I'm not talking the classical period here. Thats where you people get confused. As I said:skittlepie345 said:No, but I understand why you'd say that. Baroque came before Classical and Romantic in the 1600's. It didn't feature the piano, they used the Harpsichord which couldn't change dynamics. Classical came after Baroque in the Early 1700's and it introduced the Piano, and other stuff but I didn't really pay attention to my Music Teacher so... Romantic came after classical in the early 1800's and it focused on a more intense form of expression where a story and imagination was present. Prokofiev's Peter and The Wolf is a good example of Romantic era music.Feriluce said:well that is classical music though.Dags90 said:Not particularly, I find Baroque and especially Romanticism and beyond works much more enjoyable.
Oh wow I LOL'd hard there. Thanks.BonsaiK said:Well, the vast majority of classical music is inherently worthless crap. It's just that with the passage of time, the "worthless crap" stuff has vanished (because no-one could be bothered reprinting the scores of a bunch of music nobody cares about) and now only the good stuff that stood the test of time is left, hence the illusion is created that classical music is somehow "better" than popular music.
I would dearly like to believe that's not true, as that's a frankly terrifying prospect, but then I remember how stupid today's youth is - and thus the bitter weeping for the future begins.BonsaiK said:It's funny, because it's my appreciation for the internal machinations of the industry itself in both a music and lifestyle sense that allow me to appreciate something like Brokencyde on a level that I don't think a lot of people would really grasp, nor would I expect them to. Without wanting to go into too much incriminating detail, those guys are riding the cutting edge of youth culture in a way which is just a little too prophetic for comfort, it's lke NWA all over again. Everyone thought they were a flash in the pan, and look at the influence they've had. The best boardroom committee in the world couldn't have come up with something like Brokencyde.
Thanks for that, as you made all the points I would have for me. The fact is very few of the classical "greats" that our modern society loves achieved any sort of renown during their own lives, with most only ever being discovered or appreciated by a wider audience posthumously.Ytmh said:Oh wow I LOL'd hard there. Thanks.BonsaiK said:Well, the vast majority of classical music is inherently worthless crap. It's just that with the passage of time, the "worthless crap" stuff has vanished (because no-one could be bothered reprinting the scores of a bunch of music nobody cares about) and now only the good stuff that stood the test of time is left, hence the illusion is created that classical music is somehow "better" than popular music.
So, er, stuff like Mendelssohn championing/promiting Bach's music had of course nothing to do with it becoming known again? There's millions of examples of things that people think is "great" now that at the time was considered either garbage or not noteworthy. Schubert for example never got any of his symphonies or actually the majority of his work was never performed during his lifetime. Then there's guys like Zelenka who nobody cared about (but Bach himself admired) until recently when they began unearthing his pieces again. Nevermind that during the 20th century tons and tons of composers were rediscovered and their pieces brought up to concerts again (Rameau, Salieri, etc.)
"Test of time" by art is a fallacy, because opinions on a piece can vary wildly with time and that's all it takes to "kill it." Certainly if Schoenberg had popped up in the 1700s he would've been readily forgotten (but probably later discovered, like Biber) but at the time he did show up he made a major impact and his pieces are considered rather important, likewise the wave of researching/discovering forgotten composers is a 20th century trend that speaks entirely against any kind of "test of time," since people are finding tons of music from rather unknown composers to be awesome all the same. And of course there's the whole other bit with today being much easier to archive compositions than it ever was, and we also have much more access to history than anyone ever had before. It's really easy for anyone today to pick up a book with pieces from X or Y composer, when back before the 20th century it was not nearly as easy to do your own research (even if you were studying at a conservatory,) and in the baroque you practically only knew what was locally close to you.