Classical music

Because you were born in le wrong generation.
There's plenty of great modern classical and non-classical music.

>>447745
Wait 100-200 years from now and you'll find the answer.

>>447745
Oh and btw, there's more people making AND recording music now than before, with modern technologies enabling the public to listen to all sorts of shit. So it wasn't like back then you'd get really good cunts being the only ones who'd get a massive aduience.

File: vukadinovic.jpg (381KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 1920x1080px

>>447752
>travel in the future
>they make better music there

File: 1442912718-italypope2-o.jpg (87KB, 800x535px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 800x535px

>>447750
yeah like what

also >>447745
satans throne room, based deus

>>447745
I agree there is something unique about this genre of music and for some reason less of it is made nowadays despite the improvements in technology, higher populations and no lack of enthusiasm for it. How would you define classical music and differentiate it from other types of music?

More complex and non-repetitive?

Could this be compared to other genres that have been overlooked in this day and age?

>>447745
>Why is there no contemporary music that could even be compared to the classic masterpieces of Bach, Mozart, Bethoween etc.

Sure there is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvmMmwdqkzM

>>447792
>comparing directionless guitar wankery to classical music

mealfags when will they ever learn

>>447745
>cash moves everything around me

now the cash demands crap, and crap is being made, only orchestre music you can hear today is in some low-cultured shit like Star Wars where space cowboys fight with space samurais which are against space nazis.

there is no demand for the next Carl Orff, Vaughn Wiliams, Gershwin, Holst, Elgar just to name the early 20th century ones.

File: MCRide2[1].jpg (55KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x281px

Everybody knows that Death Grip is the Mozart of our time

>>447794
>directionless
>guitar wankery

Now I know you're just talking smack. Look, I like classical music too, but just because it doesn't have the same complexity and character, doesn't mean it can't evoke the same emotions.

But anyway, kill yourself you fucking elitist cunt.

>>447798
>le I don't care enough to seek it out so it doesn't exist

>>447745
Genres come and go
In 100 years they will talk about the Beatles the same way we talk about Mozart.
Classical music is considered sophisticated because its old.
Just because you like something doesn't make it special

File: maxresdefault (4).jpg (62KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 1280x720px

>>447745
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94dY-QxjDiE

There still are, however they are working in symbiosis with movie directors that have the budget to finance them and profit directly from them. The profession shifted, however talented composers still exist.

>>447822
>In 100 years they will talk about the Beatles the same way we talk about Mozart.

I pray to Scaruffi every day they won't.

File: mark-twain.jpg (110KB, 510x505px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 510x505px

>>447822
>In 100 years they will talk about the Beatles the same way we talk about Mozart.

yeah sure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1-TrAvp_xs

VS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75J_oMq4_pk

If that is your point, OP is right we are becoming culturally retarded.

>>447835
Just because you were born in the wrong generation doesn't mean Mozart is objectively better than The Beatles as you seem to imply.

File: 14stone-img-tmagArticle.jpg (155KB, 592x832px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 592x832px

>>447835
cannot argue about taste m8

>>447745
>Why is there no contemporary music that could even be compared to the classic masterpieces of Bach, Mozart, Bethoween etc.

Because it is contemporary, the definition of a classic means that it has survived the test of time, became a pillar of human culture and as such cannot be criticised since it is the one that establishes every further cultural evolution. Contemporary music cannot achieve that, since it is contemporary.

>>447855
>Mozart is objectively better than The Beatles
He is most certainly objectively better than the Beatles, even the early Rolling Stones are by far objectively better than the Beatles however music is too personal a medium to support an absolute hierarchy of values, if it is worth loving, it must be great; no more need be said.

File: aida-web.jpg (531KB, 1080x790px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 1080x790px

>>447798
>only orchestre music you can hear today is in some low-cultured shit like Star Wars where space cowboys fight with space samurais which are against space nazis.
So...just like before?

Where composers made music for regurgitated plots taken from history/myth or ribald comedies involving cuckoldry?

>>447893

>He is most certainly objectively better than the Beatles,

Explain to me how Mozart is objectively better than the Beatles

>>447745
Only time can tell. Or can you decide are these works of 'classic' or not? just to name a few:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wjcbC-xn9g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUyjYC_Pv90

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h8UdaHBxyU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOmJLk1lu08&list=PLh2RN2s25X_CKGiYTo7-Y5bQOmjDULIMU

objectively, what is the difference in quality between these 2?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVycvLAFXmc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7O91GDWGPU

>>447861
>mfw this picture defines 90% of the young musicians I've ever met, and I know a lot of them

>>447910
Compared to a classical composer, someone writing a popular song can utilize only a very small range of musical possibilities: a shorter time span, fewer kinds of instruments, a lower level of virtuosity and a greatly restricted range of compositional techniques. Correspondingly, classical performers are able to supply whatever the composers need for a given piece; popular performers seriously restrict what composers can ask for. Of course, there are sublime works that make minimal performance demands. But constant restriction of resources reduces the opportunities for greater achievement.

>>447897
if you wanna tip your fedora further, you could also point out that before operas the composers would "be forced" to honor jews nailed to wood and their relatives
yes, music is motivated by cash. i don't know why /mu/tards think this is bad or even related to quality

>>447745
No rich nobles -> No cool music.

>>447923

There are those who would argue the opposite is true, that minimalist approsches are more to their taste.

So in the end, it all boils down to taste. For someone who does not like Classical music, Beethoven is not better than Beatles (nor do I think so, Beethoven is not very good).

>>447938
>There are those who would argue the opposite is true, that minimalist approsches are more to their taste. So in the end, it all boils down to taste.

That is not objective, but subjective. As I wrote earlier if it is worth loving, it must be great; no more need be said.

>>447940
>it is worth loving
but that's subjective too

>classical
>not romantic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OFHXmiZP38

Fucking plebs

>>447923
>popular song
There is more to contemporary music then whats popular.
You cant compare classical music to pop. That doesn't make sense.
Classical music wasn't the pop of its day.
Some fucker playing a fiddle in a pub was the equivalent of justin bierber.

File: download (1).jpg (7KB, 224x225px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 224x225px

>>447745
Contemporary music is richer in melody, rhythm, harmony, texture and timbre than ever before. If you can't find modern music that matches the quality of the classics then you haven't been looking, and you're probably an intellectually lazy philistine.

File: ugly-wigger.jpg (58KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 400x400px

>>447957
show us patrician

>posts some death metal crap with people recording their dysentery

>>447949
He's talking about Mozart vs The Beatles. Not contemporary vs classical.

>>447745
>degraded culturally
Ultimately a meaningless expression.

I have Brahms sandwiched between Black Sabbath and Franz Ferdinand in my car's flashdrive. What gives?

>>447940

That is exactly my point. None of these composers are objectively better than any other music.

>>447946
>Tries to into semantics
>can't into semantics

Classical music is degenerate. Amelodic native Asian music is where it's at.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6_OBBaIUvo

I also think there's plenty of great classical music out there begin made nowadays (not those crappy film scores posted here though).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAymD_BL_qI

File: dawn-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-shotgun.jpg (57KB, 680x510px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 680x510px

>>447985
would you please read his fucking posts ffs. idiots discussion

File: jpg.jpg (14KB, 300x304px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x304px

>>447966
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaUoVaUI7pk

if this shit ain't better than mozart then nothing is

File: images.jpg (10KB, 200x252px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 200x252px

>>447745
>Why is there no contemporary music that could even be compared to the classic masterpieces of Gesualdo, Tallis, Obrecht etc.

File: This+fat+chick+also+american+_abeb7ac9e31780df12cc463fd879024a.jpg (49KB, 458x526px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 458x526px

>>447745
>Why is there no classical music that could even be compared to dub, huh OP tell me that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fVK7atPvLQ

File: images (1).jpg (13KB, 223x226px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 223x226px

>>447966
>melody
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pkvju_DlP8A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EGriPbFmKE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYxaoRVofE8
>rhythm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3AW8IMlGw4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg_Uxq2L1aI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9W4GMVvXxY
>harmony
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYryV8og6Ms
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBN9wZMEb0o
>texture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJZ13SyRXhU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3L-gL4XmjM
>timbre
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=captain+murphy+duality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HQqXllXpfQ
>lyrics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8Ru8d0l_fU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rdm8LItAHs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBGkhPx529g


These aren't even the best examples, just well known ones that I could think of. /mu/ would probably call some of these pleb tier but they're still far more advanced than the classical era was (not that that's necessarily better)

>lusty
>negro
>attitudes

File: 1450659713834.png (497KB, 502x700px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 502x700px

>>448070
>/mu/
lol no

>>448070
It's nice to see someone who knows what they're talking about and doesn't suffer from the "le wrong generation" meme.

File: le_sacre.jpg (38KB, 475x356px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 475x356px

>>447745
Western classical music reached completion with the premiere of The Rite of Spring in 1913.

>>447817
>thinking elitism is bad

>>448070
>townes van zandt

Muh nigga.

>>447938
>So in the end, it all boils down to taste.
Fag.

File: homo.gif (1MB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 250x250px

>>448291
>thinking elitism is not just faggotry

>>448306
>not being elite

File: autismus maximus.jpg (158KB, 523x720px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 523x720px

>>448315
>being a faggot

>>448240
He knows what he is talking about because he posted a few songs he liked?

>>448321
brilliant

>>447745
Because you touch yourself at night OP

>>448291
Baseless elitism is bad

File: CLC5YRFUwAAiVEv.png (94KB, 429x468px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 429x468px

>>448070
>zappas cacophony
>more advanced than the classical era

advanced yes, as in fucking a cartoon pony is advancement of sexuality.

>>448322
It's not about what I like, I was giving examples of people using devices that either didn't exist or weren't fully exploited back then, different time signatures, scales, improvisation, production quality, sampling. That wyschnegradsky piece is using notes that didn't even exist in Western Classical music( though they were popular in Turkish and Indian music)

It's the same reason that we seem to not have any painters at the same level of those in the renaissance. They had a clear direction of painting for the church, or depicting scenes from history. The same can be said for classical music. As we have become more mobile with our listening, it has made symphonies less favorable than a three minute song that, though is more catchy and easier to interpret, does not convey emotions at the same depth that a good symphony can. As a result of this, there is less money to be had in making classical music for the masses, but there is more money to be had in composing for movies. This, compared with modern classical music moving to a more experimental style, has made it seem like there is no modern composer to match Strauss, Mussorgsky, Ravel, Shostakovich, Holst, or the other great composers of the past.

>>448544
Also, comparing non-classical music to classical music is like comparing a horror book to a romance to see which one conveys a romantic feeling better. They're entirely seperate genres of music, so comparing them to see which one is better doesn't achieve anything.

>>448506
No advanced as in employing the use of intervals and scales that were undiscovered or unexploited by early composers.

Zappa was an absolute genius

>>448562
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMdhWRO4-dQ

>>447745
Globalization, pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Classical music still exists, and it is still primarily funded by the elite, but we don't teach it to children anymore. This allows commercial interests to reach them first.

>>448562
>employing the use of intervals and scales that were undiscovered or unexploited by early composers.


does not guarantee harmonic and melodic or even qualitative productions, in 100% it ends in cacophonic pieces that are 'interesting' only to those of interested in that field of experimental musical study.

File: 1082040862.jpg (77KB, 600x391px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 600x391px

>>448544
>It's the same reason that we seem to not have any painters at the same level of those in the renaissance.
Picrelated is a painting, not a photograph

Modern painters far exceed renaissance painters in terms of technique, even with realism. Realism isn't seen as the be all and end all of talent anymore, and rightfully so.

>it has made symphonies less favorable than a three minute song that, though is more catchy and easier to interpret, does not convey emotions at the same depth that a good symphony can

You're comparing a song to a whole symphony, which is a bad comparison to make, a song or track is more like a movement or theme, with a symphony being related to an album. Also the length of songs was three minutes because of limitations on old records, once better records were developed that limitation went out the window, and different genres and artists made tracks at their own length. The length of a track is heavily dependent on the genre. Avant garde jazz pieces tend to be long, between 7-12 minutes, to fit in solos from all the musicians as well as the theme. Instrumental hip hop has often got very short tracks, as short as 1 minute, in order to showcase a variance of loops, keep the pace of the album brisk and in imitation of live DJing.

>>447897
Or historical fanfiction

>>447799
Found the /mu/tant

File: 330px-Dvorak1.jpg (60KB, 330x519px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 330x519px

Why is Dvorák so best?

Yes because as we all know everyone in their time knew and regularly listened to Bach, Mozart, Bethoween, etc,... right?
Well no, you faggot. Most people in 1700 weren't listening to Bach, what they knew was folk songs and similar music, which is what spawned modern pop, really.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7DMcG3UCY0
This is what "plebs" would listen to. Not Mozart.

>>448643
>Picrelated is a painting, not a photograph
wow

>>447745
Imo Igor Stravinsky was on Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven's level, and he lived in the early 20th century.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqWZGUO_eoc

>>447792
>metal
pfffft haha

>>448577
based

>>448586
does not guarantee harmonic and melodic or even qualitative productions, in 100% it ends in cacophonic pieces that are 'interesting' only to those of interested in that field of experimental musical study.
doesn't guarantee them, but that's where Zappa's talent comes in.


> in 100% it ends in cacophonic pieces that are 'interesting' only to those of interested in that field of experimental musical study.
Most of the best music is only interesting to those who have already invested time into listening and understanding music. Truffles or Scotch might taste like shit to an average person but to a connoiseur they are amazing. Likewise with dense music like Zappa or even bach. The average person wouldn't listen to either. Sounds pretentious but it applies to everyone equally, I think it's just a matter of acquiring the taste.

I'd go so far as to say that the majority of people who like Bach these days will also like Zappa, and I find it hard to take someone's taste seriously if they engage in genre fanboyism.

File: 1441981106014.png (655KB, 964x1033px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 964x1033px

>>448070
>>447792
>>447799
>>447798
>>447817
>>447915
>>448036
>>448070
>>448240
>>448534
>>448562
Terrible, terrible examples.

The classic music of our era is - surprise - classical music. It is still being made, unfortunately it is much more niche now because it is far more abstract, and as such far more advanced and ahead of it's time. Compositions from the 70's that fuse acoustics and electronics still sound like they're 10 years from now on. Most of the music you've posted imitates what composers have made decades prior, and turn it into soulless kitsch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nffOJXcJCDg

This is the most popular example of modern classical music. You don't have to like it, but point remains: it is historically relevant, much more than the popular music you personally think is going to be.

>>447745
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTn1Y0HhYsk

Wrong

File: boulez.jpg (88KB, 709x468px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 709x468px

>>447957
>Contemporary music is richer in melody, rhythm, harmony, texture and timbre than ever before
correct

>>448070
>posts shitty /mu/core
welp

>>448771
So much trolling in that pic.

>>447817
Classical is more complex than metal could ever be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxbpF_aW4vU

This was from 1913, and still more brutal and technical than most Metal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiH3vA7q0jo

Metal is 70 years late to the complexity party.

>>447750
this

>>447767
yeah like what
Rautavaara, Arvo Part, Tristan Murail, Ferneyhough, Lachenmann, Lera Auerbach, John Adams, Karl Jenkins if you want something more traditional, Hosokawa, John Psathas, Saariaho.

And thats just the ones who are alive. The list of great 20th century art music is far too big for one post.

>>447826
Film composers are still pretty average tier. Some good composers, but most are just regurgitating romantic idioms without too much innovation.

>>448070
We're not talking about the Classical era, we're talking about classical music as a whole. Call it art music if that helps. No other genre can really compare, especially to 20th century art music.

File: 1440274875345.jpg (45KB, 739x741px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 739x741px

>>447745
Making a remark like that shows the lack of knowledge of contemporary music on your part. Composers such as Schonberg, Scelsi, Nono, Feldman and Ligeti have pushed music to a new level using atonal systems unknown by past composers.
>have we culturally degraded?
No, we have simply gone in a different direction.

File: antispiral 2.gif (822KB, 500x297px) Image search: [Google]

822KB, 500x297px

>>448771
And yet what is "art music", beyond the pointless, impractical gesturing of those so desperate to consider themselves above the "masses" that they scoff at joy, entertainment, and the very present moment itself?

Listening to music you don't actually understand or enjoy doesn't make you greater than you are. It does not elevate you, or improve you. All it does is reveal your insecurity, your inability to accept your own nature.

Its like all of the red-square-on-a-canvas "modern art" that doesn't actually represent or mean anything, but everyone says is "so deep" just because rich people are dumb enough to fall for the "artist's" grandstanding.

>>448771
This is really wrong. I could have told by your picture alone.

> it is much more niche now because it is far more abstract
There are genres which are both more niche and more abstract, and "abstractness" in music was really pioneered by jazz. In fact abstract jazz and abstract classical are very similar in aesthetics, the main difference being improvisation vs composition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSuuwJFw4wU

>Compositions from the 70's that fuse acoustics and electronics still sound like they're 10 years from now on.
If you think so then you haven't listened to enough music either from now or from the 70's. The fusion of electronic and acoustic sounds was nothing new in the 70's, and neither are any of the techniques employed in that piece.

>Most of the music you've posted imitates what composers have made decades prior, and turn it into soulless kitsch.
This is where you went full retard. Besides the fact that composers have always imitated themes from folk or religious music, in the modern era the influence was almost always going from popular (usually jazz) to classical.

The most famous modern composer from my country uses a lot of folk tunes and distorts them to make his music. (I remember having to study him in school)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eUBCBjunrc

File: Axiomatic Triangle 2.png (130KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1600x1200px

>>448845
art music is the commonly accepted term for music written by trained composers, and primarily stored in a written score, as opposed to a recording.

Easy concept to grasp, here's some background reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_music

All music is technically "art" (And in this post-Duchamp world, the word is essentially meaningless), but only classical music is "art music"

>>448803
I was trying to give popular examples from a variety of genres. I don't go to /mu/ so I don't know what they think.

I posted Wyschnegradsky, I figured that was enough for modern classical and arguing about modern vs traditional classical would give the impression that popular music has not made important developments, which is wrong.

Posting Boulez wouldn't illustrate my point.

>>448845
>>And yet what is "art music"
Academic music rooted in western tradition, that twists the norms by mixing things up with non-western traditions and other non-standard elements (thus creating the avant-garde)? Are you seriously implying memerap sampling a piano piece counts as "art music"?

Whether art music is better or superior to popular music depends on how much of a pretentious fuckvad you are. One thing's certain is that both take influence from each other (plenty of great art music composers took influence from folk music, the precursor to today's art music, and plenty of contemporary composers take influence from jazz and popular music, minimalist composers in particular), thus both are relevant but not in the same way - The Beatles will be remembered as The Beatles, not as Mozarts.

>>448557
Implying At the mountains of madness isnt' romantic

>>448070
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orzkAUY9Te0
if you're gonna post breakcore at least post good breakcore m8. Igorrr is the Mindless Self Indulgence of breakcore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orzkAUY9Te0

>>448889
It's actually a Vladimir Bozar tune,and it's not really breakcore. I'm not an expert on breakcore but I was trying to post something entry level as an example so I think it served my point.

That's a good tune though m8

That's a good tune btw.

>people ITT think that the term "classical music" for all orchestral compositions pre20th century

Seriously. You're using one term to encompass all musical genres, movements and composers that existed over the course of hundreds of years. This is high school music theory you idiots.

>>448771
fuck off ame

>>448923
he gave examples so it's pretty obvious what he meant. Baroque, classical era and romantic art music are often lumped together under "classical"

>>448823
>We're not talking about the Classical era, we're talking about classical music as a whole. Call it art music if that helps. No other genre can really compare, especially to 20th century art music.
i doubt that's what OP meant by "contemporary music". I could be wrong though.

Classical quality music will be enjoyed forever, because humans think and perceive the world in similar ways of how they did 5000 years ago, brain did not evolve nor mentality.
If the sounds appealed to general public hundred of years ago, they will appeal to the public even 1000 years in the future.

Does this sound like some primitive shit that only they understood or enjoyed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBhB9gRnIHE

>>447745
Who /gershwin/ here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_XMUvnT_aQ

File: ask-the-expert-A-Rubber-Ball-Thrown-On-The-Sea-631.jpg__800x600_q85_crop.jpg (56KB, 631x300px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 631x300px

>>447745
we haven't degraded but with modernism and post-modernism the artists got mindfucked and started creating crap that is of minimal artistic value but of "unimaginable" philosophical value, which of course can only be percieved by someone sharing his absolute views to the point of 'just believing the crap he says'. that is hat "art" has become. All epochs had their crap-periods producing works of little or no actual value, post-modernism is the current one. However it is essential to the progress since out of it the people learn and develope, look at it as preparation time before the breakthrough phase.

>>449086
>Lawrence Weiner, born in New York in 1940, is almost the epitome of the radical conceptual artist. His most famous works are just words that describe art that might or might not get made. And that's when Weiner is at his most concrete. Sometimes his words describe thoughts that are largely unthinkable.

I absolutely get your point

>>447861
That works in the opposite way too. Freddie Mercury was the complete opposite if that.

>>449086
>post-modern
>current

read up on your art, son

compared in what way? you could definitely argue there is music of the same complexity and memorability. it's not like no one tries to copy mozart

File: 1450149888279.jpg (32KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 500x500px

Mozart's a common fuckboy and Beethoven's a dirty deaf-mute.
Posting some actual music
https://youtu.be/rCb37sGxMLc

File: god-cock.jpg (19KB, 339x422px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 339x422px

>>449113
>post-modern
>not current
read up on yours fagon, post-modern is the current art epoch, no millenial bull-crap invented has defined a new one.

>>447745
>Why is there no contemporary music that could even be compared to the classic masterpieces of Bach, Mozart, Bethoween etc.
Why are there no contemporary cars that could even be compared to the classic masterpieces like the 65 Ford Mustang, 72 Pontiac Firebird, 78 Chevy Camaro, ect.

File: intellectual sculpture.jpg (61KB, 587x397px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 587x397px

Classical music used to be made to please the crowd. Now the masses don't want it anymore, and it's been relegated to the same domain as modern art, which I think we can all agree is utter crap.

>>447745
>why the average modern composer doesn't compare with my selection of the most amazing talents of the last 5 centuries
Gee op I don't know.

>>448813
It may be inflammatory but it is right. Left is Reddit taste and right is actual good taste. It isn't trolling.

File: what went right.jpg (2MB, 2200x1100px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2200x1100px

>>449171
>>449154
not all of it

File: gateway_140419_SB_Jim-Lambie-3.jpg (202KB, 700x422px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 700x422px

>>449086
true

>>449171
also, after listening to all that bullshit anons here called 'classical contemporary music', I have to agree

>>448643
realism=/=beauty

>>449178
It goes to full retard after the first wikipedia link.

>>449180
>comparing older modern art to modern classical techniques.

>>449086
so what is the new renaissance anon? where should we look.

>>449180
Why is it that the good shit nowadays are still emulating ancient styles?

>>449191
It's still true for the most part. The literature part was spot on.

>>449210
Time-tested goods are always better than contemporary novelties.

File: Josquin+des+Prez+josquin.jpg (38KB, 300x391px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 300x391px

>>449171
>Classical music used to be made to please the crowd
Not true btw,

>>449154
no, typically in art historical literature current art is just called 'contemporary'. post-modernism passed last century

File: smugshinoa2sqr.png (271KB, 531x531px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 531x531px

>>449235
Art should literally never change
The new shit sucks and half the time we don't even know what we want

>>449171
you should at least do some cursory reading on what 'modern art' is. also the art that deals with poopies and peepee that everyone finds so gross is not 'modern' really, nor is it representative of any art

>>449246
I prefer Classical but if nothing changes then we don't know what we want.

>>449246
>Art should literally never change
>smug animes would never exist
>everything would be cave paintings

File: parametric-architecture.jpg (774KB, 1200x848px) Image search: [Google]

774KB, 1200x848px

>>449203
in music this http://computoser.com/track/1238

also in architecture picrelated, other arts will follow.

>>448643
'realism' wasn't the point of the highest art

>>449262
you probably aren't aware of any debates amongst 'classical' art

>>449284
I am aware of it but my comment was that new things should be tried so the people can choose what they want.

>>449269
Renaissance is a recreation of the style of a bygone era. What era is that modeled on?

File: SmugShiina.jpg (550KB, 1320x1080px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1320x1080px

>>449267
>anime is art

File: 4-tree-root-shelter.jpg (96KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 640x480px

>>449295
Paleolithic

>>449299
It is a product of art. It evolved from art.

if art is religion and modern art is anti-art in that it denounces religion is it fair to say that people who don't listen to classical music and don't value art are fedora-tipping atheists?

>>449318
Many people who enjoy modern art are fedora tippers but not because of that round about logic.

>>449318
on the contrary, fedora-tipping atheists enjoy the products of a religious culture because their shallow enjoyment of it makes them seem intelligent. fedora-tipping atheists want to differentiate themselves from the crowd, even if it means being complete hypocrites

>>449245
still disputed, for anons point he is right the new era is not yet defined, even post-modernism is still undefined since it still doesn't have a prominent style that defines it from others to a matter of an epoch, thus POST-modernism as some shit that happend after the modern but we still do not know what shit is the actual crap that describes it.

File: 1R7XXkJ.png (57KB, 625x656px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 625x656px

>>449329

>>449223
>The literature part was spot on.
That's the most retarded part anon

>>449332
it's not defined which is why it's called 'contemporary', to differentiate it from post-modernism, since it is no longer post-modern.

>>449347
it's true though

>>449348
How is it retarded? All of the shallow literature was on the left, where it should be. It's not inherently bad but it isn't deep either. It is not incorrect to say the right side is more complex and objectively better than the left.

>>449354
I misread that. Yes, atheists enjoy living in a religious culture so they can feel smarter than those around them.

>>449351
>since it is no longer post-modern
not anon, who says that? what defines contemporary from post-modernism what are the traits that are so definitive for both epochs?

>>448014
Beethoven is

>>448014
he looks like that guy who made doom, also the solo at the begining is the only thing that is mildly interesting everything else is utter bullshit.

>>449361
>It's not inherently bad but it isn't deep either.
Prove it

> It is not incorrect to say the right side is more complex
No, it's absolutely correct. As of now.

>and objectively better than the left.
>objectively

>>449406
The ones on the right use language better. Morals and ideas are given through clever language and comparisons unlike the left. It is commonly accepted that Camus is shallow pseudoscience whereas Shakespeare is a good use of language and references. I hope this is bait because it is obvious that genre fiction is shallow and not a complex use of language, plot or references.

>>449433
(you)

>>449433
>The ones on the right use language better.
I already agreed to that.

>Morals and ideas are given through clever language and comparisons unlike the left.
And?

>It is commonly accepted that Camus is shallow pseudoscience
What?

>whereas Shakespeare is a good use of language and references.
And?

>I hope this is bait because it is obvious that genre fiction is shallow and not a complex use of language, plot or references.
Your point of view is based on very limited aesthetic considerations.

>>449372
like i said before typically in art historical literature the distinction is made, because 'post-modernism' is inadequate to describe the different artistic practices in contemporary art. there's no real 'trait' in contemporary art other than a distinction from previous art. post-modernism though was mostly cynical and critical, especially of the modernist art that preceded it. post-modernism still informs art produced today, such as repurposing display space, or blurring the distinction between high/low cultural forms, but it's not a direct response to the problems of modernism that post-modernism often concerned itself with. actually there's a trend in art currently called 'remodernism' or 'retromodernism' where artists are exploring the principles of modernist art, which can't really be called post-modernism.

>>449269
>computer aided parametricity
that is most probably the next epoch, with new tools and practices also come new artistic forms

File: What's killing classical music.jpg (1021KB, 1984x4081px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 1984x4081px

>>447745
>Be in year 1615
>Why is there no classical music that could even be compared to that of the writers of the Liber Usualis? Have we degraded culturally?

>Be in year 1815
>Why is there no classical music that could even be compared to the renaissance masters like Ockghem and Du Pres? Have we degraded culturally?

>Be in year 2215
>Why is there no contemporary music that could even be compared to the post-modern masterpieces of Steven Stucky, Shulamit Rham and Kaija Saariaho? Have we degraded culturally?

>Be 2415
>Why is there no contemporary music that could compare to the classical masterpieces of Flooglebop and the Gentoos? Have we degraded culturally?

This attitude has been around forever.

>>448544
You think you're really smart, but you're not.

Mussorgsky was a drunk who slammed out piano music and songs before drinking himself to death.

Holst was literally a one-hit wonder, and otherwise a fairly mediocre composer
>inb4 some high school euphonium player links a wind band piece

The remaining three are acceptable, but hardly the most interesting or accomplished artists of their respective times.

>>449310
The highest form of art

>>449555
>The remaining three are acceptable, but hardly the most interesting or accomplished artists of their respective times.
Depends on the Strauss. Richard Strauss was probably among the most "interesting and accomplished artist" of his time when he was young, before he got into tl;dr operas. The Johann Strausses are just some waltz composers who were picked to represent a shitty ass boring period in Viennese history.

You're pretty much right about everything else. Mussorgsky gets a pass because he wrote Boris Godunov.

>>449433
It's bullshit because it's
A) appeal to authority: the post
B) it doesn't compare like with like
C)It's clearly dishonest trolling bullshit.

I mean you can't compare "prose" and "fantasy", that's just fucking retarded, you're clearly looking for an excuse to compare a singular genius with a meme writer to justify your retarded idea that "art music" and popular music are mutually exclusive and that art music is better by default.

>>447745
Because you don't actually know a damn thing about music, and you want to appear intelligent for it.

>I was born in le right generation
>Kanye is totally better than Mozart xd

>>449614
True. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and assumed Richard.

>>449555
>Holst was literally a one-hit wonder, and otherwise a fairly mediocre composer
Holst was also the worst kind of one-hit wonder: The one-hit wonder who resents his hit, and thinks it wasn't even good.

ITT: Homosexuals explain why it isn't possible to love several different genres of music because of their elitist attitudes, even though they are most likely working/middle class.

>>447826
basically this. People act like older classical music is 'pure' and modern classical music somehow sullied by the fact that it's attached to films. Take idiots like this for example >>447798
we start a discussion about the merits of modern classical music and he defines it as low cultured because of the plot of the movie its associated with, as if that has something to do with the quality of the melody or harmony or whatever. But in any case, it's not like classical composers weren't often writing for theatrical productions. Take Prokofiev's Dance of the Knights, written for Romeo and Juliet. And compare it to Ennio Moricone's Ecstasy of Gold, written for The Good the Bad and the Ugly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUmq1cpcglQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUmq1cpcglQ

Why should one be a time honoured piece of classical music while the other is relegated to the status of 'just a movie score'. Frankly there is no reason beyond ignorant snobbishness.

>>448823
>Film composers are still pretty average tier. Some good composers, but most are just regurgitating romantic idioms without too much innovation.
Do you really think there weren't plenty of average classical composers in the 19th century, regurgitating worn out old themes with no innovation? Because there were, same with every other era of history. But if a piece is bad or boring, it doesn't get played much and eventually gets forgotten. The past always has the advantage that way, because we only remember the good stuff whereas the failures of the present are still fresh in our minds.

>>448683
also this. With the spread of democracy and the growth of the wealth of the lower classes, culture got democratised along with it. Culture always follows the money.

File: Joan-Rivers-slams-Lena-Dunham-says-she-sends-the-wrong-message-with-her-body.jpg (38KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 640x480px

>>449842
>ITT: Homosexuals explain
you want fagplay go to /mu

>>449856

also, it's not as if classical music in the traditional sense isn't still being written and performed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mqmbz8W1-tA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oE8iEDsAED4

File: 6a615eacea437aa37ba78c017ebfe355.jpg (177KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1000x1000px

Do you think that, with the way western art music is going, music will become more formal rather than aesthetic? As in, that music will only look good on paper, and that the beauty of it being performed only stems from the theory behind what's written?

>>449944
Schoenberg already happened, anon.

>>449856
>Ennio Moricone's Ecstasy of Gold
might help if I actually posted the link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-rHdSWZLpQ

>>449086
>However it is essential to the progress since out of it the people learn and develope, look at it as preparation time before the breakthrough phase.
That is exactly what contemporany art try to do,but you dipshits are too foolish to accept your poor and prejudiced point of views

>>449246
>Art should literally never change
You clearly don't understand what are you talking about

>>449944
That happened in the 1900s, as >>449968 said.

There's still a big hangover from this among academic composers. Stockhausen and Ferneyhough took these ideas to the extreme, but now we're getting back to aesthetics. Guys like Rautavaara and Arvo Part. Even the minimalism gang of Reich, Adams and Glass are pretty focused on aesthetics.

Then there's the guys who do aesthetics in a formal way. The spectralists and sonorists. Grisey, Murail, Scelsi, Varese, etc.

>>449899
Hmm, where can I find more modern things like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiorncOFpcg

tbeh

>comparing popular music to classical
And that's where your failure starts. You should compare it to folk where it belongs, because that's what it practically is.

>>449180
What's the image of the Nazis looking at the baby? It's pretty cool.

>>447745
I always thought Stairway To Heaven was a pretty close bet, American Pie, and some Swing
But I'm a tasteless bachelor when it comes to music, half of my playlist is pop hits from the 2000's.

>>447745
>Why is there no contemporary music that could even be compared to the classic masterpieces

Two words: John Williams

>>447745
I think Morriconne is much better than it, besides masterpieces like Peer Gynt.

File: Partenheimer-22.jpg (228KB, 1025x658px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1025x658px

>>450513
he just explained it to you, and you say he is too foolish to accept. you are too stupid to recognise that this is the period of shit and that only after it we can hope that something of artistic and not philosophical value will take its place.

>inb4 too stupid to understand
art is not based on intellectual effort, but on emotional communication

>>452639
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQGAhOzkNSk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upjlKlV9uIA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn6o3T_WlXM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad8pGPxAoSU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW6DlvPd_Cs

>>447835
Like every piece of Mozart was good. We only talk about his good shit

>>452653
>understanding art should not be* based on intellectual effort, but on emotional communication

correction

you had artists, and then you had guys that were trying to mix the paint to get a new tone or develope a new brush. today we live in the latter.

>>449261
Just trying to trigger people

Anyway there's plenty of good classical music out there, but it's all played behind movies so it's not usually noticed.

>>447745
>classical music
>today
that shit was boring to begin with, we evolved got better instruments other understanding. when classical music was at its height people felt crap about early medieval folk songs. now people feel crap about classical music, too boring no emotions just some kitchy crap. true there are some cool things like that camina burana thing.

File: 1450208766626.png (357KB, 397x402px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 397x402px

>>453708
>Philistine: The Post

>>453708
You clearly don't know what kitschy means, you clearly have no understanding of history, and I feel personally insulted by this level of stupidity.

>>448643
That's a photograph made with paint. Not a painting.

Renaissance painters weren't trying to just recreate life. Anyone with a massive grid and lots of patience and time can do that.

There's so much more to painting than that.

File: dumb-american-woman.jpg (359KB, 700x556px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 700x556px

>>453767
>general petraeus
>kek
burger go fuck a cousin or some shit, /his aint a place for retards to be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D40fXVzaU80

>>448683
this sounds better than modern pop, how could it spawn a degenerate progeny? shouldn't art like evolve?

File: 20070226manzoni.jpg (44KB, 560x373px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 560x373px

>>453866
it evolves into literal shit

>>447745
I think plenty of modern music sounds great and plenty of classical music sounds basic, simplistic, and boring. There's good and bad in everything.

>>453849
Is the problem with the tripfag or petraeus himself

It is actually kind of hard comparing the music of (Johann Sebastian) Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven. It is true that they all belong to the common practice period of aristocratic Western art music.It is also true that Mozart was sometimes inspired by Bach, and Beethoven by Mozart, especially around the time of Mozart's death. Finally, it is true that we are dealing with an instrumental sort of music that is intended to be played live in front of an audience, often just a handful of times.

...but LISTEN to their music. It is so very different! The solemnity of Johann Sebastian Bach's often-geometric and symmetric music is NOT Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's profoundly melodic craftsmanship is NOT Ludwig van Beethoven's faux-improvisational outburst of emotions.

It really is hard to compare the three! In Mozart's day, harpsichords across Europe were being destroyed, often used as firewood, because the view of the classical period was that everything that went before it was somehow less valuable and should be discarded. Johann Sebastian Bach's music was already considered extremely old-fashioned in his latter years. And Beethoven lived in the days of the French revolution, the event that caused the beginning of the end of European aristocracy, and the time of Napoleon. Revolution was in the air, as was a desire to confront past traditions. These differences are just some of the walls between the three.

When it's hard to compare the three (in terms of similarities, there are PLENTY of differences) it is also hard to compare today with then. And today will never be similar to then. Always different.

I would say we have degraded culturally in the sense of philosophy and aesthetic in music. 21st century popular music is trite as fuck. However, we have progressed in making the wonders of musical experiences freely available to everyone. Especially since the emergence of mass-distributed music (= popular music, unlike folk music).

>>454371
Part two: Guess what, though? Western art music has not died. It was the popular music of the time, and sure, today it is not. It has more of a niche role today, the more you move forward in time.

Classical music is HUGE in Russia, by the way, which is why the Tchaikovsky Piano Competition takes place there. That launches the careers of contemporary pianists who win completely into the skies.

Anyway, three things have contributed it to becoming a niche: The emergence of the "cultural radicals", as they were called in Scandinavia — the modern, liberal, wealthy globalist, a cultural relativist, who grew up when it was cool to be a hippy and then turned super conservative and elitist in their older age. These people are the ones behind classical music being so damn elitist that even the musicians complain today. They exist at all levels: Audience, arrangers, performers, etc.

Second, the music developed along with post-Picasso modern art into becoming this ultra-philosophical ultra-hipster thing. Listen to Sofia Gubaidulina's music. It's music for a philosophical elite, not regular people, and is not for regular enjoying. Phillip Glass is an expression of this too, except that he did it in a way that really resonates with people.

Third, copyright fucked things up. We all play the old classics because hey, copyright did not even exist back when these people lived. Mozart's music was not played by others until later in his life, and then he didn't get paid for it! So everyone can do it. And the music is nice. So it just spreads like that. What about Shostakovich's ridiculously nice music, though? He's up there with Bach, Beethoven and Mozart for sure. A different spirit of time, sure, but he really has something special. His music is still under copyright. As is the music of many others. It's all so locked down. Valentina Lisitsa made her career by making music public for free after finding it on a torrent site. Hard conditions.

>>453849
Nice meme, sorry you got BTFO so hard.

>>454402
It's true that copyright has made a difference in accessibility, but I think that's more than compensated for by the internet. Nowadays you can obtain recordings of pretty much everything for free.

I really think Western art music has suffered from the last few decades, for the reasons that you describe. But I'd like to reiterate as I said earlier that there are successors to it: soundtracks to movies and television are often done by orchestras and provide the sort of sweeping, emotionally engaging sound that was found in much of the past.

File: tripfag anon.jpg (32KB, 572x572px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 572x572px

>>454553
you really showed him tripfag, proud of ya

>>454589
tripfagging makes the 4chan experience at least twice as enjoyable and its all beccause of people like you, thanks

Classical music is still produced, it's just not mainstream and not granted the same legitimacy as the old composer's pieces. There's also various forms of neo-classicalism kicking around.

Does /his/ like King Crimson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvz8jtZ3f5s

File: 1450357360284.png (1MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x1920px

>>454609

You guys do know that classical was barely heard by the populace when it was prominent, right?

What you're hearing now is a direct continuation of plebeian music that "classical" enthusiasts at the time (namely the upper class) would have balked at. We haven't become more "retarded", the middle and lower classes have just become more prominent.

>>449299
This

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDjPEQAArUo

Classical music got stale desu senpai. It's evolved but in a way devolved as well.
That's why jazz, ragtime and even big band got popular. They "broke" the rules of music but still provided quality audible pleasure.

9ths, 11ths, and 13ths were basically musical heresy until the 20th century. Not sure about augmented and suspended chords though, but I think those fall in the same vein.

File: Pieter_Aertsen_005.jpg (1MB, 2449x1711px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2449x1711px

>>453815
>>449270
>>449186
>denying the inherent beauty of realism in paintings
>pursued and perfected for the last 600 years
>one of the reasons to the greatness of Dutch Golden Age art
You know realism is compelling and awe-inspiring in paintings, even if sentiments can be effectively, and some perhaps even more effectively, communicated without it, the technique and results are still breathtaking.

Another principal forgotten is that modernism and its philosophy does not invalidate realism in the slightest, it provided a substitute to it.

Why does no art form that has ever existed surpassed Led Zeppelin?

It sucks so much that I was born a generation too late.

Let's all agree that we all fail to appreciate the present.

>>456264
>jazz, ragtime and even big band got popular

those are all dead now

>>456331
>Let's all agree that we all fail to appreciate the present.
Speak for yourself 'le born in le wrong generation' fag-o.

>>456337
I believe he may have been making a joke.

>everybody goes on about Mozart, Bach and Beethoven
>No mention of other greats like Bizet
Reee

>>456382
>everybody goes on about relevant German composers
>No mention of muh irrelevant French composer
Reee

>>456387
>irrelevant
To any non-learned sure, but anyone who says they like classical music should explore out to the unknown

>>456337
That's my point. Y'all niggas need to learn to appreciate the present instead of romanticizing some pre-penicillin bygone era.

>>456422
But anon I do appreciate the present.
There are artists of all styles, some making facsimiles of older works, and engaging new works, along with a variety of other great media.
I just really love historical art too.

>>447745

>bach
>classical

>>456394
>fucking casuals dont know Bizet

>>448070
I'll never understand people who listen and like this garbage. It feels like they don't know what music is.

Ever tried Prog, OP?

>>447921
Those were forced to listen classical when they were children, but it is easier to enjoy what everyone is enjoying.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (112KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1920x1080px

how can you say that when we have grimes, op?

File: 58366414[1].jpg (75KB, 400x405px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 400x405px

>>448771
>This crap
wtf am i listening? Why is this 'the classic music of our era' when it is not even classic in sanitariums?? Please explain this to me, why i wasted my ears listening this crap

I am going to say it out loud. Bach & Mozart are overrated. Generally Baroque and Classical era composers are. Romantic era and nationalistic composers show much better skill and their works are way more beautiful. Prove me wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qrKjywjo7Q

>>456700
>vevo
proved you wrong.

File: 4114581.jpg (75KB, 747x667px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 747x667px

>>456733

>>456700
>Bach is overrated

nigger please

>>456752
I am entitled to my opinion, disregarding it hurts my feelings, and that makes you racist, bigot, homophobic white cis male.

>>456317
See, you posted a shitty picture, because the most interesting and striking thing about this painting is the ways it breaks from realism.

File: 1421920677777.png (1MB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x2000px

>>456766
>effectively a large-scale still life painting
>doesn't break from realism at all apart from the biblical scene in the background, completely dwarfed by the realistic depictions of the deli foods
>the most interesting and striking thing about this painting is the ways it breaks from realism
>by congruously intertwining a biblical scene into an entirely realistic scene
Are you retarded?
Do you know what realism is in art?

File: Pussy-Riot-Orgy-In-A-Museum-2.jpg (132KB, 1010x674px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1010x674px

>>456616
b-bbut anon that is arts

>>449510
>>451063
>>454371
>>454402
>>455640
Seems like the good replies were ignored and people discussed all the cliched knee-jerk replies to the topic.

It would be worth while to consider the big aestheticians first, particularly ones that bridge the gap from aristocratic/euro culture to globalized/usa culture like Nietzsche. Also Alex Ross' main book is a good summary of music particularly.

>>456752
Out of the big three you have to admit he's the worse

>>456317
maybe go back in time and make that argument. i know for a fact that copying from nature was nowhere near the highest point of art for the academies

>>456459
>historical art

i bet it's all from the 19th century you turbopleb

>>457077
you mean the best, Chaconne in Dm is considered pinnacle of musical architecture and mastery of technique.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw9DlMNnpPM

>>457112
Nothing beats Beethoven's Symphony 9

File: 11027943_850663768320288_4421760908775913255_n.jpg (34KB, 426x426px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 426x426px

>>457112
great taste anon, still Segovia does it best https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcGt9AFlIPY

>>457115
>picrelated

>>457085
niglet I own several good comprehensive catalogs of german printmakers, it's a beautiful artform and on a scale large enough to keep surprising me, but not overwhelm me, unlike italian painters.

>>455539
Of course

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KylMqxLzNGo
Post Patrician pieces

>>457080
> i know for a fact that copying from nature was nowhere near the highest point of art for the academies
I never said it was the highest point, but it's an artistic ideal whether you like it or not, and continues to be.

>>457115
pleb detected

>>447745
John Williams is the Mozart and Beethoven of our time
Even your pic-related says so

File: tumblr_n8a2l9zE4d1se00emo1_400.jpg (67KB, 353x334px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 353x334px

>>457115
>'good' taste anon

>>447792
embarrassing

>>456616
>I'll never understand people who listen and like this garbage. It feels like they don't know what music is.
Because you're a contrarian retard. I posted music from most popular genres of music these days, including classical btw. My background is folk and I probably could have given better examples but the all of the music I posted is quality music made by prominent figures in their fields(as opposed to obscure special snowflakes)

Being a fanboy for "art music" doesn't make you a patrician, it just makes you a fanboy pleb, same as dad rock kids on youtube. You can go and wank yourself off to feynerhough all you like but all you'll be doing is denying yourself a vast corpus of creativity just so you can feel superior about your shitty taste.

Quality doesn't come from institutions, it's inherent. Music is either good or bad, and genre has fuck all to do with it.

You're a pleb

>>447745
>tfw I wrote a long as fuck reply and it got deleted

This elitism/populism shit is a cancer in music and arts in general. Make an effort to understand things you fucking plebs and don't just dismiss it because it's intellectual wankery/vulgar garbage. You're both as bad as each other.

I guarantee none of you cunts even play music.

I really hate Beethoven, like holy fuck

>>457308
I understand you're frustrated anon, but provided anyone else does reply to you, it's probably only going to make you madder.

>>457308
I play music, but I do not record my farts which I then proclaim as some "art" music that explores the arythmical tonal scale never before used in such a fashion.

>>448869
That description really falls flat. The idea that there were strict boundaries between art/pop/folk was never fully correct as your chart demonstrates but those boundaries have disappeared completely nowadays, given the internet, etc. The idea that art music is necessarily scored is bullshit, same as the idea that popular music is necessarily unwritten.

Modern genres of popular music have become more like "gesamtkunstwerke" or even cultural movements which contain all three of these "purposes". An example would be Jazz, with New Orleans second line music being the folk music, swing being popular and 60's avant garde or free jazz being the Art music.

I mean it's ridiculous to claim that this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBy8_ZbktzQ

and this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CI-0E_jses
both fall into the same music category (popular)

>>457315
>it's probably only going to make you madder.
getting mad is a form of entertainment these days so I don't really mind.

>>457349
>I play music, but I do not record my farts which I then proclaim as some "art" music that explores the arythmical tonal scale never before used in such a fashion.
That's not an honest representation of contemporary art music. There is an immense amount of artistry that goes into it. I agree that it has to some extent let aesthetic value fall by the wayside in pursuit of novelty and in an attempt to free themselves from imaginary shackles. That said, it's important that someone is doing it and I appreciate the quality of much of contemporary art music. The biggest issue for me is that I think they have become lazy, and Jazz artists are essentially doing their job better.

File: Antonio_Ciseri,_immacolata._Firenze,_Chiesa_del_Sacro_Cuore.jpg (122KB, 431x699px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 431x699px

Try this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT0MF4XNjkA

>>457410
the part at 15:00 is the greatest imo

>>448675
Bc he invented the keyboard

>>457349
You're living in the same time and age as neoclassicist composers such as Górecki, Pärt and Vasks, yet you get upset about that pretentious pomo shit.
Classical music aiming to be beautiful is alive and doing extremely well, there has literally never been a better time to be a fan of classical music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaI7KMPMJXg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDAenP2c0gM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHu4JB_dIJE

>>457430
You shouldn't just write off pomo music as pretentious, it makes you just as bad as the pomoists who say shit like "you just don't get it lmao" Being dismissive of genres is gay.

File: 0P1MGsK.gif (208KB, 384x288px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 384x288px

>>447932
this.
the masses control the market and are controlled by the market - and this cycle of stupid will never get better.

still... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGQxI0G6mKk

>>453708
>too boring no emotions just some kitchy crap
i seriously hope you're taking us for a ride

>>457451
I should have phrased it differently,
I wrote that in response to his fart example.
But thinking, that some artists are to self-centered or are putting to much emphasis on their individuality is valid criticism. "Anything goes" does not mean, that one needs to be accepting of everything.
I also enjoy certain genres of modern music, yet I would unterstand, if someone told me, that he doesn't get it.

More modern music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n7uWa0wvzI

>>447932
reactionaries are like feetfags
there is no discussion in which their fetish for "nobles" cant be brought up

File: 674544.jpg (82KB, 480x516px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 480x516px

>>448586
>>448506
>Zappa
>not the second coming

pick one

http://wiki.killuglyradio.com/wiki/Martin_Perlich_interviews_FZ

>>448544
Classical music wasn't made for the masses except church music

File: elon-musk-on-valley-girl-grb.jpg (54KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 800x450px

>>453708
>true there are some cool things like that camina burana thing

are you, can't even

>>448282
hnnnnggg

yes, yes it is true

File: smug24.jpg (27KB, 263x217px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 263x217px

>>457125
You mean Hahn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KaYzgofHjc
or Grumiaux
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqpo--lu8yQ
or Kuijken
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjnkFLmatfM

>>457430
Thanks for posting this mane. I bump rap and electronic but good classical never gets old. Pomo shit can suck my dick and balls

File: IMG_0601.png (366KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 640x960px

>autists who don't know the meaning of the word "subjective"

File: download (3).jpg (6KB, 275x184px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 275x184px

>>457696
Might as well make this a Zappa thread. Plebs and contrarians need a good BTFOing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUxJQlOKj38

>>452604
One word: No.

>>458898
>these streaks of shit on a canvas are just as good as michelangelo bro, it's all subjective!

fuck outta here, if you suck, you suck, not my problem

>>456264
>9ths, 11ths, and 13ths were basically musical heresy until the 20th century. Not sure about augmented and suspended chords though, but I think those fall in the same vein.
I'm so sick of these retarded posts. 9th chords turn up in music as old as Bach's Matthew passion. Nothing was ever "forbidden".

>>456700
You're an uneducated pleb, that's really all I need to say.

t. music major

>>456264
>jazz, ragtime
Those became popular because we now had the tech to record them, before that the only music recorded was art music through sheet music. But folk musics have literally always existed, we're just missing a lot of record of pre 1900 folk styles
>20th century
More like 15th century
Gregorian chants are literally the last thing to have limited harmonic intervals.
And they weren't forbidden, thy just weren't in style

>>447832
THE FACT THAT
>>448070
nice to see someone who is not a fucking retard

>>456336
jazz isn't dead

>>447745
It's extremely hard to be original. Romantic music, starting with beethoven is a flight from the mastery that peaked at Mozart.

File: lennon.jpg (34KB, 615x470px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 615x470px

Hello /his/

>>457291
/thread/

File: image.jpg (77KB, 595x750px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 595x750px

/mu/ here

just passing by to let y'all know that Julius Eastman is better than all the memeclassical posted in this thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_QGQcKq1ik

>>448860
the classical listener seems like the biggest femboi twink

>>449261
>also the art that deals with poopies and peepee that everyone finds so gross is not 'modern' really, nor is it representative of any art
While I agree it's not modern (it's been done for ages), it is still 'related' to art by questioning the concept of art itself.

Hence that 'fountain' sculpture that got so famous. It's a rubbish looking piece from a pre-raphaelite point of view, but it still is art.

File: 1357300359366.png (144KB, 311x309px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 311x309px

>>449299
it's low art

Basically like pornography, most television shows, brochures, food packaging, kanye west, etc.

>>448014
I also used to think that Ayreon was really good and deep
I was 12 and I hope you are

>>449246
Naw, we need to keep changing so we can create shit and know it for what it is. If we didn't create shit, we wouldn't know when we've created !shit. Then we can pick up the stuff that wasn't !shit rather than just being stagnant unimaginative faggots.

How contemporary is contemporary?

I mean, John Williams wrote Cavatina in 1971, it's classical guitar.

I think it's pretty neat.

Are the 70s contemporary enough or does OP mean shit like 2000+?

File: hqdefault (4).jpg (33KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 480x360px

>>458872
Although for violin, I have to say for me personally it sounds best played with a guitar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNEnzNHTkd8

>maybe because I play one

>>460992
>teacher has been pestering me to play the chaconne
To be honest I wouldn't mind not playing Bach. Every guitarist I know and hear has at least some Bach on their repertoire. It's just so boring nowadays.

>>461400
chaconne on guitar transcribed by segovia is a great thing to perfect a variety of techniques. I do not know how far you are in your training, but chaconne is not an easy piece to be played on the guitar

>>461505
I think I could manage it if I put in the time, Currently I have on my program the Antonio José Sonata, Bach's Prelude, Fugue and Allegro and some Takemitsu pieces.
But like I said, I really don't want to play more Bach (besides occasionally the PFA) because it's all so overplayed.
I think I'd rather play something like the Fantasia-Sonata by Manén.

The one place where classical music is alive and well is in compositions for cinema and television shows.

>>447745
based arvo part. Classical will never die.

Most music in the West today has more in common with African traditions than European ones.

The music of the Beatles (basically 90% African) was much more sophisticated in terms of groove and feel (very precise microrhythmic placement of attacks) then anything Mozart could have dreamed of.

African musical innovations have proved to be more popular than European ones. Everybody enjoys a back-beat or a clave but I'm pretty no one ever has enjoyed a modulation.

If you are looking for good recent European concert music I would recommend

Scelsi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNxUpaWN3iI

Lachenmann: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqhUXqTUiO0

>>461858
you're confusing classical music and orchestral music.

>>461943
>The music of the Beatles (basically 90% African) was much more sophisticated in terms of groove and feel (very precise microrhythmic placement of attacks) then anything Mozart could have dreamed of.
Is this how plebs try to feel better about themselves? By bullshitting so hard their turd looks like a delicious meal?

>Everybody enjoys a back-beat or a clave but I'm pretty no one ever has enjoyed a modulation.
Every fucking anthem or ballad has a modulation (more a transposition really) during the final chorus, what the fuck are you talking about.

>>462053

>Is this how plebs try to feel better about themselves? By bullshitting so hard their turd looks like a delicious meal?

what is bullshit about my statement. also, plebs don't listen to scelsi

>ballad modulations
nobody enjoys these. esp not the ones that just go up semitone.

he is right though in some aspects, 100% of north american music that is dominating the western pop-scene is of african heritage. this has a strong cultural impact, the north-american youth is imitating the african culture since decades now, which essentially becam the north-american culture.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tkny1aJddyU [Embed]

as for the beatles he is absolutely right, their reinterpretation of black music is what made them famous, same as elvis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=2rHcvYa93sU [Embed]

>>447923

Complexity =/= quality

>>462073
>nobody enjoys these. esp not the ones that just go up semitone.
Ah okay, good to know you know exactly what everybody thinks.

>>462078
>completely drops the "THIS IS SO MUCH MORE COMPLICATED THAN MOZART" argument
Okay buddy.

Let's be fair here, you're just pulling all of this out of your arse. I know it, you know it, everybody here knows it. Just go back to /mu/.

>>462081
Complexity = quality. Refuted your argument bby.

>>462084
>Ah okay, good to know you know exactly what everybody thinks.
99% of pop music has a backbeat. Most pop music does not contain modulations. QED.

>"THIS IS SO MUCH MORE COMPLICATED THAN MOZART"
I said that the Beatles were more complicated in terms of groove and feel. This is objectively true.

>>462106
>I said that the Beatles were more complicated in terms of groove and feel. This is objectively true.
It is objectively untrue.

>99% of pop music has a backbeat. Most pop music does not contain modulations. QED.
>pulling statistics out of your arse.

>>462113
Mozarts music: no microrhythmic organization (what lies below a hemidemiquaver).
The Beatles music: incredibly complex microrhythmic organization.

Re: pop music and backbeats. Have you ever listened to a radio?

>>462140
Have you ever listened to Mozart playing his own music?

>>462145
no one alive has. i doubt it was groovy tho.

what he wrote doesn't contain any information regarding groove outside of vague italian tempo markings .

>>462168
And I bet Bach never did anything with dynamics either. Hell, I bet those silly monks didn't even sing until they started writing music down!

>>462176
To bring it back to the point, are you saying that European music of that era was as rhythmically sophisticated as present day pop-music?

Have you given up on the backbeat thing?

>>462191
I am saying your argument that the beatles are rhythmically more complex than mozart is absolute nonsense, since you're basing it on what you hear from the beatles vs. what you can read in a mozart score. I can transcribe a beatles song for you and it would look even flatter than your average mozart piece.
I can not only argue but also prove that Mozart is rhythmically much more complex, just look at the Don Giovanni opera. During it there's a dance scene in which he simultaniously has a minuet, contradanse and masetto playing at once. That's astounding rhythmic complexity and to even imagine that you need to have incredible compositional skill.

File: 1447871456385.jpg (62KB, 625x417px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 625x417px

>>447792
>Hundreds of notable Rock ballads
>Chooses this instead

>>462226
I am not talking about rhythmic organization that can be written down. I am talking about what in the rhythm section anticipates the beat and what lags behind the beat in a consistent way. What musical intonation is to pitch, groove is to rhythm.

What I would use to prove my point is that, next to a mediocre funk band, the best classical ensembles sound rhythmically sloppy. This is because classical ensembles privilege things like tone and intonation over rhythm.

So you have given up the backbeat point?

File: literallyyou.jpg (198KB, 3000x1688px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 3000x1688px

>>462226

>>449433
>art
>science
What the fuck are you doing anon

>>462270
So you're saying you're not actually talking about the music itself, but about the performance? This is looking an awful lot like moving goalposts anon. Surely it could not be you're just talking out of your arse.

The backbeat vs. modulation point is absolute nonsense, we've been over this.

>>462281
see >>448860

>>447745
Schoenberg
John Cage (20th century)

Aphex Twin
Schlohmo
Nicholas Jaar (contemporary)

There is still plenty classical music in the sense you're using the term, democracy just forces you too look harder.

>>462310
>So you're saying you're not actually talking about the music itself, but about the performance

what is the music itself, is this a platonic idealism thing? I am talking about the music people play and that you can hear. I know we can't hear Mozart play his own music, but the people playing it today don't groove and i would bet both of my kidneys that neither did he.

>The backbeat vs. modulation point is absolute nonsense, we've been over this.

most music made today has a backbeat. very little music made today contains modulations. We live in an era of African musical dominance, deal.

File: are you fucking kidding me.jpg (31KB, 583x465px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 583x465px

ITT: Bach is shit, Mozart is shit, Beatles are better, Zappa is the best

fucking plebs taking over /his

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmcYTShN4Fk

fucker singing about dental floss, fedorafags masturbating to their own better-than-thou

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MQf-86ikvM
this is art, not that faggotry and "all my shit is art because I am out of convention"

>>462544

Bona Nox (K. 561) is literally music about shitting the bed and then maybe eating it.