On March 11 2010 08:33 JohnColtrane wrote: "(a famous example of something that’s “atonal” is John Cage’s 4’33”, which is exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds worth of silence from the orchestra."
sounds fantastic
Just like Telepopmusik's song titled "15 minutes". Previous song ends with the words "And now let's just relax for the next 15 minutes" -> 15 minutes song which is just 15 minutes of silence.
On March 11 2010 08:33 JohnColtrane wrote: "(a famous example of something that’s “atonal” is John Cage’s 4’33”, which is exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds worth of silence from the orchestra."
sounds fantastic
Just like Telepopmusik's song titled "15 minutes". Previous song ends with the words "And now let's just relax for the next 15 minutes" -> 15 minutes song which is just 15 minutes of silence.
As you can see, you can buy 15 minutes of silence for $2.99! Awesome!
The difference is that John Cage's work is supposed to be done live (so you can hear the shut up stifled audience (well still not exactly good use of money IMO)) and Telepopmusik made a recording of silence.
On March 11 2010 08:33 JohnColtrane wrote: "(a famous example of something that’s “atonal” is John Cage’s 4’33”, which is exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds worth of silence from the orchestra."
sounds fantastic
Just like Telepopmusik's song titled "15 minutes". Previous song ends with the words "And now let's just relax for the next 15 minutes" -> 15 minutes song which is just 15 minutes of silence.
On March 11 2010 08:33 JohnColtrane wrote: "(a famous example of something that’s “atonal” is John Cage’s 4’33”, which is exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds worth of silence from the orchestra."
sounds fantastic
Just like Telepopmusik's song titled "15 minutes". Previous song ends with the words "And now let's just relax for the next 15 minutes" -> 15 minutes song which is just 15 minutes of silence.
As you can see, you can buy 15 minutes of silence for $2.99! Awesome!
The difference is that John Cage's work is supposed to be done live (so you can hear the shut up stifled audience (well still not exactly good use of money IMO)) and Telepopmusik made a recording of silence.
I agree. The difference is that JC is to be listened live while Telepopmusik is something you should listen alone at home for best effect.
A classical discussion about aesthetics. If You look carefully You will notice that problems touched exists in all areas of art (music,painting,sculpture, poetry and so on...). The modern search for new forms of expression (like atonal music for example), attempts to define the borderlines of art- when something stops being and art and became a product, trying to formulate theory that would explain art, past,present and future)-its all in vain. And it exists in all forms of artistic activity. Its noting new, people where trying to do that for many years now, and they all failed. There is (and most likely will never by) a theory that would solve those fundamental aesthetical problems. Every known theory has its flaws (it either possess some internal inconsistency or it is not including many forms of human activity that we would like to call art).
Conclusion? Your disscusion is pointless gentlemans (i am afraid). There is no possible way to say that some form of artistic expression is more artistic (or bettter) without making yourself look like idiot. Its either art or its not. 0 or 1. You cant say that classical music is "deeper", "better", (and so on...) without falling into contradictions, as, like i said before there is no coherent aesthetical theory that would back Your words up.
Well maybe i am oversimplyfing but its really like in this latin proverb "De gustibus non est disputandum". As much as i would like to call (lets say) Britney Spears fans stupid, and feel superioir to them I know its not really intellectualy correct. And its hurts as hell.
Ps. The article from fist post is realy stupid, a waste of time if You ask me. PS2. The way topic author posts is realy confusing so please excuse me if am totaly of topic, i hope that someone will find some merits in my post.
On March 11 2010 08:33 JohnColtrane wrote: "(a famous example of something that’s “atonal” is John Cage’s 4’33”, which is exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds worth of silence from the orchestra."
sounds fantastic
Just like Telepopmusik's song titled "15 minutes". Previous song ends with the words "And now let's just relax for the next 15 minutes" -> 15 minutes song which is just 15 minutes of silence.
As you can see, you can buy 15 minutes of silence for $2.99! Awesome!
The difference is that John Cage's work is supposed to be done live (so you can hear the shut up stifled audience (well still not exactly good use of money IMO)) and Telepopmusik made a recording of silence.
I agree. The difference is that JC is to be listened live while Telepopmusik is something you should listen alone at home for best effect.
Yeah but Telepopmusik's silence has no effect. It's recorded within a studio, whereas sound can be controlled. Cage's composition instructs the orchestra not to play their instruments, but there's nothing to prevent them from sneezing, farting etc - a form of Indeterminacy, fancy classical nerd word for chance.
Well thats the "looking for the borderlines of art" part i was talking about. Proving folks that there is music all around us, we are just not paying attention to it,or perhaps that true silence does not exists or something like that. Of course You can discover it with minimal intelectual effort yourself, but some peaople prefere to experience things rather than thinking it out.
Paying for listning to "silence" does not make much sense for me either, but if someone is buying it....well thats not my problem.
I recently had an argument with a bunch of people that labelled "Classical Music" as "Pretentious". Which really pissed me off because they didn't know what they were talking about.
On March 11 2010 08:24 broz0rs wrote: Personally, I like it to remain as elitist as it is because I don't particularly like the discussions that are going on the internet about the music itself. Youtube is a classical example, where some people love to write about "I think this interpretation is completely wrong, so and so's interpretation is far superior." They are not elitists, they are just stupid people who think they know everything when they clearly are imbeciles. When I think about elitism, I think about musicians and writers who actually give a damn about they are interpreting. It allows me to keep my thoughts about what I am feeling when I listen to this highly subjective and emotional form of music.
You're being hypocritical here. Many times some videos do actually have different interpretations, and those comments are people merely giving their opinions, it is these sorts of starting discussions which get us to start really talking about music, then getting to more profound and proper discussions, people learn, stop having such a cynical view of everyone else all the while placing your self on this high pedestal just because you can point to them saying they got nfi. And you want it to remain elitist? That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. It's people like *you* that enforce the pretentious label that is already plaguing classical music.
The strange thing and inevitable feature of music compared to any other form of art, is that it is literally timeless. It can be kept and reproduced to almost exactly how it was first played however many years ago it was written. So much is known about the tuning systems used, instruments used et cetera. So to say that classical music will stay known only to its supposed elitist circles is quite dumbfounded, because anyone can get a CD pop it in, and listen to music how contemporaries listened to it back in their day.
On March 11 2010 08:24 broz0rs wrote: The only idea I like is teaching young kids more about classical music in schools. Kids would be exposed to a very complicated form of music, and hopefully they'll learn to appreciate it a lot more so that they have an open mind about not just music but other aspects of life as well.
I Agree with you 100% here. Education is the most important thing. Music is cultural. The only reason there is an aura of elitism and pretentiousness with classical music is because people did not grow up culturally to the musical styles. Just like people ought to know their history, people ought to know their musical history (they fold well with each other too ). Just like learning history deepens ones understanding and appreciation of the world, studying music and different types of music, also, deepens ones understand and appreciation of music as a whole.
On March 11 2010 08:42 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Where do we draw the line? Classical orchestras have traditionally performed art music, and adhered to its standards, but art music is finding itself distanced from the general public. Should orchestras work to appeal to the masses or to plow on as they have before? "People's music" is not the same as popular music, and the idea that Beethoven and Mozart were the "pop music" of their day is simply not true.
On March 11 2010 09:06 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: And no, Mozart and Beethoven were definitely not pop stars. That is a history misconception popularized in part thanks to films such as Amadeus. Again, the 19th century audience was certainly more familiar as a whole with art music than we are today, but what is thought of today as "classical music" was basically limited to the nobility and the aristocracy - to "high society," if you will. Steve Reich does not, despite what he may think, compose pop music, no more than Schubert or Schumann did.
Some pieces were popular though. In fact the transition from baroque to classical was essentially a transition from purely aristocratic upper class, to a majority of the middle class. So as far as this is concerned, by my own definition it was quite popular.
It's all a matter of cultural difference as some have pointed out, and I mentioned above. This is the deciding blow. You have to either grow up in the culture or have it taught to you for a much fuller appreciation of it. That's why growing up in suburban Sydney I could tap my foot to any contemporary r&b/rap song, yet I would find myself having to listen to older pieces many times over, just so I could at least predict sections of a composition which is arguably the founding principle of musical appreciation. Sure a piece can sound nice and all but only when you really understand its structure and all other contemporary information about it can it really hit you deep down inside. In the same way, listening to some blues rock today or something even more contemporary like hip hop, expecting the chorus, beat transitions, rhythmic complexity of the rappers beats, all of that is imbedded within our cultural understanding of hip hop today so we don't really notice it perse, whereas classical music's contemporaries had it 'natural' to them as well. To them, they knew the basic Concertos were split up in 3 fast/slow/fast tempoed movements. It was just built-in to them.
In the same way we process grammar in our brain without us thinking about it, they could understand and appreciate music while subconsciously parsing over the musical grammar.
How well the brain can trace and predict the next segment of a piece. Will the composer play around with it a bit? Will he delay that expectation of the de capo/return by that extra phrase inserted making you cream harder when he gets back to it? Long 20 minute instrumental pieces required many many bustrips over and over for me.
It took me a while to completely grasp Jazz, but before i knew it I couldn't stop shaking my head to its beats. Same with rock. I had a weird music listening upbringing. I grew up in Kuwait, my dad listnened to pretty much only classical music, I came to Sydney at age 5 where classical music mixed with mainstream pop/rnb/rap of the day.
That being said, beautiful music will never die. I myself am a fan of mainly instrumental music, but I love listening to all types of music, random JPOP to some trance stuff, to jazz, to plain-chants, to medieval court music.
Ahh my post is all over the place, fucking frustrating arguments make me rage anyway for TLDR:
1. Music is cultural, people have to learn it. You can't just switch on some archaic genre and appreciate it, in the same way you can't read an old book and really understand what it's talking about.
2. To try close off a genre of music into its own circles is stupid. To give it distinct labels and all is fine, but to strictly endorse one group to listen to it over another is only feeding the flames.
On March 12 2010 22:29 liosama wrote:You're being hypocritical here. Many times some videos do actually have different interpretations, and those comments are people merely giving their opinions, it is these sorts of starting discussions which get us to start really talking about music, then getting to more profound and proper discussions, people learn, stop having such a cynical view of everyone else all the while placing your self on this high pedestal just because you can point to them saying they got nfi. And you want it to remain elitist? That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. It's people like *you* that enforce the pretentious label that is already plaguing classical music.
The strange thing and inevitable feature of music compared to any other form of art, is that it is literally timeless. It can be kept and reproduced to almost exactly how it was first played however many years ago it was written. So much is known about the tuning systems used, instruments used et cetera. So to say that classical music will stay known only to its supposed elitist circles is quite dumbfounded, because anyone can get a CD pop it in, and listen to music how contemporaries listened to it back in their day.
yeah, after I wrote it I realize it was hypocritical. I'll admit it!
On March 12 2010 21:30 phosphorylation wrote: you are deliberately missing the point its a cocnept piece
bro ive got some silence
want to buy it?
That's so easy it's not even funny.
It's as silly as saying as "lololol Duchamp is so crap, he just take some toilets and put it in a museum I can do it too lolololol".
it was a serious inquiry, petal
however the fuck you may look at it, a song of silence being sold for money is hilariously retarded
It's an artwork not a product, "petal". If you can't make the difference and need to think it in terms of money, no wonder why you don't understand shit about what it is about.
To be fair, John Cage's particular work wasn't about the silence, but it was rather meant as a way for the audience to experience the surrounding sounds - and how everyone will perceive something different.
I've tried to keep personal opinions out of this, but I will throw in that I personally am not a big fan of modernism/minimalism/atonality. The focus of my knowledge of classical music centers around the (call me old-fashioned if you will) 19th century Austrian-Germanic tradition.
I don't agree with the whole "need to be brought up or taught classical music to be a listener". Personally I only started listening because I simply found that what I was listening to was boring and uninteresting, thus I delved in classical and jazz works. My taste has changed in just over a year rather considerably, from a primarily indie rock, alternative, idm and ambient listener to one who's ears are dominated by classical, both contemporary and baroque/romantic and jazz - mainly free jazz.
I don't agree with this contemporary/modern vs romantic/baroque classical periods debate. Personally I love both but enjoy the former a little more. It's probably the newer techniques that I find far more invigorating and interesting - the string quartets of Bartok, Shostakovitch and the New Viennese School are currently my absolute favorites, along with the contrasting 6 hours long 2nd String Quartet of Feldman's minimalistic era. Why cannot we just accept people's differing taste's and move on? X likes X, I respect that. The vast majority of my friends dislike classical music - I do not ridicule them, nor do I feel elitism or better than they are in any way.
Here's an opinion that throws a spanner in the works - I have dismissed all but one of Beethoven's symphonies. I have listened to recordings by the likes of Kleber, Rattle, Bernstein, Bohm, Klemperer, Marriner, Szell, Furtwanglar (and a few more) and mostly Karajan but only one has truly convinced me.
EPT
