Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
Nice job! It wasn't easy, or anyway I'm not sure I would have gotten it even though I know the song (and have accompanied for it), because I'm not sure I could have kept listening to that long enough to get to a part where I would have recognized it.
Nice job! It wasn't easy, or anyway I'm not sure I would have gotten it even though I know the song (and have accompanied for it), because I'm not sure I could have kept listening to that long enough to get to a part where I would have recognized it.
A great composer like Mendelssohn can call his work whatever he wants but I am talking about people who know nothing about music referring to, say, the maple leaf rag as a "song."
A great composer like Mendelssohn can call his work whatever he wants but I am talking about people who know nothing about music referring to, say, the maple leaf rag as a "song."
It's that kind of superior attitude that turns some people off to classical music.
I suggest you get used to this horrible error because it's here to stay and probably already used by the great majority of people on the planet. If it's not already an accepted dictionary usage, it will be very soon.
Thank you, Andy! By the way, did you ever play anything from My Fair Lady and posted it in the Members Recordings subforum? For some reason I thought you had posted something, but cannot find anything right now.
Thank you, Andy! By the way, did you ever play anything from My Fair Lady and posted it in the Members Recordings subforum? For some reason I thought you had, but cannot find anything right now.
Not yet, CA! (I'm currently obsessed with "What A Difference A Day Made," "The Day After Forever," and "From This Day Forward." )
Here's another rendition that's too good to pass up, since I've fallen down the YouTube rabbit hole:
Remember that row we had about the relative musical "worth" of the arrangements in the George Shearing Interpretations series? I ask you~~ does not this interpretation played by George Shearing sound very much like one of those? (I am not saying that he did not wax virtuosic in other offerings--I am asking, honestly and objectively, does not *this* version, above, sound "simple" (yet, beautiful) like those found in the 50s series?)
--Andy
Last edited by Cinnamonbear; 03/02/1402:25 AM. Reason: itallic/bold added for trolling effect
Yes I can't stand it when people refer to instrumental music as a song. I honestly cannot understand such an error in thinking.
Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy didn't care. Good for the world.
I don't believe that. The interest and novelty of the title "Songs Without Words" depends on the distinction. If he didn't care, the name would be absurd. As well call the pieces "Music for Piano using Black and White Keys."
It just bothers me to hear someone call piano music (or any instrumental music for that matter) a song. It's just wrong and annoying!!!
It bothers me too. Even someone who doesn't know much about music, should know that it's a *song* only when there's somebody *singing*. If you talk about instrumental music, and you don't know about the word piece, just call it 'instrumental music' or '[insert instrument name here] music', not 'song'.
Remember that row we had about the relative musical "worth" of the arrangements in the George Shearing Interpretations series? I ask you~~ does not this interpretation played by George Shearing sound very much like one of those? (I am not saying that he did not wax virtuosic in other offerings--I am asking, honestly and objectively, does not *this* version, above, sound "simple" (yet, beautiful) like those found in the 50s series?)
--Andy
I think this version is very beautiful and yes, most of it is simple like the ones in his series of books for amateurs. But I also think most of the ones in those books are not so good and are too simplified and too short to get anywhere near the beauty of most of Jarrett's more complex renditions. If Shearing had played every song in as simplified form as the one on this video he would not have been considered so great.
It just bothers me to hear someone call piano music (or any instrumental music for that matter) a song. It's just wrong and annoying!!!
It bothers me too.
Normal people aren't concerned with this during regular conversation...
It's an entirely understandable, innocent mistake.
On top of that:
Originally Posted by Svenno
Even someone who doesn't know much about music, should know that it's a *song* only when there's somebody *singing*.
That's not even correct. Here's the actual definition(s):
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
a song is a composition for voice or voices, performed by singing or by musical instruments
Originally Posted by Oxford English Dictionary
A musical composition suggestive of a song.
But like I said, honest mistake
"A good intention but fixed and resolute - bent on high and holy ends, we shall find means to them on every side and at every moment; and even obstacles and opposition will but make us 'like the fabled specter-ships,' which sail the fastest in the very teeth of the wind." R. W. Emerson
Remember that row we had about the relative musical "worth" of the arrangements in the George Shearing Interpretations series? I ask you~~ does not this interpretation played by George Shearing sound very much like one of those? (I am not saying that he did not wax virtuosic in other offerings--I am asking, honestly and objectively, does not *this* version, above, sound "simple" (yet, beautiful) like those found in the 50s series?)
--Andy
I think this version is very beautiful and yes, most of it is simple like the ones in his series of books for amateurs. But I also think most of the ones in those books are not so good and are too simplified and too short to get anywhere near the beauty of most of Jarrett's more complex renditions. If Shearing had played every song in as simplified form as the one on this video he would not have been considered so great.
And, at least this time, the question really *was* about a song.
Yes I can't stand it when people refer to instrumental music as a song. I honestly cannot understand such an error in thinking.
Forgivable. It's not an error in thinking if you don't know the convention.
Ok so I'll call an orange a bicycle. It's ok, I didn't know the convention.
My strong guess is that the conventional usage today is to call any piece of music a "song". If not true right now, that will be the case in a few years. That's certainly the case for most everyone under 30. So you're correct about not knowing the conventional use of "song".
And, at least this time, the question really *was* about a song.
Yes I can't stand it when people refer to instrumental music as a song. I honestly cannot understand such an error in thinking.
Forgivable. It's not an error in thinking if you don't know the convention.
Ok so I'll call an orange a bicycle. It's ok, I didn't know the convention.
My strong guess is that the conventional usage today is to call any piece of music a "song". If not true right now, that will be the case in a few years. That's certainly the case for most everyone under 30. So you're correct about not knowing the conventional use of "song".
So because everyone is getting it wrong it's ok? What if everybody decided 3 was 5?
I'm not really sure why you posted a definition. You realize that just about every word in the English dictionary didn't exist in Old English? Language is highly plastic. Words adapt new meanings and can even completely morph into new words over time. I'm not saying that I like when people call a concerto a song, but it's just the way it is and it's not going to change.
I'm talking about idiots who call, say the Moonlight sonata a "song"
...I'm sure that a person is not an idiot just because they mistakenly refer to Moonlight as a song. All that really means is they don't know the exact definition, which is an honest mistake. Jeesh...
"A good intention but fixed and resolute - bent on high and holy ends, we shall find means to them on every side and at every moment; and even obstacles and opposition will but make us 'like the fabled specter-ships,' which sail the fastest in the very teeth of the wind." R. W. Emerson
I'm talking about idiots who call, say the Moonlight sonata a "song"
...I'm sure that a person is not an idiot just because they mistakenly refer to Moonlight as a song. All that really means is they don't know the exact definition, which is an honest mistake. Jeesh...
I'm talking about idiots who call, say the Moonlight sonata a "song"
...I'm sure that a person is not an idiot just because they mistakenly refer to Moonlight as a song. All that really means is they don't know the exact definition, which is an honest mistake. Jeesh...
I'm talking about idiots who call, say the Moonlight sonata a "song"
...I'm sure that a person is not an idiot just because they mistakenly refer to Moonlight as a song. All that really means is they don't know the exact definition, which is an honest mistake. Jeesh...
"Song" is not a technical term.
But you're arguing that it is.
I posted the dictionary definition earlier in the thread. If you want to argue with the dictionary, have fun And when I said it wasn't a technical term I meant people should understand it refers to vocal music and works evocative of vocal music.
I'm talking about idiots who call, say the Moonlight sonata a "song"
...I'm sure that a person is not an idiot just because they mistakenly refer to Moonlight as a song. All that really means is they don't know the exact definition, which is an honest mistake. Jeesh...
"Song" is not a technical term.
But you're arguing that it is.
I posted the dictionary definition earlier in the thread. If you want to argue with the dictionary, have fun And when I said it wasn't a technical term I meant people should understand it refers to vocal music and works evocative of vocal music.
This particular subject has been discussed TO DEATH on these forums well before you came on the scene. Perhaps we should just give it a rest........
I posted the dictionary definition earlier in the thread. If you want to argue with the dictionary, have fun And when I said it wasn't a technical term I meant people should understand it refers to vocal music and works evocative of vocal music.
You're saying two totally opposite things. If 'song' has a specific meaning, then how is it not a technical term?
I posted the dictionary definition earlier in the thread. If you want to argue with the dictionary, have fun And when I said it wasn't a technical term I meant people should understand it refers to vocal music and works evocative of vocal music.
You're saying two totally opposite things. If 'song' has a specific meaning, then how is it not a technical term?
I meant you don't need a special training to know it refers to vocal music and its derivatives.
Obviously one does, otherwise we wouldn't have the whole song issue in the first place. I too called classical pieces 'songs' until I learned otherwise.
While I confess that it sometimes irks me to hear piano/instrumental/orchestral compositions called songs - but only from those who should know better - we do have to give some slack to those who aren't informed for the following reasons :
- just about every track downloaded from iTunes is called a "song" and, - get this, folks! - the esteemed Sheet Music Plus, "friend" of Piano World, often has the following disclaimer under the description of piano music scores : " (does not include words to the songs)." This "quote" was directly copied from Sheet Music Plus' description of the Henle edition of the Bach WTC, Bk I. no less!
Interestingly Sheet Music Plus doesn't do this for every piano score on their website, but I've seen enough of them with this caveat that it leaves me both scratching my head and wondering what I have to do to get the words to these "songs"!
While I confess that it sometimes irks me to hear piano/instrumental/orchestral compositions called songs - but only from those who should know better - we do have to give some slack to those who aren't informed for the following reasons :
- just about every track downloaded from iTunes is called a "song" and, - get this, folks! - the esteemed Sheet Music Plus, "friend" of Piano World, often has the following disclaimer under the description of piano music scores : " (does not include words to the songs)." This "quote" was directly copied from Sheet Music Plus' description of the Henle edition of the Bach WTC, Bk I. no less!
Interestingly Sheet Music Plus doesn't do this for every piano score on their website, but I've seen enough of them with this caveat that it leaves me both scratching my head and wondering what I have to do to get the words to these "songs"!
![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/Uploads/files/Joplinbadgesmall.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://forum.pianoworld.com//gallery/42/medium/10968.png)
LOL! 
