The five myths about contemporary classical music

[albedo]

would it be a fair critique that modern composers usually don't give brass and woodwinds much work to do?


Or that modern cinema doesn't like music that competes with the screen and $million dollar voices or faces, and has squeezed the epic out of composers? does anyone still say '100 voice choir because...I said so'?


http://www.nats.org/home/38-general/400-journal-of-singing-feature-article-economy-of-choir-size.html


i am not very knowledgable in modern orchestral composition so I cannot really levy any critique at all. I do hope we aren't talking about soundtracks however.

[eyeresist]

Funny how Schoenberg is still "contemporary".

There is some good new stuff amongst the academic dreck, but the time and money you need to spend to find it isn't worth it, from my point of view. Especially as there's so much "old" music I haven't heard yet.

[DavidW]

would it be a fair critique that modern composers usually don't give brass and woodwinds much work to do?

No because it's untrue.

[Sequentia]

Contemporary classical music is devoid of melody and appeal,
all noise and no fun. At least, that's the cliche. But this is music
that is very much at the heart of our modern world.

Tom Service
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 26 April 2012 20.00 BST
Article history


A scene from English National Opera's 2009 production of György Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre.
Photograph: Tristram Kenton for the Guardian

1. It all sounds like a squeaky gate

[removed]

2. It's inaccessible

[removed]

3. You need to have a beard and wear a black polo-neck jumper to appreciate it

[removed]

4. It's irrelevant

[removed]

5. It's written for classical musicians so it must be 'old'

[removed]

* What are the composers' favourites? Mark-Anthony Turnage, Anna
Meredith and more tell us the contemporary work they couldn't live
without.

Sounds like the average criticism of "Mousard".

[Sequentia]

People are just getting dumber and dumber. The time for civility is over. No one should criticize shit (anything) anymore; they can all go to where they're comfortable, and STFU, and listen to their Strauss, and leave others alone.

If anyone EVER,... if they happened to hear what's coming from the car audio,... if they ever even DARE to give me 'that' look,... wow, just try it buddy,... I have no patience for the 'why do you play something nice?', or the 'that sounds like shit',... you know, why don't you just turn yellow and die?? Trust me, it's 2012, the time for winking at idiots is over. Fuck 'em all,... dingy consumerists.

May ALL have war enough to be able to appreciate the sounds of war in Xenakis, for instance.


'Drop the bomb. Exterminate them all' (Apocalypse Now)


ok, to all you people calm down snyprrr, calm down, it's only Saturday morning, it's only a Classical Music forum, it's only a movie, it's only a movie...


ahhhh,... I neeeed to stay away from the controversy,.... ahhh, soothing balm of Gilead,.... there, there....

I agree. Let's celebrate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoRgo5_kzgA

[Sequentia]

I believe we're way past this now, snyprrr. Even my Dad likes Contemporary classical music! I introduced him to Takemitsu, Part, and Salonen (the composer, he already knew the conductor ) and he's loving every minute of it!

Is that really contemporary classical music?

[Sequentia]

Funny how Schoenberg is still "contemporary".

Not "funny", but certainly "irritating", and ultimately "disappointing". In 2548, people will say, "this is the most recent classical music," and proceed to play Mahler's 9th.

[Leon]

I honestly don't think aquiring more knowledge, being open to challenges, while widening perception and stretching one's ears along the way in this passionate pursuit has anything to do with just "taste", my friend.

Nor does it follow that possessing those qualities will guarantee that someone will like how contemporary music sounds. 

I've spent a majority of my life listening to and studying new music and while there are some composers (Carter, Boulez are two) whose music I can admit an appreciation for, I do not enjoy listening to it anywhere as much as any work by Haydn, and countless other "old" music composers.  And there are many more new music composers whose music is of absolutely no interest to me whatsoever.

I fail to see why the issue of whether more people enjoy it or not is the subject of debate.  People gravitate to the music they like more than other music.  Many people like Mahler, I don't.  Many people like Wagner, I don't.  I love Haydn and Mozart, many people find them boring.  The same is true for 20th and now 21st century music.

Perfectly natural state of affairs, IMO.

[Mirror Image]

Nor does it follow that possessing those qualities will guarantee that someone will like how contemporary music sounds. 

I've spent a majority of my life listening to and studying new music and while there are some composers (Carter, Boulez are two) whose music I can admit an appreciation for, I do not enjoy listening to it anywhere as much as any work by Haydn, and countless other "old" music composers.  And there are many more new music composers whose music is of absolutely no interest to me whatsoever.

I fail to see why the issue of whether more people enjoy it or not is the subject of debate.  People gravitate to the music they like more than other music.  Many people like Mahler, I don't.  Many people like Wagner, I don't.  I love Haydn and Mozart, many people find them boring.  The same is true for 20th and now 21st century music.

Perfectly natural state of affairs, IMO.

Well said, Arnold. My sentiments exactly. People like what they like. That's all there is to it.

[Philoctetes]

Is that really contemporary classical music?

What is this supposed to mean? They're all alive. Composing classical music. Therefore etc.

[PaulSC]

What is this supposed to mean? They're all alive. Composing classical music. Therefore etc.

Well, Takemitsu is no longer alive, but he was until fairly recently. It's totally uncontroversial to call the music of all three "contemporary classical music."

[Philoctetes]

Well, Takemitsu is no longer alive, but he was until fairly recently. It's totally uncontroversial to call the music of all three "contemporary classical music."

Okay, I didn't know that. Thanks for the correction, but they've all been alive recently, and at least two of them are still alive composing. That would make them contemporary in my estimation.

[Sequentia]

Nor does it follow that possessing those qualities will guarantee that someone will like how contemporary music sounds. 

I've spent a majority of my life listening to and studying new music and while there are some composers (Carter, Boulez are two) whose music I can admit an appreciation for, I do not enjoy listening to it anywhere as much as any work by Haydn, and countless other "old" music composers.  And there are many more new music composers whose music is of absolutely no interest to me whatsoever.

I fail to see why the issue of whether more people enjoy it or not is the subject of debate.  People gravitate to the music they like more than other music.  Many people like Mahler, I don't.  Many people like Wagner, I don't.  I love Haydn and Mozart, many people find them boring.  The same is true for 20th and now 21st century music.

Perfectly natural state of affairs, IMO.

This discussion deals with stereotypes, not preferences.

[Sequentia]

What is this supposed to mean? They're all alive. Composing classical music. Therefore etc.

They are not contemporary because their works are fairly conservative, when compared to compositions such as Boulez's 2nd Piano Sonata or Stockhausen's 10th Piano Piece - works that are several decades old. I was making reference to musical progress, not chronology.

[Philoctetes]

They are not contemporary because their works are fairly conservative, when compared to compositions such as Boulez's 2nd Piano Sonata or Stockhausen's 10th Piano Piece - works that are several decades old. I was making reference to musical progress, not chronology.

LOL! Ho, is this supremely ironic given your previous post.

[Sequentia]

LOL! Ho, is this supremely ironic given your previous post.

The one about stereotypes? Please explain.

[Philoctetes]

The one about stereotypes? Please explain.

You have a stereotype in your mind about what contemporary classical music should sound like, which I would also wager is a preference.

Outside of the fact that you're simply wrong about what contemporary classical music means. You can't simply fix a definition to suit your prejudicial needs. While language can be used in such a fashion, it shouldn't be.

[Sequentia]

You have a stereotype in your mind about what contemporary classical music should sound like, which I would also wager is a preference.

Outside of the fact that you're simply wrong about what contemporary classical music means. You can't simply fix a definition to suit your prejudicial needs. While language can be used in such a fashion, it shouldn't be.

So if I were to sit down and compose a "Missa Papae Marcelli", it would be contemporary, simply because it was composed in 2012?

[Philoctetes]

So if I were to sit down and compose a "Missa Papae Marcelli", it would be contemporary, simply because it was composed in 2012?

Yes, the context is part and parcel with the phrase. Simply because an older form was utilized, does not negate the time frame from which it was composed. I would view it under the auspice of appropriation, which is easily a modern, if not postmodern idea. Sherrie Levine demonstrated this in the realm of photography.

[Sequentia]

Yes, the context is part and parcel with the phrase. Simply because an older form was utilized, does not negate the time frame from which it was composed. I would view it under the auspice of appropriation, which is easily a modern, if not postmodern idea. Sherrie Levine demonstrated this in the realm of photography.

Music is organisation of sound; commercial goals or lack thereof and "context" have nothing to do with that. In what ways has Pärt gone beyond Darmstadt?