This is a favorite piece of music of mine which I had not listened to in a while.

Please listen carefully to the attached file and think before you answer .. Is this classical music?

Why did you (or didn't you) think so?

http://www.box.net/shared/o8ti3ibynv

N.B.
Asking folks from the non-classical area (or anyone) who know the piece [and I assume that they may be many] to leave their opinions to the last.

Yes/No; it all depends. What is your - or my - definition of "classical" music?

However, you gave it away, I think, by asking people aware of "non-classical" music to withhold their responses; that suggests that it may not be of the genre considered "classical".

Regards,

I suppose. I don't know the piece, but sounds like Leroy Anderson or someone similar who was classically trained but whose career focused on pops/popular.

I'm almost sure they're classically trained because of the harmonic structure.

What is classical music in the end?

I'd dare to say that if this is played on a concert hall then it is "concert hall music" and classical is a bit weird to use (unless this was written in the 18000s or so...).

But it's nice! And fun!

I guess that it must be a "cover" from some sort of a weird pop/rock song, but anyhow...

i'd agree.

It relates more to the classical tradition than to a pop tradition. Probably written by someone with a foot in both camps.

Tomasino

What piece is that? Whatever you want to classify it as, it's pretty nice and I'd like to learn it

No. I mean, I guess it could be extremely sloppy classical music, but music from that time period would have that lilt that this piece has.

Also, the rolled chords in the left hand are uncharacteristic of the time period. The melody sounds a little too short to me, also. It reminds me more of a motive than a complete thought, and the classical composers rarely used motives.

My criterion for classical music is: does it sound basically like Mozart or Haydn? Is it from the time period 1750 - 1827 (Provided I know when it was written)? In this piece there really isn't enough (that's in this clip) to look for the concrete form typical of classical music, too.

It's different. I can't really say whether or not I like it, but harmonically it is close to classical music, and I tend to favor romantic/impressionist music more.

If you're talking about music from the Classical period, then I'd agree that this doesn't fit the criteria. On the other hand "classical music" - small "c" - as a term is often loosely used to represent everything from pre-Baroque to modern, as long as it's not pop, jazz, blues, etc., etc.

I think it was in this latter context that the original question "Can this count as classical music?" was posed.

Regards,

Sounds a lot like ragtime to me. So does Classical include ragtime?

Mary

I've gotten people to believe that Apocalyptica covers of Metallica songs are really classical pieces.

Sorry for making you wait so long .. but I wanted to discuss differences between classical and pop/other genres: differences in music or difference in our perception of what is/is not classical.

Kriesler and Palindrome made a very important initiative by listening to the underlying harmonic changes. So is classical music characterized by certain progressions that is somewhat different from that of pop?

Anyway, the piece is surprisingly classical music.
Ferdinand Hiller, a friend of Liszt and Chopin. The composer who Chopin wrote telling him 'I want to rob Liszt of his way of playing my etudes'.

The Piece is an Impromptu, called Zur Guitarre and was very popular in the European Salons in its day, probably also played by pianists like Clara Schumann.

As always, Kreisler deserves a clap and the others too for being so close

I first heard this piece on the radio, and I thought I switched away from the classical channel.

Yes, classical music can be fun (sometimes) :p

Now if only I had the sheet music

OK, how about these 2 clips:


Mystery #1

Mystery #2


Classical music?

Slightly.

Obviously he didn't, but if say, Ligeti composed these, I'd accept them as music. Judging by the name, it's a Halloween soundtrack, so I don't really acknowledge its musical value. Screwed up, yes, but that's the way music works.

I guess you didn't recognize these pieces, then.

pianojerome, I'm surprised that you posted those two -- you could've chosen more, um, extreme pieces.



And yes, I know them ...

How about if George Crumb and Henry Cowell composed them?

Hint: neither of these composers wrote "Halloween soundtracks."

Care to tell me what they are then?

Obviously, I don't find it enriching to pass time listening to these "soundtracks."

I once listened to some of Ligeti's electronic music. It was quite disturbing.

For the record, I still hold my judgement as 'slightly' classical music.

Obviously, many of us are affected by "who the composer is" to give status to the piece.

I confess that I am not totally innocent of this too.

But the difference between the example I gave and the examples Sam gave is that mine is too simple and nice on the ears (almost pop) while Sam's examples are from the modern strange-sounding works not easily apprehended by casual listeners.

Either way, our prejudices may get ahead of us. We just need to keep them in check.

As for a similar situation to Sam's examples:
I remember an episode of 90 minutes (or some other TV programme) where they gathered top art critics and they showed them some modern abstract paintings.

Actually, they prepared the paintings beforehand by giving a bunch of water colors to toddlers to mess with!

When they were asked about the artistic value, the critics said these paintings are works of art!! And when they were confronted with the truth (a very embarrassing situation ouch!!), some said this is a prank or a trap. Others did not believe. While others said "These kids must be genious."
But certainly all of them were sweating to their knees.

There's a tradition in Japanese ceramics, I believe, of having children decorate cups. The naive hand of the child is appreciated in that instance.

However, some friends of mine once put some dilute maple syrup into a wine tasting, and quite a few people were fooled.

The first one is a String Quartet, nicknamed "Black Angels", by George Crumb. This is only a brief excerpt from one of the movements -- the whole quartet is somewhat programmatic. It's actually a neat quartet in part because it calls not only for electric string instruments, but also for water glasses (think Miss Congeniality), chanting noises, banging on the wood of the instruments, etc (all to be performed by the 4 quartet musicians). You might laugh at the thought of water-glasses, but it's actually *very* effective.

The second is a piano solo by Henry Cowell. Amazing, isn't it? He gets all these neat sounds by holding down the sustain pedal, and stroking the strings inside the piano with his fingers. It is a character piece, as you might know -- in Irish mythology, the banshee is kind of like the Grim Reaper. Cowell played around with new ways of playing the instrument, in order to get new unheard-before sounds to portray the ghastly Banshee.


They were both written to be performed in the concert hall in a classical setting -- not as the soundtrack to some Halloween party, although they certainly could fit that bill, too!

And yet... as artsy as they are, and as well-established as they are in the realm of "classical" music, and as influential as they were on later composers, they don't sound a bit like Chopin!