2017 was our 20th year online!

Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Shop our online store for music lovers
SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad) Piano Sight Reading
train piano sight reading with your iPhone or iPad
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
 Best of Piano Buyer
(ad)
Pianoteq
Steinway Spiro Layering
(ad)
Wessell Nickel & Gross
PianoForAll
Who's Online Now
46 members (Ampersand, anotherscott, briangmoore, chopinetto, Bill McKaig,RPT, c++, Carey, 1957, 12 invisible), 466 guests, and 434 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by Jared Hoeft
Originally Posted by gsmonks
The thing is, Jared, this thread is about furthering classical music. You can not cause progress through emotional means. Every advance in classical music has been through technical means. This is because it takes technical know-how to work with musical devices.

Writing from a standpoint of emotion is no different from writing popular music, and as we all know, popular music consists of static forms that do not progress.

Progress, after all, is what this thread is about.

Or what part of that do the lot of you not understand?

If you have an opinion about that, express it elsewhere. Start your own thread. But THIS thread is about advancing classical music.


You wrote about advancing classical music alone, but I disagree. I do not think it's wise to consider the advancement of "classical" music rather than simply "music" in general. Out of all the pieces of classical music I love listening to, I enjoy them for two reasons: 1) They impact me emotionally, and 2) They make me think. Who are you to say that you can't progress through emotional means? I cannot stand music that lacks emotion. If the focus was on technicality or the science behind the composition, I as well as the majority of modern listeners will simply skip over it. It's BORING. You need emotion to progress in any form of music, and I would in fact argue that "art" music is the only form of composition where sheer technicality truly matters for progression. If popular music consists entirely of static forms that do not progress, then explain why the Beatles do not sound like Lady Gaga. All pop art takes a long time to change because the majority of it is basically just copied and pasted from the few artists in the loop who are willing to try creative things. I know this from the friends I have at USC, who are struggling with pop composition.

You aren't going to consider the thousands of examples of musical progression through primarily emotional means. But I will give you some credit here and say that when music is composed with nothing but emotions considered, it rarely does progress. If you subject yourself entirely to emotion as a composer, you are completely at the mercy of pre-conceived ideas about the art. Some degree of technical consideration is necessary. But what you're talking about with furthering classical music makes it sound like you want to compose as if you're writing down physics problems, and no listener wants to hear that. If you don't want opinions, why did you start this thread? I'm giving relevant feedback concerning my opinions. WHY are you getting so mad???


First off, Jared, I mentioned the underlying classicism of all music at least a dozen times in this thread.

Secondly, this thread is about advancing classical music. There is nothing to disagree with there. If you don't like the notion, don't participate, just as I don't horn in when players are discussing certain composers whose music I detest.

You do not speak for the many theorists who take this matter seriously and follow it closely. You also do not speak for those for whom technique is of great interest. You may not like the technical aspect as though "you're writing down physics problems", but if it strikes you that way, don't participate. All you end up doing is derailing the thread and annoying me.

(ad)
Piano & Music Accessories
piano accessories music gifts tuning and moving equipment
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 174
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 174
Originally Posted by gsmonks

First off, Jared, I mentioned the underlying classicism of all music at least a dozen times in this thread.

Secondly, this thread is about advancing classical music. There is nothing to disagree with there. If you don't like the notion, don't participate, just as I don't horn in when players are discussing certain composers whose music I detest.

You do not speak for the many theorists who take this matter seriously and follow it closely. You also do not speak for those for whom technique is of great interest. You may not like the technical aspect as though "you're writing down physics problems", but if it strikes you that way, don't participate. All you end up doing is derailing the thread and annoying me.


I simply disagree with the barrier between "art" and "commercial" music. I think that the existence of that perceived barrier is the cause of many of the problems you're bringing up. I would love to discuss this, if that isn't too much of a digression for your thread. I feel that the opinions I gave were very much relevant to your topic and non-derailing. I have re-read all of what you wrote so many times that I don't think I could possibly understand your purpose more clearly without swapping brains with you. I disagree with you on a couple core things, and beyond that, you and I are really fighting the same battle. This grumpiness is stupid.

Watch out for trolls, even in places like this.

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
There is and always has been a barrier between art music and commercial music, Jared. Musicians have always been aware of it, and it is not merely a matter of perception.

In fact, musicians periodically fight back. Some notable examples in the jazz world alone are Edward Kennedy (Duke) Ellington, Artie Shaw, John Burks (Dizzy) Gillespe, Thelonious Monk, Charlie Parker, Miles Davis, Dave Brubeck, and many others.

In the Lower Mainland, British Columbia, Canada, the Punk/New Wave/Indie movements in the late 70's, early 80's were a rebellion against commercial control and commercial music. Many pioneers from that period are still very active today.

The main difference between art music and commercial music is that art music represents musical and artistic values, whereas commercial music is controlled by people who don't know anything about music and don't care, and the music is ephemeral product.

What I mean by the latter can best be summed up by my own personal experiences in the publishing industry. This is where the standard novel format (50,000 to 55,000 words, an average of 10 chapters at around 5000 words per chapter) is still the norm. Some notable examples include Harlequin Romance, Harlequin Presents, crime fiction published by Black Dagger Publications, and many others. When you write fiction of this type, you're given strict guidelines which prevent you from producing a work of lasting value. What they want is high turnover, something cheap that will be read once and thrown away, like a Bic lighter.

In the commercial world (and I know this from many years of personal experience- I've owned two music studios over the years and produced a good many commercials for radio and television), you always have someone breathing down your neck, telling you what to do. Your creative output is relegated to trying to inject some level of intelligence into the music despite these clowns and their continual interference. That's a far cry from being able to expend all of your energies on a work of quality.

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 174
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 174
Gsmonks - I agree with you. I have had much different experiences in the past that have consequently shaped my opinions differently than yours. All I will add is that although the difference you mention is definitely present, it's not nearly as stark as you make it sound. There's almost nothing but gray area; there's virtually no "purely art" music or "purely commercial" music by the -and I admit- wonderful definitions you give. Most music comes from some sort of mix. Also, even if one is to try to avoid commercial mass-production bullcrap, that doesn't necessarily mean that the musician in question is then forced to utilize primarily technical means of producing artistic music. I would argue that most of the mass-produced pop music is sadly and pitifully lacking in emotion and depth. I love Rachmaninov's first Symphony because it wrenches my emotions first, and makes me think second. I laugh at the lack of feeling in Justin Bieber's cookie-cutter scripted music. What I'm saying is, trying to advance new ideas in artistic or "classical" music doesn't mean you must neglect the use of emotion as a primary means of composition.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
Quote

Just listened and enjoyed! Nice stuff. smile eweiss


Thanks Eweiss!


Stop analyzing; just compose the damn thing!
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
Quote
"It sounds like what you'd get if a lounge pianist was asked to write a film score. It's not original by any stretch of the imagination, but it is witty in a campy kind of way, like the movie Betelgeuse" - gsmonks


Well witty isn't too bad gsmonks. I can live with that. laugh


Stop analyzing; just compose the damn thing!
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
Quote
The main difference between art music and commercial music is that art music represents musical and artistic values, whereas commercial music is controlled by people who don't know anything about music and don't care, and the music is ephemeral product" - gsmonks


Yeah, like the popular music of George Gershwin, Scott Joplin, and Percy Granger - to mention a few.

John


Stop analyzing; just compose the damn thing!
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
I don't know anything about Percy Granger, but the Gershwins and Joplin were fortunate to be alive at a time when art music was the popular music of the day. Caruso was one of the popular favourites in the world of 78 rpm records, Paul Whiteman's orchestra was producing popular jazz classics in the 1920's, and Tin Pan Alley was populated with ex-patriot European classical musicians and composers who produced some of the great music of the early 20th century, which today is seen as a Golden Age of popular music. John Philip Sousa was selling a lot of records at the time, Richard Strauss, Rachmaninoff, Khatchaturian, Stravinsky, Hindemith, Holst, Shostakovich and a host of other classical composers and performers were very much alive and well. The American Novel was in its heyday, Picasso and many other famous artists were very much alive and active, Existentialism and its thinkers were well under way, the big newspapers were thriving, the car industry was exploding, and the world was enjoying an unprecedented period of economic wealth.

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,393
2000 Post Club Member
Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,393
Originally Posted by gsmonks
It sounds like what you'd get if a lounge pianist was asked to write a film score. It's not original by any stretch of the imagination, but it is witty in a campy kind of way, like the movie Betelgeuse.

It amazes me how quickly others can judge someone else's music yet have nothing to show of their own. BTW, it is original. You may not like it, but it's something that's never existed before - therefore original.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
Quote
It amazes me how quickly others can judge someone else's music yet have nothing to show of their own. BTW, it is original. You may not like it, but it's something that's never existed before - therefore original.


Thanks eweiss! And that's more in line with my definition of originality.

John smile


Stop analyzing; just compose the damn thing!
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
"I don't know anything about Percy Granger" - gsmonks

Born late 19th century - died 1961. One heck of a pianist. His music was frowned on by the classical elite of the day - mainly because his music was popular. Of course today his music is well respected even by the snobbiest of the classical snobbery. laugh

You can see him play live here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5d53hnXvmA

John smile



Stop analyzing; just compose the damn thing!
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by Johnny-Boy
Quote
It amazes me how quickly others can judge someone else's music yet have nothing to show of their own. BTW, it is original. You may not like it, but it's something that's never existed before - therefore original.


Thanks eweiss! And that's more in line with my definition of originality.

John smile


Um . . . guys . . . if you check, you'll see that I've placed four books of my piano music for free download on this site. And that 196 pages is just a collection of my "guilty pleasure" music, written on the side.

So . . . I have plenty to show of my own. Plus I've been teaching composition for over 30 years. So I a) know what I'm talking about, and b) am not just some kid talking through my hat.

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by Johnny-Boy
"I don't know anything about Percy Granger" - gsmonks

Born late 19th century - died 1961. One heck of a pianist. His music was frowned on by the classical elite of the day - mainly because his music was popular. Of course today his music is well respected even by the snobbiest of the classical snobbery. laugh

You can see him play live here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5d53hnXvmA

John smile



Okay, now this is some tasty technique:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDosOA7ru9E&NR=1

I love learning new stuff! Thanks, John!

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by Johnny-Boy
Quote
It amazes me how quickly others can judge someone else's music yet have nothing to show of their own. BTW, it is original. You may not like it, but it's something that's never existed before - therefore original.

Thanks eweiss! And that's more in line with my definition of originality.John smile

BTW, guys, I wasn't being critical- I was making an observation.
Here's another: the type of originality you're referring to reminds me very much of David Wisdom's old CBC radio show Brave New Waves. He would play music written by young guys on their 4-track portastudios, and some of it was very interesting. David would talk at great length about how original the music was.

However, while the music was original to the young guys sending it in, it was nothing we hadn't heard a bazillion times before. Having played in Punk and New Wave bands myself in the 1970's, I'd heard this same music two decades before.

The mere mention of genuine originality is something that seems to get up the nose of young musicians these days. Instead of paying their dues and doing many years of hard work in order to achieve genuine originality, they tend to shoot the messenger instead, and try to claim that originality is whatever they feel like dubbing "originality".

However, as I and a host of others have said before me, you can't argue with or deny four-hundred years of accumulated knowledge and experience. You can thumb your nose at it all you like, but you're not accomplishing anything useful.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
I guess we should come up with an ironclad definition of originality. Though we could never find one we all agreed on.

Ans: something original, e.g. a new idea or approach. Peculiar Nightmare would fall into "new approach" at the very least.

Synonyms: novelty, uniqueness, inventiveness, innovativeness, creative, freshness, imagination, ingenuity - again, would fit into some of those synonyms.

John


Stop analyzing; just compose the damn thing!
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 661
Originally Posted by gsmonks
Originally Posted by Johnny-Boy
"I don't know anything about Percy Granger" - gsmonks

Born late 19th century - died 1961. One heck of a pianist. His music was frowned on by the classical elite of the day - mainly because his music was popular. Of course today his music is well respected even by the snobbiest of the classical snobbery. laugh

You can see him play live here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5d53hnXvmA

John smile



Okay, now this is some tasty technique:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDosOA7ru9E&NR=1

I love learning new stuff! Thanks, John!


Yes, Percy Grainger was quite a musician. Quite a personality too. laugh


Stop analyzing; just compose the damn thing!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,696
D
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,696
Originally Posted by gsmonks
Originally Posted by Damon


thumb Especially if you have a cat!


Which has what to do with this thread?



Originally Posted by gsmonks
Originally Posted by Damon


thumb Especially if you have a cat!


Which has what to do with furthering classical music, exactly?


A touch of the Alzheimer's or are you just attempting to increase your post count for some reason? I thought you said you were out of here.

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 174
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 174
I still don't understand this "guilty pleasure" concept. Why does the creation of ANY type of music have to make you feel guilty? Just because you aren't breaking new ground doesn't mean you aren't creating something legitimate enough to feel proud of rather than guilty.

I still defend my position that it is impossible to create 100% original music. If you are making music at all, you are inevitably creating organized sound, which has been done before. Simply by calling your creation "music," you forfeit total originality. There is no black and white here, but rather degrees of originality, which are obviously quite subjective. As Johnny-Boy said, a standard can't really be established on such an opinion-driven issue. You can't call one piece of music entirely original and another piece of music completely non-original.

In my experience, artists who strive for absolute originality often make the worst (my opinion) art. Don't be afraid to look backwards occasionally in the pursuit of progress.

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by Damon
Originally Posted by gsmonks
Originally Posted by Damon


thumb Especially if you have a cat!


Which has what to do with this thread?



Originally Posted by gsmonks
Originally Posted by Damon


thumb Especially if you have a cat!


Which has what to do with furthering classical music, exactly?


A touch of the Alzheimer's or are you just attempting to increase your post count for some reason? I thought you said you were out of here.


This isn't a post. It's abuse, and therefore will be reported to the mods.

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
G
gsmonks Offline OP
500 Post Club Member
OP Offline
500 Post Club Member
G
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by Jared Hoeft
I still don't understand this "guilty pleasure" concept. Why does the creation of ANY type of music have to make you feel guilty? Just because you aren't breaking new ground doesn't mean you aren't creating something legitimate enough to feel proud of rather than guilty.

I still defend my position that it is impossible to create 100% original music. If you are making music at all, you are inevitably creating organized sound, which has been done before. Simply by calling your creation "music," you forfeit total originality. There is no black and white here, but rather degrees of originality, which are obviously quite subjective. As Johnny-Boy said, a standard can't really be established on such an opinion-driven issue. You can't call one piece of music entirely original and another piece of music completely non-original.

In my experience, artists who strive for absolute originality often make the worst (my opinion) art. Don't be afraid to look backwards occasionally in the pursuit of progress.


A guilty pleasure is the enjoyment of something you shouldn't like. For example, I like old-time fiddle music despite the fact that I'm a classically-trained musician.

Dunno why you can't wrap your head around the notion. It's pretty much universal.

No one ever said anything about any music that is 100% original. By "original", we're talking "new", not "100%" original, and by "new" it is meant that a new range of expression has been brought to the table. Bach counterpoint with its liberal use of dissonance brought a new musical vocabulary to the table. Chromaticism brought a new musical vocabulary to the table. Serialism brought a new musical vocabulary to the table. Bitonality brought a new musical vocabulary to the table. And so on.

Which reminds me, someone earlier in this thread made some disparaging remarks about serialism. I was going to remind that poster that Also Sprach Zarathustra by Richard Strauss is a serial composition in the section leading up to the conclusion of the 1st half of the piece.

Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Piano World 

Link Copied to Clipboard
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinway pianos
(ad)
Couch to Concert Hall
Couch to Concert Hall
(ad)
PianoDisc

PianoDisc
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Mason & Hamlin Pianos
New Topics - Multiple Forums
New Yamaha CX series vs Boston
by GraceTuraco - 04/20/21 09:15 PM
Thinking of buying a 2007 Yamaha G2 5'7" Grand
by Teresa100 - 04/20/21 07:52 PM
Estonia L190 Bass Scale
by mbd - 04/20/21 07:52 PM
A closer look at the Feurich 'Vienna' 123 model
by oswaldpeters - 04/20/21 04:22 PM
generic name for Mellotron
by TheophilusCarter - 04/20/21 03:24 PM
Download Sheet Music
Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads
Forum Statistics
Forums42
Topics206,431
Posts3,084,688
Members101,254
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
Please Support Our Advertisers

Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways

Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

 Best of Piano Buyer

PianoTeq Bechstein
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads



 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | MapleStreetMusicShop.com - Our store in Cornish Maine


© copyright 1997 - 2021 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5