Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Composer's Lounge Exploring New Ground

gsmonks, you seem to have the all-too-common attitude of "Western Classical music is the only true artistic music and all other styles are inferior." Why do you think this?? What is so wrong with Country, or Rock music, or Indonesian Gamelan? I listen to just about every style of music. I don't dig modern Rap music, since it's been absorbed into the commercial mass production of popular music, and I really don't like classical opera, since I personally cannot stand the heavy vibrato and throaty quality to the vocals. But I enjoy country music, Rock music, A wide variety of World Music and Jazz, European Classical, Western Romantic, and of course my favorite style, Progressive Metal.

However, regardless of what it is I'm listening to, too much of it drives my brain up the wall. My typical playlist is a mix of a couple of my favorite styles. I can't help analyzing everything I hear theoretically, and I've noticed that I gravitate more towards energetic, life-filled music that challenges my ears (Dream Theater and Rachmaninoff are two of my favorite artists). Digression aside, why are you so condescending towards non-classical music? Is it because you think the "layman" isn't smart enough to understand it? Write music you enjoy, and stop trying to be so smart. Arrogance is not a virtue.

"Exclusive club elites?" What are those? I've never heard of them.

The bit about the emotional component isn't an opinion, John. I've been seeing it first-hand for over fifty years, and I am far from alone in identifying this as a problem area.

If you can write a kick-ass fugue in six parts, if you can write a symphony, if you can compose a piece in sonata-rondo form, in short, if you can do the things a classical composer can be required to do, then at some point you will have learned the technical aspects of writing classical music. If not, then no fugue, no symphony, no sonata-rondo.

The emotion involved is the pleasure associate with the craft. In that respect, Haydn is an excellent example. Don't go looking for refreshing originality in a Haydn symphony- the body of Haydn symphonies is like a showroom containing 104 oak desks. Each one is a high-quality piece of furniture, but a desk is a desk is a desk. Don't go looking for a sofa or a settee or an end-table. Now, Haydn went at symphony-writing just like a master carpenter who specialises in oak desks. Many would find such work boring, but to the bourgeois mind there is nothing that says permanence and stability like a well-crafted oak desk, and for such a person each and every Haydn symphony is a pleasurable experience.

Now, much as you might detest oak desks and all they stand for, they are and remain works of quality. And unless you're willing to learn all the boring stuff that goes into making a piece of such quality, it's a sure thing that what you yourself produce will likewise be lacking in expertise and quality.

There's a word for that- it's called "fluff".

That's not a bad thing! I've written lots of fluff, and I enjoy British and Northern European "light" classical music, much of which is pleasant-sounding fluff. But I wouldn't try to pass it off as something more than that, and emotionally-conceived music is just that. And while come of it may sound profound, the craft involved tells a different story.

Where is this coming from, Jared? I don't know anything about Indonesian Gamelin, but I listen to both country and rock, and there are great examples of both. I don't know a single classical composer who would dismiss heavy metal (except for a few snobs), which has had its share of originality and virtuosity. I've also heard some very creative Hip Hop.

When I mentioned country music, I wasn't putting it down. I was referring to the place it comes from, which differs from classical music.

Ok. Glad to have that cleared up!

"The bit about the emotional component isn't an opinion, John. I've been seeing it first-hand for over fifty years, and I am far from alone in identifying this as a problem area" - gsmonks

I'll match your fifty years and stand behind mine 100%.

John

BTW, Jared, don't confuse intelligence with education. It does require education to understand certain things. Not acknowledging that is arrogance. Or would you presume that the layman knows as much and should be on an even footing with a brain-surgeon?

gsmonks, you said yourself that Country is a "guilty pleasure" for you. Why is the pleasure guilty? Is the pleasure you feel from classical music also guilty?

I am a huge supporter of education, and I think I always will be. But I write music to be listened to by many people, educated musicians and laymen alike, and if I demand that every member of my audience is sufficiently educated in order to "understand" my compositions, then I'm not going to have a very big audience. If the layman doesn't "understand the emotion" of classical music, perhaps that is because many people simply don't connect with classical music on an emotional level. This operates independent of education.

Some (not all) of what passes for "compositional methods" is mere after-the-fact recognition of patterns that were actually employed without knowledge and without planning. The fact that analysis is possible does not mean that analysis should precede action.

Some (not all) of what passes for "emotional music derived from the heart" is simply a tired re-re-re-use of someone else's cold, intellectually-generated system.


If you don't have some of each, analysis and emotion, then you fail - but the proportions are up to you. There is no real potential for disagreement with that - the fact that some composers approach one end of the graph or the other does not negate the existence of the graph in the first place. Composers at each end may not agree on everything, but their arguments on the topic are petty at best.




And (as a footnote) I argue that all serialism is aurally a structureless mess, and the fact that it has a structure at all is therefore of no consequence to anyone except its composer. (I was going to say composer and performer, but adding those two little words would constitute a glaring unwarranted assumption.)

Very poor analogy gsmonks. A brain surgeon has to follow strict surgical procedures to save lives (and avoid law suits). There’s not much room for emotion in his/her profession. Music is the opposite. Heavy on emotion.

John

What, you're asking me to justify myself to you, Jared? And I would do that why?

Don't keep trying to put words into my mouth. I can speak just fine for myself.

I never said the layman doesn't "understand the emotion". That's what you just said, before responding to your own words, which is refered to in legal terms as "asked and answered".

What I did say about emotion was in an entirely different context that had nothing whatever to do with the layman.

You guys should pay attention and at least try to get your facts straight before deciding to waste my time with this nonsense.

I'm trying to do something constructive here, whereas certain of you are trying to drag this topic down into the mud.

If you're not interested in the topic of this thread, which is concerned with the future development of classical music, then [censored] off and stop wasting everyone's time.

How do you figure? You have to follow strict rules of procedure to compose a six-part fugue. Or d'you suppose that a wild display of unbridled emotion wil somehow magically result in a masterpiece popping out of your arse?

Johnny-Boy and gsmonks! Boys! Behave!
Structure without emotion is crap. Emotion without structure is also crap. We all knew that already. Next.

Judging from the timbre of your guys' comments, you want the process of writing classical music to be simple and easy. In other words, you want to be seen as having mastered a very difficult and highly technical profession when you're not willing to do the work and/or assimilate the knowledge.

Furthermore, you want to derail any talk that entails discussing the actual content and mechanism of composing music.

This is highly reminiscent of a writers' site I once belonged to, where I was asked to run and moderate a thread on grammar. What ended up happening was that people who hate the study of grammar derailed the thread, calling people with a keen interest in grammar "grammar nazis" and so on. For some reason the thread seemed to act as a magnet for people who had no interest in grammar, but who felt they had the right to [censored] on anyone who did.

Interestingly, the same thing is happening here. This thread is about furthering Western music, but those of you doing most of the posting are attacking the subject, and myself for bringing it up.

If this were a site dedicated to writing classical music, you guys would effectively have sabotaged it and shut it down.

Well, bravo! Well done! What a positive, wonderful thing you've accomplished! You should be proud!

Behave? It's known as stating one's opinion. Are you some kind of a self-appointed referee? Besides; I know crap as well as the next guy.

Spot on Jared. This one's going in my quotable quotes book!

Going by the last two posts, I rest my case.

This forum is a complete waste of time. That's it for me.

"Judging from the timbre of your guys' comments, you want the process of writing classical music to be simple and easy. In other words, you want to be seen as having mastered a very difficult and highly technical profession when you're not willing to do the work and/or assimilate the knowledge" - gsmonks

Your process of labeling people is remarkable, if not inaccurate. Okay... you do your thing and I'll do mine. As long as both methods turn out good results, nothing else matters.

Peace, John

Exactly. It's the fruit that matters. How it got produced is secondary.

You're the one who kept responding (5 times) to your own original post. You were trying to get people to respond. I'm not trying to argue or start unhappy discourse, I'm really not! I'm upset that it had to come to this in such an un-political forum. I disagree entirely with your idea of composition. It should never be so limited. Why further only Western music? If this site were dedicated only to classical music, I would never have made an account here. This is the composers' lounge, not the western classical composers' lounge! Structure is great and can help propel a piece forward, but without emotion, technically created pieces fall flat. I have friends who struggle with composing for this very reason. I re-read everything that you wrote on this thread, and I have to say I'm getting a mixed message. On the one hand you preach closed composition techniques that have been dead (unchanged) for centuries, and on the other you are trying to say that composers must break new ground. I disagree with both of these things, but they do not coincide...

I did not mean to misinterpret what you meant with the "layman." But you did say that


and then you tried to say that you didn't mean the layman "doesn't understand emotion" in the music. Haha.

I disagree with you, but I don't think that's a call for animosity. This should be a constructive debate, and if you're going to get all fussy when people disagree with you, then it takes away from the learning.

Imagine (I exaggerate, just slightly mind you) witnessing Einstein and Dirac beginning a fascinating conversation, but it only lasts two minutes till they start shouting opposing opinions about which way the toilet paper should unroll. You might try to prod them back to sanity.