Who is "greater," Bach or Beethoven?

[Opus106]

I see. Well, I can't think of any such instance on GMG --- not with Beethoven nor any other composer.

My interpretation is similar to Gurn's. Of course, what starrynight said -- and what (s)he said is certainly not restricted to GMG -- perhaps need not apply only to liking one composer over others but also to taking some ideas, like the romantic notions of the genius, greatness etc., too seriously just because a majority does.

[Florestan]

My interpretation is similar to Gurn's. Of course, what starrynight said -- and what (s)he said is certainly not restricted to GMG -- perhaps need not apply only to liking one composer over others but also to taking some ideas, like the romantic notions of the genius, greatness etc., too seriously just because a majority does.

Yes, I agree this can happen --- especially with newcomers. But I think that, as the listening and study develops and deepens, this kind of peer pressure is likely to fade away. I might be wrong, though.

[mc ukrneal]

It's not just you, it's at least me (and JdP) as well, the difference being that I (or he) have no fear proclaiming it out loud: most (and I mean 99%) contemporary pop music is crap, and contrary to ukrneal's* claims, if anything, it impoverishes one's life --- because more often than not it draws one away from the true sources of beauty and truth. Now, of course, if one equates the beauty and truth as expressed by Bach or Beethoven with the vulgarity and bad-taste (on all levels, from the music itself to the visual "story" it tells) which is the trademark of most (and I mean 99%) contemporary pop music, any discussion is useless. To put it mildly, I have never been a fan of cultural relativism. 

* I hasten to add that ukrneal's classical music taste, especially concerning rare opera recordings, is impeccable!  0:)

Nice to know I got 1 out of 2!

I wasn't really trying to make claims about non-classical genres, nor was I trying to compare classical genres. But I sense that ship has sailed, and perhaps a good thing, so I'll just let it lie until the subject comes up again - and I think it will.

[prémont]

I'll just let it lie until the subject comes up again - and I think it will.

Can we be sure, that you don´t tell lies?

[mc ukrneal]

Can we be sure, that you don´t tell lies?

Is this a grammar correction? The expression I am referring to (but playing with) is 'to let sleeping dogs lie' - otherwise, not sure what you mean.

[prémont]

Is this a grammar correction? The expression I am referring to (but playing with) is 'to let sleeping dogs lie' - otherwise, not sure what you mean.

It is not a correction. I do not know the expression you refer to. To tell the truth, I just felt uncertain whether you meant "lie" or "lie" .

[Josquin des Prez]

And a Mahler marathon lasts for over half a day -- I think you are missing Neal's point. There are many levels at which "art" music can be enjoyed and appreciated. If one wants to delve deep into technicalities of structure, even a short prelude for solo piano may take longer to be analysed than sitting at a concert would. But if like many of us who do not know how to read music, let alone have an academic understanding of it, one can still listen to a few of Chopin's nocturnes, lasting hardly thirty minutes, and still come out of it having experienced something wonderful (or not).

You don't seem to understand Neal's point. He's not arguing over which type of approach one should adopt when listening to music, he is arguing that the average person can enjoy classical music just as much as the real connoisseur, even if we are talking about simple pieces like Beethoven's Für Elise. His argument is quite disingenuous because he is trying to pretend, with false nonchalance, that there is no difference between any given classical composition. A person of average taste can easily be made to appreciate some of the simpler and more approachable classical compositions, but that's entirely besides the point. It doesn't mean that they are actually making any concrete step into appreciating classical music. There is no growth, no individual development, and thus, no real progress.

[Josquin des Prez]

Although I agree, you have to keep in mind that they are trying to do completely different things with their music. Beethoven is greater at writing Beethoven music and Lady Gaga is better at writing stupid music.

Except that Beethoven's music is greater then Lady Gaga's music. The fact something was meant to be lesser/inferior does no mean it automatically means it is of equal value to something that aimed higher from the outset. If i draw a stick figure on an chalk board i'm not going to pretend it is of equal value and importance to a Rembrandt merely because it was meant to be a stick figure on a chalk board.

[Scarpia]

It always astonishes me that anyone thinks there is anything new to be said in this argument.  Yes, Bach's "Well Tempered Klavier" is superior to Paper Lace's "The Night Chicago Died."  Shall we move on?

[Gurn Blanston]

It always astonishes me that anyone thinks there is anything new to be said in this argument.  Yes, Bach's "Well Tempered Klavier" is superior to Paper Lace's "The Night Chicago Died."  Shall we move on?

That part of the discussion won't be over until every person here swears a blood oath that they buy into it. Because they don't, not in their heart of hearts. Perhaps they don't want to admit to themselves, and especially in public, that they are unintentional elitists because they actually prefer a superior music, and this shatters the egalitarian dream that they are being taught in school these days. I don't know, perhaps my POV is on the harsh side, but I have been trying to reconcile for years why people insist that they are just like everyone else (except for the music they like, oh, and they actually read, stuff like that) why be embarrassed just for liking different music? 



----------------
Now playing:
Costantino Mastroprimiano - Clementi Op 25 #5 Sonata in f# 1st mvmt - Piu tosto allegro con espressione

[Scarpia]

That part of the discussion won't be over until every person here swears a blood oath that they buy into it. Because they don't, not in their heart of hearts. Perhaps they don't want to admit to themselves, and especially in public, that they are unintentional elitists because they actually prefer a superior music, and this shatters the egalitarian dream that they are being taught in school these days. I don't know, perhaps my POV is on the harsh side, but I have been trying to reconcile for years why people insist that they are just like everyone else (except for the music they like, oh, and they actually read, stuff like that) why be embarrassed just for liking different music? 

[deleted]

There, I almost got drawn into it.   

[Gurn Blanston]

[deleted]

There, I almost got drawn into it.   

  Yup, near as dammit!  In any case, it can't be settled one way or the other. I have sat in on virtually every argument disguised as a debate that has happened here since 2003 (it's my job, not that I care about outcomes), and I would be hard-pressed to recall one that actually settled anything, or won anyone from one side to another. I am pretty sure that this is the 27th iteration of this particular one...



----------------
Now playing:
Costantino Mastroprimiano - Clementi Op 25 #5 Sonata in f# 3rd mvmt - Presto

[starrynight]

There is always peer pressure definitely, doesn't have to be the whole work of a composer, may just be a particular work.  Certainly people new to composers will look first at what is the generally considered best work of a composer, or most famous work.  So among symphonies they will look at Vaughan William's 5th or Shostakovich's 5th for example, though I haven't felt they are the best symphony of either myself.

People always tend to quote the Beethoven example to show this idea is wrong as well, ie he is great and has a big reputation too.  But there are obviously better examples, more specific and less clear cut within classical music, just as there are within other types of music.  And of course it's easy to just fall back on the general traditional opinion on something when faced with the huge amount of music out there. 

[Gurn Blanston]

There is always peer pressure definitely, doesn't have to be the whole work of a composer, may just be a particular work.  Certainly people new to composers will look first at what is the generally considered best work of a composer, or most famous work.  So among symphonies they will look at Vaughan William's 5th or Shostakovich's 5th for example, though I haven't felt they are the best symphony of either myself.

People always tend to quote the Beethoven example to show this idea is wrong as well, ie he is great and has a big reputation too.  But there are obviously better examples, more specific and less clear cut within classical music, just as there are within other types of music.

Surely so. And for another example, Dvorak 9, even though I consider the 7th to be his best work. Examples and suggestions seem to choose the 'obvious' ones because being popularly acclaimed makes them a safe choice. So, that is peer pressure on the recommender which is far more subtle than on the potential listener.

I chose Beethoven for my example simply because there are people on this forum, and IIRC, in this very thread, who have stated that they felt forced to either capitulate to Beethoven or else not mention him at all; this due to peer pressure. My personal belief vis-a-vis Beethoven in particular is that I can't imagine a scenario wherein anyone had to ever twist my arm to enjoy listening to him, so I can't relate to being in that position.



----------------
Now playing:
Costantino Mastroprimiano - Clementi Op 25 #6 Sonata in D 2nd mvmt - Un poco andante

[karlhenning]

. . . "everyone on this forum likes Beethoven, therefore I must like Beethoven even if I think he sucks... " . . . .

Well, and didn't Poju say as much? ; )

[jochanaan]

...But I think that, as the listening and study develops and deepens, this kind of peer pressure is likely to fade away...

That assumes that listening and study will deepen--an unwarranted assumption in my experience.

You don't seem to understand Neal's point. He's not arguing over which type of approach one should adopt when listening to music, he is arguing that the average person can enjoy classical music just as much as the real connoisseur, even if we are talking about simple pieces like Beethoven's Für Elise. His argument is quite disingenuous because he is trying to pretend, with false nonchalance, that there is no difference between any given classical composition...

Is he?  I don't quite see that, but if he is, he's exactly right--as long as we understand the difference between enjoyment and understanding.

...If i draw a stick figure on an chalk board i'm not going to pretend it is of equal value and importance to a Rembrandt merely because it was meant to be a stick figure on a chalk board.

But even a Strauss waltz is no stick figure!

That part of the discussion won't be over until every person here swears a blood oath that they buy into it. Because they don't, not in their heart of hearts. Perhaps they don't want to admit to themselves, and especially in public, that they are unintentional elitists because they actually prefer a superior music, and this shatters the egalitarian dream that they are being taught in school these days. I don't know, perhaps my POV is on the harsh side, but I have been trying to reconcile for years why people insist that they are just like everyone else (except for the music they like, oh, and they actually read, stuff like that) why be embarrassed just for liking different music?

Conversely, why should a classical music fan or even a classical musician be ashamed for liking Lady Gaga or Eminem or whoever wins a Grammy this year?  Can we not like them for different reasons?  Of course I admit the superior complexity, musicality and spirituality of the B minor Mass or the Ninth Symphony, but I can also enjoy Eminem's clever and passionate rhyming.  (I confess that I've never actually listened to Lady Gaga sing, though. )

[starrynight]

I think it's pointless comparing a popular music song and a large scale classical piece, they have completely different functions.  Compare like with like, surely that's the best way to evaluate things.

[jochanaan]

I think it's pointless comparing a popular music song and a large scale classical piece, they have completely different functions.  Compare like with like, surely that's the best way to evaluate things.

Yep.

[karlhenning]

So, what do you propose for a classical equivalent to a Lady GaGa song, and why?

[jochanaan]

So, what do you propose for a classical equivalent to a Lady GaGa song, and why?

Offenbach's Orpheus in the Underworld--for the Can-Can.