[HN Gopher] Classical music is for everyone
___________________________________________________________________
Classical music is for everyone
Author : Bostonian
Score : 68 points
Date : 2023-08-27 18:37 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.firstthings.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.firstthings.com)
| TheAceOfHearts wrote:
| My favorite classic piece of all time is Dvorak's 9th Symphony,
| the 4th movement [0].
|
| He was ahead of the curve when looking to integrate inspiration
| from various sources, as mentioned on the Wikipedia article [1]:
|
| > I am convinced that the future music of this country must be
| founded on what are called Negro melodies. These can be the
| foundation of a serious and original school of composition, to be
| developed in the United States. These beautiful and varied themes
| are the product of the soil. They are the folk songs of America
| and your composers must turn to them.
|
| [0]
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVDofBFtvwA&pp=ygULZHZvcmFrI...
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._9_(Dvo%C5%99%C3%A...
| kashunstva wrote:
| > My favorite classic piece of all time is Dvorak's 9th
| Symphony, the 4th movement
|
| Ah yes, I always thought the opening of that movement was the
| inspiration for the Jaws theme. Me, I'm a sucker for the second
| movement of the Dvorak 9. Anything to give the cor anglais a
| little time in the spotlight.
| tzs wrote:
| > In the summer of 1968, a friend and I went to see the
| blockbuster movie of the year--2001: A Space Odyssey. We settled
| into our seats and the theater went dark. The film began. And
| then we heard the most astounding music. It grabbed me like no
| movie music ever had.
|
| > There was more magnificent music in 2001, some of which I
| recognized, such as "The Blue Danube," but it was the opening
| that stuck in my mind. What was that music and where did it come
| from?
|
| That particular music can make anything seem deep and epic and
| moving.
|
| A great illustration of that is this video on YouTube where
| someone took someone else's video showing a squirrel trying to
| balance its desire for a peanut and its fear of approaching the
| human who was holding the peanut and added that same music [1].
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQ1ZYGHmtN8
| the_cat_kittles wrote:
| best way to like a genre is to try to play it yourself
| verve_rat wrote:
| Made many movies have we? Lots of TV shows? Written a ton of
| books?
|
| The idea that you need to be able to make a thing to be able to
| critically evaluate it is rather limiting.
| zogrodea wrote:
| I used to like music and listen to it (even tried playing an
| instrument and using DAW tools), but I found out that, despite my
| enjoyment, the OCD and intrusive thoughts it gave (I have medical
| OCD) are just not worth it.
|
| (Not a criticism of the article, and still of course respectful
| of others who like music but music in general is not something
| for all of us.)
| tgv wrote:
| Music certainly has a psychological effect. I do feel somewhat
| sorry if you can't enjoy it, because for me the effect is quite
| positive.
| alexwasserman wrote:
| I've really enjoyed The Story of Classical in new iOS Classical
| music app.
|
| The app itself is a pain with how it doesn't integrate into
| things like CarPlay, but the album itself is great.
|
| It's a smart lead through classical music in 9 hour long
| episodes. Each explains the key pieces from different areas, with
| the history of the composers and social impact.
|
| https://classical.music.apple.com/us/album/1675318629
| OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
| I listen to classical music and nothing else but want nothing to
| do with the First Things crowd.
| zabzonk wrote:
| Beethoven? I cannot imagine anyone not liking that stuff. And
| play it loud!
| bwv848 wrote:
| Play Grosse Fuge loud and make everyone hate you. Well, not
| everyone - except for me and a portion of one percent[0] of the
| population.
|
| [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/23/business/media/stream-
| cla...
| [deleted]
| layer8 wrote:
| I have to disagree that it's for everyone. There are a few pieces
| of classical music that I like (for example the Infernal Dance
| from Stravinsky's Firebird), but 99.9 % just bores me to tears.
| And it's not for lack of trying. It's frustrated me for the
| longest time, but in the end I accepted that it's just not for
| me.
| 9dev wrote:
| I'm not so sure. If you play death metal to people who
| distinctly do not like metal, they will tell you it all sounds
| the same, that it's just noise. The next metalhead to swing by
| can lament for hours on the compositional genius of Children of
| Bodom, but will ensure you all hiphop is a long string of
| meaningless profanity. Don't even bring the avantgarde jazz
| enthusiasts in. And so on.
|
| What I'm getting at is that any musical genre will be difficult
| at first. And I don't mean just listening to a lot, but
| actually _understand_ it.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
| If you've given it a try and find it is not for you, then so be
| it. There is concern in the classical enjoying community that
| people are put off from even trying it because it is supposed
| to be reserved for certain ethnic groups, economic strata, and
| whatnot.
|
| I've had similar experiences to yours with jazz and opera.
| ob wrote:
| The thing about classical music is that you have to understand
| the works in order to really enjoy them - of course there are
| exceptions when the melody just grabs you but that's not the
| norm. There was an album collection called "Musically Speaking"
| that explained music works and detailed what to listen for. For
| example, they isolated the flutes in Beethoven's Pastoral and
| explained they represented birds, etc. My enjoyment of
| classical works spiked after understanding more. I think it's
| much easier to connect with Rock/Pop because the works are
| much, much simpler so it's mostly whether the lyrics speak to
| you and you like the melody.
| jschveibinz wrote:
| And there was this wonderful man and his great commentary
| program:
|
| Karl Haas, "Adventures in Good Music"
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventures_in_Good_Music
|
| https://archive.org/details/1.14.1992CatalogueCriteria
| jacquesm wrote:
| I really can't get behind that understanding bit. Some of
| this stuff is just so beautiful it just gets me. For
| instance: Marcello's adagio:
| https://youtu.be/vE2O_yfgtBU?si=f8BcjAg7ul-VuIHA&t=212 for
| oboe.
|
| But I can easily get similar feelings from much more popular
| music.
| beebeepka wrote:
| "This is great and here's why you should like it" strikes mme
| as a terrible argument, especially for things that boil down
| to taste.
| khazhoux wrote:
| "This thing that most people today don't like, they really
| might love it if they gave these a try."
| beebeepka wrote:
| > you have to understand the works in order to really
| enjoy them
|
| That's what they said
| khazhoux wrote:
| sorry, I thought you were commenting on the original
| article
| beardyw wrote:
| > The thing about classical music is that you have to
| understand the works in order to really enjoy them - of
| course there are exceptions when the melody just grabs you
| but that's not the norm.
|
| Sorry, but if you need I reason to enjoy something, you
| don't. There is so much music out there - just enjoy what you
| enjoy. There is never a reason why you need to enjoy
| something.
|
| Expose yourself to different genres but if it doesn't hook
| you move on.
|
| For me the film 2001 I discovered Gyorgy Ligeti, I wouldn't
| recommend that to anyone!
| khazhoux wrote:
| > The thing about classical music is that you _have to
| understand_ the works in order to really enjoy them
|
| Very strong disagree that this is required. Proof: the
| millions of people who have enjoyed it for 200 years without
| knowing a cadence from a _cor anglais_.
|
| Can it help? Sure, probably. I'm a big fan of Rop Kapilow's
| "What Makes It Great?" series where he does lively
| walkthroughs of pieces of (usually) classical music [1].
|
| > I think it's much easier to connect with Rock/Pop because
| the works are much, much simple
|
| I don't think it's about simplicity at all. In the end, all
| music is a language (in a literal sense) and if you grew up
| with rock music then you understand and relate to that
| language, and others will sound foreign. Same for people in
| China, or in India with ragas and microtones, or people in
| Mexico who grew up listening to Norteno music with those (to
| me, nonsensical) drum breaks.
|
| And like any language, sometimes it doesn't come naturally
| but with enough exposure, one can start to "understand" (in
| the intuitive sense) what is being said. And there are
| certainly pieces than are better than others for making the
| transition into a new genre.
|
| [1] Rob Kapilow is at Stanford's Bing Concert Hall about
| twice a year. Highly recommended!
| bwv848 wrote:
| What does it mean to understand a piece of work? Do I have
| to read the sheet music? Do I need to know musical theory?
| Should I be familiar with the composer's background? The
| definition is somewhat vague. However, I would argue that
| one have to remember the works, know what tune plays next
| to really appreciate them. At least that's the case for me
| with Mahler.
| kashunstva wrote:
| > What does it mean to understand a piece of work? Do I
| have to read the sheet music?
|
| Not necessary to read the score. But a familiarity with
| the structural conventions helps the listener
| contextualize the listening experience. If I listen to
| Mozart or Haydn, I should expect that I'm going to hear
| something in sonata form, meaning melodic exposition,
| thematic development and recapitulation, with some
| variations around that format. If I hear a Bach fugue,
| I'm going to hear even more formalized structure, a
| subject (ie theme) and then restatement of the theme
| (initially a perfect 5th lower) then introduction in
| other voices and elaboration.
|
| Maybe there's even a wider context to place it in.
| History, how the structural and other elements mirror
| similar characteristics in the visual arts, architecture
| etc.
| khazhoux wrote:
| > What does it mean to understand a piece of work? Do I
| have to read the sheet music? Do I need to know musical
| theory? Should I be familiar with the composer's
| background? The definition is somewhat vague.
|
| Oh no, I didn't mean any of those _at all_. Quite the
| opposite.
|
| I mean "understand it" as the opposite of "it sounds like
| nonsense." It's at the intuitive level, not about the
| ability to reason the structure details or whatever.
|
| Everyone grows up listening to some particular types of
| music in their household, culture, etc. You naturally
| develop an intuitive understanding, in the same way a
| native speaker has adopted the rhythms and tones and
| phonemes of their local language. A typical modern
| American listening to Charlie Parker rip through a bebop
| solo, is not too different than listening to someone
| speaking Mandarin. The sounds don't map onto anything
| recognizable. But you listen to it enough, and the brain
| starts to understand the structure. It's not just a
| blurred stream of saxophone, but a series of phrases,
| with inflections, patterns, _meaning_. Listen to it long
| enough, and you hear every individual note as it flies
| by.
| layer8 wrote:
| I believe I do understand classical music in the sense
| you describe, but I just find it mostly boring. Its
| features are not what excites me in music.
| tgv wrote:
| I agree with your first statement. Classical music
| captivated me at an early age (5 or so), and I really
| didn't know Jack about music. As a matter of fact, my first
| crush was Bach's organ music; I got an album for my 6th
| birthday.
|
| But there is complexity to it, like there is to jazz and
| prog. These are also not really popular. And the more
| complex the classical music (think on a scale from
| Offenbach to Birtwistle), the less popular it is.
|
| Music is not really a language, despite all the theoretical
| attempts. It's poetry without language, if you want a
| metaphor. It conveys timbre, structure, emotion, and time.
| If it's not your thing, it's difficult to get into.
|
| I do agree that many people don't know if it's their thing
| or not, for lack of experience. And a music teacher that
| explains the programme behind Danse Macabre doesn't really
| count. If anything, it kills the joy.
|
| Another thing that heightens the feeling for classical
| music is playing it, at least for me. Some form of musical
| education would really benefit the sector. And that's not
| just a "sounds good" idea. Where I live, the system of
| music schools and its support systems has slowly been razed
| to the ground. The effect is that where once student
| orchestras were healthy organizations, they're now
| dwindling, as is the influx to the conservatories. The more
| famous ones still attract many students, but more and more
| foreign. It won't be long before they run out of teachers
| and lose their stature, too. Such are the joys of supply
| side economics and small government ideology.
| khazhoux wrote:
| > Music is not really a language, despite all the
| theoretical attempts
|
| I always liken it to a language, but not in any formal
| ("theoretical") way. Rather, in the sense of: it conveys
| meaning and emotion, but if you're not fluent in the
| genre then it will be essentially nonsense.
|
| Like the first time listening to Charlie Parker, I
| thought it sounded cool but it was just a blob of notes.
| And then the first time with Coltrane's solo work, it was
| again a flurry of nonsense until I listened enough.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Some other HN'er said it far better than I ever could but
| I can't find the comment, something like 'Photography and
| painting are how we decorate planes, sculpture and
| architecture are how we decorate volume and music is how
| we decorate time'.
|
| It really resonated (pun intended) with me, that's very
| much how I perceive it. And you can decorate time in all
| kinds of ways just like you can with planes or volumes.
| adw wrote:
| > I don't think it's about simplicity at all
|
| I'd go further and say that "simplicity" is the wrong way
| of thinking about it. Arguing that Western classical music
| is more complex or requires more understanding -- and that
| complexity on a particular axis is more valuable inherently
| than complexity on another one - is a poorly informed
| viewpoint. You can't separate the cultural deification of
| the Western classical canon from traditional great-man
| historiography.
|
| A lot of classical music is in meaningful ways much simpler
| than a lot of pop music, as long as you pick the right
| axis. Western classical music is, if you were to caricature
| it, about the elevation of harmony above the other elements
| of music. It is, particularly, much less prone to
| developing complex rhythmic ideas. Even within Western
| music, George Clinton's work is more rhythmically inventive
| than the majority of the Western canon; John Coltrane's
| work is arguably more _harmonically_ complex and inventive
| too. Many high-culture art-music traditions (jazz, Carnatic
| classical music) are fundamentally improvisational.
|
| This doesn't mean Beethoven sucks, quite the opposite; a
| lot of music in the Western classical tradition is _really
| really good_. It doesn't mean it wrong to _prefer_ that
| music. It does mean that dismissing other musics as
| intrinsically lesser is fundamentally more about bigotry
| than aesthetics.
|
| While we're here, let's defend Eurodance too. Modern music
| in the pop tradition, which I'm going to argue starts
| somewhere around Joe Meek, has used technology to enable
| unprecedented _timbral_ complexity. (Yes, yes, Xenakis,
| Stockhausen, Messiaen, Penderecki; but they're exactly the
| sort of classical composer this author would reject out of
| hand too.)
| tgv wrote:
| > Western classical music is, if you were to caricature
| it, about the elevation of harmony above the other
| elements of music.
|
| While that is definitely important, don't overlook
| structure. Bach is the quintessential puzzler, Beethoven
| is nothing without cells and development, Brahms follows
| both, and the serialists you mention tried to push it
| even further.
|
| > let's defend Eurodance too
|
| Too bad its timbral complexity never leaves the boink
| boink boink phase.
| adw wrote:
| The assumption that music the author doesn't like must be a --
| likely political - statement is, let's just say, revealing and
| itself highly political.
|
| People appear to enjoy things which are bitter, or ugly, or
| complex, or an acquired taste. Either they're all lying posers,
| which certainly some people believe, or there really _is_
| something to Scotch whisky or James Joyce or Autechre which
| speaks to some people and not to others. I believe the latter,
| and I feel sorry for the former. The idea that human experience
| would be so narrow that some forms of expression are good and all
| others are bad on a single axis! And music, especially, one of
| the most cultural-context dependent forms.
|
| A bunch of traditions wouldn't even recognise the Western canon,
| which tends to seriously lack rhythmic complexity, _as_
| worthwhile music.
|
| So: taste varies and that's the point. I love Autechre, and I
| find real beauty in their work, but I would place significant
| money that more than half of the audience here would find this -
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev3vENli7wQ - somewhere between
| modem line-noise and actively painful. Is it pretty in the way,
| say, Teenage Fanclub (who are also magnificent) are pretty? No.
| It's not trying to be. It's communicating something else.
| FPGAhacker wrote:
| After reading your post I was expecting the author to rant
| against other types of music. It's nothing of the sort.
|
| He does mention at one point that there is such a thing as
| music that purports to be political.
|
| I struggle to understand how you came away from the article
| with a response like that.
| loup-vaillant wrote:
| > _The assumption that music the author doesn 't like must be a
| -- likely political - statement is, let's just say, revealing
| and itself highly political._
|
| You're putting words in the author's mouth. Here's the relevant
| paragraph:
|
| > _The station prides itself on operating without any
| government funding, which in turn requires it to play music
| that people enjoy hearing and never the kind that some stations
| (and performing ensembles) play just because it's avant-garde
| or purports to make some political statement._
|
| Simply put, "We don't play music just because it's innovative
| or political."
|
| Here's the thing: sometimes people make a very crappy execution
| out of a silly idea nobody's done before (because it's silly),
| and we call that "contemporary art" in an attempt to belong to
| some wealthy in-group (and sometimes end up helping money
| laundering). Sometimes (not always of course), the "avant-
| garde" label is just a cover-up for unskilled crap. One way to
| know the difference: would it still be art if it was done by a
| slum boy instead of some famous dude?
|
| And of course, political art is often sub-par, for two reasons:
| first, there is more art out there than just the one that
| support your particular cause. Smaller pool to draw from, less
| quality: good luck winning the Olympics if you don't train many
| many gymnasts. Second, we tend to tolerate worse art when it
| happens to support our cause.
|
| Not saying that innovation and politics always hurt art. Often
| it's the exact opposite. Music in particular is particularly
| enjoyable when it contains just the right amount of surprise.
| Too many surprises and it might as well be random. But do
| something predictable, and insert here and there ideas that
| have never been heard before, and it can really blossom (since
| "surprise" here is fundamentally subjective as a matter of
| information theory, some music really is an acquired taste,
| even though it really sounds random to the uninitiated). Same
| thing for politics: just go see the Andor Star Wars series, it
| is highly political in a way that _enhances_ it.
|
| But if you select art _just_ because it is innovative or
| political, you'll end up with something worse than if you just
| selected for the good stuff. I mean is it any surprise that if
| you select for the wrong criteria you'll get disappointing
| results?
| bigbillheck wrote:
| The site itself is also highly political, and the author even
| more so:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_G._Martin_Center_for_Aca...
| https://www.jamesgmartin.center/author/georgeleef/
| https://www.nationalreview.com/author/george-leef/
| FPGAhacker wrote:
| Maybe so, I have no idea who they are and afaik I haven't
| been to the site before.
|
| But that certainly was not a political article.
| retrac wrote:
| There's also simultaneous appreciation and aversion.
|
| There's some experimental and challenging modern classical
| compositions that I can appreciate aesthetically but which are,
| at the same time, almost painfully unlistenable. Steve Reich's
| Four Organs is a good example [1]. It's music, I hear the
| structure of the music, my mood shifts with the music, yet
| after a few minutes... _aaaaaaaaaaghh! turn it off!!!_
|
| In the dramatic arts, there's the whole genre of horror.
|
| I'm fairly sure this extends to foods. Some people like to eat
| foods that are right on that threshold between triggering
| intolerable revulsion and excitement.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0yTZmMgI5I
| loup-vaillant wrote:
| > _In the dramatic arts, there 's the whole genre of horror._
|
| For me that would be tragedies: characters being stupid and
| obnoxious just to make sure it all ends up very badly. All
| the more infuriating when there are _good_ tragedies out
| there, where the drives and struggles of the characters
| actually make _sense_. Last one I recall was _Cyberpunk:
| Edgerunners_.
|
| _(Edit: just listened to the organs, it is SO slow. And
| what, a single chord? To be honest I don't find enough
| information in there, it's boring to the point of torture.)_
| adw wrote:
| The whole stunt-hot-sauce phenomenon is exactly that.
| demux wrote:
| Krzysztof Penderecki is also on the list of revolutionary but
| unlistenable.
| agalunar wrote:
| > The assumption that music the author doesn't like must be a -
| likely political - statement is, let's just say, revealing and
| itself highly political.
|
| Where are you getting this impression from? I just went back
| through the piece and can't find a place where the author
| implies that "music they don't like must be a (political)
| statement" whatsoever.
| bigbillheck wrote:
| > Where are you getting this impression from?
|
| This part: The station prides itself on operating without any
| government funding, which in turn requires it to play music
| that people enjoy hearing and never the kind that some
| stations (and performing ensembles) play just because it's
| avant-garde or purports to make some political statement.
| [deleted]
| adw wrote:
| Yes, exactly that bit. This is a cultural-conservative
| screed in Sunday dress.
| agalunar wrote:
| That's not the only way to interpret that passage (it's
| not how I interpreted the passage, in any case). There's
| no contradiction in saying "pop music is also popular and
| so our station also has programs that play pop music". In
| fact, I took the author as meaning "there is some
| _classical_ music that people only play b /c it's avant
| garde or political, &c, but the subset of classical music
| that we happen to play is what people request". And I'm
| not even sure that's a criticism of those other subgenres
| of classical music - more an observation on the general
| population's preferences and the influence of funding on
| the programming decisions of radio stations.
|
| edit: to be clear, I vigorously agree with everything
| else you wrote in your first comment! I just want to
| assume good faith for the author of the featured piece.
| fweimer wrote:
| Any idea what kind of broadcasting practices the author
| might be alluding to? I doubt it's about union songs.
|
| Is it about representation issues? I'm not sure if there's
| even attempt do address that in classical music
| broadcasting. (Women composers are very much
| underrepresented in the scores that survived.)
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| yongjik wrote:
| [flagged]
| themadturk wrote:
| I don't get the problems with this article. I'm an avid listener
| of Seattle's KING-FM, which is also a non-goverment publicly
| funded classical radio station. The station (which also streams
| worldwide) is actively working to expose more BIPOC composers and
| performers.
|
| Personally, I'm passionate about western music of the 19th
| century, everything from Beethoven up through pre-WWI. But
| sometimes music surprises me. Salonen's violin concerto "Out Of
| Nowhere" (which I discovered via an Apple commercial) seem
| completely unmelodic and without structure, but I love it anyway.
|
| I enjoy a wide variety of music, and don't enjoy an even larger
| variety of music. You like yours, I'll like mine, there's room
| for everyone.
| freitzkriesler2 wrote:
| I always find it comical that classical music is blared outside
| of stores to keep people from loitering.
|
| Little did they realize I hung out outside so I could wait for
| that Paganini concerto to finish.
| drewcoo wrote:
| It's as if they'd never seen A Clockwork Orange!
| howinteresting wrote:
| [flagged]
| Unfrozen0688 wrote:
| I have recently found "academica" classical is THE genre for me.
| Both dark and light. Spotify and Youtube have lists on it. Highly
| recommended.
|
| Some others are too fast or just noise for me.
|
| ex Dark Academia Classical
|
| https://open.spotify.com/playlist/37i9dQZF1DX17GkScaAekA?si=...
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGC80iRS7tw
|
| Light Academia Classical
|
| https://open.spotify.com/playlist/37i9dQZF1DX1jDTenPbqLo?si=...
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMuzS3XVho8
| schizo89 wrote:
| I started playing piano in 2018 and now it's part of my daily
| routine. I would recommend this to folks how are looking where to
| invest time to. Mastering an instrument takes years, but it's
| progress and dopamine.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Same here. There even is some progress (there should be after
| this much time invested, but this is easily the hardest thing I
| have tried to master in my life and I'm already resigned to not
| ever getting as good as I would like to be). It's a lot of fun
| too!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-08-27 23:02 UTC)