Friendly reminder that if you weren't classically trained

File: 1473768181486.png (177KB, 697x768px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 697x768px

>tfw classically trained
>tfw been in jazz bands
>been to music college
Can confirm op is a massive faggot who shits out cocks.

I learned how to play ode to joy on the recorder

>>68742883
>replying seriously to a frogposter
kill yourself

File: 1476316239368.jpg (39KB, 323x267px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 323x267px

>>68742909
>look I'm fitting in!

>>68742842
jazz is dead we killed it

>>68742842
I only agree with you in one way...if you don't play an instrument, how can you possibly enjoy all that jazz has to offer? I truly don't think you can, I'm sorry.

>>68743646
>>68742842
Music is only about the feelings it creates within you, no need for technical knowledge.
Sure, you can appreciate it in different ways once you know instruments and theory, but that's not what matters at the end of the piece.

>We might all agree that a knowledge of the historical and biographical circumstances that saw the production of a work of literature or music or even an analytic study of them may often help us to a greater understanding and to the increase of pleasure that comes with understanding. Nevertheless, one brute fact often overlooked needs to be forced upon our consideration: most works of art are more or less intelligible and give pleasure without any kind of historical, biographical, or structural analysis. There are always some aspects of the work which do not need our critical industry or demand much interpretation. All that is necessary is just some small familiarity, acquired however involuntarily and informally by occasional experience with the stylistic language and tradition of the work.

>>68743761
>A piece of Mozart or a poem by Pope for example, both carries with and conveys a sense of the age and the society in which it was created, and yet at the same time it can speak directly to the sensibility of a modern listener who has little knowledge of the original historical context. Merely a nodding acquaintance with the style and language of the time will generally be enough, and this acquaintance may be superficial and still effective. A study of the historical conditions in which the art was created can of course deepen our understanding and make it more complex and even increase our delight, as I have remarked at the opening. But the study is rarely absolutely indispensable, the individual interpretation never exhaustive or permanent. Every critical approach is likely to obscure important aspects of a work that will enter into the experience of a naive reading, Any appreciation of the past must acknowledge that several different critical approaches are valid, and that even in the absence of any formal system of interpretation, the work may still speak to us simply through its intrinsic merit or value.

>>68742842
Yet another idiot with a fetish for watching people having pseudo-intellectual arguments.

>>68742842

Good thing you're not correct, there's definitely wanky abominations but generally there's a reason so much Classical tunes are universally loved. The thing about music is that if you have to be educated to understand it, it's automatically narcissistic trash that's only acceptable as a reference for actual musicians. Music is meant to speak to the souls of humanity, to bring us closer to God.

I think you can still enjoy it but learning said instrument would be necessary to FULLY enjoy the virtuoso stuff. Art music fags become so intentionally detached that they forget that any pop music listener is able to discern a melody they like or notice obvious stuff like key and tempo changes. If anything its harder to appreciate the music's finer details when youre busy being so goddamn smug