Chumpy

Alienating

Recommended Posts

Why does fantastic quality 'Classical' music alienate potential-lovers (like horticulture using Latin names ...) by being presented as for e.g. hyper-intelligent-pedantic-out-of-touch.

Yo y'all-cool-hip-wotever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classical music is often more esoteric and sophisticated in its form than modern music, requiring a deeper understanding that would have been more common to contemporaries. General modern / pop music on the other hand was intentionally designed to appeal to the masses (or influenced by such music) and for our contemporary generations. There was the equivalent of pop music in centuries past - old folk and country music, as well as hymns, and I think these are still quite accessible to everyone now. This is just western music I'm refering to, but I believe a similar thing has happened to most African and Asian music - commercialisation and internationalisation has spread through the last century, along with the evolution of the technology of recordings. No longer is music something that is only performed for a special or specific occasion. For example, a lot of classical music evolved out of a strong tradition of church music where the purpose of music was serious and not primarily for entertainment but to glorify god or to express religious feeling. Classical styles evolved much much slower than say the evolution of rock from the era of Elvis to Marilyn Mansun and Radiohead, and therefore audiences had much more time to get used to it, and from the composer's perspective, there was more time to explore the style and push it to its limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another important change was the technology and the accessibility of instruments - it has only recently become easy for anyone to pick up an instrument and create music. This is a good thing but also meant that music has been increasingly performed by people who are not good performers and composed by untrained musicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Classical music is often more esoteric and sophisticated in its form than modern music, requiring a deeper understanding that would have been more common to contemporaries. General modern / pop music on the other hand was intentionally designed to appeal to the masses (or influenced by such music) and for our contemporary generations.

Sort of agree but then you have shows, radio stations, CD releases that do not stray beyond the 'popular' classics.

Intelligent music is not the preserve of classical musicians; each decade has produced its 'intelligent movement' and there are still plenty of modern artists who like to push the cerebral envelope and who do not give a hoot about popularity.

This track is almost 20 years old and it still sounds like it was written tomorrow...

[video=youtube;JT0m_-al-B8]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Wammer

^^^

yet again Bonio, Paul Weller and Morrissey are mentioned in a thread :whistle:

- - - Updated - - -

Another important change was the technology and the accessibility of instruments - it has only recently become easy for anyone to pick up an instrument and create music. This is a good thing but also meant that music has been increasingly performed by people who are not good performers and composed by untrained musicians.

I meant this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another important change was the technology and the accessibility of instruments - it has only recently become easy for anyone to pick up an instrument and create music. This is a good thing but also meant that music has been increasingly performed by people who are not good performers and composed by untrained musicians.

A lot of modern is way beyond merely pressing buttons to generate a predetermined sound.

If Bach or Mozart were in their youth today they probably wouldn't be p*ssing around with violins or whatever, they'd be writing their own programmes or ripping the guts out of a synthesiser to produce their own unique sound signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the industrial and social revoultion in Europe in the nineteenth century that created a middle class who demanded access to Art and Music, and the socialist governments in the New France for example, who commisioned Artists of all types to make works that inspired the public to admire socialist ideals. Special public exhibitions were commissioned and concerts performed.

Previously, music split into 'folk' or an elite of composers, musicians and instrument makers, all being paid by the wealthy to perform 'classical' for small gatherings.

Romanticism was the movement that grew from a perceived need to provide for this new middle class. ( The poor still couldn't afford the concerts, so had to make do with folk traditions until much later).

Blame Beethoven maybe for starting to write for the masses. Wagner, Berlioz, Brahms and others followed suite rapidly. Before long, musical 'superstars' began to appear. It's recorded that the Pianist and composer Franz Liszt was so adored that he was the first ever musician to have females in the audience there specifically for 'the thrill'...knicker throwing was rumoured. And thus popular music was born.

In theory then, only music composed before Romanticism should be that hard to 'get' and Beethoven for example quite accessible.

I think the world of classical works quite hard to allow all in, Classic FM being a decent way to listen to much that is enjoyable.

I agree that the more obscure and complex composers are tough simply to 'like'. As to understanding, that will take musical knowledge and time and no, not many can be bothered when there is now so much designed for absorbtion without thought. It goes without saying that lurking within the circles that DO listen to and 'get' this technically challenging stuff, will be those who sniff at lesser mortals and their taste.

I think they are everywhere...food snobs, music snobs, car snobs, job snobs...

who cares? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn :goodone:

I learned something there :^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was the industrial and social revoultion in Europe in the nineteenth century that created a middle class who demanded access to Art and Music, and the socialist governments in the New France for example, who commisioned Artists of all types to make works that inspired the public to admire socialist ideals. Special public exhibitions were commissioned and concerts performed.

Previously, music split into 'folk' or an elite of composers, musicians and instrument makers, all being paid by the wealthy to perform 'classical' for small gatherings.

Romanticism was the movement that grew from a perceived need to provide for this new middle class. ( The poor still couldn't afford the concerts, so had to make do with folk traditions until much later).

Blame Beethoven maybe for starting to write for the masses. Wagner, Berlioz, Brahms and others followed suite rapidly. Before long, musical 'superstars' began to appear. It's recorded that the Pianist and composer Franz Liszt was so adored that he was the first ever musician to have females in the audience there specifically for 'the thrill'...knicker throwing was rumoured. And thus popular music was born.

In theory then, only music composed before Romanticism should be that hard to 'get' and Beethoven for example quite accessible.

I think the world of classical works quite hard to allow all in, Classic FM being a decent way to listen to much that is enjoyable.

I agree that the more obscure and complex composers are tough simply to 'like'. As to understanding, that will take musical knowledge and time and no, not many can be bothered when there is now so much designed for absorbtion without thought. It goes without saying that lurking within the circles that DO listen to and 'get' this technically challenging stuff, will be those who sniff at lesser mortals and their taste.

I think they are everywhere...food snobs, music snobs, car snobs, job snobs...

who cares? :)

A few corrections needed here - music for a paying public (as opposed to the church or the court) started long before Beethoven. It was well under way in the middle of the 18th century, and London was a leader in the field. Handel's British output was mainly for public consumption - originally it was for operas in the Italian style (something like one-third of Handel's output is these operas). Only when they fell out of fashion (and Handel out of pocket) did he turn to oratorio.

One of Beethoven's major contributions was the concept of the composer as artist, as opposed to craftsman. Haydn wore a servant's uniform at the Esterhazy court and was expected to dine with the servants; Beethoven insisted on sitting at the master's right hand. The other Beethoven innovation was the invention of Romantic, which started with the 3rd Symphony (Eroica), a move away from the "classical" style (used in its strictly correct meaning) of Haydn and Mozart.

I think it needs to remembered that classical music (now used in the currently accepted sense) is different, in that it was written by people who actually knew what they were doing, by composers who were steeped in the technical knowledge and who could use that knowledge properly. I always find it funny when people say that classical is old-fashioned and conservative. Classical has always been the cutting edge of music, from Monteverdi's daring Vespers, bridging the gap between Renaissance and baroque, Bach's embrace of the tempered scale, which allowed the transposition of music between instruments, Beethoven's Romantic revolution, the twelve tone row of Schoenberg, etc.

In order to comprehend classical, a listener needs to be prepared to adopt to a different musical language. Not everyone is prepared to do this - for those who are, incredible musical riches await. And you won't like everything, nor should you expect to. I still can't get my head around many more modern composers, who seem to write stuff that's great for scaring the local cats out of the garden. However, this is usually my lack of imagination and/or comprehension.

I said a lot of this already here:

http://www.hifiwigwam.com/showthread.php?111201-Easing-my-way-into-classical-music

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very difficult to discuss the subject of pop/rock vs. classical music without being called a snob or an intellectual or an elitist.

There are lots of different musical genres and all of them have their own merits, and we can find examples of examples of "good" and "bad" music in all.

It's up to each one of us to choose which genres most suit our taste, culture, etc.

I like classical music (mostly romantic period), jazz from before the mid 60's, ethnic and traditional, a bit of world music, minimalist, some rock (motley alternative) and a tiny bit of pop.

I don't feel it would be unfair to say that most pop and a bit of rock are quite simplistic melody wise and rather empty of emotional and intellectual content; after all it's meant to be easy and entertaining, and the target audiences are mostly teenagers and young adults.

But some bands produce very good work, with complex melodies and high density content.

I do listen to a tiny bit of pop and some rock/alternative music and enjoy it, mostly in the car or on youtube.

I also play it in the living room as background music (I hardly ever sit and listen to it exclusively) or when the kids wish jump about to some music; I find it important to teach them that there are much better things out there besides Shakira, Riana or Katie Perry.

I like the sound of electric bass and guitar, but can't stand electronic generated synthetic sounds or music.

I also hate loud and have been forced to cover my ears a few times during the last live gigs I've been to...

I think it might be fair to compare pop and rock to comic strip books and classical music to literature.

Whilst most comic strip books are rather simple and infantile, some of them contain a solid narrative and can be almost be described as illustrated literature.

It's the same with music, books or even the cinema: some people go to the movies to be entertained whilst others like to be provoked, stirred, challenged...

R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is very difficult to discuss the subject of pop/rock vs. classical music without being called a snob or an intellectual or an elitist.

I think there's no doubt that classical music is more intellectual, simply because it is written by people steeped in their art, who know exactly what they want to achieve and how to achieve it. This does not make pop/rock/folk "inferior", merely different, nor does it make classical lovers snobs. As a nearly 100% classical lover, I am musically ignorant, but there's just something that "grabs" me about it, makes it more satisfying. Like yourself, I do have some pop/rock/folk stuff, which I enjoy. One interesting factoid - I've always liked Oasis's "Don't look back in anger", and then I realised that I was listening to a disguised version of Pachelbel's Canon in D!).

Your comic strips/literature comparison is nice, but perhaps it might be taking it slightly too far. There is an element of the "comic strip" in much classical - think, for example, of Tchaikovsky's Romeo and Juliet overture, and ignoring the fact that Pete shifts the order of events around somewhat from Shakespeare's original, how he uses musical leitmotivs to paint the violent Montague v. Capulet confrontation and the love theme of the doomed lovers. Or Smetana's Die Moldau, depicting the course of the river flowing from its source through rapids and plains to Prague.

To me, the proper comparison is that classical is a different musical language, and this has to be learned by listening to it. Some folk come to it naturally, some folk not at all. Some, like me, started with Romantic (which is essentially the language of modern film scores), but then went backwards to the baroque, and I now find most satisfaction in Bach, but never having given up the Romantics.

There are certainly annoying things about classical (the monkey suits, the rituals of concert performance), but folk who can see past that to the music have a treat in store.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are certainly annoying things about classical (the monkey suits, the rituals of concert performance), but folk who can see past that to the music have a treat in store.

Yes, the intellectual massage that is Berg's Violin Concerto awaits the pop music plebeian who has felt an inner awakening to the Classical Side.:cafe: And you thought U2 was high art...

SS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A few corrections needed here ....

I said a lot of this already here:

http://www.hifiwigwam.com/showthread.php?111201-Easing-my-way-into-classical-music

Many thanks...inadequacies noted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.