Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Lady Gaga...

Indeed it's not up for debate, but you know why?

Because I don't care, in the slightest to brand people in a negative way. The way that you are (constantly) doing.

In fact I don't care to label people at all (regardless of the existence of this very thread, which I started, but I did so to stop the misconceptions about Lady Gaga).

Forgive me for being a little irritated at the celebration and glorification of junk.

I don't have to forgive you. I don't care to 'correct' anyone, nor I would be able to do so! Just keep in mind that you keep labeling people/things/music/etc.

But, btw, as I'm a composer TODAY, and making music TODAY, I do find your post a little insulting.

EDIT: A, A, a...

You edited your post, but someone got to quote you first!

To explain a bit better...

As a publisher, who at the moment represents almost 70 composers (not visible at the website yet all of them, due to technical issues), you can understand that I have to evaluate continuously the works that are coming in. And there's plenty of works coming in in a weekly bases now!

As such, I'm forced to think past my own enjoyment as a listener, as a composer and as a pianist. There's tons of other issues to consider when starting to publish the works of any composer.

So in the rest of my time (which is very limited right now), I'm doing my best NOT to judge much. As a listener I enjoy tons of stuff, from Nu Metal, to contemporary classical, to Mozart to whatever you can imagine. So I just listen to whatever I like and as it so happens some of Gaga's songs I like. Same with Take That btw(!)

As a composer I have a rather extended freedom of expression, due to my dealing with the computer games industry, which gives me an opportunity to go very light on what to compose, and to be honest I don't necessarily miss my academia days, but it remains that I'm bound by my own limitations, some of which are constantly augmented, as I diminish others.

I should have specified. Obviously I don't mean all music created today. I'm talking about the superstars. The standard for A list music acts as plummeted to an all time low.

Glad to hear it. Are you going to have to expand to keep up?

Lucky her. Maybe she has a chance now of writing decent lyrics


(like the Beatles said, "It doesn't really matter what chords I play or
What words I say")

I suspect, that there may be other end of that stick: ignorant people thinking that she plays piano as well as classical virtuoso, so that leads them to thinking that they do not listen to worse music, but just to different. Which is obvioiusly not correct.


It's not about like or not like, just look at form and structure, and compare this to some serious music, pop is primitive, and since 80ties it's usually awfully primitive. It is an objective fact.



I've got one question: can this be treated in a way the word "gaga" was used in the past? Since she has lots of money, she should tell her fans that what they listen too is a bad joke.




Having skills doesn't mean that you can't do bad thinks in order to make money from people who have terrible perception abilities or taste, but at least at some point somebody should show them that world is a bit bigger than a bottle they are sitting in. Otherwise, people like Lady Gaga deliver stuff that makes next generations even worse. This may eventually lead even to serious crisis, because it may happen that it will be to easy to be "musician" and there won't be enough audience to keep high culture alive. Then somebody may make this awfull noise prohibited, considering it as satanic or something, and we shall become something like Saudi Arabia or worse. I know it sounds crazy, but crazy things are happening in history all the time, cultural revolution in China for example was a complete madness hard to believe when you read more about it.


Because media always look for sensation. Eventually we will get so tired and used to it, that some days we shall read such title: "Shock! An artist did NOT put her pants off at concert"

She's what ... 30? McCartney, etc. are in their seventies or dead. People turn corners. By their own admission, McCartney, etc. spit in sandwiches while working at a Heathrow cafeteria when they were younger. Maybe she's pulling it together like a lot of us have done.

Btw, while I haven't heard all of them out there, most national anthems are not particularly difficult compositions, not that she will be invited to compose one if PM7 discovers a pop free inhabitable planet.

Nicholas, you are clearly are drawn to the flame! Like you, I saw Gaga at the Stevie Wonder tribute and said "wow!" Like you I'm a former academic. Maybe escape from the academy is what it takes.

One thing I learned a long time ago was there are a lot of really talented people out there who simply do what they do. There are also a lot of people who critique them simply because they can (just a different case of doing what they do).

That irony is why NIcholas Slonimsky published the "Lexicon of Musical Invective" where you can see pretty much all beloved composers were, in their day, called (and their music as well) all sorts of unbelievable things! Criticism is by and large a blin, earless art and it has much more to do with the biases of the critic than it has to do with the qualities of the artist being critiqued.

Although there are always examples to that and it's also true that many of the more interesting critics at some point or another admit their biases and leave it at that.

Lady Gaga didn't write Bad Romance (is that what it's called?) hoping that someone else would turn it into a fugue. And Schumann did't compose leider with the hope that Sting would one day turn a few into pop tunes.

But when these sorts of things transfer easily from one genre to another they show us there's less rather than more that separates music in the world. Whether or not we choose to see or hear that is a different story. And it really doesn't make a difference.

Gaga, Schumann, and Stevie Wonder all have their audiences. It's up to us to decide whether to follow along or dismiss. Both are options. Except–you can probably see my bias. "Dismiss" something and it makes it harder to see and hear it. But that's an individual choice and that's simply my opinion, my observation, and how I try and approach things. But I have yet to like anything from Lana Del Rey but, who knows what's coming.

Anyway, just had to say: I saw Gaga doing Stevie Wonder and said "wow!" So, we will meet up in London sometime, yes?

Mark: Of course we'll meet! I mean we HAVE to! I will be in the piano meetup next week. Will you be there?

But other than that, I still find that there's something about her music which is far more interesting than plenty of stuff. And to be honest, I find that pop today can be tons more sophisticated than most of you probably think it possible. I'm almost inclined to believe that pop today is the new classical music (though I have my pet peeves as far as recordings go, as some of you know).

Still, if I, and Mark, can go "wow" over a live performance of someone (BTW, she got the nickname Gaga (on her own I believe), because of Queen's Radio Gaga song! ), then there's something interesting happening, no? At least it's worthy of a thread in pianoworld!

If this applies to the course of musical form analysis , we should expect evaluation Unsatisfactory.
All the time I meet music lovers who want to replace forcibly G at K.

I think it's is exactly opposite. You can make a wall or palace from the same bricks, but beatifully designed and finished palace is superior to 5 bricks placed extra on a wall. It can show much more different qualities than simple wall and it is far more difficult to build.



Theory of flat Earth also has it's supporters, as well as nazism or other nonsenses that have failture of reality recognition in common. Music itself is not dangerous, and listening to better or worse music is no guarantee of intelectual abilities, still pop is not equal to classical music in any way, and it is out of question that at least it is way easier to make and perform pop music, therefore listener should be aware that it's nothing special, as well as anyone's overall knowledge should be as wide and deep as possible, in order to avoid failtures that may be harmful to social living and development.

Btw. isn't that idiotic that pop stars are more rewarded than classical musicians? I support capitalism, but this is exacly one of it's major problems: prize still doesn't reflect quality. It's not very good, because some people get very large reward for very little work, while some work all the time and they often get almost nothing. It discourages.

PM7: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

People like you are the ones who create the notion about classical music that's filled with snobs and elitists to begin with. And other people create the notion that pop music is filled with idiots.

Why do we have to label everything, and as it so happens, stand in the corner of the winner always? Doesn't it seem, the bit odd that as it so happens not only classical music is a palace compared to the brick wall of pop music, but it also happens to be the music that YOU prefer.

lol

The rest of your post is filled with so many whatever moments that I won't post a reply. Suffice to say 'quality' is not the only thing that earns $$$$. I really can't see how you support capitalism and don't know that.

Totally disagree with such claims, it's like building a theory of everything, taking only 1 parameter into account. (Well, yes, I exaggerated a bit, but I hope my point is understandable)




Perhaps it is very difficult to avoid such situation. I've posted an opinion which I consider that may cause lots of controversies, still you accuse me of putting myself into a winner corner, while actually it seems that at least half of people here would disagree with me and I wouldn't dare to speak such opinion somewhere else for obvious reasons.




I didn't say that pop is bad because I don't like it, I said that pop is bad because of objective facts about how it's made, and yes, I prefer things which are well made, that shouldn't be odd.

I suppose that if we ask a pop musician to write o sonata or fugue, and classical composer to write a pop song, the first one would be unable to do so, while the second would do the job, although he would be disqusted with it.




Supporting some idea, doesn't mean thinking that the idea is perfect.

PM7: I'm getting a strong vibe that I'm talking to a young... adult. I'm used in this lovely forum to getting much better arguments, rather than "He can do it, she can't, so he's better".

I mean the world is not black & white, and my father doesn't own a bigger car than yours. Sheesh...

BTW, you just came RIGHT into the whole point of Godwin's law. Teeheehee

I know I'm a bit late to the party here, but the video referenced by the OP is fantastic. I didn't read through the whole thread, but I am guessing people have also mentioned her terrific performance of the National Anthem at the Super Bowl.
I would say Lady Gaga is a rare talent.

But isn't it funny that Sting is doing something like that, with his interest in early music, and his often successful adaptations of it? I think his favorite composer is really Anonymous.

PM7: Statements such as your "pop is not equal to classical music in any way, and it is out of question that at least it is way easier to make and perform pop music, therefore listener should be aware that it's nothing special, as well as anyone's overall knowledge should be as wide and deep as possible, in order to avoid failtures [sic] that may be harmful to social living and development." and like actions are part of the reason why what most younger people call "dead guy music" is so unpopular now. More often than not, when I become acquainted with people through the music I prefer (or they happen to-through their misfortune-hear me play) they assume I'm a snob or an elitist only because of my musical preference. It's not only younger people, either-many from my generation are no different. I'm not a pop fan, but I do recognize that Lady Gaga is very talented.
And this: "Btw. isn't that idiotic that pop stars are more rewarded than classical musicians? I support capitalism, but this is exacly one of it's major problems: prize still doesn't reflect quality. It's not very good, because some people get very large reward for very little work, while some work all the time and they often get almost nothing. It discourages." indicates that you are probably reasonably young and/or naive. Monetary rewards are dictated by the popularity of the product. Fact is, a lot of people like this music; also, the quality might not be very good by your standards, but I believe that a lot of people disagree with you, based on her popularity. It's extremely difficult to be successful in any field of music as a performer, and a lot of work. The brand of music I (and apparently you) prefer has, unfortunately, become increasingly unpopular over the years. When I was a child (chronologically) classically trained pianists were revered; now they're considered elitists, snobs, insert any other derogatory adjective here. This attitude was, to an extent, was created by some of our own. Consider some of the pianists from the early to mid-twentieth century. Horowitz, Rubenstein, and many others were pretty much snobs, and put people off. I always wanted to hear Horowitz in person, but he refused to perform pretty much anywhere in the US other than the east or west coast. I've never noticed music sounding any better at a lower altitude, and I've attended performances here by pianists who would actually play here such as Andre Watts, and it was incredible. Some of us did it to ourselves, but music is also constantly evolving: Music from the 1960s and 1970s is being called "classic" now-go figure. For me, music is to enjoy, and since this is mostly an audience of pianists, I must add that some of what we play is difficult to appreciate if you don't play the piano. How many people that don't play do you think have any idea how much work goes into mastering Chopin, Liszt or Rachmaninoff works? I prefer to enjoy playing and listening, and not listening to what I don't like. Cheers-and try to have more fun...