Are questions on pop music legit. for University Challenge?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

But this is why UC concentrates on pop music/culture:

But it doesn't. There are still far more questions based around the Western Classical traditions than there are on popular Musics - the point, as I see it, is that students as a whole are no better at answering the Pop questions than they are the Classicals. Unless there is an enthusiast on the team, teams can at best hazard a guess (of varying magnitudes of wildness). It's not the case that "schools don't teach Classical Music anymore" (it never has been) - it's that (large enough numbers of) children and their parents don't value Arts-based subjects to study them beyond what is "compulsory" - and what is "compulsory" has been reduced in the past seven years.

The real ire should be directed not at the question-setters at UC, but at anyone who thought that such matters were important, but not important enough to make their disapproval very clear to their MPs.

[french frank]

Was not one big breakthrough for pop being taken seriously the article by William Mann, Lied expert, in the Times 27 Dec 1963? Reprinted here.

I'm not clear here: when he mentions 'pandiationic clusters', 'the discreet, sometimes subtle, varieties of instrumentation – a suspicion of piano or organ, a few bars of mouth-organ obbligato', even 'Aeolian cadence' - how far were these definitely Beatles contributions and how much worked into a basic tune by the arranger?

[french frank]

But it doesn't. There are still far more questions based around the Western Classical traditions than there are on popular Musics - the point, as I see it, is that students as a whole are no better at answering the Pop questions than they are the Classicals.

That seems to sink the OP - or at least deliver a big hole in the hull. I'm only responding to what other people say about UC since I don't see it myself.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

That seems to sink the OP - or at least deliver a big hole in the hull. I'm only responding to what other people say about UC since I don't see it myself.

I don't see that it does - ardy said that his and his wife's hearts sank "when" questions about "Pop" Music occur. This doesn't imply that they occur all the time - and if it did, the regular posts here expressing amusement/despair that students suggested that "Handel" was the composer of a piece by Stockhausen (for example) would immediately contradict such a suggestion.

Questions about popular culture are probably more frequent than they were in the days of Bamber Gascoigne, but it is simply not the case that there is a "concentration" on these: there are still more "classical"-based questions.

[french frank]

I don't see that it does - ardy said that his and his wife's hearts sank "when" questions about "Pop" Music occur.

True - though an early intervention to the effect that there were "far more" questions about western classical music than about pop, and that the students were "no better" at answering the pop questions than the classical ones might have sent the discussion in a different direction .

If, indeed, there are far more questions on classical music than pop, I'd have to say that I think some questions now and then on pop music are probably not much to comment on. The fact that Mr and Mrs a's hearts sank suggested to me that this happened rather more often than you suggest: this may be a question of differing perceptions.

And considering that the students are no better at answering questions about pop opens up further subjects for speculation: are the fans of popular music as 'genre-focused' as classical music fans, in knowing, perhaps, about metal of various sorts but nothing about rap or hip hop (or is rock the only popular music covered?) &c?

[Richard Barrett]

I'm not clear here: when he mentions 'pandiatonic clusters', 'the discreet, sometimes subtle, varieties of instrumentation – a suspicion of piano or organ, a few bars of mouth-organ obbligato', even 'Aeolian cadence' - how far were these definitely Beatles contributions and how much worked into a basic tune by the arranger?

What does it matter? given that George Martin, their arranger and producer, is often referred to as the "fifth Beatle" - but of course you can use Aeolian cadences and flat-submediant shifts without knowing what they're called, and these and other harmonic idiosyncrasies would certainly have come from Lennon and McCartney. As for instrumentation, don't forget that in 1963 there were few if any "orchestrations" added to what the Beatles themselves played, and live performances around that time sound almost exactly like the released recordings; most of the details would be worked out in rehearsal, while Martin would make suggestions and refinements when they met him in the studio. His contributions increased during the course of the 1960s up to the complex arrangements you find on Abbey Road, Sgt Pepper, the "White Album" etc., but almost always based on ideas from the group. There's quite an extensive literature on this, and much information also on the Wikipedia entries for albums and particular songs.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

True - though an early intervention to the effect that there were "far more" questions about western classical music than about pop, and that the students were "no better" at answering the pop questions than the classical ones might have sent the discussion in a different direction .

I would have - except that I would have regarded such an intervention earlier as moving off-topic: I hadn't really read any of those posts as implying/stating that pop questions had "overtaken" classicals. (And, in my very first post on the subject - the third on this Thread - I did point out that I did better than the students.)

If, indeed, there are far more questions on classical music than pop, I'd have to say that I think some questions now and then on pop music are probably not much to comment on. The fact that Mr and Mrs a's hearts sank suggested to me that this happened rather more often than you suggest: this may be a question of differing perceptions.

Pop Music questions appear quite regularly - but they are still outnumbered by classical-based ones (around a 3:2 ratio - there's always a classical-music based set of questions; not always a pop-based one). Hearts being affected "when" doesn't suggest frequent regularity - unless I've been misunderstanding Wordsworth all these years and he was complaining about regular palpitations? In either/any case there is certainly no "concentration" on pop music.

And considering that the students are no better at answering questions about pop opens up further subjects for speculation: are the fans of popular music as 'genre-focused' as classical music fans, in knowing, perhaps, about metal of various sorts but nothing about rap or hip hop (or is rock the only popular music covered?) &c?

Oh, I'm quite sure they are - based on absolutely no evidence! - perhaps "I wouldn't be at all surprised if this turned out to be the case". The feeble provision of Music education of any sort - even by excellent Music teachers - will do nothing to expand people's awareness of other types of Music beyond what people experience from their personal encounters.

[Ian]

how far were these definitely Beatles contributions and how much worked into a basic tune by the arranger?

I’ve noticed that those with little interest outside ‘classical’ music are often bothered by the collaborative nature of much pop music. That’s not to say that all pop music is produced that way - tracks can be the work of a single writer/producer (often singlehandedly playing a range of instruments) or by quite a large team each lending their specialist element. But surely, one’s enjoyment a track wouldn’t be determined by those sort of extra-musical considerations?

Another aspect of pop music which seems to cause confusion in classical circles is a common inability to distinguish between the artists and the composers/producers of the actual material.

[Richard Barrett]

I’ve noticed that those with little interest outside ‘classical’ music are often bothered by the collaborative nature of much pop music.

Indeed. But I'm sure it often derives from the way that sole billing, or at least top billing, is often given to someone who's basically just turned up in the studio to record a vocal over an otherwise complete track (after which there's much de-essing, EQ, compression and maybe pitch-correction to be done before the voice sounds "right").

[Richard Tarleton]

Pop Music questions appear quite regularly - but they are still outnumbered by classical-based ones (around a 3:2 ratio - there's always a classical-music based set of questions; not always a pop-based one)....In either/any case there is certainly no "concentration" on pop music.

Indeed. And as I don't think has been mentioned up till now, just occasionally the music questions are on film music, or music used in films.

[Ian]

Indeed. But I'm sure it often derives from the way that sole billing, or at least top billing, is often given to someone who's basically just turned up in the studio to record a vocal over an otherwise complete track (after which there's much de-essing, EQ, compression and maybe pitch-correction to be done before the voice sounds "right").

It usually suits those involved, though, the writers/producers can live in the studio producing their music, while the artist gets out on the road selling the stuff. It's a model that works.

[french frank]

Ian, I don't undertand how your answer relates to my post. I was simply wondering what form the Lennon-McCartney 'raw material' took and what George Martin did to it, vis-à-vis William Mann's comments relating to theoretical aspects.

I'm not 'bothered' about it at all: I hoped someone knowledgeable would be able to give an answer.

I’ve noticed that those with little interest outside ‘classical’ music are often bothered by the collaborative nature of much pop music. That’s not to say that all pop music is produced that way - tracks can be the work of a single writer/producer (often singlehandedly playing a range of instruments) or by quite a large team each lending their specialist element. But surely, one’s enjoyment a track wouldn’t be determined by those sort of extra-musical considerations?

Another aspect of pop music which seems to cause confusion in classical circles is a common inability to distinguish between the artists and the composers/producers of the actual material.

[french frank]

What does it matter?

If it doesn't matter to you, it doesn't matter to you. Your knowledge and experience of music is infinitely deeper than mine. George Martin may have been the "fifth Beatle", but he wasn't Lennon or McCartney, and I presume his input was of a different sort.

But thank you for the answer - I knew/know as much about an Aeolian cadence as John Lennon did.

[Mary Chambers]

This is so politically incorrect that I hardly dare write it, but when questions on popular culture came up on Top of the Form my parents used to say "Ten marks for not knowing". I still think this way to some extent.

[Ian]

Ian, I don't undertand how your answer relates to my post. I was simply wondering what form the Lennon-McCartney 'raw material' took and what George Martin did to it, vis-à-vis William Mann's comments relating to theoretical aspects.

I'm not 'bothered' about it at all: I hoped someone knowledgeable would be able to give an answer.

Well, you were bothered enough to wonder if certain (good?) attributes in The Beatles music were actually by The Beatles. I took that to mean that perhaps they shouldn’t be counted in some way when assessing the music’s ‘value‘ - an idea that is consistent with the ‘classical‘ mentality of constantly trying to assess ‘worth‘. In that respect my comment wasn’t entirely directed at you.