it has no teeth.-Why, suppose one were to say: the cow chews its food and then dungs the rose with it, so the rose has teeth in the mouth of a beast. This would not be absurd, because one has no notion in advance where to look for teeth in a rose.


----------



## brianwalker

My favorite movement of the 5th is the 3rd movement. Mysterious, brooding. 

You are wrong Argus.


----------



## misterjones

science said:


> Yeah? Well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.


I'd say the entire site is based on this principle.

And just who are these people who hate classical music? I'll bet you'd even get a decent favorable percentage at a NASCAR event.

I think everyone likes some form of classical music, even if it's just the easy to follow stuff.


----------



## Argus

brianwalker said:


> My favorite movement of the 5th is the 3rd movement. Mysterious, brooding.
> 
> You are wrong Argus.


In this situation it is impossible for me to be anything but correct.


----------



## Vaneyes

misterjones said:


> And just who are these people who hate classical music? I'll bet you'd even get a decent favorable percentage at a NASCAR event....


Yes indeed, they could have used some boisterous CM, apocalyptic even, during the jet fuel fire at Daytona last night.


----------



## PetrB

Like Jazz and chamber music are 'not for everybody,' that should be expanded to "Jazz, chamber music and classical music are not for everybody."

You had, clearly, a negative experience having classical music rammed down your throat while required to sit around with a bunch of people you probably don't much care for. Yay....

Your near rant says more about you than any kind of music. It also shows you really 'do not get' classical music, or at least what you've heard of it till now, and it shows you have no inclination to care to 'get it.'

Some people have a horrible knack for being smug about what they get when another person does not 'get it,' - That is sheer snobbery, which is present in some classical music fans - in my experience none of the professionals within the field, but the amateur 'devotees' are most prone to the snobbery: if you want rank musical snobbery which takes all awards and prizes, listen to some of the fans of various genres of rock and pop music - the more it is a relatively obscure sub-genre, the rifer the snobbery there. At any rate, I think you were a victim of it in you own home. Commiserations.

So you don't get it: what is the problem? It is not, outside of your family, a forced activity required of anyone.

What you primarily miss is that kind of 'art music' (I have to include jazz here) requires a type of active listening tracking ALL the working elements to make sense of it. Pop music, Rule Britannia, etc. are simpler and more direct forms, a readily recognizable tune, a few simple chords underneath. Nothing wrong with it, but that is your taste and how far you are willing to go.

You are also British, and sorry, that is, outside of India, about the most socially class / caste bound nation on earth. That doubles the force of how you might have been bludgeoned with classical music - as a divisive element in a disturbing, arch and often condescending class war - where 'culture' is used like a club to prove 'class.' More is the pity - 90% of the classical composers were ordinary Beer, fish 'n chips kind of guys. Me, my ancestors left your country centuries ago to escape just that sort of divisive and repressive class war nonsense -- leaving my average middle class self to like what I like without any other 'significance' attached to it.

At the risk of traumatizing you further, I recommend the last movement of Ravel's piano concerto in G, early twentieth century tonal stuff (I wonder if you've heard anything past Brahms?) and guarantee you it is lively, more than upbeat, and is absolutely 'not all that old Brahms stuff.'





Good luck with getting over your conditioned aversion to fun and cool stuff.

P.s. Your posting your rave here is virtual proof you desperately want to avenge yourself upon those 'what done it to you.' But guy, it was none of 'us.'


----------



## neoshredder

Yeah I think some don't like classical music because their parents like it. And they don't want to be like their parents who can be very bossy. For example, my dad is into the Romantic Era. I tend to avoid that era as I know it reminds me of some unpleasant experiences where I was forced to listen to Wagner. But I learn there is a lot of variety in classical music. Baroque almost feels like it is in the opposite side of Classical realm compared to the Romantic.


----------



## Argus

neoshredder said:


> For example, my dad is into the Romantic Era. I tend to avoid that era as I know it reminds me of some unpleasant experiences where I was forced to listen to Wagner.


Surely that violates Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Get your dad down to The Hague.


----------



## Thunders

As Debussy said : "People don't very much like things that are beautiful — they are so far from their nasty little minds."


----------



## Shostakovichiana

I am not sure whether other people here feel this way, too, but I always feel extremely sad and disappointed when people call classical music boring, or other scrutinizing words as elitist, old-fashioned etc. I take it very personally, perhaps because classical music was the only music genre that meant something real to me through those horrid teenage years. I had a constant fear of letting anyone know of my musical taste, I actually had to hide from people the fact that I enjoyed classical music. Maybe that is why I was, and am so protective of it now?
I really don't handle very well these people who criticize, especially when they don't think through and can see both negative and positive sides with something.. perhaps that is the problem with many people who have strong opinions on things: they are so blinded by their opinions that they ignore everything else. 
Ignorance and prejudice really must be the worst crime, especially when it comes to music..

And by the way: Classical music covers such a huge area and span of sub-genres, so I am wondering: do people really find ALL of the classical epochs just as boring, or is it normally f.ex just the romantic era or wiener-classisism that people find boring? Because, really, one cannot compare baroque music to romantic, or postmodern to rococo etc.. 

I am just relieved and thankful that there are so many classical music enthusiasts here. At least there is still some hope left for the world


----------



## neoshredder

Shostakovichiana said:


> I am not sure whether other people here feel this way, too, but I always feel extremely sad and disappointed when people call classical music boring, or other scrutinizing words as elitist, old-fashioned etc. I take it very personally, perhaps because classical music was the only music genre that meant something real to me through those horrid teenage years. I had a constant fear of letting anyone know of my musical taste, I actually had to hide from people the fact that I enjoyed classical music. Maybe that is why I was, and am so protective of it now?
> I really don't handle very well these people who criticize, especially when they don't think through and can see both negative and positive sides with something.. perhaps that is the problem with many people who have strong opinions on things: they are so blinded by their opinions that they ignore everything else.
> Ignorance and prejudice really must be the worst crime, especially when it comes to music..
> 
> And by the way: Classical music covers such a huge area and span of sub-genres, so I am wondering: do people really find ALL of the classical epochs just as boring, or is it normally f.ex just the romantic era or wiener-classisism that people find boring? Because, really, one cannot compare baroque music to romantic, or postmodern to rococo etc..
> 
> I am just relieved and thankful that there are so many classical music enthusiasts here. At least there is still some hope left for the world


I agree here. Romantic is probably my least favorite period and probably a lot of people who don't like classical probably only heard the Romantic part. At least that is how it was for me. I think people who like Rock would probably enjoy Baroque concertos the most. But I know it can be vice versa. But it's more likely people listened to Romantic and a possibility they've never heard Baroque. But I guess there are the few that hate all classical music. My brother being an example of that.


----------



## PetrB

I think you'll find that 99% of those who listen to pop music are almost exclusively listening to a song with text. (I often wonder if the same music as an instrumental, the lyrics never disclosed, would ever rise to the popularity of the songs as sung.) Most of the consumers of pop music are not at all interested to follow absolute music which, in a nutshell, IS the abstract 'meaning' of the interaction of notes. There is that "If it doesn't have lyrics or you can't dance to it, what good is it?" mentality. 

I think there is something with which to credit those 'haters' (I detest the current use of the word), even though it is also the reason they 'don't get' classical music. In an interview with Evelyn Waugh's widow, she said music Of Any Sort irritated Waugh no end. I jumped to a hypothesis I think worth considering. Some people are so literal-minded, that when confronted with absolute music, the DO GET that it means something. They are frustrated because they sense it means something they do not get and cannot put into words. Imagine signing up for someone speaking to you for hours in a language you did not understand, like being presented with a puzzle about which you have no idea of how to even begin... both frustrating and irritating.

As far as opera and that type of trained voice and sound... I've been seized by classical music since the age of four: I think it was not until my late teens that I could even distinguish the pitch being sung, let alone the rest - that was in an age of what is now considered a completely unacceptable amount of applied vibrato, but nonetheless! Perhaps that tradition was being abandoned as I began to find I 'liked' opera.


----------



## neoshredder

Oh yeah. Opera can be a turnoff as well. I still don't enjoy listening to Opera. I know it takes talent but it's not easy to listen to. I guess there are some parts of classical music that translate well to modern society and some that don't. Maybe Medieval is my most disliked era then though most don't even get to hear Medieval unless they really search for it.


----------



## ksargent

People respond to art which communicates to them. Part of that communication process is familiarity - knowing something well enough to be able to "get inside it" so to speak. Classical music (and a lot of jazz) often presents higher barriers to understanding - and a lot of people are just not interested enough to invest the time and effort required to develop that affinity. It doesn't mean that they're stupid or small-minded or anything else; it simply means that their interests lie elsewhere.


----------



## Krunchyman

I have spent a considerable amount of time contemplating why people hate classical music but I am unable to give myself a satisfactory answer. I suppose the most common answers are prejudice and lack of understanding. I don't understand why people would consider classical music to be "boring"; classical music is full of vivacity and emotion.


----------



## violadude

Wow is this thread the new members new meeting ground?


----------



## Dodecaplex

violadude said:


> Wow is this thread the new members new meeting ground?


Guess how I found TC...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=why+do+people+not+like+classical+music


----------



## brianwalker

Why do people on THIS forum hate Wagner? The structure of the reason is the same. Extrapolate and pesto, you have it.


----------



## Llyranor

I had a classical radio station playing at work, and had comments from co-workers in the vein of "Not this music again!" "This makes me fall asleep..." This makes me kind of sad 

(Naturally, I kept the station on anyway)


----------



## beethovenian

Llyranor said:


> I had a classical radio station playing at work, and had comments from co-workers in the vein of "Not this music again!" "This makes me fall asleep..." This makes me kind of sad
> 
> (Naturally, I kept the station on anyway)


I hope that you are feeling sad for *them*.:devil:


----------



## misterjones

Let's face it, though. A lot of classical music can be a real snooze-fest, especially when you're doing tedious work at a less-than-exciting job. The same can be said for all types of music, but I think classical has more slow, contemplative aspects. After all, most traditional classical music has the fast-slow-fast motif that by definition injects a "relaxing" element in every piece. We all want to be relaxed at work, but there's a fine line - especially for those who didn't get enough sleep the night before - between being relaxed and sawing a heavy log.

At work I need some up tempo baroque or other energetic classical . . . though jazz is the best for me.

Pop stations may keep you awake, but only long enough for you to barf in your desk drawer.


----------



## Boogieman

Hello again everyone,

Thanks to all for responding/participating. First of all, allow me to clear one thing up; the reasonable question of why, as a self-confessed "hater" of classical music, I would be here at all? I'm no troll, I assure you- when this thread has run it's course you won't hear from me again. We disagree on musical issues, but I have no wish to impinge on your enjoyment. My brother-in-law is not computer savvy (neither am I), and has recently purchased his first laptop; I was attempting to inform him how to search for sites of interest on the internet, and told him that he could type anything at alll in the search field and that this would be followed by a list of related sites. Consequently, and mischeiviously, knowing my thoughts on the matter, he typed "classical music is great"; cue list of sites. I altered the word "great" to "c***", and received another listing of which your site, and indeed this very thread, were second in line. I was intrigued and began to read the thread. Having a group of classical enthusiasts trying to deduce why anyone may not like the genre seemed like an exercise in supposition. Most, in my experience of them, are of the mind that everyone enjoys it really; as someone here has said "even if they don't know it yet". Hence I presume, the Jehovahs Witness-esque tactics employed by some classicists of leaving CDs in peoples houses or cars (this has happened to me) or steering conversations around to specific composers or styles. In any event, and seeing that site registration is free, I merely thought that, rather than attempting to see through the eyes, or in thiis case hear through the ears, of others, the topic may benefit (if that is the correct word) from the views of one who really does loathe classical music, though I can't and don't claim to speak for all who dislike it. That was my sole motive, nothing more. You have my word.

Additionally, insofar as my experience of listening to classical goes, it wasn't all forced by any means. On more than a few occasions I would pay the pittance required for the cheap seats, so to speak, at the Philharmonic Hall (I was born and raised in Liverpool) to listen to the Liverpooll Philharmonic Orchestra perform a variety of works. I stuck it out too. Indeed, one of the first pieces I learned to play on a guitar was Greigs "Hall of the Mountain King" that I first heard when the LPO played it, besides the ubiquitous "Romanza" and of course "Greensleeves" (alongside "Stairway to Heaven" it was almost illegal not to play them, at the time). Bach's Toccata was slightly more challenging but certainly acheivable. I didn't like them, but it pleased my family and they encouraged me to play as it kept me away from the various street gangs that roamed in our area. They were certainly torn as I got more profficient and started to rip into the Rolling Stones, Hendrix, Led Zep and Cream, but I never did cross swords with the law. I don't feel that it's entirely correct to blame my parents for my negative views on classical; I don't hold any bitterness at my memories of them. But they did lead me to think that classical was the be-all and end-all insofar as music is concerned. Forgive me for saying so, but rather like some folk here. They were wrong, and watching Jimi Hendrix on the TV all those years ago, I knew they were. He inadvertantly opened another door.

Well isn't that what music does, open doors? When one of you hears, for example, one of Bach's English Suites (yes I have heard them) and I listen to Motorhead's The World Is Yours album the effect is pretty much the same. Now reverse the order and give me Bach, whilst you have Motorhead: same people, same music, wildly different reactions. But as to how, and why, who can say, and you have a thread such as this. With me, much of it is the sound and sheer energy (something Motorhead have in abundance) of a cranked up, distorted electric guitar. No orchestra in the world will provide that sound, no classical composer or musician will give you that energy. It's the opposite end of the spectrum. They have violins and cellos to work with, a brass section that sounds like a drunk on a night out, oboes that provide a mating call from something in the Amazon, etc, etc; the tools simply aren't there. Take Paganini's 5th Caprice; on a violin, as originally written, it's terrible, like the soundtrack to a 60s Hammer film, but Steve Vai's interptretation of it on the electric guitar packed quite a punch. A piano is a hopeful looking instrument, but instead of Pete Yancey, Albert Ammons, Little Richard or Jerry Lee Lewis, we get Liberace with numerous tinkly flourishes. The whole thing simply lacks bite. But then, to return to reality, the whole object of a classical performance, is emphatically NOTto have 'em rocking in the aisles, whereas that's the effect that a rock band would want.

I'm not knocking classical musicians; a degree of talent is inherently required and they clearly have that. Neither do I have any truck with classical fans because of their musical choice; if my earlier post gave that impression then I apologise. That was not my intention. I'll knock the music sure enough as I beleive it to be depressive and dull, but I'll happily support your right to enjoy the genre of your choice, and you should be free to do so without abuse. Can you honestly afford the same privilege to fans of other genres?

Anyway, as interesting as this is, I suppose I should get the car fixed before my other half gets home. Thank you again for providing the platform.

As ever, all best regards, B


----------



## neoshredder

Another well thought out post. Have you listened to some of the virtuoso guitar players that use classical music ideas with the punch of rock music? For example Yngwie Malmsteen, early Vinnie Moore, early Tony MacAlpine, Jason Becker, and etc? Maybe you don't appreciate the instruments used in classical music but I'm sure you could like the some of creative ideas used. Here are some links to follow.


----------



## tdc

I find classical music (ie - Bach and Paganini) played on electric guitars ridiculously cheezy myself - to each their own. Rock music to me in general is about a lot of things that are non-musical like adrenaline and image, which boil down to cheap tricks. I think people can get addicted to this fakery and these adrenaline rushes and mistake it for good music. Classical composers generally don't try and sell an image or be 'cool' they just write music, and they generally write music that is more intelligent, well thought out and artistically creative than rock musicians.


----------



## neoshredder

Well I disagree but you are free to feel that way. I also disagree with the adrenaline rushes part. That is what makes music fun.


----------



## Argus

misterjones said:


> Pop stations may keep you awake, but only long enough for you to barf in your desk drawer.


The problem with pop stations is not so much the content but the constant repetition of the same songs over and over. I think equally listening only to classical or jazz stations at work would get irritating very quick. It's a shame there are very few (absolutely none commercial) stations that play a decent mix of styles and genres. I find it best to switch between a few stations (R2, R3, R6, talkSPORT, XFM) to mix it up and keep a nice compromise between peoples tastes.



tdc said:


> I find classical music (ie - Bach and Paganini) played on electric guitars ridiculously cheezy myself - to each their own.


I agree.



> Rock music to me in general is about a lot of things that are non-musical like adrenaline and image, which boil down to cheap tricks. I think people can get addicted to this fakery and these adrenaline rushes and mistake it for good music. Classical composers generally don't try and sell an image or be 'cool' they just write music, and they generally write music that is more intelligent, well thought out and artistically creative than rock musicians


I disagree entirely. There are no cheap tricks and fakery in the music, only in the performance. Miming, auto tune and such are deceptive but they don't take away from the music itself.

To say that any kind of music is more intelligent or artistically creative than another is just a reflective of your prejudices.


----------



## jalex

Argus said:


> To say that any kind of music is more intelligent or artistically creative than another is just a reflective of your prejudices.


I'm not sure how you'd defend that statement. I'd consider it a demonstrable, objective truth that reasonably complicated pieces of classical music are more intelligently written than the vast majority of popular music songs/instrumentals. 'Artistic creativity' is a bit of a vague term, but again I'd say it's difficult to construct a case for the creativity required to produce The White Album being equal to the creativity required to produce, say, the Eroica. The issue of handling large scale structures alone is enough in my mind to put classical music on a higher _intellectual_ plane than most popular music, regardless of how one feels about the music itself.


----------



## science

I wouldn't have gone with the White Album. Maybe something like the Sex Pistols.


----------



## jalex

science said:


> I wouldn't have gone with the White Album. Maybe something like the Sex Pistols.


No, I was deliberately setting the bar relatively high for popular music.


----------



## Argus

jalex said:


> I'm not sure how you'd defend that statement. I'd consider it a demonstrable, objective truth that reasonably complicated pieces of classical music are more intelligently written than the vast majority of popular music songs/instrumentals. 'Artistic creativity' is a bit of a vague term, but again I'd say it's difficult to construct a case for the creativity required to produce The White Album being equal to the creativity required to produce, say, the Eroica. The issue of handling large scale structures alone is enough in my mind to put classical music on a higher _intellectual_ plane than most popular music, regardless of how one feels about the music itself.


So intelligence equals complexity in your view. In that case, there is more to the music than just the pitch and duration of the notes. How can you compare the complexity of a multi-voiced contrapuntal piece to a piece built up from layers of samples or a piece generated by computers using mathematical formulae? Is it just the sheer amount of information in the piece or is it something else?

In my view, 'intelligent' is not a word that can be used to describe music. (Even though I do like some 'Intelligent Dance Music')


----------



## violadude

Boogieman said:


> A
> 
> With me, much of it is the sound and sheer energy (something Motorhead have in abundance) of a cranked up, distorted electric guitar. No orchestra in the world will provide that sound, no classical composer or musician will give you that energy.


Actually, if you take into account Einstein's theory of relativity, E=mc2 where m=mass, E=energy, c=time, the total mass of an orchestra is certainly larger than the total mass of an average 4-5 person rock band. Also, a symphony is likely to be longer, thus more time played, than an average rock song. Therefore, an average symphony being played at a concert certainly produces more energy than an average rock song at a concert.

Sorry, that was a nice theory though.


----------



## brianwalker

Boogieman said:


> Hello again everyone,
> 
> Thanks to all for responding/participating. First of all, allow me to clear one thing up; the reasonable question of why, as a self-confessed "hater" of classical music, I would be here at all? I'm no troll, I assure you- when this thread has run it's course you won't hear from me again. We disagree on musical issues, but I have no wish to impinge on your enjoyment. My brother-in-law is not computer savvy (neither am I), and has recently purchased his first laptop; I was attempting to inform him how to search for sites of interest on the internet, and told him that he could type anything at alll in the search field and that this would be followed by a list of related sites. Consequently, and mischeiviously, knowing my thoughts on the matter, he typed "classical music is great"; cue list of sites. I altered the word "great" to "c***", and received another listing of which your site, and indeed this very thread, were second in line. I was intrigued and began to read the thread. Having a group of classical enthusiasts trying to deduce why anyone may not like the genre seemed like an exercise in supposition. Most, in my experience of them, are of the mind that everyone enjoys it really; as someone here has said "even if they don't know it yet". Hence I presume, the Jehovahs Witness-esque tactics employed by some classicists of leaving CDs in peoples houses or cars (this has happened to me) or steering conversations around to specific composers or styles. In any event, and seeing that site registration is free, I merely thought that, rather than attempting to see through the eyes, or in thiis case hear through the ears, of others, the topic may benefit (if that is the correct word) from the views of one who really does loathe classical music, though I can't and don't claim to speak for all who dislike it. That was my sole motive, nothing more. You have my word.
> 
> Additionally, insofar as my experience of listening to classical goes, it wasn't all forced by any means. On more than a few occasions I would pay the pittance required for the cheap seats, so to speak, at the Philharmonic Hall (I was born and raised in Liverpool) to listen to the Liverpooll Philharmonic Orchestra perform a variety of works. I stuck it out too. Indeed, one of the first pieces I learned to play on a guitar was Greigs "Hall of the Mountain King" that I first heard when the LPO played it, besides the ubiquitous "Romanza" and of course "Greensleeves" (alongside "Stairway to Heaven" it was almost illegal not to play them, at the time). Bach's Toccata was slightly more challenging but certainly acheivable. I didn't like them, but it pleased my family and they encouraged me to play as it kept me away from the various street gangs that roamed in our area. They were certainly torn as I got more profficient and started to rip into the Rolling Stones, Hendrix, Led Zep and Cream, but I never did cross swords with the law. I don't feel that it's entirely correct to blame my parents for my negative views on classical; I don't hold any bitterness at my memories of them. But they did lead me to think that classical was the be-all and end-all insofar as music is concerned. Forgive me for saying so, but rather like some folk here. They were wrong, and watching Jimi Hendrix on the TV all those years ago, I knew they were. He inadvertantly opened another door.
> 
> Well isn't that what music does, open doors? When one of you hears, for example, one of Bach's English Suites (yes I have heard them) and I listen to Motorhead's The World Is Yours album the effect is pretty much the same. Now reverse the order and give me Bach, whilst you have Motorhead: same people, same music, wildly different reactions. But as to how, and why, who can say, and you have a thread such as this. With me, much of it is the sound and sheer energy (something Motorhead have in abundance) of a cranked up, distorted electric guitar. No orchestra in the world will provide that sound, no classical composer or musician will give you that energy. It's the opposite end of the spectrum. They have violins and cellos to work with, a brass section that sounds like a drunk on a night out, oboes that provide a mating call from something in the Amazon, etc, etc; the tools simply aren't there. Take Paganini's 5th Caprice; on a violin, as originally written, it's terrible, like the soundtrack to a 60s Hammer film, but Steve Vai's interptretation of it on the electric guitar packed quite a punch. A piano is a hopeful looking instrument, but instead of Pete Yancey, Albert Ammons, Little Richard or Jerry Lee Lewis, we get Liberace with numerous tinkly flourishes. The whole thing simply lacks bite. But then, to return to reality, the whole object of a classical performance, is emphatically NOTto have 'em rocking in the aisles, whereas that's the effect that a rock band would want.
> 
> I'm not knocking classical musicians; a degree of talent is inherently required and they clearly have that. Neither do I have any truck with classical fans because of their musical choice; if my earlier post gave that impression then I apologise. That was not my intention. I'll knock the music sure enough as I beleive it to be depressive and dull, but I'll happily support your right to enjoy the genre of your choice, and you should be free to do so without abuse. Can you honestly afford the same privilege to fans of other genres?
> 
> Anyway, as interesting as this is, I suppose I should get the car fixed before my other half gets home. Thank you again for providing the platform.
> 
> As ever, all best regards, B


Hendrix is pretentious ****. I like Katy Perry better.

And the people agree with me. Katy Perry is more popular today than Jimmy Hendrix.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

This is the most redundant topic.

When you want complex forms and narrative, organic emotional development, go with classical. When you want more singular mood-based music derived from an entirely different musical vocabulary (jazz, old r&b, blues), go with rock.

If you dismiss either as worthless, I won't mince words, you're just dumb, I'm sorry.


----------



## jalex

Argus said:


> So intelligence equals complexity in your view. *In that case, there is more to the music than just the pitch and duration of the notes*. How can you compare the complexity of a multi-voiced contrapuntal piece to a piece built up from layers of samples or a piece generated by computers using mathematical formulae? Is it just the sheer amount of information in the piece or is it something else?


Eh? Not sure how you reached the bold. Intelligence and complexity are related to a degree, though I'm not sure whether I'd go so far as to say they were equal.



> In my view, 'intelligent' is not a word that can be used to describe music. (Even though I do like some 'Intelligent Dance Music')


Of course 'intelligent' can't be described directly to a piece of music. 'Intelligently written' can. 'x is an intelligently written piece of music' means x piece of music exhibits large degree of technical compositional skill (whether this be intricate counterpoint, thorough and inventive development of ideas or whatever). Is it not self-evident that it takes more musical intelligence to write a convincing Bach chorale than than a short pentatonic riff based on power chords? (Again, regardless of your feelings about how 'good' the end product is.)


----------



## jalex

regressivetransphobe said:


> If you dismiss either as worthless, I won't mince words, you're just dumb, I'm sorry.


What if I consider most popular music worthless even after judging it by it's lowest aim (to provide simple, undemanding entertainment)?


----------



## norman bates

Boogieman said:


> With me, much of it is the sound and sheer energy (something Motorhead have in abundance) of a cranked up, distorted electric guitar. No orchestra in the world will provide that sound,


i agree with this



Boogieman said:


> I'll knock the music sure enough as I beleive it to be depressive and dull,


do you really think that this (just five minutes)





lacks energy, it's depressive or dull?
Do you really think that centuries of music are all the same?


----------



## AlexD

_one of Bach's English Suites (yes I have heard them) and I listen to Motorhead's The World Is Yours album the effect is pretty much the same. Now reverse the order and give me Bach, whilst you have Motorhead: same people, same music, wildly different reactions_

Speak for yourself. I enjoy both Bach & Motorhead.


----------



## misterjones

Who plays Bach on electric guitar? I'd like to hear that.

Jazz great Ron Carter made a very nice album of Bach played on an upright bass. I'd say there is room for both him and the likes of Casals in the world. I figure if Hendrix had lived a bit longer he might have recorded a Bach suite or two.

But to get back to the issue(s) at hand, here's an interesting clip from an interview with Frank Zappa where he touches upon many of the topics raised in this thread. I find Frank has a knack for bringing one's feet back closer to the Earth's surface.


----------



## Glissando

I think the explanation that makes the most sense to me is that many people simply have interests that lie outside the realm of music. Most people I've met who are passionate about any type of music, be it rock, folk, jazz, etc., also will be able to recognize the greatness of certain classical music (if not all or even most of it). If any of these people still have a bias against classical music as a whole, I feel safe in saying that it's probably a lack of exposure to the music that is all that's barring their entry. If someone has enough taste to enjoy Led Zeppelin, or Television, or the Byrds, or the Smiths, then they are naturally set up to start enjoying Bach and Brahms. I say this because this is what happened to me. I started with rock, then incorporated jazz in my teens, and a few years ago discovered the greatness of classical music. Now I enjoy music of many genres, although classical music is what I'm predominantly interested in now.

However, there are many other people in the world whose only interest in music is when it can serve as a background accompaniment to other activities. I have occasionally found myself bewildered when attending a rock concert, to see people divert their attention during the best moments of a song, to chat to a friend about something totally unrelated. Yet we who love music sometimes may forget that the world consists of many more people of their ilk than of ours. People who are uncultured, who only listen to music as background accompaniment, or who just lack a basic sense of tunefulness or melody, will always be frustrated by music that demands more attention in order to enjoy it. It's true for jazz and rock too, but I think the problem is more pronounced with classical music.


----------



## Argus

jalex said:


> Eh? Not sure how you reached the bold. Intelligence and complexity are related to a degree, though I'm not sure whether I'd go so far as to say they were equal.
> 
> Of course 'intelligent' can't be described directly to a piece of music. 'Intelligently written' can. 'x is an intelligently written piece of music' means x piece of music exhibits large degree of technical compositional skill (whether this be intricate counterpoint, thorough and inventive development of ideas or whatever). Is it not self-evident that it takes more musical intelligence to write a convincing Bach chorale than than a short pentatonic riff based on power chords? (Again, regardless of your feelings about how 'good' the end product is.)


How about a hip hop song that's made entirely of sampled beats with rapping over the top? How can can you compare the intelligence required to write/improvise lyrics and arrange those samples with the intelligence required to create, say Boulez's Le Marteau Sans Maitre?

Or take something like Part's Fur Alina. A very simple piece in many respects. Does that make it less or more intelligent than pieces like these:





















The first two requiring expert knowledge of how to use electronics to create the desired sounds, the latter two requiring only control of the human voice.

What I'm saying is 'intelligent' or 'intelligently written' music is impossible to quantify (therfore nonsense) as there is more to the skill of creating music than just the vertical and horizontal positioning of tones.


----------



## science

You think the conversation at a rock concert is bad? The best jazz club in Korea has become a trendy place, so people go there in order to be there rather than to hear the music, and the result is that during the music there is all this chatter and laughter. I swear someday I'm going to take in a super soaker and enforce some rough justice. 

Of course this means it is no longer actually the best jazz club in Korea.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Argus said:


> How about a hip hop song that's made entirely of sampled beats with rapping over the top? How can can you compare the intelligence required to write/improvise lyrics and arrange those samples with the intelligence required to create, say Boulez's Le Marteau Sans Maitre?
> 
> Or take something like Part's Fur Alina. A very simple piece in many respects. Does that make it less or more intelligent than pieces like these:
> 
> The first two requiring expert knowledge of how to use electronics to create the desired sounds, the latter two requiring only control of the human voice.
> 
> What I'm saying is 'intelligent' or 'intelligently written' music is impossible to quantify (therfore nonsense) as there is more to the skill of creating music than just the vertical and horizontal positioning of tones.


Why don't you compare with Black Sabbath? I would be interested in any of your Black Sabbath (acronym B S) opinions. In the context of "intelligently written" stuff, which I have no idea. Many thanks.


----------



## Dimboukas

Don't you think some people find classical music intimidating? I believe that some kinds of classical music are elitist. No, Mozart and Strauss are not elitist at all. But Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Schoenberg and others (I hope you understand what composers I mean) are somehow elitist. It is not easy to understand them, with strange structures and melodies. Everyone may listen to Mozart sometime, but few are going to listen to a Prokofiev's violin concerto.


----------



## science

I don't think people hate classical music - they hate classical music fans. I understand _that_ perfectly. We're a very condescending, inconsiderate bunch. I hate us, a lot of the time. If the music wasn't so good....


----------



## josecamoessilva

Has anyone noticed how many "bad guys" like [what we for convenience will call] classical music? I can think of three examples off the top of my head:

There's the murderous architect in the last episode of Columbo series 1, who gets caught


Spoiler



because he left the radio of his victim's car tuned to the classical station (the victim only heard country music).

Hannibal Lecter plays the Goldberg Variations himself and then goes to the Opera in Hannibal, and is shown listening to [I think, but am not sure] the GV in Silence of the Lambs while murdering and mutilating the police officers in the court building.

There's an episode in the first season of Numb3rs where a genocidal murderer


Spoiler



hiding as a music teacher gets caught because he can't shake his addiction to opera and has to go to the opening night of a LA Opera performance.

I'm sure there are a lot more, but what's with this "classical music is the favorite music of murderers" meme?

Cheers,
JCS


----------



## GrosseFugue

josecamoessilva said:


> I'm sure there are a lot more, but what's with this "classical music is the favorite music of murderers" meme?


In the recent Sherlock Holmes film, Professor Moriarty is shown singing Schubert while brutally torturing Holmes. His henchman is also a big fan of Don Giovanni. So yeah, there is a lot of that and it's so counter to real-life. I mean when you hear on the news about another spree killing or school shooting I would bet you anything the person was NOT a fan of Classical Music. More likely Death Metal or Gangsta Rap or Country maybe (there's been studies about it as well).

And aside from Hitler, I really can not recall a single murderer who loved CM. I think basically Adolf began the whole negative stereotype and it's just stuck because, well, he was a full-fledged maniac. But to be fair -- that was just ONE GUY. People need to get over it already and start paying attention to serial killers who listen to Iron Maiden. 

As for beetzart's plight. I feel for you, man. That must truly suck to work with two ignoramuses. And in the close confines of a van no less! You ask why you should suffer abuse. My answer is: YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TO! I think you're doing the right thing by not revealing that you're a fan of CM. Of course, it would be nice to come out (so to speak) and be accepted and etc. But there's a time and place for everything. As a wise man once said: You need to pick your battles.

These moron a--holes you work with aren't worth the bother. Let them do their stupid antics and just mentally block them out. Unless, of course, it becomes personal, as in they denigrate YOU (and not merely Beethoven) then that should be addressed. But otherwise, yeah, just blow 'em off.

Listen, I come across complete jacka--es and punks all the time. And I would dearly love to put all of them in their place. But that's the world for you. 'Sides I don't want to give us CM-lovers a bad name and be labeled a serial killer! :lol:

At least you have the gift of listening so you can go home and escape into blissful sound. Sorry, if that sounds a little dopey, but it's true, right?


----------



## Sequentia

You can bet classical music is "hated", given that admitting to enjoying it is socially almost as unacceptable as "coming out of the closet".


----------



## Miaou

Sequentia said:


> You can bet classical music is "hated", given that admitting to enjoying it is socially almost as unacceptable as "coming out of the closet".


'What kind of music do you like?'
'Oh, so many kinds I can't specify.'
'Name your favourite then.'
'I can't decide, how about you?'

It's just awkward.


----------



## science

If what you say actually happens, I suspect it's the way you say you like classical music. No one has ever given me any attitude about liking classical music.


----------



## musicphotogAnimal

I tend to stick to a genre of classical music that most people didn't see a resurgence until the period accuracy phenomenon of the late 80s -90s. Yeah...Baroque. It's the genre of classical music that has grabbed me and held my attention. I tend to gravitate towards Handel, Bach, Albinoni and Vivaldi. I have my dad to blame for my love of classical music. That was all he ever listened to. He tended to deride other forms of music (like rock and metal as "monkeys screaming"). My dad tended to be more classical-romantic period in his choice of composers (Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Verdi...etc). 

I married a rock listener whose favorites range from Def Leppard, Poison, Bon Jovi...which drives me nuts because it grates on my nerves. Used to be a music student, but didn't find it was my right niche and gravitated to a career in wildlife photography, and decided to keep my listening to classical music as a hobby rather than a choice of career. I chose baroque music as a hobby to listen to because I find it more stimulating (but that's my personal preference, take it as you will). My wife says I'm a snob. ~evil grin~

I feel that most people don't understand the complexities of classical music and tend to view it with a jaundiced eye. People also tend to go with the flow and listen to whatever everyone else listens to and that's usually rock...which tends to be more popular.


----------



## neoshredder

Have you listened to Corelli and Biber?


----------



## Carpenoctem

They don't hate it, they just don't understand it.


----------



## brianwalker

*No one likes it when (it is insinuated that) they're on the lower end of a vertical hierarchy (relative to whoever else). It's. That. Simple. *

People also hate "hipster music", it's just that there are more hipsters, defined non-derogatorily as people who belong to the "Indie" class of listeners, than classical music fans, so there's more hate for the latter, since more people are excluded from the privileged place in the hierarchy.

There are enough hipsters so that most hipsters can find enough other hipsters in geographic proximity to form a community of hipsters in which inside the group inferior music can be freely condescended upon. Make no mistake, there is always condescension, and hipsters are far more condescending than classical music listeners. The lower they are on the pyramid of taste, the more brutally condescending they tend to be to those below them, and more contemptuous of those above them.

*Fight fire with fire.* If they won't bow down to Bach, berate them with the supposed equality between Britney Spears and Black Sabbath. Reuse every single argument they've used to prove the supposed equality between Bach and their favorite band.


----------



## Ramako

I'm sitting on holiday on the balcony, and every evening there is a fair about 50 yards away with their speakers blaring repetitive, cliched, boring pop music at top volume straight at us from 8-11 pm. Every evening I want to go and attack them with an axe (the speakers that is). So pop music is not in my good books at the moment.

Even when I have less reason to be annoyed, however, I genuinely believe pop music is basically worthless, certainly much inferior to classical (and some other forms of) music. If people want to listen to something to give them a break, so that their brains don't have to work, I'm not going to complain - I play games or watch tv - but to claim it even approaches equality with Beethoven, Bach etc. I won't accept. Why?

It is intellectually dwarfed by classical music. It's like comparing a chimpanzee with Isaac Newton. Art music is also (big dramatic pause) ART. It aspires to beauty, whereas pop music aspires to be popular. Being old fashioned, I believe that tragedy and the sublime etc. are inherently good things, and relativism taken too far gets on my nerves.

People get annoyed because of an inferiority complex. I know several intelligent people who do not like classical. They think it is the invisible robe - all snobbery and pretension. I don't believe that they are inferior beings or something stupid like that, but simply that they haven't bothered to take the time to develop and refine their musicality.


----------



## Lenfer

I don't think enough people have heard enough to hate it. Anything these people say is born of ignorance and stereotypical ideas of classical music. If someone can listen to as much as some of the users on the site have an turn round and say they hate it then I will believe them.

However I do think it's true not everyone will enjoy or get pleasure from listening to classical music but as I've said before classical music is niche always has been. It just seems mainstream as it's pretty much the music of the establishment from *Washington* to *Peking*. Perhaps this and the associated formality puts people off?


----------



## Ramako

Lenfer said:


> I don't think enough people have heard enough to hate it. Anything these people say is born of ignorance and stereotypical ideas of classical music. If someone can listen to as much as some of the users on the site have an turn round and say they hate it then I will believe them.
> 
> However I do think it's true not everyone will enjoy or get pleasure from listening to classical music but as I've said before classical music is niche always has been. It just seems mainstream as it's pretty much the music of the establishment from *Washington* to *Peking*. Perhaps this and the associated formality puts people off?


Maybe. But classical is more niche than it has been in the past. Look at Haydn - he was massively popular. 20,000 people attended Beethoven's funeral *in Vienna*. In the 19th century, the rising middle classes became followers of classical because they were aspiring to the existing and waning upper classes. This, I think, maybe happening in China now where they want to be "Western" to be more "classy". Now culture is generally looked down upon more freely _because the rich no longer look up to it_. It used to be looked on with envy by those not stinking rich, but now with scorn.


----------



## BurningDesire

Speaking as a lover of all kinds of music, I know some people who tend to view classical in a negative light because most classical music lovers and those who study it tend to look down on other kinds of music which they tend to know very little about. Its really annoying when great art you love is dismissed by people who haven't even listened to it because its "not as complex", though most listeners in either group don't study music so how would they know? I know its not a good excuse to dismiss great works of music, that the blame lies with ignorant and pretentious listeners, but that goes both ways.


----------



## Lenfer

Ramako said:


> Maybe. But classical is more niche than it has been in the past. Look at Haydn - he was massively popular. 20,000 people attended Beethoven's funeral *in Vienna*. In the 19th century, the rising middle classes became followers of classical because they were aspiring to the existing and waning upper classes. This, I think, maybe happening in China now where they want to be "Western" to be more "classy". Now culture is generally looked down upon more freely _because the rich no longer look up to it_. It used to be looked on with envy by those not stinking rich, but now with scorn.


I doubt those 20,000 were fans a big funeral like his was a go to event especially if you had nothing better to do or were forced to by your employer which sometimes happened. Pre-radio pop music was folk songs and songs sang in the public house or at work etc...

The fact that there are more people on *Earth* now than ever in human history means that in percentage terms there must be more classical listeners no matter how many people listen to other music.

For those who don't like classical music I'm glad they have things to do. Can you imagine! How difficult it would be for those without contacts to get tickets to thing if everyone wanted to go to the *Proms*?

As for *China* I'm not sure what you say is fair, *Japan* has always loved classical music since opening up to the West, *Korea* both north and south apparently hold it in high regard and *YouTube* is full of "Asian" enfants playing classical music. They are either Asian or are of Asian descent I dislike saying "Asian".

So I don't think you can just say that *China* is just trying to be like the West. Classical music was banned at least that from the West (I'm sure the Russian/Soviet stuff to after the war) by the Party for a long time. This could explain the lack of apparent *Chinese* interest in classical music pre-X date.


----------



## Ramako

Lenfer said:


> I doubt those 20,000 were fans a big funeral like his was a go to event especially if you had nothing better to do or were forced to by your employer which sometimes happened. Pre-radio pop music was folk songs and songs sang in the public house or at work etc...


Good point about the funeral - but I'm not sure the same would happen nowadays. But contemporary classical music then was much more accessible then than it is now. I also think that possibly because of this, it was held in generally higher esteem



Lenfer said:


> The fact that there are more people on *Earth* now than ever in human history means that in percentage terms there must be more classical listeners no matter how many people listen to other music.


This doesn't make sense to me. Sure if there's more people then it follows more people listen to classical but, all other things staying the same, the percentage remains the same?



Lenfer said:


> For those who don't like classical music I'm glad they have things to do. Can you imagine! How difficult it would be for those without contacts to get tickets to thing if everyone wanted to go to the *Proms*?
> 
> As for *China* I'm not sure what you say is fair, *Japan* has always loved classical music since opening up to the West, *Korea* both north and south apparently hold it in high regard and *YouTube* is full of "Asian" enfants playing classical music. They are either Asian or are of Asian descent I dislike saying "Asian".
> 
> So I don't think you can just say that *China* is just trying to be like the West. Classical music was banned at least that from the West (I'm sure the Russian/Soviet stuff to after the war) by the Party for a long time. This could explain the lack of apparent *Chinese* interest in classical music pre-X date.


I said China of the top of my head, but you're probably right that I'm wrong. I really don't know very much, but it does seem that there is a lot of western classical in the far east, and not very much of there music in our classical sphere. I was assuming it was that reason, as that I think is the generally accepted reason for the Chinese buying Bordeaux wines etc. It seemed a fair assumption.


----------



## Lenfer

Ramako said:


> Good point about the funeral - but I'm not sure the same would happen nowadays. But contemporary classical music then was much more accessible then than it is now. I also think that possibly because of this, it was held in generally higher esteem.


I still think those people who held it in high esteem are the those who would do so now. 



Ramako said:


> This doesn't make sense to me. Sure if there's more people then it follows more people listen to classical but, all other things staying the same, the percentage remains the same?


Perhaps percentage is not the right word sorry but there are a lot more (comparably) rich and educated people who a higher percentage of listen to classical music from what I've read.



Ramako said:


> I said China of the top of my head, but you're probably right that I'm wrong. I really don't know very much, but it does seem that there is a lot of western classical in the far east, and not very much of there music in our classical sphere. I was assuming it was that reason, as that I think is the generally accepted reason for the Chinese buying Bordeaux wines etc. It seemed a fair assumption.


I agree with you on the wine (they push up the prices on that to! ). I read in a magazine that some *Chinese* people "top-up" their wine with *7-Up* soda and *Coca-Cola*. Those are the bourgeoisie and the nouveau riche a lot of the performers came from quite poor family backgrounds, money can't buy taste it seems.

I'm sorry if you felt I was hostile towards your post I didn't mean for it to come across that way. :tiphat:


----------



## Ramako

Lenfer said:


> I still think those people who held it in high esteem are the those who would do so now.
> 
> Perhaps percentage is not the right word sorry but there are a lot more (comparably) rich and educated people who a higher percentage of listen to classical music from what I've read.
> 
> I agree with you on the wine (they push up the prices on that to! ). I read in a magazine that some *Chinese* people "top-up" their wine with *7-Up* soda and *Coca-Cola*. Those are the bourgeoisie and the nouveau riche a lot of the performers came from quite poor family backgrounds, money can't buy taste it seems.
> 
> I'm sorry if you felt I was hostile towards your post I didn't mean for it to come across that way. :tiphat:


If I overreacted it was just because I thought you made good points and I wanted to reply to them, sorry.

At least now classical music is accessible to a lot more people with a lot less money. I guess I was talking about the general attitude rather than those who actively liked classical music - I agree that those would be the same.


----------



## musicphotogAnimal

On occasion, however I haven't put any recordings of Biber (other than the Biber Sonata for 8 trumpets) and Corelli into my meager collection. Too busy saving for a large wildlife lens that costs in the neighbourhood of $11,000 CDN.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

I used to be quite indifferent to classical music (but still I would not call it hate), because it seemed to me too bland, relaxing (I hate that word in relation to music. I don't want to be "relaxed", no, thanks, I want my heart and soul to be set on fire!) and lacking inner energy - the kind of music you would put on when you want some pretty sounds in the background, without having to pay attention to them. It took Siegfried's funeral music and the finale of Götterdämmerung to convince me otherwise.


----------



## Rapide

Some hate classical music because of the perceived evil-political associations with it. Look around here for musical-political threads.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

But those musical-political threads were started by the lovers of classical music, not by the haters. The haters are usually not knowledgeable enough about the political associations with music of certain composers.


----------



## oogabooha

Many of my friends at home (most of my classical music friends are not in the exact town i'm living in) dislike classical music. One of my friends (who i go to many non-classical concerts with) says that he gets too depressed when listening to it. He thinks it is snobby and condescending. However, throughout the 2 or so years we've been friends I've shown him why that is not true, and he now has more respect for it.

I have another friend (and his girlfriend) who aren't classical music experts, but for the most part they are interested. After a few NYPhil concerts I took them to, they have both decided that they are definitely interested in the subject.

I feel like people get too caught up in the snobby, affluent aesthetic that classical music carries along to realize that this music is created by _people_ who think thoughts that many popular musicians express with guitars. It's just expressed differently.


----------



## Flamme

beetzart said:


> That is what I have observed throughout life. It is as this music seriously offends them!
> I work with two people and I have to listen to crappy commercial radio stations all day, blearing out all the latest hits, over and over again. But, while the three of us where sitting in our van yesterday one of them started flicking through the preset channels on the radio. He came across Radio 3 and Classic FM. Playing on Radio 3 was a Mozart Opera and he turned it up really loud to take the ****. The said 'I've had enough of that ****!'. They don't know I love classical music and never will. The reason behind this is why should I get abuse for something I have spent the last 22 years studying and enjoying because people are so ignorant to something they don't understand.


People are simply idiots and conformists who follow herds...There is not only one herd but many...
For me classical music is a cure for a soul in first instance then technical and emotional perfection in second...
I was in phase when i thought it was ''boring'' and ''old fashioned'' not trendy enough but then i learned you have three phases in listening 1. Getting to know her and all her varietes(its a strange new world you sometimes feel like you are Alice in Wonderland its so ''not common'' for todays way of living) 2. one Learning to recognize various compositions and making tghe list of your favorite and less favorite composers and works 3.Master phase when you really become a Knower of that sort of music and living classicopedia...Im in a second phase and msut say i understand why ppl give up and go listen to trash media serves them...It takes effort patience and certain level of sophistication most ppl dont have...Anyway since i started to listen it on daily basis sometimes even for days on my endless playlist i feel much much better safer in myself and happier...This music brings scattered and chaotic things into Order and offers so much positive and Composed things in todays maelstrom times...


----------



## Aries

Because the leadership is forcing cultural degeneration. And because the people are scum.


----------



## Flamme

Everyone has the agenda to follow the ''well known'' path in life path most ppl try not to think too much not to lay stress on themselves ppl are tired of work family problems they approach the music like they approach the food they take first thing in the fridge they see...


----------



## Novelette

There's also a problem of attention span. Many classical works are vast and complicated pieces of music that require a great deal of attention and focus to come to understand the piece, and its effect upon the listener. When people are bombarded by a constant parade of flashing images, loud noises, etc., the relatively slow and measured pathos of classical music can be difficult to endure. For the same reason, many people cannot endure reading a book; not necessarily because they are non-intellectual, but because when one is accustomed for the endless barrage of fast-paced activity, it can be difficult to unwind enough to focus intensively on any work of music. Besides, I think that most people only have music in their lives for distraction or for entertainment only. For me, music brings enrichment and joy. For that reason, I cringe at the thought of relegating, say, Brahms to background music. 

In my experience, people don't hate classical music; they will listen to it when prompted but won't go out of their way to listen to it. I don't dislike modern music, but I never go out of my way to listen to it. The world of classical music has enough variety to keep me satisfied and constantly excited.


----------



## Novelette

People are often surprised that a person can listen to nothing but classical music, too. But "classical music" is a blanket term for a tremendously broad spectrum of music. I don't feel insulated within the realm of classical music, when I have had my fill of Baroque music, I happily turn to Romantic music. They are so different to my ears, that they may as well be regarded as wholly separate genres.


----------



## NightXsenator

Wow, I fully agree with you! I think that term "classical" can refer to any kind of music that withstanded generation trial. It may be from any genre. Better to use term "art music" or, as it is called in Russia, "academical music". As for me, some years ago I didn't understand classical music and thought of its listeners as of hypocrites and snobs. Probably, it's an influence of mass culture. Now I listen to classical and only classical! Well, sometimes it takes me much to understand one or other symphony, but when I success, this symphony becomes my obsession for weeks or even months.


----------



## Tero

I think part of it is that classical music covers so much music. I
don't actually like about half of it. There were composers who cranked
out such similar works that they really added nothing new for years.

The other issue is that people tolerate instrumentals for movies and
ceremonies to set moods. They do not actually "understand" it but
tolerate it. For radios and iPods they typically like catchy melodies
with songs. Songs from 200 to 1000 years ago are not likely in English
so they are dismissed for that alone. Plus the style was not people
think of as entertainment now. Opera singing vs. say Lady Gaga.

I don't mind. I have developed a bit of an allergy to country in the
last 10 years, but I listen to all the rest, Monteverdi to Death
Metal.


----------



## farmerjohn

One problem is that classical music is portrayed as a virtuoso bloodsport, which is played by geniuses like Paganini and not by mere mortals.

One of the things I like about folk music is that it is very inclusive. Anyone can go to a folk club and borrow a guitar and get up and sing something. Doesn't matter if you only know 3 chords or you sing out of tune, people are very warm and encouraging and the thing is audience participation and get up and have a go. So it is extremely inclusive. At a folk music club there is no distinction between the performers and the audience - the performers are the audience and the audience are the performers. It is totally inclusive and non-elitist.

By contrast, so much classical music seems to be about show off style virtuosity that you have to be a superman child prodigy to play. You look at it on TV and you are impressed, but you also think to yourself "I'll never be able to play that" and it puts you off - you give up before you've even started. Perhaps I am being unfair, but, rightly or wrongly, I believe that is a common perception.

I remember when I started the secondary school aged 11. At the time, I was only interested in soccer. Music (classical or otherwise) was not something I liked nor disliked particularly, it was just that soccer was everything to me then. 

I remember we had our first music lesson and the teacher went through the register one by one as we had to take turns of piece standing in front of the class singing. I was painfully shy and this filled me with terror. Unlike other children in the class I had never had any music tuition and didn't know how to read music or what to do but had a go anyway. The teacher only let me sing a few bars and then stopped me and gave me the lowest mark in the class. I felt humiliated and I thought I was stupid or no good and it scarred me and, although I became interested in pop music around age 14 and taught myself the guitar then, I never went near classical music until many, many years later and it was all because of the shame i felt from the public rejection i had received in front of my peers when I was 11 and the feeling of worthlessness it gave me.

Now I look back, the Music teacher was only interested in picking the best kids for the school choir. He didn't give a monkeys about trying to awaken my interest in music and develop me, he just wanted the finished article, so he could bring glory upon himself and the school.


----------



## Lukecash12

Bassoonist said:


> There have been very few times where I've heard a piece or song and loved it to pieces the first time I've heard it.


Wow, I would have a hard time even estimating how many times that has happened to me.


----------



## Bethany

I think it is probably because it is too complicated for them to understand. People don't appreciate the beauty of classical music and how unique every piece of it is. Most people these days listen to modern pop music (that I simply loathe) and every little thing in it is done for them. You don't have to think to listen to such music and every sound in modern pop music is 'fake'; it's not natural, just awful sounds made by a computer. I expect it doesn't take much effort to create pop music, either. I don't think singers or writers put their entire hearts into it like classical music composers do/did, so it is easier to understand as often, it gives no impact on you at all. I suppose it might do to some people but really, I think many people dislike Classical Music because new music has come out that is easy to understand, and most people like the things they can understand.
Perhaps the singers do put their feelings into the modern music they create, but it does not create something as wonderful as an orchestral piece, for example, as that is far more complicated and beautiful than modern music could ever be.


----------



## KenOC

A quote I remember reading from an article. A younger girl was asked to listen to some classical music. She said something like, "It sounds like he keeps trying to make a tune and never quite succeeds."


----------



## Ramako

KenOC said:


> A quote I remember reading from an article. A younger girl was asked to listen to some classical music. She said something like, "It sounds like he keeps trying to make a tune and never quite succeeds."


That is actually a profound quote.

Classical Music is usually about motion... The melodic material is developed and varied, constantly changing shape - sometimes it comes back in similar forms, which we might label a tune, coming at the same idea from different angles, but constantly _failing to ultimately realise that idea_. The promise of the idea is greater than the thing itself, so without putting in the thing itself the result seems higher. As a rule, the most intense power is derived from satisfaction denied, the greatest sentiment from sweetness withheld, the greatest satisfaction from stability denied. This might be why some people talk of Classical as aiming for higher things, but it also means that Classical does not, as a rule, give things 'easy'.


----------



## KenOC

Ramako said:


> That is actually a profound quote.


I agree with that. Which is why some people get a bit exasperated with Schubert, who often gives his melodies away too easily.


----------



## Ramako

KenOC said:


> I agree with that. Which is why some people get a bit exasperated with Schubert, who often gives his melodies away too easily.


I almost included a bit on Schubert in my previous post.

A Schubert 'tune' (the ones for which many composers would give limbs to have written, usually his second subjects) contains this within itself. If you listen to the 'tune' in the Quintet, it is in constant motion, and when it is not - when it reaches rest, it reaches rest in the most unlikely of places - in instability (G major?!). When it finishes, reaches cadential 'satisfaction', what is our reaction? Disappointment! We want it to play again - it must play again! And so it does. The motifs within the tune, though, are treated in the same way that tunes are treated in a larger scale in, say, a Beethoven symphony. Implication rather than realisation.

Schubert gives out his melodies easily enough, but the melodies don't give away their own secrets (motifs) at all easily.


----------



## Garlic

I don't think classical music fans do themselves a lot of favours with their dismissive attitude towards "lesser" musics. They can be as bad as metal fans sometimes! Speaking from experience, this attitude is very offputting from the outside.

Also, most pop music listeners want catchy hooks, or beats they can dance to. These are perfectly valid things to want from music. Classical music is quite deficient in this regard.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

Garlic said:


> I don't think classical music fans do themselves a lot of favours with their dismissive attitude towards "lesser" musics. They can be as bad as metal fans sometimes! Speaking from experience, this attitude is very offputting from the outside.
> 
> Also, most pop music listeners want catchy hooks, or beats they can dance to. These are perfectly valid things to want from music. Classical music is quite deficient in this regard.


Well, I think a lot of people turn to classical because modern pop doesn't offer much in the way of a moral framework. Most 'pop' lyrics are about having sex or wanting to have sex - but if I turn to art, it's idealism and mastery which I look for. I'm not saying sex is a bad thing, but I think art should be there to raise human beings above their animal nature, and pop which caters to sexual instincts certainly doesn't achieve that.


----------



## Nereffid

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Well, I think a lot of people turn to classical because modern pop doesn't offer much in the way of a moral framework. Most 'pop' lyrics are about having sex or wanting to have sex - but if I turn to art, it's idealism and mastery which I look for. I'm not saying sex is a bad thing, but I think art should be there to raise human beings above their animal nature, and pop which caters to sexual instincts certainly doesn't achieve that.


Ugh. I certainly don't look for a "moral framework" from classical music. What a depressing thought.


----------



## moody

Nereffid said:


> Ugh. I certainly don't look for a "moral framework" from classical music. What a depressing thought.


Also,there is plenty of sex in classical music ,what has he been listening to ---cantatas ?


----------



## Nereffid

moody said:


> Also,there is plenty of sex in classical music ,what has he been listening to ---cantatas ?


Not even cantatas are safe. Some of Bach's "dialogue cantatas" are a little risqué unless you really buy into the theological underpinnings!


----------



## Guest

This is a curious thread to want to revive as the OP seems no longer worth referring to. Why does anyone 'hate' anything? How can anyone hate something so large and varied?

Few people, if any, have a considered, informed and genuine 'hatred' of classical music. Surely, it's a colloquialism, not a statement made in earnest truth?


----------



## Cosmos

I've only met one person who truely hates classical music. She told me "Ugh, no not classical. I HATE classical music." and that's about it. I should have asked her why she hated it, because I never encountered anyone who hates it before. Most people either say that they like it (not enough search beyond the popular pieces) or they don't like it (not that they think it's bad, they're just not interested)

But hate it? That's unusual to me.


----------



## apricissimus

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> Well, I think a lot of people turn to classical because modern pop doesn't offer much in the way of a moral framework. Most 'pop' lyrics are about having sex or wanting to have sex - but if I turn to art, it's idealism and mastery which I look for. I'm not saying sex is a bad thing, but I think art should be there to raise human beings above their animal nature, and pop which caters to sexual instincts certainly doesn't achieve that.


There's a _lot_ of great music about sex. And it's about as universal a subject as you can get.


----------



## brotagonist

Pop music is escapist. The beats, the noise, the lyrics, etc. keep thoughts at bay. It's a non-stop party away from the here-and-now that exerts a pull that is difficult to resist.

Classical music is thought-provoking. It lacks the overt distractions of popular music. It can transport, given the desire or will, but its interpretation is subject to the listener's frame of mind.


----------



## moody

MacLeod said:


> This is a curious thread to want to revive as the OP seems no longer worth referring to. Why does anyone 'hate' anything? How can anyone hate something so large and varied?
> 
> Few people, if any, have a considered, informed and genuine 'hatred' of classical music. Surely, it's a colloquialism, not a statement made in earnest truth?


Young people bandy the word "hate" around without realising quite what a terrible word it is.
I never use it at all in normal circumstances.


----------



## Neo Romanza

It really doesn't bother me if someone 'hates' classical music. If they're that ignorant and uneducated then it's their own failing, not mine.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

apricissimus said:


> There's a _lot_ of great music about sex. And it's about as universal a subject as you can get.


well, all of music could be considered a 'mating call' I guess. Well, whatever, it's clear that each person has their own reasons for liking or disliking something. People probably dislike classical because it doesn't 'hook' them right away. But it shouldn't be our concern to attempt to 'convert' them, everyone should listen to what they prefer.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

moody said:


> Also,there is plenty of sex in classical music ,what has he been listening to ---cantatas ?


Apparently you don't know what my nickname means because if you did, you would understand that I listen to symphonies. I very rarely listen to cantatas. And who are you to judge my musical tastes?


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

apricissimus said:


> There's a _lot_ of great music about sex. And it's about as universal a subject as you can get.


saying it's a universal subject is, in my opinion, a generalization. Granted, it's a thing we are biologically predestined to perform, but it's unnecessary to thematize it in music, in my opinion. Any attempt to do so is probably motivated by financial gain, which is what you see today in modern pop music.


----------



## arpeggio

*Diversity*

My oldest son, in spite of my best efforts, never liked classical music until recently he discovered it. He is now 35.

He lost interest in pop music because there is a sameness to all of it. There is very little variety.

Classical music is extremely diverse. At one end is baroque and classical music. At the other end is the 20th century avant-garde. All pop songs are short pieces with about the same tempo. When it comes to length and tempo again diversity is the norm in classical music.


----------



## Blancrocher

arpeggio said:


> He lost interest in pop music because there is a sameness to all of it. There is very little variety.


You remind me of the "Pachelbel Rant" that was doing the rounds awhile back:


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

arpeggio said:


> My oldest son, in spite of my best efforts, never liked classical music until recently he discovered it. He is now 35.
> 
> He lost interest in pop music because there is a sameness to all of it. There is very little variety.
> 
> Classical music is extremely diverse. At one end is baroque and classical music. At the other end is the 20th century avant-garde. All pop songs are short pieces with about the same tempo. When it comes to length and tempo again diversity is the norm in classical music.


nice post, I think so too.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

moody said:


> Also,there is plenty of sex in classical music...


The difference between the expressions of sexuality in classical and pop music is the difference between Tristan and Isolde's all-consuming passion and a one-night stand.


----------



## moody

HaydnBearstheClock said:


> saying it's a universal subject is, in my opinion, a generalization. Granted, it's a thing we are biologically predestined to perform, but it's unnecessary to thematize it in music, in my opinion. Any attempt to do so is probably motivated by financial gain, which is what you see today in modern pop music.


What was Richard Strauss' reason do you suppose ?


----------



## Novelette

Cosmos said:


> I've only met one person who truely hates classical music. She told me "Ugh, no not classical. I HATE classical music." and that's about it. I should have asked her why she hated it, because I never encountered anyone who hates it before. Most people either say that they like it (not enough search beyond the popular pieces) or they don't like it (not that they think it's bad, they're just not interested)
> 
> But hate it? That's unusual to me.


Agreed, I've not encountered a person who claimed to hate Classical Music. At the very least, people are indifferent. Usually, though, the people I've known have some appreciation for it--even for works that don't show up on those silly "Romantic Classics" albums!


----------



## moody

SiegendesLicht said:


> The difference between the expressions of sexuality in classical and pop music is the difference between Tristan and Isolde's all-consuming passion and a one-night stand.


Are you putting me right or merely commenting ?


----------



## moody

Novelette said:


> Agreed, I've not encountered a person who claimed to hate Classical Music. At the very least, people are indifferent. Usually, though, the people I've known have some appreciation for it--even for works that don't show up on those silly "Romantic Classics" albums!


Exactly my experience !


----------



## KenOC

SiegendesLicht said:


> The difference between the expressions of sexuality in classical and pop music is the difference between Tristan and Isolde's all-consuming passion and a one-night stand.


Fans of Tristan and Isolde may enjoy reading Bernard Cornwell's "Arthur" trilogy. It's a fun read, and a sub-plot presents the T&I story in a much different way...

http://www.bernardcornwell.net/the-arthur-books-information/


----------



## Ebab

SiegendesLicht said:


> The difference between the expressions of sexuality in classical and pop music is the difference between Tristan and Isolde's all-consuming passion and a one-night stand.


As much as I'm obsessed with the idea of Tristan and Isolde's very particular kind of passion, I think it has very little to do with anybody's real life (including Wagner's own).

I think lyrics/libretti _really_ trying to describe the experience of real-life physical passion are quite rare, in any genre. In Pop music, Alan & Marilyn Bergman have tried it, like in "The Island" - bless them for that.


----------



## musicphotogAnimal

Garlic said:


> Also, most pop music listeners want catchy hooks, or beats they can dance to. These are perfectly valid things to want from music. Classical music is quite deficient in this regard.


But you gotta admit that Classical music has some catchy beats that you can "wave your arms around to..." that is if you want to look like the guy standing in front of the podium and the music stand at a concert.


----------



## neoshredder

Garlic said:


> I don't think classical music fans do themselves a lot of favours with their dismissive attitude towards "lesser" musics. They can be as bad as metal fans sometimes! Speaking from experience, this attitude is very offputting from the outside.
> 
> Also, most pop music listeners want catchy hooks, or beats they can dance to. These are perfectly valid things to want from music. Classical music is quite deficient in this regard.


Thank God for that. We don't need those type of fans.


----------



## KenOC

I can't remember anybody who said they hate classical music. The standard reply is, "Oh yeah, I like all kinds of music." Whether they can recognize or name a piece of CM is, of course, another matter. In fact, they have their priorities, which really can't be argued with.


----------



## BurningDesire

Why do some people seem to hate rock music? or hip hop? or electronic music? or jazz? or folk music?


----------



## kevink

I think many people seem to be apathetic towards classical music because there is sometimes an expectation to have studied classical music, either playing an instrument, or analysing music, etc. That may be the reason that when a classical piece goes into a movie, etc, many people start liking it, as it has become more mainstream. 

In my mind and experience, classical music lovers seem to be very serious, snobbish sometimes (lots of nasty comments on Lang Lang's videos), rich - concerts are expensive, and educated - I feel like there is an expectation to have studied classical music to listen to it. Maybe that is just a stereotype, but stereotypes are usually based on truth.

People might not feel like they belong to that group of people.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock

kevink said:


> I think many people seem to be apathetic towards classical music because there is sometimes an expectation to have studied classical music, either playing an instrument, or analysing music, etc. That may be the reason that when a classical piece goes into a movie, etc, many people start liking it, as it has become more mainstream.
> 
> In my mind and experience, classical music lovers seem to be very serious, snobbish sometimes (lots of nasty comments on Lang Lang's videos), rich - concerts are expensive, and educated - I feel like there is an expectation to have studied classical music to listen to it. Maybe that is just a stereotype, but stereotypes are usually based on truth.
> 
> People might not feel like they belong to that group of people.


well, then, you can prove those people wrong by setting a good example with your own behaviour, hehe. I agree with your comment on movies though.


----------



## neoshredder

The key is if they find the right Era of Classical Music right away. I think for most though, late 20th Century/Early 21st Century would be a quick turnoff for many. They'll be saying 'what is this ****'?


----------



## Jobis

The music business is trying to assert itself as the only acceptable source of music. They can't make (much) money off classical, so they pretend it doesn't exist.

Its kind of a cultural genocide to put it extremely. No one in the pop business seems to care one jot about the deeper applications of music theory, which has been developing over thousands of years.


----------



## moody

kevink said:


> I think many people seem to be apathetic towards classical music because there is sometimes an expectation to have studied classical music, either playing an instrument, or analysing music, etc. That may be the reason that when a classical piece goes into a movie, etc, many people start liking it, as it has become more mainstream.
> 
> In my mind and experience, classical music lovers seem to be very serious, snobbish sometimes (lots of nasty comments on Lang Lang's videos), rich - concerts are expensive, and educated - I feel like there is an expectation to have studied classical music to listen to it. Maybe that is just a stereotype, but stereotypes are usually based on truth.
> 
> People might not feel like they belong to that group of people.


That is very definitely a stereotype.


----------



## Guest

moody said:


> That is very definitely a stereotype.


...and prejudices are often built on stereotypes!


----------



## brotagonist

neoshredder said:


> The key is if they find the right Era of Classical Music right away. I think for most though, late 20th Century/Early 21st Century would be a quick turnoff for many.


It wasn't for me. Modern CM led me to an appreciation of CM. It resembled the avant garde rock that I was listening to as a young adult.



Jobis said:


> The music business is trying to assert itself as the only acceptable source of music. They can't make (much) money off classical, so they pretend it doesn't exist. Its kind of a cultural genocide to put it extremely.


It seems fashionable to lambaste the labels, to hold them responsible for the ails of the music industry. What other sources of music are there? In pop music, some have turned to specialty download sites, artists' own sites and the like. In my limited exposure to these new methods of delivery, since everyone can sell himself as an artist, the quality is generally low and trying to find the really good artists is like looking for the proverbial needle in the haystack.

I don't see labels as bad. They are the source of _all_ of my music. They have recorded and preserved, in their own commercial interests, the _entirety_ of the music that matters to most of us. They periodically reissue timeless recordings and make available new recordings. Is this "cultural genocide"?



Jobis said:


> No one in the pop business seems to care one jot about the deeper applications of music theory, which has been developing over thousands of years.


No one in the pop business cares, but I wish that more contemporary composers still cared about music theory (sonata form, etc.). It is not a limitation, but a common language shared between composer and audience that allows the composer to freely express and explore his ideas in a manner that the audience can follow and understand. I think that the loss of this commonly understood musical meta-language has rendered contemporary music difficult and unapproachable to many who would otherwise be open to new works.


----------



## science

brotagonist said:


> It wasn't for me. Modern CM led me to an appreciation of CM. It resembled the avant garde rock that I was listening to as a young adult.


I don't know for sure, but there's a pretty good chance that more non-musicians under 45 or so have been brought to classical music by contemporary music than have been brought to classical music by the common practice period music. Groups like the Kronos Quartet and Eighth Blackbird are doing it.


----------



## BoredWithLife

jurianbai said:


> LOL. Isn't the opposite behaviour that exist more? The classical fans that hate everything non classical.
> 
> I myself is a metal converted to classical (not really, since metal still a daily menu). But from what I remember the reason it got rejected is, the overall impression about classical music as high class, hard to understand, anti social and ... boring. all of the reasons we all know is not true. But then most of their knowledge is about Mozart (identic to pregnant women) or easy listening pieces. Once they concentrate on specific piece like Beethoven's symphony, they may chance their mind. I agree other's say accessibility being a factor.


No, it isn't the opposite behaviour that exists more. I have two friends who, like me, adore both pop, rock, _and_ classical music.

In fact, I don't know anyone that hates everything non-classical, but I have a class full of people who does not understand classical music.


----------



## hpowders

Well, it's like a friend of my wife, as anti-semitic as they come, raving about the demonic Jews. My wife pointed out to her that I am Jewish. She replied, "No! No! He's the exception!!" Uhhhh....no I'm not, she is simply prejudiced against Jews and believes all the stereotypical lies....until she actually meets a real life Jew and then rationalizes.

Folks who hate classical music believe the stereotypes of we, the collective "listeners" who must be mental psychos and the music-sleep-inducing boredom/too intellectual, serious and custom made for chess champions. Give me two hours with any of them and I could probably make a convert, dispelling all the lies.


----------



## Livly_Station

I'm a 29 years old brazilian, and the only friends I made that like classical music are the ones I met through classical music in the first place. Virtually all other people I know don't listen to classical music at all. I've tried to make some of my friends like it, but failed. Maybe it was my fault because my choices and methods were bad, or maybe it was the only possible outcome anyway. It's not that people hated classical music, but there was not enough reason for them to keep listening to it on their own. 

Regardless, it's a futile endeavor not only because I failed, but because it's a little pointless. Classical music is not the only good thing in life or even in music, and most people would rather get into something that they can have a communitary experience with, something that's part of the present and which they can share with their friends and become a part of. That's culture. And they're not wrong, as I found my love for classical music to be a lonely journey.

In any case, since I've thought about the subject a few times, I'll try to make an essay of my thoughts on people's dislike for classical music.


----------



## science

lucashomem said:


> I found my love for classical music to be a lonely journey.


At least we're among friends here. It's one great thing about the internet.


----------



## amfortas

It's great to share pastimes with your friends, and it can indeed be lonely to enjoy pursuits they don't care for. But it's not the end of the world to have some parts of your life remain more private and personal. Besides, when it comes to classical music, you're not really alone, as the countless chamber, orchestral, and opera performances around the world indicate. If nothing else, you've got this site here to commune with more-or-less like-minded people.


----------



## Livly_Station

science said:


> At least we're among friends here. It's one great thing about the internet.


It's certainly a blessing to have the internet to find people who share the same interests as me. That's what made me who I am. But sometimes I wonder if it's not a curse because it's an incentive to alienate yourself from what's around you in the real world.


----------



## amfortas

lucashomem said:


> It's certainly a blessing to have the internet to find people who share the same interests as me. That's what made me who I am. But sometimes I wonder if it's not a curse because it's an incentive to alienate yourself from what's around you in the real world.


Like so much else, it's a matter of maintaining some kind of balance--in this case, between sharing with your friends and enjoying on your own. No reason you can't have both.

Of course, you're still young. I'm old and ornery, so I keep to myself. Screw the world! :scold:


----------



## Livly_Station

amfortas said:


> Like so much else, it's a matter of maintaining some kind of balance--in this case, between sharing with your friends and enjoying on your own. No reason you can't have both.
> 
> Of course, you're still young. I'm old and ornery, so I keep to myself. Screw the world! :scold:


I agree with you, and not for a second I consider throwing classical music out of my life.

That said, I find classical music to be excessively time-consuming (even more at the start), especially if it's not naturally a part of your social life. If you don't go all-in, you'll end up listening only to the Greatest Hits, which is a very superficial way to enjoy classical music since its best selling point (to me) is variety of styles and emotional range (even inside a single composer's oeuvre).


----------



## fluteman

lucashomem said:


> I agree with you, and not for a second I consider throwing classical music out of my life.
> 
> That said, I find classical music to be excessively time-consuming (even more at the start), especially if it's not naturally a part of your social life. If you don't go all-in, you'll end up listening only to the Greatest Hits, which is a very superficial way to enjoy classical music since its best selling point (to me) is variety of styles and emotional range (even inside a single composer's oeuvre).


Yes, you have a lot of good insights for such a young guy. :lol: But the other side of the coin to classical music being a time-consuming interest is that it's one that can last a lifetime. I don't know you, but at 29 you may enjoy doing a lot of things -- rock climbing, football, surfing, even drinking and dancing till dawn, that as you age, you may find yourself doing less often. But you have many years of enjoying classical music listening ahead, in which you will get far beyond the classical top 500. If you want friends in the classical community, there are many ways to do that beyond the internet.


----------



## Krummhorn

I don't think people "hate" classical, icalthey have not been properly exposed to it. Seems the background music in every place we go shopping is non-class music that we hear. There was one exception when I was in Salzburg Austria where the elevator music was Mozart!!

I grew up in a family of classical musicians ... it's all we heard until we grew into our teens. 

I think one of our tasks, as lovers of classical music, is to educate others about the music we love and appreciate. This was one of the main purposes for the creation of this forum, and on TC, we are going a good job. 

Kh


----------



## Livly_Station

fluteman said:


> Yes, you have a lot of good insights for such a young guy. :lol: But the other side of the coin to classical music being a time-consuming interest is that it's one that can last a lifetime. I don't know you, but at 29 you may enjoy doing a lot of things -- rock climbing, football, surfing, even drinking and dancing till dawn, that as you age, you may find yourself doing less often. But you have many years of enjoying classical music listening ahead, in which you will get far beyond the classical top 500.


You're right!

But I also find a little unintuitive for a layman to manage their discovery of the classical repertoire in such a long-term goal. It's easier to get scared off and don't even try, or to give up once they find too many pieces they don't care about (- it's important that they find highly rewarding pieces for their personal taste on a regular pace, so luck is part of the game).

That's why I believe it's better to binge classical music at the start, and to do the proper research, which is all very time-consuming and can look pointless for a layman. Even more so because a lot of the music won't click with you the first time, and you won't have familiarity enough to pick the music apart. There's a lot of persistence required, and all for what? A lonely hobby.



> If you want friends in the classical community, there are many ways to do that beyond the internet.


Oh, I'm sure. There was a time of my life where I was a little closer to the classical community in my city, and I used to go more to concerts (mostly alone). Not so much nowadays.

I believe it must be one of the coolest things in the world to study in a great conservatory or a lively school of music.


----------



## mbhaub

lucashomem said:


> I believe it must be one of the coolest things in the world to study in a great conservatory or a lively school of music.


I hope that's true, but I doubt it. When I was in college even though I was a math major, I spent a lot of time in the music department and one thing was absolutely clear: I knew more about classical music than ANY other student - including the music majors. I was far more aware of lesser-known music than any professor. Of all the music majors I would hang around with I was the only one who actively collected classical records, went to concerts, or read composer biographies.

As a performer I am still shocked how poorly even performance majors know the literature. Just last week I was in a rehearsal for the Beethoven 6th and there's this important clarinet solo that the PhD clarinetist totally missed. Any experienced player would know that solo and when to come in and how to play it. He didn't have a clue. He admitted he had never heard this symphony which I find terribly sad. A PhD music major never heard the Pastoral!

So while people may not hate classical, even musicians who should love it don't seem to care. It's really tragic. One bassoon player I took some lessons with was really blunt with his students who wanted to get gigs in professional orchestras: put away the rap, hip hop, bubble gum music and immerse yourself in the standard classical repertoire. As a pro, you just have to know some 500 works and the performing traditions.


----------



## starthrower

amfortas said:


> Screw the world! :scold:


That's what young people are doing so it's no wonder they don't have time for classical music!


----------



## Neo Romanza

I personally don’t care if someone doesn’t like classical music. I didn’t like it either when I first heard it, but I made the effort to understand it and this is what anyone would do if they’re genuinely curious about it or simply have a passion for music and want to expand their horizons.


----------



## Livly_Station

mbhaub said:


> ...


Your anecdote confirms my personal experience. When I made some friends who were studying music at college, I seemed to be much more knowledgeable than them (although, arguably, they had a deeper understanding of some aspects of the music and theory). I didn't see too much passion and curiosity, but rather people trying to have a cool job.

However, I thought that was mostly because I don't live in a big city for classical music like you'd expect in Europe and some parts of the US.


----------



## mbhaub

lucashomem said:


> I thought that was mostly because I don't live in a big city for classical music like you'd expect in Europe and some parts of the US.


Nope! I played a gig several years ago with a recent Julliard graduate in percussion. She could play all the etudes and excerpts perfectly. But she completely choked on the Chavez Sinfonia India. She botched the Rach 2nd piano concerto. Couldn't play the xylophone part on Firebird. When we got to an encore once, Stars and Stripes, the section leader said "we're going to play the roll-off ending". Now, any percussionist with experience knew what that meant without hesitation. She didn't. And thought it was dumb. Even the big school degrees don't mean the grads know the music.


----------



## SanAntone

I don't think people "hate" classical music, at least that has not been my experience. What I believe is that most people simply like different kinds of music and don't give classical music much thought.


----------



## fluteman

mbhaub said:


> Nope! I played a gig several years ago with a recent Julliard graduate in percussion. She could play all the etudes and excerpts perfectly. But she completely choked on the Chavez Sinfonia India. She botched the Rach 2nd piano concerto. Couldn't play the xylophone part on Firebird. When we got to an encore once, Stars and Stripes, the section leader said "we're going to play the roll-off ending". Now, any percussionist with experience knew what that meant without hesitation. She didn't. And thought it was dumb. Even the big school degrees don't mean the grads know the music.


That is shocking. The only way to be a good orchestra player is to do a lot of orchestra playing. I guess opportunities are lacking at some of these schools. My nephew went to the New England Conservatory as a cellist, where participation was mandatory in one of four orchestras. Even the fourth tier orchestra that he was in was a crack ensemble that breezed through Hindemith and Richard Strauss after little or no rehearsal. His stand mate was a young (16?) Korean prodigy. I found a youtube video and could hardly believe my ears. My nephew wisely transferred to Harvard (their top orchestra is at a level typical of a major university but nowhere near those of NEC).

But I can't believe any advanced clarinet student wouldn't know the solos from Beethoven's 6th,


----------



## Coach G

OK, so evidently, I'm coming to this thread about 11 years late! I didn't think that people "hate" classical music. In fact, most people seem to like it when they hear it in cartoons, a movie, a TV commercial, etc. What most people don't do, that WE do, is listen to a steady diet of classical music.


----------



## Roger Knox

Quite a few people resent classical music for being elitist, socially and/or intellectually. It is seen as being for the privileged, dominated by wealthy, snobbish cliques, promoted by pretentious hangers-on.

I was fortunate to get started in classical music early on and keep going. I don't agree with the above barbs, finding there to be a gap between what they suggest and what the truth is. As for "why people hate classical music," I don't find that people say it that way, but the resentment is there.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Coach G said:


> OK, so evidently, I'm coming to this thread about 11 years late! I didn't think that people "hate" classical music. In fact, most people seem to like it when they hear it in cartoons, a movie, a TV commercial, etc. What most people don't do, that WE do, is listen to a steady diet of classical music.


Came here to say much the same thing. I also agree with Roger above that there is "class" resentment at work, too.

As far as the loneliness mentioned earlier in the thread, I find that people otherwise not enthralled by CM will happily attend an outdoor event and have a picnic with classical music. I also find that people will do an evening at the orchestra hall, dressing up, nice dinner, all that. Now, this is within my set of urban. college educated, liberal friends. But I think most people would be receptive to non-stuffy events involving CM, especially given the priming by osmosis in the culture at large (movies, TV, commercials).


----------



## mossyembankment

Speaking as a millennial, I don't think most people my age (musicians aside) have an opinion one way or the other about classical music, it's just completely irrelevant.


----------



## Roger Knox

MatthewWeflen said:


> Came here to say much the same thing. I also agree with Roger above that there is "class" resentment at work, too.


Matthew you have made a number of good points and my previous post may be too much on the negative side. Sometimes the best answer to peoples' criticisms of classical music is to play some classical music. The music is always more authentic than any verbal representation of it!


----------



## Roger Knox

mossyembankment said:


> Speaking as a millennial, I don't think most people my age (musicians aside) have an opinion one way or the other about classical music, it's just completely irrelevant.


I'm afraid that to think classical music is completely irrelevant is to have an opinion about it. It's not my opinion, and maybe not yours, but I'm sure some millennials think that way.

The following is not a criticism of your post. But as a boomer with a still (somewhat?) intact long-term memory, I'm amazed at how many expressions from the late-60's/early-70's have returned. One of them is "irrelevant." Back in 1968 just about anything was dismissed as irrelevant -- school, university, mainstream media, organized religion, capitalism (described as "late"), the legal system, history, on and on. What goes around ...


----------



## Livly_Station

Roger Knox said:


> I'm afraid that to think classical music is completely irrelevant is to have an opinion about it. It's not my opinion, and maybe not yours, but I'm sure some millennials think that way.
> 
> The following is not a criticism of your post. But as a boomer with a still (somewhat?) intact long-term memory, I'm amazed at how many expressions from the late-60's/early-70's have returned. One of them is "irrelevant." Back in 1968 just about anything was dismissed as irrelevant -- school, university, mainstream media, organized religion, capitalism (described as "late"), the legal system, history, on and on. What goes around ...


Classical music irrelevant because millennials don't even think about it*. It's not like in the 60s when young people had an open disregard for classical music (their parents' music, the music of the establishment, oldschool boring music) in favor of new musical expressions like rock, soul and jazz. They had strong opinions on the matter and were vocal about it.

Nowadays it's a non-question. Only when you ask millennials about it, or when you disrupt their environment with classical music, that they'll quickly express an opinion, which will probably be informed by a complete lack of interest, if not by some random prejudice that's lightly ingrained in them through popular media and cliches.


----------



## Forster

SanAntone said:


> I don't think people "hate" classical music, at least that has not been my experience. What I believe is that most people simply like different kinds of music and don't give classical music much thought.


You may be right, but that doesn't fit the 'decline of civilisation as we know it' school of thinking.

In the UK at least, classical music still has an affluent audience. The old stuff is still being performed and recorded. New stuff is being composed and performed. There is plenty going on for the classical fan. I see no reason yet to despise those who, it is claimed, hate it.


----------



## Roger Knox

lucashomem said:


> Classical music irrelevant because millennials don't even think about it*. It's not like in the 60s when young people had an open disregard for classical music (their parents' music, the music of the establishment, oldschool boring music) in favor of new musical expressions like rock, soul and jazz. They had strong opinions on the matter and were vocal about it.
> 
> Nowadays it's a non-question. Only when you ask millennials about it, or when you disrupt their environment with classical music, that they'll quickly express an opinion, which will probably be informed by a complete lack of interest, if not by some random prejudice that's lightly ingrained in them through popular media and cliches.


I don't remember the 60s that way at all. Yes there was Chuck Berry's cheeky "Roll Over Beethoven" covered by the Beatles, which seemed more humorous than angry. But groups like the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Procul Harem, Moody Blues, Emerson, Lake, and Palmer, Simon and Garfunkel, Lefte Banke, Mothers of Invention, and many others were closely connected with classical music in one way or another. Partly for that reason, the interest of young people in classical music actually grew during those years. And I only remember a few extremists hating on classical music at that time. Things changed later in the 1970's with punk ...

As for "Only when you ask millennials about it, ..." the behavior you describe strikes me as more passive-aggressive than indifferent. They have learned from various sources that classical music is out-of-date, colonialist, authoritarian. If someone adopts a prejudice, it is no longer random.


----------



## fbjim

There are many reasons why young people aren't particularly into music of which the bulk of the most famous works are over a century old, but thinkpieces aren't striking me as a big one.


----------



## mossyembankment

Roger Knox said:


> As for "Only when you ask millennials about it, ..." the behavior you describe strikes me as more passive-aggressive than indifferent.


I disagree - it really is indifference. For most people it's just not viewed as something that one needs to have an opinion on. Why be passive aggressive about something that has no meaning to you?


----------



## Livly_Station

I don't think people _hate_ classical. It's more that they don't enjoy it, or don't care for it, and would rather not get into it because popular music offers them, in their opinion, a better experience overall.

Here are my thoughts:

*1) Time*

This is a topic I've already mentioned in previous posts. To get into classical music from ground zero you need to commit, to binge the repertoire, to research composers, all of that in order to create a reasonable menu of pieces to go back to and your personal rating of them. It doesn't help that most works are huge, ranging from 20 minutes to an hour, sometimes even more. Who has time for that nowadays? And that's, I repeat, one single piece, a drop in the ocean of the repertoire.

To a lesser extent, you also need to get familiarity with classical music's languages (form and harmony) and historical context, which are all foreign to contemporary audiences, but essential for you to derive meaning beyond your primary instinctive response to the sound. In general, besides personal taste, people prefer popular music over classical not only because it's "simple", but especially because people are born with it playing on their social circles and everywhere else, so they learn how to understand it, what to expect from it, its social role, how to dance to it, etc.

We shouldn't underestimate the need to know _what to expect_ from the music you'll listen to and to know _where to look for_ in order to get what you want from music each day, aesthetically and emotionally. Only experience brings this knowledge. In other words, you don't want to listen to Beethoven's _Eroica_ in a day when you need Ravel's _Miroirs_ instead, but that's what happens when they don't know the repertoire.

That's _*a lot*_ of time invested in a hobby, which for most people is a pointless project, especially because there's no way they know if it'll pay-off at the end. You can't guarantee them it'll pay-off either.

Having all that in mind, I believe the best way to get into classical music is through learning an acoustic instrument, since it gives extra incentives to listen to classical because of the repertoire, and it also feeds you new music and information naturally. So classical becomes musicians' music, not people's music. That said, even musicians might still prefer popular music (playing and listening) and they don't waste their time with classical music, which is fine. Popular music can be much more seductive for its own merits and cultural place.

All of this is a problem because _classical music should be a passion_, not a chore, so you shouldn't force it upon yourself or others. At the same time, discipline and investigation are required, so it's almost a beginners' paradox. It's often the first impressions that will make or break people's interest in classical music. And people can lose interest at any point if they're not given new stimulus. The problem is that first impressions of any piece can be misleading, and maybe you're not being exposed to the repertoire you'll like.

All in all, getting into classical music is just anachronistic, and time is too precious for that. So much effort for a lonely hobby... (But I know how great it is!  )

*2) Entry barrier*

Let's say a person liked their first impressions of classical music, then what's next? There's no clear-cut guidebook for beginners, especially because it's all personal and controversial. Written articles/books help, but words can't fully explain music. Even information that should be simple (like a composer's catalog) sometimes can be extremely confusing and messy. 
You have to carve your own path. And it's hard to know how to navigate through the amount of information and music there is, and how to select what's useful information and what's not. Besides that, one of the weirdest things of classical music is the number of recordings for each piece. It's so natural for people who's already used to it (and have a frame of reference), but it's just another complication for outsiders.

*3) Sociology*

This is a topic that many forum members have mentioned already. Classical music has become irrelevant, and despite its irrelevancy it also suffers from many prejudices about the music and people who like it.

Given how abstract and meaningless is music in a vaccum (before you gain experience and make sense of it), it's much more natural for people to develop their musical tastes around social environments that are more relevant to them, and to follow the guidance of people and artists who they deem more interesting and attractive. And once you get into a genre, you learn to pay attention to the music through its own point of view and tropes, which may highlight different sensorial aspects and values that, perhaps, you won't find in the music of Mozart or Boulez.

In this regard, the polyvalent nature of music (its meanings and social function) make it more malleable to perform different social roles for different people. People interact with music belongs in a social context, and that's why they will love music that's new, popular and that you can share with others, because lends itself to a more lively and authentic environment. It also influences _*how*_ you'll listen to music. So, for example, the value of music for people can be in singing it out loud with friends, or dancing to it in a club, or leaving it as a soundtrack for an activity, or for it to be a part of a hyper-popular multimedia experience with video and the cult of personality where you're part of an active fandom. Art is a social thing.

And this is something that classical musical can hardly offer to anyone anymore. It has become an artform which is mostly introspective even at its most epic and outward, even when you're in a concert with a thousand other people. It's still social, of course, but not in the same scale. It's not part of the conversation. The exceptions are if you're a professional player, or if you're a music student, or if your family is into classical music, or if you're an active member of an online forum  , or something else very particular. As _mossyembankment_ said a few posts before, _"Speaking as a millennial, I don't think most people my age (musicians aside) have an opinion one way or the other about classical music, it's just completely irrelevant."_ So why bother?

*4) Taste is social / Taste is personal*

Some classical music fans tend to think that its beauty is _obvious_ and _universal_, but that's not objetively true. Our tastes for things like melody, rhythm and texture are personal and, more frequently, defined by culture and habit. Most people learn to prefer specific cadences, particular melodic shapes and accents, certain tonal colors and sounds, all according to their environment.

Sometimes I see someone talk about "the death of melody" in popular culture, but melody is still one of the main features of pop music. However, what constitutes a "good melody" changes according to the generation - just different sensibilities. Nowadays I see a preference for fast and syncopated melodies, with softer cadences, melodies that are not too diatonic (which still use regular pitches, but don't go all over the scale, and some notes can be out of tune to be closer to speech), and some notes and intervals are particularly popular. From the point of view of this trend, an 18th century classical melody can sound too clean and bright, too happy and pompous, and the cadences are too strong and annoying.

Texture is an even bigger issue for people to get into classical. Most new listeners just won't see much color in the sound of a string quartet compared to all the production in modern pop music, which they're also more used to aesthetically, and they'll miss the drums and beat. I'd argue that texture has become one the most important features of music in the last 70 years, and it defines genres within pop music as much as harmony and rhythm, so people are picky about it. A pop songs succeeds and fails because of texture, and classical music will be under the same scrutinity. Btw, that's why contemporary classical is, sometimes, more accessible to young people than pre-modern classical.

*5) Voice*

Still in the topic of taste, we shouldn't underestimate the value of the human voice as a factor for classical music's lack of popularity. It's not merely a general preference for lyrics (which is also something), but the _human voice_ itself is super important for the modern listener: it's the easiest vehicle for most people to relate to the music emotionally.

Popular music uses the human voice very effectivelly: it's more raw and imperfect, it's closer to speech (especially when there's speak-singing), and also because of all kinds of genre-related traits. In general, I think it's easier to imprint emotion and style through the popular type of singing than classical. Also, pop music uses technology extremely well, abusing the advantages of the microphone (which allows all kinds of singing and whispers and falsettos and moaning), sound effects and filters.

Classical music, on the other hand, is instrumental most of the time, but even when it features the human voice, it's not quite the same thing. With the exception of some contemporary music, classical music still uses that kind of operatic voice that most people don't really vibe with, without as much versatility in aesthetic, and emotion is conveyed through more nuanced details of phrasing and entonation. It's an acquired taste.

*6) Familiarity with the form*

As much as classical music takes pride in structure and form (even when it's intentionally avoiding it), the sequence of events inside a piece just sounds random for most people nowadays who grew up without classical music. They're not as used to some cadences, transitions, the length of themes, the transformation and abundance of material, the overall structure, etc. It doesn't need to be Mahler to cause confusion, but even Haydn and Beethoven.

That's not the listeners' fault since it's due to a lack of familiarity. Once you get used to the tropes and patterns, you can hear them come more easily, but it takes times, and it's even more difficult if you're switching between pieces from different periods.

*7) Ear training*

Classical music can be extremely nuanced aurally - which is one of its biggest strengths. The experience is enhanced by the beauty of inner voices, rich counterpoint, exquisite harmonies, detailed textures for a given instrument or ensemble, subtle shifts of dynamics and color, lots of contrasts and change of momentum, and the rhythm can be chaotic.

These things are all be perceived on a more subconscious level by any listener, but if your ears are not trained, you can't really pick up for real a lot of what's going on. Things sound muddy and buried under the main melody or material, and at the worst case scenario the music becomes incomprehensible. Sometimes you even like the piece regardless, but it's not the same thing as being able to properly hear all the details.

Popular music is also detailed and listening to it is more rewarding if you have ear training, but the construction of a song is made to enhance the melodic hook and the beat, which are more easily perceivable by most listeners.

*8) Elitism, conservadorism and the effort to make classical music unnapealing to young people*

This topic is related to the social arguments I made above. But I'd like to mention that classical music culture has too many dogmas and etiquette. Conservadorism don't let it adapt to new generations, and while some points are valuable, there's a lot of nonsense too. It's not just about the music, but everything else around it.

Unfortunatelly, classical fans can be bullies too.


----------



## Richannes Wrahms

Old classical music bores people, new classical music scares them.


----------



## fbjim

The amount of exposure people have to contemporary classical music is next to minimal, unless it shows up in a movie (sup, Arvo Part). 

This isn't to say that the record companies would be selling it by the boatload if they promoted it, but if you look at young people with an interest in artistically-motivated music beyond top-40 pop and classic rock - they're generally not listening to contemporary classical, but they are frequently listening to things which are hardly accessible or have immediate appeal. 

I mean some of it is literally called "Noise".


----------



## fbjim

to put this another way - I think the issue that contemporary music has lost the "general listening" "average 18 year old" audience is kind of overblown, because a lot of those people aren't listening to art music anyway, and it's more notable that contemporary/classical has, to a large extent, lost younger audiences who clearly have an appetite for adventurous, challenging, artistically-inclined music.


----------



## SanAntone

lucashomem said:


> I don't think people _hate_ classical. It's more that they don't enjoy it, or don't care for it, and would rather not get into it because popular music offers them, in their opinion, a better experience overall.
> 
> Here are my thoughts:
> 
> *1) Time*
> 
> This is a topic I've already mentioned in previous posts. To get into classical music from ground zero you need to commit, to binge the repertoire, to research composers, all of that in order to create a reasonable menu of pieces to go back to and your personal rating of them. It doesn't help that most works are huge, ranging from 20 minutes to an hour, sometimes even more. Who has time for that nowadays? And that's, I repeat, one single piece, a drop in the ocean of the repertoire.
> 
> To a lesser extent, you also need to get familiarity with classical music's languages (form and harmony) and historical context, which are all foreign to contemporary audiences, but essential for you to derive meaning beyond your primary instinctive response to the sound. In general, besides personal taste, people prefer popular music over classical not only because it's "simple", but especially because people are born with it playing on their social circles and everywhere else, so they learn how to understand it, what to expect from it, its social role, how to dance to it, etc.
> 
> We shouldn't underestimate the need to know _what to expect_ from the music you'll listen to and to know _where to look for_ in order to get what you want from music each day, aesthetically and emotionally. Only experience brings this knowledge. In other words, you don't want to listen to Beethoven's _Eroica_ in a day when you need Ravel's _Miroirs_ instead, but that's what happens when they don't know the repertoire.
> 
> That's _*a lot*_ of time invested in a hobby, which for most people is a pointless project, especially because there's no way they know if it'll pay-off at the end. You can't guarantee them it'll pay-off either.
> 
> Having all that in mind, I believe the best way to get into classical music is through learning an acoustic instrument, since it gives extra incentives to listen to classical because of the repertoire, and it also feeds you new music and information naturally. So classical becomes musicians' music, not people's music. That said, even musicians might still prefer popular music (playing and listening) and they don't waste their time with classical music, which is fine. Popular music can be much more seductive for its own merits and cultural place.
> 
> All of this is a problem because _classical music should be a passion_, not a chore, so you shouldn't force it upon yourself or others. At the same time, discipline and investigation are required, so it's almost a beginners' paradox. It's often the first impressions that will make or break people's interest in classical music. And people can lose interest at any point if they're not given new stimulus. The problem is that first impressions of any piece can be misleading, and maybe you're not being exposed to the repertoire you'll like.
> 
> All in all, getting into classical music is just anachronistic, and time is too precious for that. So much effort for a lonely hobby... (But I know how great it is!  )
> 
> *2) Entry barrier*
> 
> Let's say a person liked their first impressions of classical music, then what's next? There's no clear-cut guidebook for beginners, especially because it's all personal and controversial. Written articles/books help, but words can't fully explain music. Even information that should be simple (like a composer's catalog) sometimes can be extremely confusing and messy.
> You have to carve your own path. And it's hard to know how to navigate through the amount of information and music there is, and how to select what's useful information and what's not. Besides that, one of the weirdest things of classical music is the number of recordings for each piece. It's so natural for people who's already used to it (and have a frame of reference), but it's just another complication for outsiders.
> 
> *3) Sociology*
> 
> This is a topic that many forum members have mentioned already. Classical music has become irrelevant, and despite its irrelevancy it also suffers from many prejudices about the music and people who like it.
> 
> Given how abstract and meaningless is music in a vaccum (before you gain experience and make sense of it), it's much more natural for people to develop their musical tastes around social environments that are more relevant to them, and to follow the guidance of people and artists who they deem more interesting and attractive. And once you get into a genre, you learn to pay attention to the music through its own point of view and tropes, which may highlight different sensorial aspects and values that, perhaps, you won't find in the music of Mozart or Boulez.
> 
> In this regard, the polyvalent nature of music (its meanings and social function) make it more malleable to perform different social roles for different people. People interact with music belongs in a social context, and that's why they will love music that's new, popular and that you can share with others, because lends itself to a more lively and authentic environment. It also influences _*how*_ you'll listen to music. So, for example, the value of music for people can be in singing it out loud with friends, or dancing to it in a club, or leaving it as a soundtrack for an activity, or for it to be a part of a hyper-popular multimedia experience with video and the cult of personality where you're part of an active fandom. Art is a social thing.
> 
> And this is something that classical musical can hardly offer to anyone anymore. It has become an artform which is mostly introspective even at its most epic and outward, even when you're in a concert with a thousand other people. It's still social, of course, but not in the same scale. It's not part of the conversation. The exceptions are if you're a professional player, or if you're a music student, or if your family is into classical music, or if you're an active member of an online forum  , or something else very particular. As _mossyembankment_ said a few posts before, _"Speaking as a millennial, I don't think most people my age (musicians aside) have an opinion one way or the other about classical music, it's just completely irrelevant."_ So why bother?
> 
> *4) Taste is social / Taste is personal*
> 
> Some classical music fans tend to think that its beauty is _obvious_ and _universal_, but that's not objetively true. Our tastes for things like melody, rhythm and texture are personal and, more frequently, defined by culture and habit. Most people learn to prefer specific cadences, particular melodic shapes and accents, certain tonal colors and sounds, all according to their environment.
> 
> Sometimes I see someone talk about "the death of melody" in popular culture, but melody is still one of the main features of pop music. However, what constitutes a "good melody" changes according to the generation - just different sensibilities. Nowadays I see a preference for fast and syncopated melodies, with softer cadences, melodies that are not too diatonic (which still use regular pitches, but don't go all over the scale, and some notes can be out of tune to be closer to speech), and some notes and intervals are particularly popular. From the point of view of this trend, an 18th century classical melody can sound too clean and bright, too happy and pompous, and the cadences are too strong and annoying.
> 
> Texture is an even bigger issue for people to get into classical. Most new listeners just won't see much color in the sound of a string quartet compared to all the production in modern pop music, which they're also more used to aesthetically, and they'll miss the drums and beat. I'd argue that texture has become one the most important features of music in the last 70 years, and it defines genres within pop music as much as harmony and rhythm, so people are picky about it. A pop songs succeeds and fails because of texture, and classical music will be under the same scrutinity. Btw, that's why contemporary classical is, sometimes, more accessible to young people than pre-modern classical.
> 
> *5) Voice*
> 
> Still in the topic of taste, we shouldn't underestimate the value of the human voice as a factor for classical music's lack of popularity. It's not merely a general preference for lyrics (which is also something), but the _human voice_ itself is super important for the modern listener: it's the easiest vehicle for most people to relate to the music emotionally.
> 
> Popular music uses the human voice very effectivelly: it's more raw and imperfect, it's closer to speech (especially when there's speak-singing), and also because of all kinds of genre-related traits. In general, I think it's easier to imprint emotion and style through the popular type of singing than classical. Also, pop music uses technology extremely well, abusing the advantages of the microphone (which allows all kinds of singing and whispers and falsettos and moaning), sound effects and filters.
> 
> Classical music, on the other hand, is instrumental most of the time, but even when it features the human voice, it's not quite the same thing. With the exception of some contemporary music, classical music still uses that kind of operatic voice that most people don't really vibe with, without as much versatility in aesthetic, and emotion is conveyed through more nuanced details of phrasing and entonation. It's an acquired taste.
> 
> *6) Familiarity with the form*
> 
> As much as classical music takes pride in structure and form (even when it's intentionally avoiding it), the sequence of events inside a piece just sounds random for most people nowadays who grew up without classical music. They're not as used to some cadences, transitions, the length of themes, the transformation and abundance of material, the overall structure, etc. It doesn't need to be Mahler to cause confusion, but even Haydn and Beethoven.
> 
> That's not the listeners' fault since it's due to a lack of familiarity. Once you get used to the tropes and patterns, you can hear them come more easily, but it takes times, and it's even more difficult if you're switching between pieces from different periods.
> 
> *7) Ear training*
> 
> Classical music can be extremely nuanced aurally - which is one of its biggest strengths. The experience is enhanced by the beauty of inner voices, rich counterpoint, exquisite harmonies, detailed textures for a given instrument or ensemble, subtle shifts of dynamics and color, lots of contrasts and change of momentum, and the rhythm can be chaotic.
> 
> These things are all be perceived on a more subconscious level by any listener, but if your ears are not trained, you can't really pick up for real a lot of what's going on. Things sound muddy and buried under the main melody or material, and at the worst case scenario the music becomes incomprehensible. Sometimes you even like the piece regardless, but it's not the same thing as being able to properly hear all the details.
> 
> Popular music is also detailed and listening to it is more rewarding if you have ear training, but the construction of a song is made to enhance the melodic hook and the beat, which are more easily perceivable by most listeners.
> 
> *8) Elitism, conservadorism and the effort to make classical music unnapealing to young people*
> 
> This topic is related to the social arguments I made above. But I'd like to mention that classical music culture has too many dogmas and etiquette. Conservadorism don't let it adapt to new generations, and while some points are valuable, there's a lot of nonsense too. It's not just about the music, but everything else around it.
> 
> Unfortunatelly, classical fans can be bullies too.


If you think those characteristics of what is typical of a Classical music listener, then you must be made aware that most of them are also common to Rock, Pop, Blues, Jazz and other genre fanatics. One need only visit an active Rock forum to find lists of the greatest records ever, and the exhaustive lists of the evolution of bands personnel, etc. In-depth studies of Rock songs, lyrics and albums, track by track - guitarists spending thousands of hours learning to reproduce every solo by their favorite guitarist, etc.

Music attracts two kinds of listeners, IMO: the casual and the obsessive.

Obviously, TC members are the latter.


----------



## Livly_Station

SanAntone said:


> If you think those characteristics of what is typical of a Classical music listener, then you must be made aware that most of them are also common to Rock, Pop, Blues, Jazz and other genre fanatics. One need only visit an active Rock forum to find lists of the greatest records ever, and the exhaustive lists of the evolution of bands personnel, etc. In-depth studies of Rock songs, lyrics and albums, track by track - guitarists spending thousands of hours learning to reproduce every solo by their favorite guitarist, etc.
> 
> Music attracts two kinds of listeners, IMO: the casual and the obsessive.
> 
> Obviously, TC members are the latter.


I agree with you. I'm not sure I understand what you're contesting in my post. I guess it's about the "time" section.

Well, of course any activity can be time-consuming, infinitely time-consuming in fact, since you can put as much time into something as you have. And people do. I know that.

But when I say classical music is too time-consuming, I'm talking about it on an "entry-level", not how much time you'll spend after you're a fan.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

I wonder what number of people who are not raised with classical music end up seeking it out when popular music changes too much for them to enjoy.

Before I became an obsessive, I was never hostile to classical. I enjoyed it in movies and television, and sought out things I had heard in longer form (e.g. Copland's Appalachian Spring). 

But the marked change that occurred before I became obsessive about CM was falling away from popular music. I was a teenager in the 90s, and as the aughts and teens dragged on, there was less and less in the top 40 that I would consider worth listening to. Rap and auto-tuned R&B began to predominate, as well as pure repetitive crap like Justin Bieber, and mush-mouthed, minimally-melodic stuff like Bon Iver and Billie Eilish. Now, this isn't to say that I listen to no new pop and rock, I do, but it's more on the order of 2 or 3 new albums annually from acts I already like. So there was a gap to be filled, and CM filled it. 

Here was a vast corpus of beautiful music that I was already mildly predisposed towards (via TV and movies) just waiting to be explored. And I did not have to partake in celebrity culture to explore it, either, unlike the ubiquitous and frequently toxic media personalities who make today's pop and rock.


----------



## Livly_Station

MatthewWeflen said:


> I was a teenager in the 90s, and as the aughts and teens dragged on, there was less and less in the top 40 that I would consider worth listening to. Rap and auto-tuned R&B began to predominate, as well as pure repetitive crap like Justin Bieber, and mush-mouthed, minimally-melodic stuff like Bon Iver and Billie Eilish.


Wow, those were weird 90s!

(Just kidding - time goes fast, I know)


----------



## Art Rock

MatthewWeflen said:


> I wonder what number of people who are not raised with classical music end up seeking it out when popular music changes too much for them to enjoy.


That happened to me. I grew disappointed with the direction of pop/rock in the mid 80s (I was in my late twenties), and with the the CD coming up, it seemed a great moment to start exploring classical music. I did not look back for well over 10 years, but over the past decades I've been mixing up classical and pop/rock in my listening.


----------



## Forster

MatthewWeflen said:


> I wonder what number of people who are not raised with classical music end up seeking it out when popular music changes too much for them to enjoy.


Whilst there was some classical in my house when I grew up, I was not 'raised' with it, so I'm not sure whether my experience is comparable. At any rate, the regular sources of 'pop' in the UK - BBC Radio 1 and Top of the Pops - provided lots of fun when I was in my early teens (early 70s) but I was already listening to other stuff that didn't always make it into the Top 40 (ELO, 10cc, Genesis for example). When I went to college, prog dominated, but there was still fun to be had from the charts, especially Bowie, punk, new wave etc. But by this time, I was seeking out other sources of non-classical by reading New Musical Express and watching other TV programmes. I wasn't dependent on Top of the Pops any longer, so didn't have to endure some of the less (musically) attractive acts.

Although classical still trickled into my collection, I didn't set out to systematically explore classical until about 2005ish - I was 46. By this time, my sons were keeping me supplied with non-classical and it was during this period that I most enjoyed listening to and going to see Muse and Radiohead.

The Top 40 doesn't interest me at all now, but not because I'm switched over to classical. Over the past 10-15 years, I've discovered plenty of new (to me) pop, rock, alt, indie to keep me satisfied. For example:

Arcade Fire
alt-J
Sufjan Stevens
Sigur Ros
Bloc Party
Burial
DeVotchka
Vampire Weekend
Amadou and Mariam

I've also continued to collect Eno (largest single artist in my CD collection), and complete back catalogues of Kraftwerk, The Beatles, Robert Wyatt, Depeche Mode and others.

At the moment, however, I'm obsessing about Vaughan Williams and have purchased two versions of his Symphony No 3 which is gorgeous.


----------



## Kreisler jr

Art Rock said:


> That happened to me. I grew disappointed with the direction of pop/rock in the mid 80s (I was in my late twenties), and with the the CD coming up, it seemed a great moment to start exploring classical music. I did not look back for well over 10 years, but over the past decades I've been mixing up classical and pop/rock in my listening.


Besides the fact that classical music was still considerably more present for the "general public" until the 1980s (e.g. mixed music radio stations or one of only three to four available TV programs having classical concerts sunday morning or afternoon), I believe that Hi-Fi also got some people interested in classical. Both in the golden age of LPs and with the introduction of the CD there were certainly some listeners who got hooked onto classical music because they had been interested in audio and Hifi.

I fear that together with the generally waning of classical music these factors are also all weaker than 35-40 years ago. Hifi/High End is a smaller niche than ever with people mostly listening on mobile devices and classical music has vanished into niche channels because almost everything is now in niche channels instead of in a handful of mixed public TV/radio stations.


----------



## Forster

Kreisler jr said:


> Besides the fact that classical music was still considerably more present for the "general public" until the 1980s (e.g. mixed music radio stations or one of only three to four available TV programs having classical concerts sunday morning or afternoon), I believe that Hi-Fi also got some people interested in classical. Both in the golden age of LPs [...].


On the other hand, note the rise of vinyl

https://pitchfork.com/news/vinyl-record-sales-increased-almost-30-in-2020-riaa-says/

And it's not just pop/rock...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/MASTERPIEC...beethoven+vinyl+records&qid=1629446796&sr=8-1


----------



## janxharris

beetzart said:


> That is what I have observed throughout life. It is as this music seriously offends them!
> I work with two people and I have to listen to crappy commercial radio stations all day, blearing out all the latest hits, over and over again. But, while the three of us where sitting in our van yesterday one of them started flicking through the preset channels on the radio. He came across Radio 3 and Classic FM. Playing on Radio 3 was a Mozart Opera and he turned it up really loud to take the ****. The said 'I've had enough of that ****!'. They don't know I love classical music and never will. The reason behind this is why should I get abuse for something I have spent the last 22 years studying and enjoying because people are so ignorant to something they don't understand.


Disliking (or hating) a Mozart opera does not necessarily mean one is a hater of classical music...I'd be surprised if your colleagues have heard enough CM to be so described.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Why would the amount of CM they'd heard actually matter? There's enough evidence on these forums at times of people writing particular music off before they've even heard it. Given beetzart's description of the incident, it seems questionable to imagine that beetzart's colleague was criticising that particular music but wouldn't have criticised something else supposedly more to his liking.


----------



## janxharris

Animal the Drummer said:


> Why would the amount of CM they'd heard actually matter? There's enough evidence on these forums at times of people writing particular music off before they've even heard it. Given beetzart's description of the incident, it seems questionable to imagine that beetzart's colleague was criticising that particular music but wouldn't have criticised something else supposedly more to his liking.


Well Mozart is a world away from Stravinsky's Rite of Spring, Boulez's Repons and anything by Einaudi (if he is to be considered classical).


----------



## MatthewWeflen

lucashomem said:


> Wow, those were weird 90s!
> 
> (Just kidding - time goes fast, I know)


My point is really just that people become acclimatized to the pop music of their youth, and then (frequently) start to dislike new pop music after they reach adulthood. So I just wonder if people tend to find classical at that point in their lives.



Forster said:


> The Top 40 doesn't interest me at all now, but not because I'm switched over to classical. Over the past 10-15 years, I've discovered plenty of new (to me) pop, rock, alt, indie to keep me satisfied. For example:
> 
> Arcade Fire
> Sufjan Stevens


These are among the "current" artists (by which I mean post-90s) that I still buy albums from. Others include The Strokes, HIAM, Coldplay and Lady Gaga.


----------



## Livly_Station

MatthewWeflen said:


> My point is really just that people become acclimatized to the pop music of their youth, and then (frequently) start to dislike new pop music after they reach adulthood. So I just wonder if people tend to find classical at that point in their lives.


I got your point the first time - and you're not wrong that this happens a lot.

One thing that I can say on this topic is that, as we get older and detached from the pop culture of the new generation, most of us start to have a skewed and incomplete notion of what's going on in pop music. We don't see the whole picture, we're not exposed to the complete spectrum of music being made, only what's the most ubiquitous. Even your impressions of an artist can be misleading. For example, you mentioned Billie Eilish as minimally-melodic (probably because of her hit-single _Bad Guy_), but her first album (the one with _Bad Guy_) is actually very melodic - one could describe it as oldschool songwriting with modern production.

That's not to say that people should like Billie Eilish or other new pop music. That's not my point.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

lucashomem said:


> I got your point the first time - and you're not wrong that this happens a lot.
> 
> One thing that I can say on this topic is that, as we get older and detached from the pop culture of the new generation, most of us start to have a skewed and incomplete notion of what's going on in pop music. We don't see the whole picture, we're not exposed to the complete spectrum of music being made, only what's the most ubiquitous. Even your impressions of an artist can be misleading. For example, you mentioned Billie Eilish as minimally-melodic (probably because of her hit-single _Bad Guy_), but her first album (the one with _Bad Guy_) is actually very melodic - one could describe it as oldschool songwriting with modern production.
> 
> That's not to say that people should like Billie Eilish or other new pop music. That's not my point.


Oh, I am certain I'm being unfair to current pop artists. But, just like Mahler, if it doesn't strike me, I'm not going to buy it and put it on repeat. I've heard 3 or 4 Billie Eilish songs. I haven't had a desire to listen to one of them a second time. Conversely, I have discovered new pop music that inspired a second listen immediately.


----------



## Livly_Station

MatthewWeflen said:


> Oh, I am certain I'm being unfair to current pop artists. But, just like Mahler, if it doesn't strike me, I'm not going to buy it and put it on repeat. I've heard 3 or 4 Billie Eilish songs. I haven't had a desire to listen to one of them a second time. I have discovered new pop music that inspired a second listen immediately.


I agree with you. Time is finite after all, so we should use it wisely.

We just should be careful to not be fooled by imperfect information - kinda like thinking that classical music is _Eine kleine Natchmusik_.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

lucashomem said:


> I agree with you. Time is finite after all, so we should use it wisely.
> 
> We just should be careful to not be fooled by imperfect information - kinda like thinking that classical music is _Eine kleine Natchmusik_.


Eine kleine Nachtmusik is a beautiful, catchy, fun piece and I think you could do a lot worse looking for something to introduce people to CM with.


----------



## Livly_Station

MatthewWeflen said:


> Eine kleine Nachtmusik is a beautiful, catchy, fun piece and I think you could do a lot worse looking for something to introduce people to CM with.


I didn't mean to belittle it. You can put any other famous piece (or less famous too) in its place and it would preserve the intention of my post.

What I mean is that one cannot take a reasonable conclusion of what's classical music based on a single piece they heard.


----------



## GrosseFugue

Meditation and eating healthy are also not easy.
Much easier to act stupid and eat McDonald's.

Pop music is simply junk food. 
Maybe you like to snack on "potato chips" now and again. But any reasonable person wouldn't eat potato chips for breakfast, lunch and dinner. You need REAL FOOD. 

Considering all the horrid music that's blaring everywhere, all the time, I'm surprised people don't get physically sick from it. Though I do believe they are rotting in the brains. I've seen my own nieces raised on the junk and I'd wager their personalities were largely determined by it and the accompanying videos and nutty fashion, etc.

I'm just a lay listener. But I refuse to believe a Justin Bieber song (or any pop song) is equal to LvB's Op. 131 for example. Just like Charles Schulz is not the equal to Da Vinci. Nor is James Patterson the same as Shakespeare. You may as well say basic arithmetic is the same as celestial mechanics. It's just not. Now a lot of people don't understand celestial mechanics. Does that mean it's "elitist" and that only the simplest math should be used? Where would that get us?


----------



## starthrower

> Pop music is simply junk food.


A fairly meaningless statement. Pop music has been around for many decades and encompasses a huge amount of music. And it doesn't need to be compared to Beethoven to judge its value.


----------



## mossyembankment

GrosseFugue said:


> Meditation and eating healthy are also not easy.
> Much easier to act stupid and eat McDonald's.
> 
> Pop music is simply junk food. ... Does that mean it's "elitist" and that only the simplest math should be used? Where would that get us?


IMO this is way too simplistic. There is plenty of pop music which is better on just about every metric than plenty of pieces of classical music. Shakespeare also wrote some stinkers. Do I think it would be good if people had more appetite for challenging and complex art? Yes. But framing it as a simple spectrum overlooks a lot of the ways that people derive value from art, and I think people who dismiss the value of pop music and other popular art so entirely don't fully understand it.


----------



## fbjim

Too much Bruckner. All that bang-bang-bang and boom-boom-boom and loud repetitive beats. Cars driving through the neighborhood playing yet another Bruckner 8 recording out the window at 3AM. Wasn't back like this in my day, that's for sure.


----------



## Forster

GrosseFugue said:


> You may as well say basic arithmetic is the same as celestial mechanics. It's just not.


May you? I'd say basic artithmethic is pretty essential for daily living whereas most of us can get by without celestial mechanics. So your analogy fails: pop is essential for daily living, whereas we can get by without classical.


----------



## GrosseFugue

Forster said:


> May you? I'd say basic artithmethic is pretty essential for daily living whereas most of us can get by without celestial mechanics. So your analogy fails: pop is essential for daily living, whereas we can get by without classical.


There are lot of things you can "get by without" -- love, beautiful sunsets, time for reflection, excellent wine. The question is: would you want to?

By your definition -- advanced medicine would also be worthless. Since the vast majority don't need it everyday.

Look, I am not going to argue with posters about pop music on a Classical Music site (which is really bizarre frankly). I don't care if you want to listen to rap or metal or whatever 24/7. It's your life. But please don't expect me to acknowledge it as something "essential" or valuable or life-enhancing. I will not. All I have to say.


----------



## Forster

GrosseFugue said:


> There are lot of things you can "get by without" -- love, beautiful sunsets, time for reflection, excellent wine. The question is: would you want to?


No, the question is, based on your analogy, what is essential, and you boobed. But, never mind. We do both love classical, we don't hate it, and that should be enough.


----------



## Kreisler jr

mossyembankment said:


> IMO this is way too simplistic. There is plenty of pop music which is better *on just about every metric *than plenty of pieces of classical music.


I doubt this. First of all, it is not easy to compare music from very different times and circumstances and with different goals and purposes. 
But when I ask for examples, I am usually presented with 1970s Art Rock or Jazz Rock or similar kinds of popular music that are (or have become) often niches as small or smaller than classical or jazz and not at all "popular". I am not presented with someone topping the charts in the last 20 years. 
I am not really familiar with this 1970s stuff, but even if I grant for the sake of argument that there are some pieces to be found that are on some metrics better than some classical music, this doesn't really change the general argument, namely that the actually popular pop music is mass produced ephemeral stuff that is as far as craft and technique is concerned way below the mass produced stuff of baroque or early 19th century opera.

It is similar in literature. I have some fondness for some middlebrow to pulpy late 19th and early 20th century literature, like Doyle, Rider Haggard, Lovecraft, Howard etc. I am not claiming that this is the equivalent of Henry James or Joyce or EM Forster. 
But if you compare it with e.g Dan Brown or other contemporary crime/fantasy fiction, on the level of language and vocabulary there is no contest. One might find aspects where 2000-20s low/middlebrow fiction is "better", i.e. more exciting, more elaborate plots but on the fundamental level of handling language, writing, composition, a lot of what was banned to pulp magazines in 1900 or 1920 is better written than middlebrow literature of today.


----------



## Sid James

I think that hate towards classical music does exist, and as the OP says, it is based on ignorance. Nevertheless, negative attitudes exist towards all types of music.

Personally, I am unlikely to mention that I like classical to people unless I know them well. Part of it is trying to avoid being labelled with the classical music snob stereotype.

My impression is that people are not as judgemental of classical music as they were twenty or thirty years ago. 

- The way its been presented has assisted in breaking down its highbrow image. A good example are the simultaneous film screenings and video game music concerts played by orchestras which have high attendance by the under forties. 

- The benefits of music in many respects are better understood, which mean people have more reasons to encourage their children to play an instrument or to sing in a choir.

- The digital revolution has assisted in disseminating classical music. Many people who wouldn’t have listened to it in the past now do, even if its limited to having a handful of pieces on their ipod.

This must all be looked at in light of how people live today. Many in the Western world report increased stress and depression, more pressure from work and less time for family. Its no wonder that recreational pursuits like music can become a luxury. When we are listening to music, its often on headphones while doing something else. Increased screen time has been shown to negatively affect attention span.

Today’s listener is an entirely different beast from that of the past. He or she is less likely to be sectarian. Different types of music are not so much put at odds with eachother. Listeners, not faithful to any particular tribe, pick and choose from the huge array of variety which is being offered. This has brought on concerns of boundaries being so eroded as to lead to classical music losing its character and uniqueness. Whatever the result, time will tell.


----------



## Enthusiast

Far more common that hate of classical music is proud rejection. These days it seems to be a source of pride for many to say "I don't listen to classical". Fifty years ago this would have been said with some feeling of shame but now it is OK to have no interest in classical music. Actually liking classical music is acceptable as well but only just - it is a little suspect.


----------



## Forster

Kreisler jr said:


> I doubt this. First of all, it is not easy to compare music from very different times and circumstances and with different goals and purposes.


Precisely. No further comment is needed...

But since you continue...



Kreisler jr said:


> But when I ask for examples, I am usually presented with 1970s Art Rock or Jazz Rock or similar kinds of popular music that are (or have become) often niches as small or smaller than classical or jazz and not at all "popular". I am not presented with someone topping the charts in the last 20 years.


You illustrate the problem perfectly for both genres. Why should an already flawed venture (to compare the quality of two dissimilar genres) rest on an example of a recent chart topper with an piece from the 19th C? Surely the least we can do is establish what we mean by pop and what we mean by classical before offering up compositions for analysis.

In the same way that no classical aficionado would want the genre reduced to something from the last 20 years, no pop aficionado would want pop reduced to a single no. 1 by [famous pop act].

Why should pop be hobbled by your 20 year rule while classical gets to pick from a genre lasting, say, 400 years? And why confine it to the pop that I presume you're thinking of, (Justin Bieber is the usual rep if it's not Lady Gaga), when classical might encompass opera, orchestral, solo instrumental etc?

Let's just leave it at your first comment. If we're objecting to the 'hate' dished out to classical, why is it neceesary to dish out 'hate' to pop in return?


----------



## Coach G

I think that "hate" is too strong a word regarding classical music. I never knew anyone to tell me that they "hate" classical music; even if I have heard people say "I don't _get_ it." And even the one's who don't _get_ it, seem to enjoy "light" classics, "pops" music, the classical radio brunch/Baroque bill-of-fare. What seems to mystify them are the symphonies, concertos, and operas, and so forth; in their entirety where there sometimes doesn't seem to be much of a catchy melody to hold.

I can say that I "hate" very loud heavy metal, hard rock, hip-hop, and rap music. It physically repulses me. It makes me jumpy and anxious, but I don't think that people have that kind of visceral reaction to classical as much as they feel confused by it.

Some have suggested that classical music has an air of snobbishness about it that turns people off to it. I grew up around working class/lower middle class people or whatever you want to call it. I was one of the first people in my family to graduate from college and none of my four grandparents even graduated high school, except for one grandmother who dropped out as a teenager but later earned a high school equivalency as an adult. It wasn't a case of abject poverty, but it certainly wasn't affluence by American standards, either. In this regard, I don't remember ever feeling as though my social background was much of a barrier in terms of liking classical music. Whenever I went out to buy classical recordings or concert tickets, the outlets always seemed happy to take my money.

When I was younger I faced some backlash from peers who were interested in whatever music was popular back in the day, the 1980s, Bruce Springsteen, Michael Jackson, Run DMC, Madonna, etc. I had little or no interest in it but it didn't serve as much of barrier to anything. Today, social and cultural identification and peer pressure and taste matters even less when it comes to taste in music, because young people and others rarely listen to anything communally or ceremonially; because everyone is plugged into their own personalized radio station on their ear-buds so there's no more generation gap; no social boundaries; and with the internet _everything_ is available, not just what is marketed by a handful of radio and TV stations, and music corporations.


----------



## fbjim

I don't think classical is particularly snobby outside of particular instances. It's much more a- sorry- nerd (across the pond, do you still use "anorak") thing, where it's obscure, but doesn't have the air of coolness that more modern semi-obscure music like the fringes of electronic/metal have.


----------



## Kreisler jr

I'll give you 40 years, the 20 years was just an accidental number and top 20 or 30 or whatever. I didn't mean to artificially restrict but I get the impression that the great and sophisticated popular music is for some reason almost never really popular and what is blaring from every corner.
I fear that most of the 1970s art rock never was that popular. And this is IMO changing the goalposts a bit, because it seems clearly cherrypicking one subgenre of a shortish period that was not even popular or quickly relegated to a niche.

What I quoted was the claim that there was "plenty of pop music which is better on just about every metric than plenty of pieces of classical music". I don't think this will succeed without massive cherry picking and it has nothing to do with hate but with assigning a proper place to most popular music.

"The Phantom of the Opera" is apparently the most popular Musical of all time and acquired this status over several decades, so I am not cherrypicking a one hit boy wonder or so. 
Unlike 70s Art Rock I have heard this and I think it is actually musically weaker/worse in many respects than an average "mass produced" opera among the dozens of Handel's or Donizetti's or their contemporaries that are forgotten today. I was truly surprised how clichéed, pretentious, repetitive and derivative TPhotO was as I expected better.
Even comparably light pieces like "Acis and Galatea" or "Elisir d'amore" are so far ahead of Lloyd Webber that it would be no contest.

FWIW I don't think many people "hate" classical music. But I think that the dominance of popular culture, including music, that has been going on since the 1960s and the pushing of high culture into niches while still pretending that there was some social? benefit in "kicking high culture from its unjustified pedestal" is overall a very bad development. Not the worst in today's world but in line with many other bad ones.


----------



## Forster

OK. So from the 'pop' genre, 1980 to 2020 - 40 years - and anything in the Top 30.

Even narrowed down to 40 years and Top 30 would encompass quite the range of pop/rock/disco/alt/hip hop/techno/electro etc etc. I just picked 1995 at random and found the Top 40 best selling singles of that year.

https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/official-top-40-best-selling-songs-of-1995__33388/

You'll find there The Beatles, U2, Oasis, Bjork, Take That, Madonna, Michael Jackson, Coolio ft LV, Meatloaf...some of the best known acts in the pop/rock world, though not necessarily their best work. And, of course, what you're getting is just the most popular based on sales. You're not necessarily getting what might be regarded as the best from the subgenre that doesn't reach the singles charts, but has critical acclaim from the pop cognoscenti.

Now, I'm not the one claiming "plenty of pop music which is better on just about every metric than plenty of pieces of classical music", which is, I think, far too vague to make much sense. All I can say is that to try and compare any of these with...well, with what? What are we allowing from the classical side?


----------



## SanAntone

Enthusiast said:


> Far more common that hate of classical music is proud rejection. These days it seems to be a source of pride for many to say "I don't listen to classical". Fifty years ago this would have been said with some feeling of shame but now it is OK to have no interest in classical music. Actually liking classical music is acceptable as well but only just - it is a little suspect.


I hear Classical music fans saying they don't listen to Pop, wearing that statement as a badge of honor. We just saw that in the poll about combining the listening threads.


----------



## Coach G

Kreisler jr said:


> ...
> 
> FWIW I don't think many people "hate" classical music. But I think that the dominance of popular culture, including music, that has been going on since the 1960s and the pushing of high culture into niches while still pretending that there was some social? benefit in "kicking high culture from its unjustified pedestal" is overall a very bad development. Not the worst in today's world but in line with many other bad ones.


It could be that "high culture", at least when it comes to classical music, is _more_ accessible than ever. Even in the 1980s, long before the internet; I was a teenager who was working various part time jobs washing dishes in an Italian restaurant; delivering newspapers, and clearing the weeds out of the neighbor's backyards; and even _then_ I had more classical music to listen to in my collection of CBS and RCA budget reissue LPs; than any member of the European royalty or nobility did even if they had the likes of Mozart or Beethoven kissing their rings. Now with the internet and YouTube, there's more classical music than ever including _everything_ and it's practically _free_. The only problem is that the internet has become so much of a part of our lives that the time it takes to listen and process really deep classical music (not talking about light classics/pops/classical radio brunch/Baroque fare); that what the internet and cell phones has done to the human attention is not conducive.


----------



## Coach G

SanAntone said:


> I hear Classical music fans saying they don't listen to Pop, wearing that statement as a badge of honor. We just saw that in the poll about combining the listening threads.


When I'm not listening to the likes of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Wagner, Stravinsky or Schoenberg; I have a weakness for sentimental and cloying old pop and pop/country songs; stuff like _Both Sides Now_ (Judy Collins); _The Rose_ (Bette Middler); _It's a Heart Ache_ (recorded by both Bonnie Tyler and Juice Newton); _Rose Garden_ (Lynn Anderson); _Roll On Mississippi_ (Charlie Pride); _The Impossible Dream_ (Jim Nabors); _I Believe_ (recorded by both Frankie Laine and Shirley Caesar); and _Ghost Riders In the Sky_ (best version by Lorne Greene). It's a strange dichotomy.


----------



## mossyembankment

Kreisler jr said:


> I doubt this. First of all, it is not easy to compare music from very different times and circumstances and with different goals and purposes.


I could have expressed myself better - when I said "just about every metric" that was hyperbolic for the purpose of making a point. I was trying to say was that there is nothing inherently, necessarily more valuable about Western classical music than pop music. I agree that making direct comparisons between specific pieces of music (especially across different genres) is pointless and subjective - but it's silly to place the worst classical music above the best pop music, based on some non-existent principle.

Heavy listeners of classical are sometimes alienated from pop culture to such a degree that it's difficult for them to appreciate it, and then it becomes tempting to believe that no one else can be appreciating it, either...


----------



## Forster

mossyembankment said:


> I agree that making direct comparisons between specific pieces of music (especially across different genres) is pointless and subjective


I agree with this too. Yet without some kind of specific comparison, rather than just an airy generalisation, the nonsense can't be laid to rest.

Perhaps it doesn't matter, however, and the pop fan must just grow broader shoulders, as must the classical. Yet it seems it matters on a regular basis to numbers of posters here, since stupid and disparaging remarks are constantly made, and risen to with indignation by those who like both classical and pop (if such a heresy is possible!)

I like Radiohead as much as I like Sibelius. I get immense pleasure from being in the company of both. I've not yet heard everything Sibelius composed and, luckily, Radiohead are still alive, performing and composing (at least afaik) so there's more pleasure to come, and I anticipate continuing to enjoy both for some years yet. It's a complete waste of time trying to compare Sibelius' _Symphony No 6 _(my favourite of the 7) with Radiohead's _How to Disappear Completely_, though since both are 'music', I suppose you could try. However, I doubt such a comparison could justifiably conclude that one was better than the other in any objective sense, though I don't doubt that those who assume so before even listening might draw such a conclusion anyway.

It's just so much easier to pitch Trio's Da Da Da against Bach's St Matthew Passion isn't it?


----------



## mossyembankment

Forster said:


> I agree with this too. Yet without some kind of specific comparison, rather than just an airy generalisation, the nonsense can't be laid to rest.


Not sure I follow your meaning.


----------



## Forster

mossyembankment said:


> Not sure I follow your meaning.


Well, in the various threads where this issue has arisen (either as a substantive part of the discussion, or a by-the-way comment, or sideswipe) the anti-pop either stick with making vague generalisations about 'pop' and its inadequacies, or just shy at a single artist deemed to represent the lowest of the low, often Justin Bieber or Lady Gaga.

Lady Gaga

Any attempt at pinning the anti-pop down by asking for some specifics (such as "What do you mean by pop?") are usually ignored or evaded. The pro-pop sometimes make the mistake of offering up prog rock as an answer. "Look", they say, "this is pop at its best, written by serious artists, some of whom have even been classically trained." The anti-pop simply says that prog rock isn't what they meant.

I don't think I've actually seen a thread or posts where someone has actually attempted to compare specific compositions. I was just musing on whether such a comparison might yield anything useful, assuming it was undertaken in good faith.

I have found this one, which doesn't quite fit the bill, but might serve to illustrate the problem.

https://www.talkclassical.com/55302-does-suppers-ready-genesis.html?highlight=compare

Has that helped at all?


----------



## mossyembankment

Okay, I think I follow you now. My personal view is that those comparisons probably wouldn't yield anything useful.

Anyone who claims that pop music is inherently worthless is obviously wrong. These people arrive at the conclusion first (pop = bad, classical = good, me = sophisticated genius), then try to find the facts and logic to support it - even if there was a way to "prove" the value of a particular piece of music (and there isn't), they wouldn't acknowledge it.

The only reason to argue with a person like that is to hopefully shake them out of their blinders, for their own benefit - i.e., get them to recognize that things may have artistic value even if they themselves can't appreciate them. But, I don't think it's something anyone should spend too much time on.


----------



## SanAntone

I agree. 

Each genre has its own unique stylistic attributes, which are not found elsewhere. I listen to Jazz for reasons unrelated to why I listen to Classical. The same goes as to why I listen to Old Time or Bluegrass and then find completely different things in Blues or Flamenco.

People who try to compare one genre with another - especially if they are not fans of both - bother me since they are really out to prove that one genre is superior to another.


----------



## 59540

I think there's more ignorance of classical music than hate for it.


----------



## SanAntone

dissident said:


> I think there's more ignorance of classical music than hate for it.


Yes, I agree; ignorance because of indifference. Whereas many Classical fans I've run into have a willful ignorance of Pop, or any non-Classical genre, for ideological reasons.


----------



## Sid James

...............................


----------



## mikeh375

The talk about trained versus untrained musicians/composers and the disparaging attitudes that can arise in both camps (musicians and listeners) puts me in mind of my own experiences. 
When I got into media it was a naive shock at first to see how many untrained composers there were writing for the big and small screen (this is still the case and is in fact more the norm these days). I was fresh out of conservatory and I saw my fluency and knowhow as a distinct advantage. To some extent, that always remained true because I could turn my hand to virtually any style of music that a brief might require given my analytic skills and a background in popular music from my guitar playing days. 

However over the years, I came across some remarkable composers with no training whatsoever and yet were capable of writing excellent music with such abandon that some became very successful and often innovative too. Of course technology opened the door for many of these composers, but that should not reflect on the talent and ability displayed by some that imv was quite amazing and humbling.
So early on, I realised the blatantly obvious that generally speaking, a talent for composing and doing it brilliantly does not need formal training but does need an autodidactic personality, belief, drive and a gift. A friend of mine is so gifted, even in orchestral mocking up with samples, that I shudder to think what he might have achieved if he knew how to manipulate an orchestra with a Ravel like fluency. I've told him there's a symphony inside him, but he's not interested.


----------



## janxharris

mikeh375 said:


> The talk about trained versus untrained musicians/composers and the disparaging attitudes that can arise in both camps (musicians and listeners) puts me in mind of my own experiences.
> When I got into media it was a naive shock at first to see how many untrained composers there were writing for the big and small screen (this is still the case and is in fact more the norm these days). I was fresh out of conservatory and I saw my fluency and knowhow as a distinct advantage. To some extent, that always remained true because I could turn my hand to virtually any style of music that a brief might require given my analytic skills and a background in popular music from my guitar playing days.
> 
> However over the years, I came across some remarkable composers with no training whatsoever and yet were capable of writing excellent music with such abandon that some became very successful and often innovative too. Of course technology opened the door for many of these composers, but that should not reflect on the talent and ability displayed by some that imv was quite amazing and humbling.
> So early on, I realised the blatantly obvious that generally speaking, a talent for composing and doing it brilliantly does not need formal training but does need an autodidactic personality, belief, drive and a gift. A friend of mine is so gifted, even in orchestral mocking up with samples, that I shudder to think what he might have achieved if he knew how to manipulate an orchestra with a Ravel like fluency. I've told him there's a symphony inside him, but he's not interested.


Nice post Mike - do you know why exactly your friend wont write that symphony? No money / not into that style?


----------



## mikeh375

janxharris said:


> Nice post Mike - do you know why exactly your friend wont write that symphony? No money / not into that style?


He's more into Peter Gabriel Jan. He aint short of money that's for sure, given his success. He has virtually no interest in classical music.


----------



## chipia

mikeh375 said:


> However over the years, I came across some remarkable composers with no training whatsoever and yet were capable of writing excellent music with such abandon that some became very successful and often innovative too. Of course technology opened the door for many of these composers, but that should not reflect on the talent and ability displayed by some that imv was quite amazing and humbling.


I agree that talent may in some cases compensate for a lack of musical education, but in most cases it's not enough. I believe the lack of musical education is the reason why so much music nowadays has such simplistic harmonies and forms.


----------



## mikeh375

chipia said:


> I agree that talent may in some cases compensate for a lack of musical education, but in most cases it's not enough. I believe the lack of musical education is the reason why so much music nowadays has such simplistic harmonies and forms.


I'm not going to join you in a genre or comparison discussion here suffice to say that in popular music, formal training is obviously not a requirement and might even be a hindrance to some. The clue as to why that is so, is in the term 'popular' because it also defines parameters that the average listener can easily comprehend.
Much great music can be and has been achieved with those "simplistic harmonies and forms" imo.


----------



## SanAntone

chipia said:


> I agree that talent may in some cases compensate for a lack of musical education, but in most cases it's not enough. I believe the lack of musical education is the reason why so much music nowadays has such simplistic harmonies and forms.


You appear to only recognize one kind of training, what you call "musical education."


----------



## mikeh375

^^good point. Even with all the training in the world, you often can't even begin to emulate the 'feel' that many pop artists have for their work - the feel/emotion we all respond to. Acquiring that 'feel', that musicality, is an equivalent musical education that requires as much a journey of self discovery as any formal conservatory training. It's a delicate yet vital trait that can be hindered by knowledge too imo. Production and vocals also play an equally important role in the composition of songs so it's not just about harmony etc.


----------



## Coach G

mikeh375 said:


> ^^good point. Even with all the training in the world, you often can't even begin to emulate the 'feel' that many pop artists have for their work - the feel/emotion we all respond to. Acquiring that 'feel', that musicality, is an equivalent musical education that requires as much a journey of self discovery as any formal conservatory training. It's a delicate yet vital trait that can be hindered by knowledge too imo. Production and vocals also play an equally important role in the composition of songs so it's not just about harmony etc.


I once saw the concert pianist, Horacio Gutierrez on the _Tonight Show_ way back when Johnny Carson was the host. At the time, (1980s?) crossover was all the rage with Luciano Pavarotti lending his wonderful tenor voice to an endless cycle of "duets" with every major pop artist. Carson asked Gutierrez why he doesn't "crossover" and play with jazz, country, or pop musicians. Gutierrez said in order to play jazz, country, or pop music with sincerity you have to be able to "feel" it; and then he said "I don't."


----------



## SanAntone

Coach G said:


> I once saw the concert pianist, Horacio Gutierrez on the _Tonight Show_ way back when Johnny Carson was the host. At the time, (1980s?) crossover was all the rage with Luciano Pavarotti lending his wonderful tenor voice to a endless cycle of "duets" with every major pop artist. Carson asked Gutierrez why he doesn't "crossover" and play with jazz, country, or pop musicians. Gutierrez said in order to play jazz, country, or pop music with sincerity you have to be able to "feel" it; and then he said "I don't."


There's that "feel" aspect - but in order to play Blues, e.g., it requires an apprenticeship in order to learn the style. "Formal musical education" will not teach you what you need to know, and it is a full-time job, thousands of hours of soaking up the style from the masters. The same is true for Bluegrass, Old Time, Jazz, and even something like mountain ballad singing.

This is not to even consider world musics like Flamenco, African, or Indian.


----------



## 59540

SanAntone said:


> Yes, I agree; ignorance because of indifference. Whereas many Classical fans I've run into have a willful ignorance of Pop, or any non-Classical genre, for ideological reasons.


Well some could be coming from the world of pop and find pop too be too superficial. I don't know very many who are willfully ignorant of pop music since it's all around us in a way that classical (however defined) isn't. Some just don't like it.


----------



## Neo Romanza

dissident said:


> Well some could be coming from the world of pop and find pop too be too superficial. I don't know very many who are willfully ignorant of pop music since it's all around us in a way that classical (however defined) isn't. Some just don't like it.


I think there's a certain attitude where people who are really into popular music just can't accept that someone doesn't share their enthusiasm for it. Classical listeners, such as ourselves, are used to the idea that this music isn't for everybody, but we don't go cramming it down people's throats like popular music seems to do. I love all kinds of music from jazz to rock, but classical music is what I listen to the most and I've never honestly felt that I was superior to anyone for preferring this music to others, but it always seems that I'm met with some kind of opposition when I tell someone that I love classical music. There's always a puzzled look on their faces, which actually puzzles me more than anything.


----------



## SanAntone

dissident said:


> Well some could be coming from the world of pop and find pop too be too superficial. I don't know very many who are willfully ignorant of pop music since it's all around us in a way that classical (however defined) isn't. Some just don't like it.


Anything is possible, hypothetically - but my experience with anti-Pop Classical fans is not based on hypotheticals.


----------



## 59540

SanAntone said:


> Anything is possible, hypothetically - but my experience with anti-Pop Classical fans is not based on hypotheticals.


What do you mean by "anti-Pop"? People that hate it, are indifferent to it or those fail to see in it the virtues that you obviously do? I don't hate pop, but the older I got the more I felt there were really no compelling musical reasons to keep listening to the relatively light things I liked when I was 16...and let's face it, most pop--other than jazz, if you want to consider that a pop genre -- is geared toward the younger listeners.


----------



## science

dissident said:


> ... most pop--other than jazz, if you want to consider that a pop genre -- is geared toward the younger listeners.


Of course there is lots of "pop" music for older listeners, but maybe it tends to be less innovative.


----------



## 59540

science said:


> Of course there is lots of "pop" music for older listeners, but maybe it tends to be less innovative.


For me it's the old stuff, and I still love it. But I outgrew it.


----------



## SanAntone

dissident said:


> What do you mean by "anti-Pop"? People that hate it, are indifferent to it or those fail to see in it the virtues that you obviously do? I don't hate pop, but the older I got the more I felt there were really no compelling musical reasons to keep listening to the relatively light things I liked when I was 16...and let's face it, most pop--other than jazz, if you want to consider that a pop genre -- is geared toward the younger listeners.


I don't like the term 'Pop" since it is either too narrow of a style, what used to be called Top Forty Radio, or only is meant to include the latest incarnation of the style. There is Pop which I don't consider for teenagers, Peter Gabriel, e.g. But on TC the conversation is usually about Classical vs. Pop.

What I care about is not limited to Pop, it is any non-Classical genre, and thankfully, I've not out-grown any of the music I have ever loved. What are those Bob Dylan lines,

_Ah, but I was so much older then
I'm younger than that now_

I have read posts on TC which do strike me as full of something like cyber-hatred for music other than Classical, I guess because it takes up space on the forum. In the discussion about merging the listening threads someone actually said, "I think that there are a LOT of people that come for the Classical Music and would get very frustrated at seeing a "Beatles post" (example) mixed in."

I mean really?

Anyway, I feel we are going in circles. We obviously think of things differently and I don't see any point in this discussion.


----------



## atsizat

How can one hate Antonia Vivaldi? Is that even possible? Seriously?


----------



## SanAntone

I don't hate Vivaldi, but am not a fan; never listen to his music.


----------



## atsizat

When it comes to Vivaldi, I can't keep to 5 music videos. I am sorry.

More is coming because it is Vivaldi who we are talking about.


----------



## SanAntone

More is less. .............


----------



## atsizat

SanAntone said:


> I don't hate Vivaldi, but am not a fan; never listen to his music.


You should listen to his music.

When I first started classical music, I had started with Bach but later I reliased that Vivaldi is even better. I dont say that Bach is bad. He is good as well but Vivaldi just turned out to be better to me.


----------



## SanAntone

atsizat said:


> You should listen to his music.
> 
> When I first started classical music, I had started with Bach but later I reliased that Vivaldi is even better. I dont say that Bach is bad. He is good as well but Vivaldi just turned out to be better to me.


I have listened to his music, which is how I discovered that I don't like it. And I haven't just started listening to Classical music.


----------



## atsizat

SanAntone said:


> More is less. .............


Italians made music, I guess.


----------



## atsizat

SanAntone said:


> I have listened to his music, which is how I discovered that I don't like it. And I haven't just started listening to Classical music.


Can you dislike the ones I shared? At least more than 3 out of 10?


----------



## atsizat

To be honest, I did not encounter one single person who disliked the first piece I shared. Maybe it is time you tried that one at least?


----------



## SanAntone

atsizat said:


> Can you dislike the ones I shared? At least more than 3 out of 10?





atsizat said:


> To be honest, I did not encounter one single person who disliked the first piece I shared. Maybe it is time you tried that one at least?


Look, I don't want to be rude - but stop pushing your Vivaldi on me. I don't like it, and I've listened to more than one piece. I don't hate it - but life is too short to waste time with music I know I don't like.


----------



## starthrower

> stop pushing your Vivaldi on me.


I gotta remember that one for my next trip to the dentist office!


----------



## atsizat

SanAntone said:


> Look, I don't want to be rude - but stop pushing your Vivaldi on me. I don't like it, and I've listened to more than one piece. I don't hate it - but life is too short to waste time with music I know I don't like.


But you didn't at least listen to the first piece I shared. And you won't. That is a fact.

As I said, I did not encounter a single person who disliked the first piece I shared. If one dislikes that one, there is no way he or she can like classical music any way.

Vivaldi does NOT mean 4 seasons, by the way. Most don't know it and they will also never know it.

I shared 10 pieces and only 2 out of 10 were from 4 seasons. Lol.


----------



## atsizat

starthrower said:


> I gotta remember that one for my next trip to the dentist office!


I am very close to turning 31 but I have never ever gone to a dentist. Never.

I don't know why there are so many people going to them. Unless I get beaten up and lose my teeth, I won't feel the need to go to one.

I got beaten up but it was not strong enough to lose my teeth.


----------



## science

If dentists actually played Vivaldi, I'd complain about how noisy their tools are. My dentists play new age / easy listening stuff, so the sound of the drill doesn't bother me. If they'd just run the thing without touching anything in my mouth, I would definitely prefer it to the music....


----------



## 59540

SanAntone said:


> What I care about is not limited to Pop, it is any non-Classical genre, and thankfully, I've not out-grown any of the music I have ever loved.


No, I think I pretty much exhausted the possibilities of "John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt", just as with "Rio" or "Be-Bop-a-Lula" or "Express Yourself" or any number of songs. Nice, but not very nourishing except as nostalgia.


----------



## mossyembankment

Aren’t those all 50+ years old?


----------



## starthrower

science said:


> If dentists actually played Vivaldi, I'd complain about how noisy their tools are. My dentists play new age / easy listening stuff, so the sound of the drill doesn't bother me. If they'd just run the thing without touching anything in my mouth, I would definitely prefer it to the music....


My current dentist doesn't play any music. But he leans on my lower jaw like it was an armrest so it's time to find a new one.


----------



## atsizat

science said:


> If dentists actually played Vivaldi, I'd complain about how noisy their tools are. My dentists play new age / easy listening stuff, so the sound of the drill doesn't bother me. If they'd just run the thing without touching anything in my mouth, I would definitely prefer it to the music....


You are also someone who won't even listen to the first piece I shared.

In real life, I did not encounter one single person who disliked the first piece I shared. And this is a classical music forum. What the hell. Lol.

There is no way in hell that if one dislikes even the first piece I shared, he or she won't like any classical. That is for sure.


----------



## mossyembankment

atsizat said:


> You are also someone who won't even listen to the first piece I shared.
> 
> In real life, I did not encounter one single person who disliked the first piece I shared. And this is a classical music forum. What the hell. Lol.
> 
> There is no way in hell that if one dislikes even the first piece I shared, he or she won't like any classical. That is for sure.


You might have better results if you start a Vivaldi thread instead of trying to make this into one.


----------



## SanAntone

atsizat said:


> You are also someone who won't even listen to the first piece I shared.
> 
> In real life, I did not encounter one single person who disliked the first piece I shared. And this is a classical music forum. What the hell. Lol.
> 
> There is no way in hell that if one dislikes even the first piece I shared, he or she won't like any classical. That is for sure.


There is a thread about Classical that is like Pop. I think you've found the best examples.

Those people you played this music for were probably just being polite.


----------



## atsizat

SanAntone said:


> There is a thread about Classical that is like Pop. I think you've found the best examples.
> 
> Those people you played this music for were probably just being polite.


Turks like melancholy. And the first piece I shared sounds quite melancholic.

They would all like Adagio in G minor or Moonlight Sonata (first movement) because they are so ****ing melancholic.


----------



## 59540

SanAntone said:


> There is a thread about Classical that is like Pop. I think you've found the best examples.
> 
> Those people you played this music for were probably just being polite.


For someone who gets so rankled at judgemental statements about music, you're awfully judgemental. Which reminds me: do you ever by chance go to any pop/jazz/whatever non-classical forums and advise the folks there to listen to some classical for a change? Seriously.


mossyembankment said:


> Aren't those all 50+ years old?


Yep. So what? I thought it's supposed to be timeless.


----------



## mossyembankment

dissident said:


> Yep. So what? I thought it's supposed to be timeless.


Who said that? I like plenty of old pop music, but it is also kind of the nature and appeal of pop that it is NOT timeless - it's dynamic and changing according to the current moment.

Re: "so what," it's just a bit funny to say that you've exhausted what the entire form has to offer and have "outgrown" it (are we talking about baby clothes or art?) and then cite a bunch of examples from 50 years ago.

Finally - I don't think anyone is being judgmental here about music, except for the anti-pop purists. And I don't exactly think anyone is being judgmental towards the purists, either - just trying to open minds and point out the unnecessary limitations of that view.


----------



## SanAntone

dissident said:


> For someone who gets so rankled at judgemental statements about music, you're awfully judgemental. Which reminds me: do you ever by chance go to any pop/jazz/whatever non-classical forums and advise the folks there to listen to some classical for a change? Seriously.


Just pulling the Vivaldi fan's chain a bit. :lol: It's how I respond to all evangelists.

And, no, I don't visit any other forums, this is the only one. Jazz fans are no less snobbish than Classical fans, and in some ways even more insufferable. But I don't remember advising anyone on TC to listen to Pop, or Rock, or Jazz.


----------



## 59540

SanAntone said:


> Just pulling the Vivaldi fan's chain a bit. :lol: It's how I respond to all evangelists.
> 
> And, no, I don't visit any other forums, this is the only one. Jazz fans are no less snobbish than Classical fans, and in some ways even more insufferable. But I don't remember advising anyone on TC to listen to Pop, or Rock, or Jazz.


No, you just berate them if they don't.

And I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate anyone yanking the new-music-evangelism chain. That usually results in mods swooping in and threads locked and citations issued.


----------



## Forster

dissident said:


> What do you mean by "anti-Pop"?


This perhaps?

What are your thoughts on the difference...

or this?

What are your thoughts on the difference...

It's not difficult to find such attitudes sprinkled throughout the Forum.

Of course, you can also find a sprinkling of anti-classical too, but it's reasonable to assume that on a classical forum, such folk are a tiny minority just bent on causing trouble and don't belong here.

The OP hasn't posted here in 2 years, offloaded in the first post in 2010 and, as far as I can see, never returned. Perhaps the thread has outlasted its usefulness, now it's turned to talking about pop instead.


----------



## mossyembankment

dissident said:


> No, you just berate them if they don't.
> 
> And I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate anyone yanking the new-music-evangelism chain. That usually results in mods swooping in and threads locked and citations issued.


Give me a break. I don't have a dog in that fight, but expressing personal dislike for a specific composer is different from dismissing the value of an entire genre.


----------



## amfortas

atsizat said:


> I got beaten up but it was not strong enough to lose my teeth.


Maybe that won't happen if you stop pushing Vivaldi so hard.


----------



## hammeredklavier

atsizat said:


> When I first started classical music, I had started with Bach but later I reliased that Vivaldi is even better. I dont say that Bach is bad. He is good as well but Vivaldi just turned out to be better to me.


I also came across this once (the OP of "Don't you think minor sounds better than major?"):



atsizat said:


> Major keys usually bore me. Minor sounds better than minor to me. I like a few major pieces from Bach like predure no 1 but even if it is in major key, It has sadness so I like it. Most of the pieces I listen from Bach and Vivaldi are in minor keys. All I listen from Mozart is in minor keys. I am not so fun of Mozart but I like some pieces of him, all of which are in minor keys. The composers I like most are Bach and Vivaldi but the most of them are in minor keys. I find Vivaldi bad in major keys but great in minor keys. Some pieces of Bach have sadness even in major keys, I like some major pieces of Bach but most of them I listen to are in minor keys. To me, It is like Bach has good pieces even in major keys but Vivaldi is very bad to me in major keys but he is great in minor keys.


----------



## 59540

mossyembankment said:


> Give me a break. I don't have a dog in that fight, but expressing personal dislike for a specific composer is different from dismissing the value of an entire genre.


Yanking the chain is yanking the chain. And it's not just people getting irate over "dismissing an entire genre". Say anything negative about John Cage and it ignites a thousand-comment subjective-objective debate.


----------



## Portamento

dissident said:


> And I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate anyone yanking the new-music-evangelism chain. That usually results in mods swooping in and threads locked and citations issued.


If this is true then you would've been banned by now.


----------



## SanAntone

dissident said:


> Yanking the chain is yanking the chain. And it's not just people getting irate over "dismissing an entire genre". Say anything negative about John Cage and it ignites a thousand-comment subjective-objective debate.


Do you ever listen to Classical music? If you do, you never post about anything. In fact I don't remember seeing you talk about any composer, or work, or recording, that you enjoyed. Your activity seems to be to argue with people about the kind of music they like.


----------



## fluteman

beetzart said:


> That is what I have observed throughout life. It is as this music seriously offends them!
> I work with two people and I have to listen to crappy commercial radio stations all day, blearing out all the latest hits, over and over again. But, while the three of us where sitting in our van yesterday one of them started flicking through the preset channels on the radio. He came across Radio 3 and Cla0ssic FM. Playing on Radio 3 was a Mozart Opera and he turned it up really loud to take the ****. The said 'I've had enough of that ****!'. They don't know I love classical music and never will. The reason behind this is why should I get abuse for something I have spent the last 22 years studying and enjoying because people are so ignorant to something they don't understand.


One problem is, for many years (maybe even since the 70s), it has been accepted wisdom by the supposedly expert music industry insiders that young people (i.e., the 12 to 21 crowd) cannot be sold on classical music. The occasional efforts to do so often have been ludicrously bad, and disrespectful both to the intended audience of young people and the music itself.

Not long ago, a violinist friend alerted me to a youtube channel run by a pair who refer to themselves as 'TwoSet Violin'. These are two 20-something formally trained classical violinists from Taiwanese immigrant families in Brisbane, Australia, helpfully fluent in both English and Chinese. Their show is entertaining for everyone, but targets the crucial teen audience with endless pop culture references, is usually humorous but occasionally quite serious, and sneaks in a lot of education and practical advice through the back door while never being academic, preachy or condescending. Regular guests include Hilary Hahn and Ray Chen.

They have over 3 million followers and have become global celebrities in the violin world, have had two highly successful international tours in Asia, North America and Europe, and would have had more but for the pandemic.

So, it seems the key to selling classical music to young generations was abandoning the narrow minded mentality of the traditional classical music industry, which in my opinion is very deservedly fading away. That, in turn, in time should reduce the pervasive hostility towards classical music one encounters all too often.


----------



## fbjim

To an extent, you can also "go after" the prospective art-school-kid crowd, who actually have some weird crossover with 20th century stuff.

Someone posted this fairly popular "introduction to avant garde" image on Twitter, and though it's mostly the type of avant-garde music not based in classical, some of the releases might be slightly familiar.


----------



## fluteman

fbjim said:


> To an extent, you can also "go after" the prospective art-school-kid crowd, who actually have some weird crossover with 20th century stuff.
> 
> Someone posted this fairly popular "introduction to avant garde" image on Twitter, and though it's mostly the type of avant-garde music not based in classical, some of the releases might be slightly familiar.
> 
> View attachment 158600


Yes, although the interesting thing about TwoSet Violin is that they appeal to the young crowd mainly with the basic classics of the Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Debussy and Tchaikovsky variety. One of the misconceptions about making classical music appealing to young people is that there needs to be an emphasis on contemporary or avant-garde music, whatever is meant by that.

It turns out that young people can be refreshingly open-minded about music, unlike many here at TC, where there seems to be a permanent state of war between the classical traditionalists who put fingers in ears for anything after 1950 and the contemporary brigade, and where questioning the established orthodoxy of either side only provokes hostility.


----------



## 59540

Portamento said:


> If this is true then you would've been banned by now.





SanAntone said:


> Do you ever listen to Classical music? If you do, you never post about anything. In fact I don't remember seeing you talk about any composer, or work, or recording, that you enjoyed. Your activity seems to be to argue with people about the kind of music they like.


*laughing to myself*


----------



## hammeredklavier

atsizat said:


> Turks like melancholy.


Here's something melacholic for you


----------

