Who Killed Classical Music?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Serial_Apologist
    Full Member
    • Dec 2010
    • 37687

    #46
    Originally posted by amateur51 View Post
    Ah not the cherry/methol cough sweets then?


    I was waiting for that: had to be you ams!

    Comment

    • ferneyhoughgeliebte
      Gone fishin'
      • Sep 2011
      • 30163

      #47
      Originally posted by Boilk View Post
      Detractors of atonality might well argue that the rise of atonality per se was a direct symptom of serialism, which makes Schoenberg and the 2VS an all-too-easy target.
      Yer wot?

      "The rise of atonality per se was a direct symptom of serialism".





      "The rise .... of atonality per se ... was a direct symptom ... of seialism".


      Nope - still can't make head nor tail of it.
      [FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]

      Comment

      • Serial_Apologist
        Full Member
        • Dec 2010
        • 37687

        #48
        Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View Post
        Yer wot?

        "The rise of atonality per se was a direct symptom of serialism".





        "The rise .... of atonality per se ... was a direct symptom ... of seialism".


        Nope - still can't make head nor tail of it.
        Possibly an arsy-varsy attempt at explanation?

        Comment

        • ferneyhoughgeliebte
          Gone fishin'
          • Sep 2011
          • 30163

          #49
          "a direct symptom".

          "atonality" "was a" "symptom" of "serialism"


          Well, can't be that because it's "the rise" of atonality.




          "Symptom" = "a sign of the existence of a condition".


          So (possibly) "The rise of atonality per se was a direct sign of the existence of Serialism"





          Or (perhaps)

          "Serialism was a direct sign of the existence of the rise of atonality per se"



          I wish these detractors would express what they meant more clearly!
          [FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]

          Comment

          • amateur51

            #50
            Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post


            I was waiting for that: had to be you ams!
            You betcha, Red Rider!

            Comment

            • Gordon
              Full Member
              • Nov 2010
              • 1425

              #51
              It's all getting a bit, er, Post Modern? As in Sokal et al. Or even Yes, Minister, "would that be the adminsitration of Policy, Minister, or the Policy of Administration?" or is it that Wednesday's child [woe] is wearing Thursday's child's [has far to go] clothing?

              Comment

              • Boilk
                Full Member
                • Dec 2010
                • 976

                #52
                Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                what people find 'difficult' is NOT the tonality or lack of conventional 'melody' in music but rather the lack of continuum .... If one takes a piece of rhythmic and tonal music and then randomises the pitches people are more than happy to listen and enjoy it.
                This rhythmic continuity is exactly what has allowed more and more commercially successful artists, armed with cheap sampling technology, to become far more experimental than their predecessors in their use of sound. A whole array of seemingly totally disparate sounds (instrumental, concrète, environmental, etc.) becomes perceptually conjoined above a 'unifying' rhythm track. The presence or absence of that all-important rhythm track is what often determines the pigeon-holing of the piece (trance, jungle, musique concrète).

                I suspect if you put a rhythm track underneath electronic music by Francis Dhomont or Milton Babbitt, you'd find a whole new audience willing to part with its money. Come to think of it, whenever I've introduced people to Morton Subotnick's Silver Apples of the Moon (1967), they've tended to immediately warm to part 2's "dance" section, but have been left stone cold by the relative rhythmlessness of the rest of the piece. Small wonder that more people like Philip Glass than Morton Feldman!

                Comment

                • ferneyhoughgeliebte
                  Gone fishin'
                  • Sep 2011
                  • 30163

                  #53
                  Originally posted by Boilk View Post
                  I suspect if you put a rhythm track underneath ... music by ... Milton Babbitt, you'd find a whole new audience willing to part with its money.
                  Mobtown Modern: Hard as F#@!Contemporary Museum, Baltimore, MDDecember 15, 2008(featuring video by Guy Werner)


                  Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
                  [FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]

                  Comment

                  • Richard Barrett

                    #54
                    Whether it's true or not that there's something about modern music that makes it inaccessible to all but an educationally privileged few (and my experience is that this is not true), there's still no excuse for the kind of sloppy writing that fills the BBC's blurb on this upcoming programme.

                    Comment

                    • burning dog
                      Full Member
                      • Dec 2010
                      • 1511

                      #55
                      Reverend Green in the library with a candlestick.

                      Comment

                      • gradus
                        Full Member
                        • Nov 2010
                        • 5609

                        #56
                        The absence of opportunity to hear classical music could kill it but it doesn't seem very likely that such an absence of opportunity will occur, nor do I think that the death of music would have much to do with the compositional methods of modern or 'difficult' composers. I have no idea why music means so much to me but as I suspect may be true of others, it has absolutely nothing to do with music teachers.
                        Last edited by gradus; 17-01-14, 13:49.

                        Comment

                        • Quarky
                          Full Member
                          • Dec 2010
                          • 2658

                          #57
                          There must be a very reactionary soul lurking somewhere in Radio 4, with very restricted musical tastes.

                          A little while ago there was a programme in similar vein: Jazz is Dead:

                          Paul Morley tests the contention that jazz is dead, a victim of its own history.

                          Comment

                          • Serial_Apologist
                            Full Member
                            • Dec 2010
                            • 37687

                            #58
                            Just a reminder: the programme is on in just over half an hour (11.30 am)

                            Comment

                            • MrGongGong
                              Full Member
                              • Nov 2010
                              • 18357

                              #59


                              Tansy gets down to Prince again

                              I predict Phil Cashian talking about Zappa next

                              Comment

                              • Richard Barrett

                                #60
                                Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                                Tansy gets down to Prince again

                                I predict Phil Cashian talking about Zappa next
                                (sigh)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X