I listen to classical music and I think how beautiful it sounds and how complex it is when compared to any modern music within the last 50 years. I am curious on peoples theories on how music eventually became what it is now, but I'm mostly interested if people think there will ever be a return to the past's focus on beauty and not just sex and money.
Also, Classical Music thread
youtube.com
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
spectator.co.uk
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Probably sex and money.
classical music is art
modern music is emotions
What you dont hear is the crap from their time. Of course there was shit music in the classical music era. It just died off because of how shit it was, just like shit music today wont be heard in 300 years.
The problem is that all music today is shit.
> I am curious on peoples theories on how music eventually became what it is now
Literally niggers
Very narrow view of music my friend. Stop listening to pop music and dig a little deeper into genres that appeal to you.
There are other music genres besides pop and rap you know?
There's beautiful modern music, you just have to look for it:
youtube.com
Please enlighten me. What music do you think will be remembered in the future? Provide links please.
kek.
this is the greatest recording that i know of
youtube.com
listen through, from 2:00 on the song becomes almost unbearably beautiful.
There was a lot of pleb folk music back then written by people who are completely forgotten. Some folksy tunes from way back have been preserved for the ages by e.g. Bartok or Liszt.
Beethoven wrote "easy listening" pleb crap music besides his symphonies, sonatas, concertos, quartets, etc. Even around Bach's day people thought his music was too complicated, too many notes.
Modern "classical" music still exists but you might not stumble upon it unless you got to symphonies or ballets or classical music competitions. I've heard modern stuff at a ballet for example that I thought was very good, reminiscent of Prokofiev's or Shostakovich's modernness. Also heard modern classical at a pipe organ competition which was torturous minimalistic avant-garde crap. It's hit or miss.
Commercialism, marketing, low cost of entry, and low cost of self publishing is what makes music what it is today. Kikes for the big label stuff, and for the indie stuff, a million bands, a thousand difference niche genres that mostly no one gives a fuck about.
then you havent been looking. you can find a decent sound from most genre if you look hard enough.
It was a surprisingly slow but consistent process, basically if you make simple, easy music popular then you can either rehash old music or create it really easily and without a composition degree. Making art more accessible for (poor) artists was a running goal of the Marxist intellectuals who began dominating universities after Hitler scared them out of Europe.
Neoclassicism is basically dirty because it has the potential to raise standards and make it difficult to create art again.
why does it need to be remembered? is it not enough that you enjoy it but that everyone has to?
Sounds like you just don't know very much about modern music. Have you ever even listened to Sufjan Stevens or Joanna Newsom?
the song "untitled 03" by kendrick lamar is undoubtably the best rap song of the last 20 years. absolutely incredible insight by that man. unfortunately you cannot find it on youtube and the record label wouldn't let him put it on a major record.
That nigger only sounds insightful he is a true pathos driven dumbass
3:50 duration LOL
That's just shit and was probably made for people with low attention.
Also one might consider film composers as the modern form of opera composers.
Opera composers would often set music to a play or poem or theme written by somebody else.
Even Prokofiev wrote music for a number of movies.
I like Phillip Glass' work. I'm not a music connoisseur, but I would say this is influenced by him with a mix with synth. I like it, but it will take me a few listens to see if I enjoy it.
...
This argument is pretty worn out by now. It doesn't address the fact that our ancestors not only produced more great artwork than we do, but also did it with 5% as many potential artists.
>pathos driven dumbass
what? literally what?
pathos is the only quality required in art for it to be truly beautiful.
> The problem is that all music today is shit
How wrong can you be!? youtu.be
I lived with band geek who love Mahler and shostakovich, but also loved Kendrick Lamar. I gave him an unbiased listen and thought he was shit imo.
Gould and Peterson: the only good things to come out of Canada.
I am quite adept at bass guitar (playing for 4 years), and very very good at drums (playing for 10), and I'm well versed in music theory. Here's my tl;dr rant:
Music degenerated after 2005, in my opinion. During the 50s-2000s you had a wealth of musical genres and styles and concepts that I cannot see matched from any other time period. Back in this time you had crappy mainstream music for the normies, and actual art in the underground for people who cared.
Music nowadays on the other hand is disgustingly homogenized, not a single artist has a unique sound anymore, it's all just copying from each other. There are couple of factors at play here:
1. Sampling is considered acceptable. Many hack artists these days are just placing beats under old "unfashionable" musical styles which were genuinely good so they can reap praise whilst essentially having done jack shit. Most people without knowledge of popular music from the past cannot see this when it is happening either.
2. There's no underground or mainstream anymore. Thanks to hipster culture, you have lots of people who think it's fashionable to pretend to like actually good artists, so they end up pandering to people who don't actually listen to them.
3. Loudness wars. All music made nowadays is compressed to extremes to squeeze the highest amount of decibels out of it as possible. There is no dynamic range either. Every song you hear is going to be loud from start to finish.
4. People have abandon music theory. Most idiots for some reason think that music theory is some kind of set of rules your forced to follow, so they don't learn it thinking it will restrict their "creativity". What they don't realize is you use music theory whether or not you actually have studied and understand it. So everyone ends up playing the same D major 3 note crap melodies.
i bet you'd love this:
I like classical music too.
youtube.com
There's lots of good modern music like John Adams operas.
youtube.com
I agree other than comedy. I love John Candy's stuff and Mike Meyers
I think in general that's correct, that minimalism has had some large influence on modern forms of electronic music. The last link is very obviously influenced by Erik Satie btw.
It's popular music, sure it's not meant to be overly complex however. It is still beautiful by any measure.
I enjoyed it!
tbqh I miss some of the tunes I listened to during my degenerate edgy teen years... *sigh*
Film composers today are nothing compared to the film composers of yesterday.
youtube.com
Juvenoia
Interesting, Thanks.
This.
Its nightmarish anymore.
And god damn do I hate sampling
some filthy nigger or "edm" artist gets their hands on an old jam and loops it.
do you not consider that to be degenerated music though?
How old are you like 15?
(((Schoenberg)))
>This argument is pretty worn out by now.
Facts don't become untrue because they are repeated or old.
He's a more Sup Forums answer if you want it: marxists, kikes, and literally the CIA pushing the corrosive cultural meme that taste, refinement, and beauty are passé; and that gritty, edgy, subversive, ugly art is the real deal. Western society is in decline. Children are not required to learn the piano and the piano is no longer the centerpiece of entertainment in the average home.
Liszt was a rock star in his day, but sadly IMO there are no modern classical musicians who are popular like rockstars except to classical enthusiasts.
youtube.com
youtube.com
this one sounds a lot like the soundtrack from Morrowind at some parts:
youtube.com
Here's some Metal from Vivaldi:
youtube.com
Literally nothing wrong with him.
youtube.com
The degeneracy starts here.
youtube.com
Jazz is good. Adorno hated jazz because lefties hate anything that's good. It interferes with their agenda to admit some things are good and other things are not.
Sampling is literally nothing more than musical fraud. It's genuinely stomach churning to even contemplate that it's somehow an accept "form" of music. You can sample gracefully, but involved actually turning the sample into a completely new song. And I wouldn't even really care if it wasn't for cancer that it brings. Go to any song that's relatively underground that's been sampled by a rapper and you'll see almost every comment praising the rapper for sampling them, while the original composer of the melodies they consider so great is plopped right infront of them and they don't give a rat's arse. It's just complete and utter degeneracy.
Here's a classic example:
youtube.com
Every single comment is about kanye. And all he fucking did was steal the opening.
Good degenerate music
youtube.com
I'm more into jazz
youtube.com
As a teen in the '90s, I was really into trading MP3s, as I had access to my dad's large collection to encode and I worked at an ISP long before most people had broadband. I saw the writing on the wall that we would soon be in a world where everyone would have whatever music they pleased at their fingertips, and I predicted that there would be a sort of musical renaissance as a generation grew up with this kind of access. However, with some exceptions, it sort of seems like the opposite is happening. Perhaps people value music even less because of how accessible it is now. Not having to play themselves, listen to in a formal or sacred settings, or even having take an LP out of a jacket and blow off the dust, has cheapened it.
The main, big composers of what is commonly termed "classical" music existed up until the time of WWI and shortly after, with few exceptions. The golden age of symphonic, operatic, orchestral, and other genres was in the decades before-hand and right up until the end were becoming increasingly sophisticated harmonically, melodically while still conforming in some part to the traditional structures. Why is this? The same reason that much of the stylistic shifts thereafter has shown a musical scene with no real dominant stylistic strains, but a continual hyper-individualistic hodge-podge with no real binding stylistic traits. It is also the same reason that a classical tradition never really flourished in America but mainly just in Europe. It has everything to do with how society is structured. Before and leading up to WWI, Europe was possessed by a landed hereditary aristocratic ruling class, which among other things clustered and hoarded intelligence and education (why do you think the Brahmins have 113 average IQ while the average Indian has nigger-tier IQ? Such is the result of societal stratification, excaserbated by structural supports). This ruling class developed the patronage system, under which artists and musicians could make money IF they could make such music conforming competitively to the cultured tastes of aristocracy. Today the market incentives drives creative energies towards appealing towards the broadest possible, uncultured, uneducated, basest tastes possible. Aural propaganda; to appeal to the least common denominator. Artists today are all shitlibs. That's a result of consumerist capitalism, where the economic incentive is in appealing to the broadest possible mass, having the least divisive opinions, etc., and the artists who succeed are able to succeed because they appeal to the broadest mass, with their cloaked nihilism. The artist of yesterday was conservative, and Wagner was their liberals (who wanted to gas the kikes before his time
Jazz is good compared to modern pop, but it's still degenerate. Jazz was explicitly banned by the Nazis because it's negermusik.
>Facts don't become untrue because they are repeated or old.
yeah, jumped the gun and replied before reading the end of your post. I thought you were one of those faggots arguing that "everythings the same artistically, its all relative man xD"
>Western society is in decline
That statement makes it seem like it's part of a natural process. It isn't. It's being undermined on purpose.
A culture or society isn't "in decline" when it's being bombed by an enemy. It's under attack.
We are under attack. Not "in decline".
youtube.com
evanescence. Gothic rock/pop
Forget it about man.
My brother and close friend unironically thinks Kanye is a genius.
I dont care that rap exists, I dislike how its critiqued.
100%
black metal is the contemporary derivative of the western musical canon
I appreciate the honest reply
...good point
This is the best national anthem in the world by far: youtube.com
And when i hear opening like such in a rap or pop song i cant get the image out of my head that the fans and the artist thinks it takes some sort of extreme music talent to sample.
>autechre
>good
Turn off MTV and the radio. Start looking beyond the shitfest that is the mainstream. There is plenty of beauty to be found.
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
Electronic music from the 70s to now is objectively the modern equivalent of le fucking classical numales constantly harp on about
Two words: Jewish netopism.
>eason that a classical tradition never really flourished in America but mainly just in Europe.
Well, we had Barber and Ives and Hovhannes.
The main reason it failed to flourish here is that a good many of us were living in somewhat primitive conditions until the latter half of the 19th century. Recollect how many of us were farmers, lawyers, laborers, doctors, in small towns, with no chance of hearing a Brahmns symphony.
Yeah, there's a lot of great pop music out there, but that just leaves me even more depressed. It's squandered talent imo
Some good points, although, even the folk music by and for the common people was better in the past. So much so that many of the great composers borrowed heavily from it.
Good stuff, Thanks
Radio killed it.
Before the invention of radio there were 2 kinds of music, artistic and tribal. Artistic music was made by wealthy educated elites and was aesthetic driven. Tribal music was the shit the peasants made with sticks and strings and shit and was message driven. Once radio came about the largest audience was the peasents so their shitty style of music became dominant
The immediacy of the musician/audience/mass media/internet dialog has fundamentally altered everything. There was a time gap between composition, performance, feedback, availability at one time. That's been compressed to nanoseconds now. They're indistinguishable. Music is trying to find an equilibrium in this new space. I have all of Bach on a spare drive in my desktop machine. All of Mozart, all of Beethoven, all of Mahler, all of Tchaikovsky. All of it available with a finger twitch. The effort to hear - and the care involved in the reward of hearing - it's all gone. Can't put the genie back in the bottle though. The old relationships of patron-composer-audience-recording-distribution are relics of another time. Those relationships defined form and structure. What comes next I'm sure I don't know.
We did have a pretty lively classical/ orchestral music scene with people like Gershwin and Copland until about the 50s and 60s when pop music became mainstream.
Bill Evans is great.
I'm sure pol digs Prokofiev:
youtube.com
I was born in the wrong generation too \m/
There's god-tier white music of every era
I don't buy it. America has a lively tradition in other musical genres, like vaudeville, or hymnals, the latter going back a long time. The economic incentive existed there culturally and the means to sustain oneself. And besides, we have more opportunity in the modern age than anyone in history to hear a Brahms symphony, and here we are discussing why music isn't like it used to be. Barber was an over-rated fag, so were Ives and Hovhannes and Copland along with them, loads of shit. Traditions, like the one in Europe come about because of structural incentives. The same incentives for artists today existed back then, but one had to out-Wagner a Wagner to get it while today you have to be the better pop star.
breef and weel explained history of why and how music was made before the emplifier (electric guitar) in a nutshell.
saved.
pretty spot on; of course there's more genres besides pop but even in those genres the music doesn't vary too much
I know it's not taylor swift, but goddamn Netrebko's casta diva is good and she's widely popular:
youtube.com
Perhaps the first modernist, Wagner's chromaticism pushed tonality to its limit. Harmony, which was what made white music white, had nowhere to go but in an atonal direction, and everything unraveled after that.
Copland and Gershwin? Two gay jews who were into niggerizing and subverting music? That's an anti-tradition.
Rock and metal of the 21st century is maximum faggotry.
The only not-dead genre made today is EDM, and still only like 2% at that
Jazz is still going strong.
true. I think it's more complicated than what I said earlier. A bit of a simplification. But appealing to popular tastes always has had a degree of incentives. It's all about being able to sustain oneself in doing something. But one could get Beyoncé-levels of wealth under the patronage system
>implying
Neo-classical music is god tier. Just because pop culture likes shitty music doesn't mean all music is degenerate.
You used to have to have money to buy music, but now every nigger and their unknown dad stream music on their phones. All about ad time on whatever app, not quality. Thus we get this garbage. Woke up to my retarded step brother who is renting a room from me pumping this shit out of my sound system. Guess who lost his stereo priveliges. Probably just going to kick him out if he wants to play that shit in my house.
Hey man, that's just not true. A lot of modern music is art as well. Progressive Metal and Jazz fusion are probably at the forefront of that. Stuff like this may take a bit to get into due to the harsh vocals, but give it a listen. There are lots of bands like this out there, keeping creativity alive in music.
youtu.be
If you can't at least appreciate the Beaty, creativity, mastery of instumentation, and dedication that goes into music like this, well then idk. Just hang yourself because you're a miserable sack of shit
Correct
At least Schoenberg's kike subversion is honest and contains accidentally beautiful passages
I like Wagner, but he's a bit slow for contemporary tastes. Maybe I just listen to the ring too much, but it's like 1 chord for 20 minutes, then another chord and so on.
"Jazz isn't dead, it just smells funny." Frank Zappa
Huh, I never paid much mind to jazz, definitely not my to-go genre
Awesome, but how to subvert the subversion?
>linked song
>Garbage djent+poser death metal+faggot vocals
This is exactly what I was talking about
I really can't get past those vocals. I want to hear people sing, which I can't do very well myself, but I could scream like this guy.
he's not only changing chords, but modulating in every other fucking bar in the except above
Same issue with folk music I think. There was no recorded music, so musicians were able to make a living performing in weddings, funerals, community and church events, in taverns etc. If you wanted music, you needed musicians. There was structural incentive to hone the craft, whereas today bar bands are comprised by mediocre hobbyists
this one ^^
youtube.com
This