Is classical music really better than popular music?

[Argoth]

Some people I know would say "yes, it's all music, but is it art?" Others try and judge music on its "technical complexity" (often people who have no clue about music theory or what complexity means), which I personally think is a pretty narrow view. Plenty of "simple" classical music, for example, connotes a lot of complex emotions. Oh well, their loss I guess.

Myself, I enjoy a very select amount of music, and I suppose most of it would be regarded as art music by any definition. I don't believe in listening to everything just for the sake of being "open minded," and nor do I think all music is equal, but I also don't have any problem with what other people prefer. If I were to judge my friends on the music they listen to, I'd be a very lonely person indeed So it's all down to personal preference I suppose, but I still tend to have very little regard for most of the music that is solely made for monetary purposes, with the "singer" being only a front for some work that has been done by anonymous songwriters, producers, and computers. I would agree with the posters here who have said that refusing to think too much about music is the best way to enjoy it.

 

[Gustav]

let me just say one thing, Beethoven, from the time he wrote his fifth symphony, til today, people are constantly talking about him, his symphony is constantly played in concert halls, recorded onto CDs. Britney Spears (sorry) on the other hand is popular only for a short period of time, the fact is that after a decade or two, nobody will even know who she was. But, Beethoven will still be played and universally admired.

 

[pnoom]

That's true, Gustav, but there are some real innovators in popular music who will be remembered, perhaps not to the same degree as Beethoven, but remembered nevertheless.

And even if they are not remembered by name, I doubt that rock music will ever throw away all the innovations of CAN, just to use a specific example.

So... the short answer: no.

The long answer: hell no.

 

[Sybarite]

let me just say one thing, Beethoven, from the time he wrote his fifth symphony, til today, people are constantly talking about him, his symphony is constantly played in concert halls, recorded onto CDs. Britney Spears (sorry) on the other hand is popular only for a short period of time, the fact is that after a decade or two, nobody will even know who she was. But, Beethoven will still be played and universally admired.

I remember back in the mid-70s, my mother telling my sister and I that, a decade or so hence, nobody would be listening to the pop acts that we were listening to then.

It was not the case, though. Of course much of what was recorded at the time has faded into oblivion, but some remains. And it's worth noting that the same can be said of any era – we don't actually know all of the music that was written by Mozart's contemporaries – or even all of his composing contemporaries – for instance.

One wonders if those deriding popular music are deriding 'pop'/'rock' or whether they are deriding all popular music – so including Gershwin's show songs, for instance – or just today's popular music? Those have already proved that they have staying power – as too have some particular performances of them, by singers such as Ella Fitzgerald. But this is popular music – simple as. It's not classical/serious – it's popular. And the likes of Fitzgerald were pop singers in their own time, as was Frank Sinatra, as another example. We've got ourselves rather landed with the idea of Britney Spears, but has anyone else here listened to The Divine Comedy or REM or Bjork? What do people think of the likes of Freddie Mercury? Is it not worth considering why the apparent simplicity of Abba has shown its staying power over 30 years? (Never trust someone who won't get up and dance to Dancing Queen )

Another point occurred to me this evening – much has been mentioned here of the complexity of serious music and the skills and learningr equired to analyse it. This apparently being a virtue in its own right. I studied music at school, so I am aware of how to analyse it, but unless I had a specific reason to do so now, that it not generally what I demand of music. On the way home, I was listening to Richard Strauss's Also Sprach Zarathustra. How do I want to listen to it? I can benefit from knowing what inspired the composition (Nietzsche's philosophical ideas of Übermensch) – it actually helps me to see pictures in my mind's eye when I'm listening to it. I can hear the influence of Wagner in the richness of the piece. But why go any further than that? I enjoy being able to float in the sea of honey that is the second movement in particular – perhaps the most sumptuous sound that I have heard. As someone who listens to music primarily for pleasure, would knowing what intervals Strauss most favoured add a single thing to the extraordinary experience of actually letting myself sink into the piece?

And finally, Also Sprach Zarathustra is fabulous – but I wouldn't want to 'live off it' musically for the rest of my days. There are times when I'm in a mood for different types of music. I can enjoy them and value them. To do so – and to applaud what is best in popular music – is not the same as making a relatavist assertion that all music is of equal value any more than to say that an Agatha Christie novel is good fun is to imply that it is on a par with Thomas Mann's Death in Venice.

 

[toejamfootball]

Me too. And I don't understand anyone who limits themselves to one genre exclusively either, be it classical music, jazz or heavy metal. I don't understand anyone having disdain for any kind of music; it's just music, it doesn't hurt anyone. Personally, my approach to music is global, historical and all-encompassing. I appreciate all the emotions available from all genres. If the music moves me in some way, I like it. Naturally I don't like all songs and pieces, and I have my favourites, but they lie in many genres. Mostly in classical, but in all other genres as well. Of course I readily admit that classical music is the genre with the most complexities, (followed by jazz,) but that fact doesn't make the emotions produced by listening to pop, or rock or whatever any less valid. I guess one could say I enjoy a large palette of emotions; I won't part with any of them! :grin: (Except sad stuff; I can do without being sad.)

Even Dvorak used folk melodies in his compositions...

I have a fascination for the ways music has evolved through time; genres influencing genres, composers influencing composers.

Today I've been at the piano playing C.P.E. Bach, Ravel, an Art Tatum riff, an Elton John tune, a Queen song, and a Michael Jackson song I recently transcribed.

Music is music is music.

I have been looking for music by C.P.E Bach, I have read he composed a lot of Harpsichord works. Where do you find his music.. Amazon?

 

[rojo]

Hi tjfb,

Unfortunately, the site I use to find public domain music scores has shut down! I'll try to find somewhere else soon.

 

[Argoth]

Hi tjfb,

Unfortunately, the site I use to find public domain music scores has shut down! I'll try to find somewhere else soon.

Assuming you're referring to IMSLP, it's been down for some time but don't despair, because it seems like it will be revived sometime in the next few months, given all the support that seems to be shown for the project. The legal issues that arose aren't too severe, and these had only resulted from the limitations of the wiki-formatted site in accounting for international law. That and a "publishing house" that seems to care more about money than publicizing the art (obviously).

 

[zoned]

I beleive that classical music is the ultimate concoction of notes and sounds.Everything else pales in comparison,especially rap music,which I consider to be noise not music.A car's muffler makes noise not music. Rap is crap, Long live Mahler,Shostakovich et. al In heaven,I beleive we good people will hear classical music! The Bible refers to harps,flutes,and trumpets! A SYMPHONY IS A WORLD IN SOUND!

 

[L0n212]

let me just say one thing, Beethoven, from the time he wrote his fifth symphony, til today, people are constantly talking about him, his symphony is constantly played in concert halls, recorded onto CDs. Britney Spears (sorry) on the other hand is popular only for a short period of time, the fact is that after a decade or two, nobody will even know who she was. But, Beethoven will still be played and universally admired.

Popularity and social acceptance does not equal greatness. I bet you that many who pay lip service to him just want to look sophisticated. I know for a fact that many students in classical music conservatories listen to Jazz all day, they only do classical for a living.

I beleive that classical music is the ultimate concoction of notes and sounds.Everything else pales in comparison,especially rap music,which I consider to be noise not music.A car's muffler makes noise not music. Rap is crap, Long live Mahler,Shostakovich et. al In heaven,I beleive we good people will hear classical music! The Bible refers to harps,flutes,and trumpets! A SYMPHONY IS A WORLD IN SOUND!

Rap is indeed bad, but there is an important thing missing in this discussion.

That is, classical and pop aren't the only types of music out there! There is film music, early music, folk songs, rock, jazz etc...

Even in the world of classical music, the works of Tallis is totally different from a Strauss waltz.

Indeed, there is nothing there to guarantee superiority for classical music.

 

[C5Says]

Popularity and social acceptance does not equal greatness. I bet you that many who pay lip service to him just want to look sophisticated. I know for a fact that many students in classical music conservatories listen to Jazz all day, they only do classical for a living.

Rap is indeed bad, but there is an important thing missing in this discussion.

That is, classical and pop aren't the only types of music out there! There is film music, early music, folk songs, rock, jazz etc...

Even in the world of classical music, the works of Tallis is totally different from a Strauss waltz.

Indeed, there is nothing there to guarantee superiority for classical music.

But then, the comparison is between classical music and pop music...regardless of whatever else exists.... (peace)

 

[Contratrombone64]

Britney Spears and Beethoven ... wow, what a comparison. If you scratch beneath the surface of Beethoven you'll find unimaginable depth ... if you scratch beneath the surface of Spears you'll only find more surface.

 

[L0n212]

But then, the comparison is between classical music and pop music...regardless of whatever else exists.... (peace)

Indeed.

But I still want to point out that all of these internet discussions about classical vs pop lacks completeness. It paints the picture that there is a polar battle between the only two forms of music available.

A better, more encompassing question is, "is classical music the most superior music to date?"

That would provide a more accurate assessment of classical music, rather than just comparing it to rap etc... which are the lowest forms of music.



I say no, for film music (that includes soundtracks from video games as well), and Early music, I'm talking about medieval to 1700, but not the music for rich people when it gets later, like the music played at carnivals in the 17th century, have unimaginable depth if people are willing to explore them. They are simple melodies yes, and mostly homophonic, but polyphony does not guarantee greatness at all, neither does homophony guarantee failures.

Some of my favorite music are soundtracks from video games and movies, and I rank them among classical music.

One interesting thing is that we do not know what the composers thought of themselves. For example, Bach is highly praised today as an unfortunate man who was underappreciated. It is definitely possible that he himself had a different view and believed that Telemann was greater than him, or at least his equal. He did admire Telemann's music a lot, and it's definitely possible that he thought that Telemann's status was well deserved. That would be a severe blow to today's academic orthodoxy boasting some composers and works as masters and masterpieces, when we find out that the composers themselves didn't think so highly of their works.


I judge music purely by how it makes me feel, not by technical complexity, not by it's social status, not by it's scope or length. Thus I do disregard some "canons" such as the Art of Fugue and Beethoven's late quartets, because I don't like them. Music is meant for people to like, not to study as a math problem.

 

[L0n212]

Britney Spears and Beethoven ... wow, what a comparison. If you scratch beneath the surface of Beethoven you'll find unimaginable depth ... if you scratch beneath the surface of Spears you'll only find more surface.

I agree that Beethoven is greater than Spears, but I challenge the status of Beethoven just because he happens to be popular today. I bet that many people are paying lip service to him in light of the current orthodoxy where if you like Beethoven and Mozart then you are "intelligent".

Ronald Regan needed cultural advisers to tell him when to applaud during operas so he wouldn't embarrass himself. That means he was doing it for political purposes, not how music is supposed to be consumed.

I for one consider Beethoven a maniac who wrote a lot of highly dissonant stuff, thus I don't consider him to be as great as he is made out to be today. I'd take Vivaldi over him any day.

 

[Contratrombone64]

I like Beethoven because he wrote music that I find attractive, not for some intellectual hit. And as to current orthodoxy, your comment is based on what research?

 

[L0n212]

I like Beethoven because he wrote music that I find attractive, not for some intellectual hit. And as to current orthodoxy, your comment is based on what research?

I refuse to pursue this further given your aggressive tone.

 

[Corno Dolce]

Hey LOn212,

Welcome aboard MIMF. We welcome all viewpoints but you may wish to tone down the rhetoric towards Contratrombone64. He is a mighty fine bloke with a world of experience and years of wisdom. His tone towards you was not at all aggressive. He is a scholar who likes to check references and sources in order to learn more and possibly prevent bad information to make its way around on the world-wide reticular. Think of him a a valuable colleague, not as a goon.

Sincerely yours,

Corno Dolce <: - |

 

[L0n212]

Hey LOn212,

Welcome aboard MIMF. We welcome all viewpoints but you may wish to tone down the rhetoric towards Contratrombone64. He is a mighty fine bloke with a world of experience and years of wisdom. His tone towards you was not at all aggressive. He is a scholar who likes to check references and sources in order to learn more and possibly prevent bad information to make its way around on the world-wide reticular. Think of him a a valuable colleague, not as a goon.

Sincerely yours,

Corno Dolce <: - |

It's hard to interpret "cold text". I misunderstood him then.

 

[Corno Dolce]

Hi Lon212,

Thanx for your reply. We all might fall into the trap of of misunderstanding the other every once in awhile. I know, I have sometimes misunderstood some of my colleagues here on MIMF but I have always aimed to rectify a wrong which I may have caused and I always welcome spirited rebuttal and dispute if my statements have factual errors.

The wonderful thing about this forum is that they are all very friendly and more than quite capable in their own fields of endeavour. Do enjoy your time with us and we look forward to some more interesting posts from you.

Cheers,

Corno Dolce

 

[L0n212]

I like Beethoven because he wrote music that I find attractive, not for some intellectual hit. And as to current orthodoxy, your comment is based on what research?

Have you read these "telemann reassessment" articles in music journals? There are so many composers today that are bashed down to nothing because of simple mob mentality. This is true for composers like Vivaldi, Telemann, Faure, etc...

On the opposite side, there are many composers that are hailed as gods, Bach and Beethoven are among them.

If you actually think about, what makes Telemann bad and Beethoven good? All you will find are either iterations of these comments, or some technical analysis of their works, which in no way translates to musical effect. Thus with this much wooing for Beethoven and no concrete proof, especially that it's been going on for over a century, indicates a strong orthodoxy that is driving this whole "cult" of who's good and who's not. The lack of opposite opinion is exactly the very evidence that there hasn't been enough intellectual discussion, people are taking in what they hear from others and that's it.

I don't study Beethoven a lot, but for Telemann and Vivaldi, they are being belittled today for no good reason. A lot of this has to do with orthodoxy, from the universities, conservatories, etc... that are brainwashing students into thinking that Beethoven must be great.

In my opinion, greatness is relative, it depends on the listener, I suspect that if people would act as a blank slate to receive the music, Beethoven and Bach wouldn't be so universally hailed. People all have different tastes.

My "evidence" is the lack of cogent arguments for the "superiority" of Beethoven and Bach over others, rather saying that it's more subjective.

By the way, I was in no way giving you rhetorics, even though I quoted your post. I was merely expressing myself as the opportunity came up since you mentioned Beethoven.

 

[Corno Dolce]

Hi LOn212,

Some good points you make. I'm one of those who thinks JSBach is best but I also like Telemann, Rachmaninoff, Tournemire, Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Bruckner, Jakob Handl, Mozart, Chopin, and many others very much.

I also love Jazz with a passion - just like I love the music of JSBach.

Cheers,

Corno Dolce