Ever since I discovered Touhou, I have come to learn that instrumental music has the potential to kick much ass. Therefore, I enjoy it much more than vocal music; though, that's not to say vocal music doesn't have it's hits.
A "classical favourites" CD is in no way a good indicator of what was going on in the realm of classical music. Those are marketing compilations like "Mozart for Lovers" or "Baby on Beethoven"--they are in no way informed by music history. Many people consider Beethoven's 9th Symphony as the greatest piece of classical music ever (a sort of title I find irritating and don't personally endorse generally)--heck, it is now the national anthem of the European Union...and that symphony has a choral section at its climax. People think it is great because of its marriage of text and sonics. The realm of Western Art Music if full of vocal music. Ignoring it is ahistorical.Jonluw said:I knew someone was going to call me out on that.
What I meant was "Most of the great classics from the baroque and out that we still listen to to this day are instrumental".
If you go out and buy an album like "classical favourites" or something, pretty much the only pieces with lyrics will be Händel's messiah, Carmina burana, Pomp and circumstance and certain versions of In the hall of the mountain king.
But that doesn't work. Opera is Western Art Music. Heck, the beloved Beethoven even wrote an Opera...as did Mozart...and Bach wrote Oratorios. If you mean to say only instrumental western art music, then say that...but you can't say that western art music (i.e. "classical music") is mostly instrumental.Jonluw said:I'm not really counting opera in that statement. I've always seen opera as its own genre that I just don't feel like touching on too much.
First things first. Lyrics are part of the music. If you look at a standard Music History textbook like the "History of Western Music" by Grout/Palisca/Burkholder, you will note they begin the story with the music of the Ancient Greeks. The word "music" is an ancient greek word...and in that word there is no difference between music and poetry. It is the same word.Jonluw said:What I meant was that in instrumental music, the only thing that is presented to the listener is the music. No lyrics. As a consequence, the melody and harmony or groove or otherwise just plain musical aspects of a piece are normally afforded more attention and more carefully crafted. i.e. I don't like the kind of music that only exists to accentuate the writer/composer's poetry.
I reject that as weasel. If there are voices, then it is vocal music.Do note that I still call music instrumental if the voice is used something other than performing lyrics.
No, but it is a good indication of what classical music constitutes in the public/layman's mind. Like it or not, when you say the words "classical music", the listener is going to assume that you're talking about the symphonies and not the centuries of bards' tales that were written and promptly forgotten.trooper6 said:A "classical favourites" CD is in no way a good indicator of what was going on in the realm of classical music.Jonluw said:I knew someone was going to call me out on that.
What I meant was "Most of the great classics from the baroque and out that we still listen to to this day are instrumental".
If you go out and buy an album like "classical favourites" or something, pretty much the only pieces with lyrics will be Händel's messiah, Carmina burana, Pomp and circumstance and certain versions of In the hall of the mountain king.
I'm not saying western art music is mostly instrumental though.But that doesn't work. Opera is Western Art Music. Heck, the beloved Beethoven even wrote an Opera...as did Mozart...and Bach wrote Oratorios. If you mean to say only instrumental western art music, then say that...but you can't say that western art music (i.e. "classical music") is mostly instrumental.Jonluw said:I'm not really counting opera in that statement. I've always seen opera as its own genre that I just don't feel like touching on too much.
Let's not revert to using the original etymological meanings of words. I'm sure you understand what I'm actually trying to say. I'm using terms in the way they are most commonly used.First things first. Lyrics are part of the music. If you look at a standard Music History textbook like the "History of Western Music" by Grout/Palisca/Burkholder, you will note they begin the story with the music of the Ancient Greeks. The word "music" is an ancient greek word...and in that word there is no difference between music and poetry. It is the same word.Jonluw said:What I meant was that in instrumental music, the only thing that is presented to the listener is the music. No lyrics. As a consequence, the melody and harmony or groove or otherwise just plain musical aspects of a piece are normally afforded more attention and more carefully crafted. i.e. I don't like the kind of music that only exists to accentuate the writer/composer's poetry.
I thought I noted that not all music that accompanies lyrics is poor.And also the idea that the presence of text meant the other musical aspects are not as carefully crafted is not accurate. Are you saying that the sonic elements of Beethoven's 9th Symphony are not as carefully crafted because text exists?[ Are you saying that the very care word painting and relationship between text and piano in Schubert's lieder are evidence on careless crafting of the sonic elements? Also note: there is lots and lots of instrumental music that is hastily and carelessly put together. The presence or absence of text is not an indicator of how much care was put into crafting the sonic elements of piece of music.
It's vocal music, yes, but it's not lyrical.I reject that as weasel. If there are voices, then it is vocal music.Do note that I still call music instrumental if the voice is used something other than performing lyrics.
I believe it does.OneCatch said:I actually own rather a lot of film soundtracks, some of which are among my favourite albums. I'm just as happy listening to them as a regular album. Does that count?
I think you're giving jazz too much of a hard time here.Thistlehart said:Take Jazz for instance. I don't like it, but then again, I don't think it's actually for me. As I understand it, Jazz is usually music for musicians. It is meant to be technical, complicated, and difficult. I'll take Ronald Jenkees over any Jazz legend you care to name.
One dude at a keyboard/synthesizer that's there to have fun, and whose music demonstrates that beats out a Jazz orchestra full of people trying to prove how good they are (no matter how good they might sound).
But you haven't gotten *my* point. Carrying Lyrics effectively is a musical value, it isn't "something else in mind." For many people to make a "musically" engaging piece includes effective use of lyrics...as Beethoven's 9th does, or any of Schubert's Lieder do. For many pieces of music the text and the sonics are inextricable.Jonluw said:Concerning your edit: It seems you might have gotten my point. Which was that music where the composer/arranger's main concern is to make a 'musically' engaging piece (Beethoven's 9th) is "better" than music that's made with something else in mind (like carrying lyrics or filling the vacuum in an elevator).
Which is all I've ever tried to argue.trooper6 said:But you haven't gotten *my* point. Carrying Lyrics effectively is a musical value, it isn't "something else in mind." For many people to make a "musically" engaging piece includes effective use of lyrics...as Beethoven's 9th does, or any of Schubert's Lieder do. For many pieces of music the text and the sonics are inextricable.Jonluw said:Concerning your edit: It seems you might have gotten my point. Which was that music where the composer/arranger's main concern is to make a 'musically' engaging piece (Beethoven's 9th) is "better" than music that's made with something else in mind (like carrying lyrics or filling the vacuum in an elevator).
You may not prefer lyrics, you might be more turned on by instrumentals. But that doesn't make it true that lyrics detract from musicality...just true for you.
Heh This reminds me of the concert Rush did in Rio a while back. The 40,000 plus fans in the stadium were singing along to everything.. even the purely instrumental songs Rush played.DustyDrB said:I do enjoy it, though a bit less than I enjoy music with lyrics. I enjoy singing along.
That picture is just made of epic.Jonluw said:Vault101 said:well...not nessicaryly instrumental..but i like music without vocals just fine
How is music without vocals anything but instrumental?
Thanks for the samples. I wish your efforts had been more positively received.Jonluw said:I think you're giving jazz too much of a hard time here.Thistlehart said:Take Jazz for instance. I don't like it, but then again, I don't think it's actually for me. As I understand it, Jazz is usually music for musicians. It is meant to be technical, complicated, and difficult. I'll take Ronald Jenkees over any Jazz legend you care to name.
One dude at a keyboard/synthesizer that's there to have fun, and whose music demonstrates that beats out a Jazz orchestra full of people trying to prove how good they are (no matter how good they might sound).
You mustn't blow off all jazz as technical wankery just because a lot of the new stuff is of the "made by musicians for musicians" kind.
Traditional jazz is absolutely lovely, and doesn't do that "solos that appear to have no structure or melody to the layman" thing.[sub]This one is a bit background-music-y so it might not be that engaging.[/sub]
[sub]This one might be leaning a little too far in the direction of the stuff you criticize.[/sub]
Tell me about it.vrbtny said:Lord of The Rings' soundtrack gives me eargasms every time I listen to it.
Curses. I might have been playing music for too long. I'm having a hard time distinguishing the "easy to like for everyone" songs from the "only enjoyable for people who play jazz" songs.Thistlehart said:Thanks for the samples. I wish your efforts had been more positively received.
Unfortunately, while pretty, this is the kind of instumental music I don't much care for (if not outright hate). It doesn't feel like it's going anywhere. For instance, in the first sample there was that extended dum-tish-dumdum-tish drum... thing... where absolutely nothing was happening for the better part of a minute or more. If I wanted to listen to something like that, I could turn off the music and listen to the conveyor belts running over my head right now, or just sit on my balcony at home and listen to traffic.
Don't get me wrong, the music was all kinds of mellow. Just not my kind of mellow.
Maybe I'm just reflexively dismissive toward Jazz. I live in Seattle after all (overflowing with pretentious art shit) and any tolerance I may have had for Jazz has been weathered down to an angry little nub by all the music-degree dropouts twiddling their saxes in public.
Oh, god yes!! Yes!!! Yes!!!! Aw, god yes!!!!Jonluw said:Tell me about it.vrbtny said:Lord of The Rings' soundtrack gives me eargasms every time I listen to it.
I currently have this one open in a different tab.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UuyeYdQnI4&
Hnnng, I love that song.vrbtny said:But I see your Lord of the Rings track, and raise you
It isn't as Epic as your piece, but, by god. If it isn't the prettiest song in the entirety of existence.