Non-Classical Music Listening Thread!

[Christo]

How do you mean?

Nothing serious. It's just about English, why bother?

But "irregardless" would be a word I would cherish - if it were Dutch. 

[mn dave]

Oh, now English is the language of inferiors! 

[Christo]

Quite a common inferiority complex, I guess 

[Kullervo]

Who cares

This guy.

(that site is my bible, btw )

[mn dave]

Where is the LOVE, Christo???

[Christo]

This guy.

(that site is my bible, btw )

Nice site! Most of it comes close to my average English vocabulary! 

Where is the LOVE, Christo???

Certainly not with me.

[karlhenning]

Nothing serious. It's just about English, why bother?

One's ear forgives infelicities on the part of foreign friends who make the effort to try to communicate in English.

I thought James was a native speaker;  and such a word in the mouth of a native speaker is . . . inferior 

Where is the LOVE, Christo???

I'm feelin' it . . . .

[karlhenning]

Nice site! Most of it comes close to my average English vocabulary! 

It is nice!  I am happy to say, that I have never witnessed the bastardization expresso 

[Christo]

One's ear forgives infelicities on the part of foreign friends who make the effort to try to communicate in English.

Extremely kind! (I'm not sure if I would be as forgiving if you tried my Low Saxonian mother tongue).   

[karlhenning]

It is gracious of you to consider that extremely kind;  I think it simple courtesy 

[rockerreds]

Juliana Hatfield-Made In China
Jeffrey Osborne-Stay With Me Tonight
Sleater-Kinney-All Hands On The Bad One
Bing Crosby-Millenium Christmas Collection

[Kullervo]

Just curious, what is this completely different kind of listening you're referring to? lol

Simply that serious music benefits from more focused listening, and pop music is made for passive listening.

[karlhenning]

Simply that serious music benefits from more focused listening, and pop music is made for passive listening.

Overall, a good generalization, I think.

[Kullervo]

À chacun son goût.

But to say that even a pinnacle of pop-writing like The Beatles' "Nowhere Man" or The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" is as deep and rewarding to repeated listening as Beethoven's Op. 135 or Sibelius' Oceanides is an idea too fatuous to warrant refutation.

[Kullervo]

[Renfield]

À chacun son goût.

But to say that even a pinnacle of pop-writing like The Beatles' "Nowhere Man" or The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" is as deep and rewarding to repeated listening as Beethoven's Op. 135 or Sibelius' Oceanides is an idea too fatuous to warrant refutation.

I'd say it depends on the criteria you apply, the "formal context". You're unlikely to see sonata form, but that doesn't mean you won't see something else that is entirely unique to the context, that cannot be replicated in "sonata form", and that is exceptional.

("See" as in "observe from a neutral point of view - I'm not implying enjoyment. In fact, I'm willfully excluding it.)


In fact, this view of mine (as of course it is, versus some universal principle) is largely the reason it's so difficult for me to listen to such a broad spectrum of non-classical artists as most people easily do: the absence of the exceptional, in favour of the passively enjoyable.

Rather: the music-maker's premise that this constitutes a necessity, unless you're writing for solo cello and "above".

[Kullervo]

sure, some music experienced is easier to digest perhaps, but still, there is no different type of listening involved ...this is just some myth type shit you've formulated in your own brain i'm afraid...

Ah, the "I'm right, you're wrong" argument. I've heard this song before — it's not one that benefits from repeated hearings.

[Kullervo]

I'd say it depends on the criteria you apply, the "formal context". You're unlikely to see sonata form, but that doesn't mean you won't see something else that is entirely unique to the context, that cannot be replicated in "sonata form", and that is exceptional.

Of course popular music has it's own unique forms and experimentation within the pop format, but it lends itself to simplicity. Of course, there are those who will argue that there is plenty of non-conventional pop music that breaks these boundaries, but for me most of them are only more pretentious than interesting (just listen to the mounds of bad prog-rock and " experimental noise" bands!).

In fact, this view of mine (as of course it is, versus some universal principle) is largely the reason it's so difficult for me to listen to such a broad spectrum of non-classical artists as most people easily do: the absence of the exceptional, in favour of the passively enjoyable.

Completely understandable. I think it all has to do with your musical development — I grew up listening to pop and only came to classical music later (age 18), whereas you IIRC have always been around it. I can only enjoy CM if I'm listening and doing nothing else. I'm not as discerning with pop — It's just a sort of aural wallpaper useful for when I'm doing something mundane (like folding laundry or browsing the intarwebs) or when silence feels too stifling.

P.S. What did you think of those Yellow Magic Orchestra tracks?

[Kullervo]

whatever, you don't know what you are talking about at all..."repeated hearings" doesn't mean a different kind of listening either btw, just to set you straight. because we tend to listen-to and want to experience any music repeatedly if we enjoy it and it moves us ...

Sitting down and focusing solely on a piece and listening to a pop album while driving down the freeway are two completely different kinds of listening. Just because it isn't your experience doesn't preclude it from being someone else's.

[Kullervo]

If you can take in every detail of Boulez's Le marteau sans maître or Berg's chamber concerto while cooking risotto and cutting coupons, you're some sort of listening god — that's all I'm going to say on the subject.