Piano World Home Page Forums Fun Stuff! - Parties, Tours, Projects & More... Just For The Fun of It Snotty musicians who act like their genre is the only "real" music

Okay, I'm posting this because it despereately needs to be said, given some of the posts I've noticed around here dissing certain genres of music.

I'm sick of classical musicians who act like modern genres of music are somehow "inferior" to classical music. You know, people who say things like "rap is for retards" or act like modern rock is not as muscially brilliant as classical music. By the definition of the word "music", this isn't even true; but more importantly, such people refuse to accept the fact that these other forms of music take as much if not more talent and creativity as any other form.

It takes a lot more creativity for a DJ to mix his own beats than it does for some asian kid with glasses to sit down and mathematically reproduce a classical score with no emotion. Think rapping is for retards? Why don't you write something and we'll compare it to something eminem wrote and see who really has more talent. You have no idea how hard it is to do what he does - I know I never could. And think hard rocking is easy? Where's your grammy then?

I should add that I have tried learning guitar before, and I'll say right now it is a lot harder than piano. I had more difficulty learning basic guitar songs than I did learning Chopin's 23rd etude. Consequently, I have as much respect for Eddie Van Halen as I do for Yundi Li, and rightly so.

You see the same thing with some Jazz musicians in reference to classical music, sometimes they'll act like classical music is inferior to jazz because there's no improvisation or whatnot. Then they call fake books "real books" like they have something to prove (which is ironic since doing so demonstrates a fear of inferiority - if they were better it would be self-evident and they wouldn't need to say so).

I love all forms of music, because I'm an artist at heart, not a poser concerned with perceptions. Music is art, and art is reflection of self, nothing more, nothing less. Mozart's music and Eminem's music are equally good works of art, because they are both forms of self-reflection expressed through an artistic outlet. Both of their creations required a lot of talent and hard work to create. You may prefer one over the other, but neither is "better" or "more real music".

I don't know why some people have to be so snotty. Maybe society can only tolerate so much creativity at a time, but I think the most likely answer is that some people are just fake -they are so concerned with image and perception that they can't look beyond the surface and see things for what they really are.

The bottom line is, if classical music is the only type of music you like, or jazz is the only type of music you like, that's fine - too each his own. But don't act like other types of musicians are somehow "inferior" or aren't real musicians.

"Think rapping is for retards? Why don't you write something and we'll compare it to something eminem wrote and see who really has more talent."

This sounds like a ****ing contest: "oh! i sure **** better than eminem!"

"You have no idea how hard it is to do what he does - I know I never could. And think hard rocking is easy? Where's your grammy then?"

Some of the best music there presents almost no technical difficulties whatsoever. High art doesn't mean it to be difficult or innaccessible to most people.

BTW, the Grammy doesn't award the best or more original, just the most popular or in vogue or old musicians for a lifetime worth of work...

I don't think rappers are bad or inferior musicians. I believe it's a fact they are not musicians at all.

rant off.

I find it interesting how rap music uses canons, and the first rap piece was probably the song, 'Trouble' from "The Music Man" rapped by Robert Preston. I like the fusion of hip-hop and classical--something I want to explore with the right producers. Perhaps you are correct that we don't realize how hard it is for some of these guys in various genres to do what they do. When you watch American Idol, and hear the out-of-tune notes, and the uninspired renditions of songs we know all too well, and some that are amazingly inspired, you then realize that it's not so easy to do. I have found a deep respect amongst my rocker friends like David Foster and Keith Emerson, Billy Joel and Mike 'Punch' Harper who revere the classical greats and talk about them more than I do! After all, their music wouldn't be what it is without their utmost respect for the eternal masters. Thos guys are far from snotty, I can tell you that. Billy once told me, 'I was lying back and listening to Beethoven's Symphonies and thought, I'm so insignificant!' Well, he's a gifted musician in his own right, for sure.

Firstly, it takes a lot of skill to gain the faculties needed to read and play music correctly, even without the emotion. Secondly, some asian kid with glasses mathematically reproducing the score without emotion is hardly a concert-worthy performance.

Haha, you think you can get away with a comment like that on this forum? Alright, guitar is written on one stave, piano is written on two. This in itself creates much more difficulty in the reading aspect. Sure, the same notes are on different places on the fretboard, but the piano also has quite a bit more range, so there's a lot of ledger lines as well. But of course, the reading isn't the only thing. Getting a piece to concert performance level is an extremely involved process, one that I'm sure you've never experienced because of the tone of your post. I'd get into the details, but I doubt you'd care.

As far as Chopin's 23rd etude is concerned, let's see you get it to concert levels that compares with the best in the world. Then we'll talk difficulty.

Now, I for one do not consider rap an actual genre of music. It's simply words set to a beat. There's no melody, harmony, counterpoint, etc. Without some sort of discernible beat and melodic content, I don't consider it music. That's just me. Sure, some may create fantastic beats and great lyrics, but there's not real melody or harmony to be found. It is NOT MUSIC.

As far as Jazz and Classical are concerned, I find that the best musicians can both play from the score and improvise and compose themselves. Look at Cziffra.

Don't get me wrong, I love all sorts of music, from the good metal to Coldplay. If there's real feeling, struggle, anguish, etc. I probably will like it. But it's not my fault that many of these pop songs are simply three chords put to lyrics. Practically anyone with some sense of taste and poetry can come up with a good three-chord song and lyrics. Practically no one can come up with a 5 voice fugue with an excellent subject, countersubject, various well-developed episodes, effortless flow, a subject that can be explored and ripped apart and transposed easily... not to mention that some of this stuff ALSO had lyrics on top of it (Mozart's requiem), and if you wish to sing this music, you must know the rudiments of multiple languages. Come on, the technical challenges of classical music are extreme. Far more impressive than yet more extremely fast shredding on distorted guitar by Steve Vai.

Some bands I like (who actually use classical elements, metal itself is atonal with harsh chromaticism, something that classical pioneered in the 20th century, and even hundreds of years earlier with Gesualdo's madrigals):

Strapping Young Lad
Winds
Behemoth
Old Man's Child
Coldplay
To\Die\For
Type O Negative
Dimmu Borgir

See, you only concern yourself with sterotypes and perceptions. The question still remains, can you write something as lyrically brilliant as he can? Don't dodge the question with an ad hominem this time.

Say that when you can play the guitar solo from the grammy-nominated Loney Day by System of a Down.

A song also does not have to be technically difficult to be good music. Chopin's 4th prelude is a piece of cake to play but muscially it is a work of genius. A similar statement can be made about Led Zeppelin's Stairway to Heaven.

Can you explain why they are not musicians? (I'm going to guess you can't). Their art requires rhythm, it requires rhyme, it requires background harmonies and melodies that fit the mood of what they're trying to convey; over all it requires a unique combination of many of the elements of music.

From Wikipedia:
If you disagree, all you have to do is say you disagree and say why. When you resort to personal attacks such as "rant off", it just proves that you can't argue with it on an intellectual level and reinforces the validity of what I said.

"The question still remains, can you write something as lyrically brilliant as he can?"

Like the guy above well put it: "It's simply words set to a beat."

So, yes, I'm quite certain I can write much more "lyrically brilliant" "poetry" than him, which isn't to say much since being better than crap is not guarantee of quality. Though I won't be a big star as I lack the right contacts, the oportunity, the media exposure and the attitude and visual flair which make up for a lack of real talent.

Music there's none there.

"Say that when you can play the guitar solo from the grammy-nominated"

Empty virtuosism is a hallmark of mediocrity. Many works by Liszt and Paganini are not high art, but mere exhibitionism.

"Can you explain why they are not musicians?"

They don't play instruments. Well, that's ok, because they sing, right? Wrong, they simply talk through a beat. So, they don't sing nor play instruments. What do they do then? Oh, yes, right, they dance like monkeys, wear funky clothes, look rather ****ed off and throw money at the camera. Yep, sure a hallmark of musicianship.

Any basic "harmony", perhaps a few chords barely heard in the background, just behing all the glam and the dance beats, is surely not worked by them, but a post-effect edited in by the smart marketeers from the recording industry...

not all of the rap artists around rely on their management and recording industry techs to do their musical work for them.
I'm not going to enter strongly into this arguement but the rappers that talk THROUGH the beat are not the good ones, the rappers that create the beat and rhythms with their words are.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it isn't music, music is changing.... what about techno?? (just to throw a spanner in the works)

Why stop there? Why not go all the way back to 17th century recitative?

here we go again...

Jeanne W

ah, I see the difference! It's a whole new level of musicianship indeed when rather than paying a drummer to punctuate the rhythm you emphasize some syllables here and there while you talk.

It's not music changing, it's people's new low standards of acceptance dictating the market. I'm sure the next hit will be a band formed by dogs: some bark, others howl, and others pee at the public.

why stop there? what about a jet turbine? or Atari2600 blip-blops? There're plenty of great sounding stuff out there for rough ears...

I was about to type the recitative in my reply above then stopped, since for the most part, they function as prose which is sung to chords held for specific periods without steady beats to allow the singer to sing the words according to their prosody against these chords placed in a quasi improvisatory fashion by the composer. The 'sprechtstimme' in Schonberg goes the next step and the 'Trouble' tune from 'The Music Man' has a definite steady beat which must keep going and the 'Harold Hill' must conform to it, rather than the recitative chords adhering to the singer.

(This is kinda long -sorry. I just dashed this off this morning and have to go to work now.)

I'd like to enter this discussion. A few disclaimers.

First, I, myself, do not have a particularly high opinion of rap music and some experimental or progressive (whatever it might be called) types of music. I offer this so people will know I do not have a bias towards/for rap or those kinds of music.

Secondly, I understand and believe that everyone has and is entitled to his/her own opinion.

To get on with it...

Some of our PW members seem to be trashing certain types of music or particular pieces of music and/or the musician's themselves - their ability to compose and play music.

Some thoughts on the subject.

When we talk about music some things are factual, but others are more subjective. Some things are "facts"; others are "opinion".

Music can stand alone; be enjoyed for what it is.

Music can be "evaluated" and comparisons and value judgements made.

What criteria is being used for the comparisons and evaluations and value judgements?

Comparing any kind of music to another only proves it is similar or not - - unless you are saying one type of music is the standard by which all music should be judged.

Saying one type of music is the standard by which all music should be judged is a value judgement; an opinion.

"Music" can also stand on its own merits. We can just simply examine the music itself and make a value judgement, not really comparing it to anything else. Even with no comparisons being made, not everyone is going to appreciate or like it.

The way I see it:

We can discuss facts: that some music in comparison to others is more or less simple, complex, organized, etc. but...

Once a person says something is "good", "bad", or otherwise, they are entering the realm of opinion.

Saying a particular type of music or piece of music is "garbage" is a value judgement; an opinion.

Opinions are not universal.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but opinions can be put forth in respectful or offensive ways.

Having strong opinions is understandable and can be a good thing, but saying something is "garbage" is an extreme way of expressing an opinion and is likely to offend people. It seems to me expressing one's opinions in that manner is meanspirited, inconsiderate and maybe even exhibits an intolerance of other people. It's easy then to understand why people get hot under the collar.

I think also sometimes we are actually in agreement here with one another but do not realize it - or, at least, not as "at odds" with one another as we think. Because we may not be expressing ourselves in a clear enough manner. Which can lead to misunderstandings that rile people. For example…

I believe everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, but if a person is stating an opinion, it is helpful to point out to everyone that is exactly what he/she is doing. Especially when taking an extreme stance. Saying something is "garbage" without attaching some kind of disclaimer to the effect that "this is my opinion" makes it sound like that's some kind of "blanket statement" that is being presented as "fact" - some kind of universal truth - rather than what it is - OPINION.

I would love to see or participate in a respectful discussion of the different types of music. One in which we discuss "facts" as "facts" and offer "opinions" as "opinions" in a civilized manner. Where people express themselves in a way that makes it clear that their opinions are just that. Where people don't make it sound as though their OPINIONS are declarations of FACTS i.e. prounouncements coming from "on high." And I don't think it's constructive or useful to participate in a discussion or debate in a way that incites the wrath of the other people you are trying to talk to.

This is a long rambling post. Maybe it will have some value, though.
Jeanne W

Thanks, Jeanne. Entirely why I took a few moments to venture into this thread--if you re-visit my posts, you'll see a support for the genre--as in every style, there are opinions of like and dislike--this is normal. The original post reflects the attitude of some toward various styles. In my opinion, the topic simply means that people should express their opinions in a positive way if they have something nice to say or especially interesting to add to the conversation. Exhibiting an elitism toward any style of music merely reflects the negative, which will gain nothing. Adding factual data about a specific subject is always of interest, and can be a springboard to other related topics which add to interesting conversation. Once it gets personal, watch out.

Nothing like getting your point across by attacking the other side.

Maybe when you are old enough to go to college you might think about taking a class called "Critical Thinking." Then study well the logical fallacies that make up MOST flawed arguments -- like yours.

Yours is ad hominem: shoot the messenger.

I play guitar and piano and I disagree.

Good point, USA. I remember taking a Music Criticism course at Juilliard with Irving Kolodin. Everyone thought they knew everything! Well!! Mr. Kolodin played two reordings of the same aria. He said after, compare them. Everyone commented on how the first one was this or that, and the second singer was this or that. Here's the punchline: Mr. Kolodin said, "Ha ha. They are both the same singer. The first recording was from her earliest recording at the beginning of her career, and the second recording toward the end of her career. Be careful how you criticize things." That's when I learned to have respect for all styles, not that I didn't before, but being in a competitive environment challenges an individual's own security and knowledge. It's very easy to lose track of this.

By the way, I tried guitar once--impossible for me. My hat's off to anyone who can play the guitar or any string instrument without lines for every note on the fingerboard. Can you imagine a piano without separate keys?

Not sure those match.

Could you name a specific rap song you're talking about? I'm not a fan of rap, but I don't hate it anymore than I do some other genres. But I've certainly heard enough to know it has the elements you've mentioned.

Remember the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air theme song?

What really sucks, is when people do all they can to take the joy out of anything that people enjoy doing. I've seen it with music, flying ultralights, scuba diving, and a myriad of other pursuits that I've engaged in, over the years. I avoid such people. Instead, I seek out people who enjoy what they do, regardless of their skill level, and I avoid the killjoys. Some people are so spiritually bankrupt that they can't be happy unless they are stomping on the hearts, joy, creations, and enthusiams of others.

Not to worry. It can be summed up to: opinions are not fact.

So let's attain to the facts about rap "music". For this, you gotta forget the MTV videos and all its flash and "attitude" altogether and focus on the "music" itself. That obviously means dropping the lyrics too of course: just the words, not the "melody".

What remains of music there? I want facts, not opinion.