Seriously, it's been like a few centuries and people are STILL recording the same fucking songs over and over again.
Like the 1500th recording of some fucking Mozart tune is gonna sound any different?
Why won't people just make some new tunes? It's like somebody once decided that all that shit is like the gold standard and nothing else should be composed ever anything
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
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
twitter.com
good thread
really makes you think
Why do people still look at Picassos or Rembrandts when we have new pictures of celebrities every day?
You're retarded. Go listen to Chimp-Hop, you nigger-loving white slave.
I blame HVK for conducting a million things and conducting them all the same way
>Why do people still look at Picassos or Rembrandts when we have new pictures of celebrities every day?
that doesn't even make sense
really firing my neurons
who cares
post asian feet
PLS JUST FUCKING STOP
Sup Forums truly is the most plebeian board
Will the average Sup Forumstant ever stop being 14 years old?
>classical is real art so i have to "appreciate" it because smart people told me so
Baroque era is objectively the best you ingrate
yeah, people jack off over old art and disregard modern art because "it's not as good! I was born in the wrong generation! Led Zeppelin RULES!"
I knew a g*rman who was hopelessly obsessed with classical music
It's literally called art music. Do you really think a brown person rhyming about stealing and killing over a stolen drumbeat compares? You totally don't listen to that """"""""""music"""""""""" so that you fit in with the groids at your middle school.
cool story sis
What does this have to do with your racist opinion of another artform that you think has less artistic value because you don't like the ethnicity of the artists?
you can jack off onto things both new and old user
same as with people
best bait i've seen in a while
it's quite weak
Ha, he thinks there is nothing being composed today.
Max Richter pls go
music is literally art you dum dum
I feel like all the big electronic musicians working today would be able to compose classical music of the same quality if that was their medium.
The majority of music is not art.
wrong, the majority of art may not be music but the entirety of music is art.
bad art is still art you fucking retard
If you mean Terry Riley-an electronic musicians, maybe; if you mean faggots like Aphex Twin and BoC, hell no—Stockhausen already dismissed Aphex Twin's "music" as being fifty years too late.
but today stockhausen is the one who is fifty years late
really makes your tables think
He is more relevant than ever today
Actually, he is less relevant than ever today
People aren't re-painting Picassos or Rembrants over and over and over again year after year. Reproductions are copies of the original, not completely re-painted by another person.
you have no clue what you are talking about kid
Educate yourself.
en.wikipedia.org
Stockhausen also dismissed all of jazz, black people in general, and like half of his contemporaries
What point are you trying to make? It is necessary to repeatedly perform classical music in order for people to hear it. A painting doesn't need to be painted repeatedly to be seen. It's not like people have stopped composing new classical pieces.
"art" is not synonym of quality you stupid giappominchia
>There are people that still believe making new music has any point after Stravinsky
It reached its peak, everything afterwards is beating a dead horse.
There's a difference between performing and recording. There are 125 recordings listed on RYM of Die Kunst Der Fugue, for instance. All because everyone and their mother wants to interpret it in their own way. That painting analogy doesn't work here because there aren't 125 or more different re-paintings of any given Picasso work floating around just because painters want to stroke their ego and add their own touches to the artist's work.
>want to listen to some classical
>finding which version to listen to is unnecessarily convoluted
yes?
s/Stravinsky/Schönberg/
>everyone and their mother wants to interpret it in their own way.
And that's the part you don't seem to get for some weird reason.
Chopin's nocturnes played by Claudio Arrau aren't the same as played by Rubinstein, they add different touches in their interpretation, they perform it differently. What's the correct way to play Chopin? Sheet music can just guide you to an extent but it leaves a lot to the artist's interpretation and performance.
It's not about stroking egos, it's about how you personally want to portray and express a particular piece of music.
You seem to really just not care though and want to rage for sake of raging so whatever.
>Chopin's nocturnes played by Claudio Arrau aren't the same as played by Rubinstein
yes, yes they are.
>noone has still listed any modern composers
proof that classical is a dead genre.
Pärt Glass Reich
may be old and memes as well, but they are composing and alive
>the important thing about music is how new it is
There is no reason to record 200+ year old songs hundreds of times. It's the definition of musical masturbation thinking that your slight tweak adds anything that justifies its existence over the dozens or hundreds of recordings that already exist.
>recorded music is all music
>what is live performance
dude he hit that note with SO much passion, like the way he pressed the key on the piano it makes SUCH a difference...incredible rendition
Classical music isn't better or worse than "today's music", but it follows completely different rules and ideals making it nearly uncomparable
John Williams, Hans Zimmer - those are today's geniuses.
>its influenced by black people music, so its shit
really turns your thinks huh
Hans Zimmer is popular music kinda equivalent to Johann Strauß
*Strauss
I've always wondered who had the ''official'' recording of a certain Mozart or Beethoven song, because you know, the one you lsiten all the time, is movies and such, sound exactly the same, so it must be from the same recording, and who did those? (inb4 maybe i'm just a retard and that's how it works, every recording will always sound the same because it's a song that's been around for centuries and there's no way you can sound different from the original scores).
>this thread
>plebs not able to into the interpretive aspect of music
They literally are not.
>songs
But anyway, the reason is that some people like them more than others, so they buy them. And maybe also to take advantage of new recording technology. That's it, nothing worth getting worked up over.
>plebs thinking they have anything to add to a 300 year old piece of music
>the reason is that some people like them more than others, so they buy them
Sounds strikingly like the concept behind popular music there, user. And that doesn't account for the people who do the new recordings unless you're saying they do it for the money from the sales of people who want to buy the same Mozart piece for the hundredth time. I thought art music (aka legitimate music) was above that kind of thing.
>They literally are not.
They literally are. All they changed was making a different retarded face while they play them because playing classical music is just so much PASSION and you really have to FEEL it that's why pianists always have to do retarded fucking faces while playing otherwise it wouldn't be considered an "artistic" rendition now go fuck off you pretentious twat
There are usually no "official" recordings, but standards, that are perceived as a kind of a reference.
For example Jochen for Bruckner symphonies or Solti for the Ring des Nibelungen (Rheingold, Walküre, Siegfried, Götterdämmerung)
As far as I know Solti's Ride of the valkyries was used in Apocalypse Now
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
pls tell me how these are performed the same or sound the same.
>rockism
>current year
>one plays it fast
>the other plays it a bit slower
omg the difference it..it is wow...all those different emotions and wow. literally blown away
it really takes a genius to be able to interpret this piece with such passion
>classicalism
>current year
Not but
youtube.com
youtube.com
Complete different sound, feeling, kind of interpretation and more or less slightly different instruments
youtube.com
youtube.com
>classicalism
Who are you quoting?
>classicalism
I'm surprised that some people cannot comprehend the idea that performers genuinely can get lost in some composer's work and classify the performance as simple as "retarded face". Then again, the dude is clearly baiting. I hope he is at least.
I prefer romanticalism
I bet more than half of these kids in this thread have radiohead as their fave artist and are 16. Like I would bet actual money im so confident.
>tempo not important
>ignoring how they treat the rhythms
Maybe this will be more noticeable.
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
refer to for clarification on the distinction between art and popular music.
>And that doesn't account for the people who do the new recordings
Not even sure what you meant by this.
I could churn out 10,000 shitty renditions of Mozart's piano sonatas to make a quick buck and that would in no way damage the integrity of the composer or the pieces themselves.
Its called film music which is basically our classical of today.
>t. 24 year old classical "enthusiast" with a playcount of 10k on NMH
>Who are you quoting?
Me. I coined it just now. Gonna send it to Merriam Webster in an hour or so.
I've read your shitty bait chart dozens of times because you keep posting it anytime this argument comes up. Please stop being classicalist.
Or the even more simple reason that the performers enjoy performing, and sell recordings so they can afford to continue doing so.
Metal is today's classical music
lol Kanye is one of Ame's most scrobbled artists, along with Vladislav Delay who makesliteral ambient music.
better than having radiohead as my favorite band.
art music isn't "better" than popular music though
That's exactly the kind of stuff that leads to people listening to classical to pretend they are intellectuals and spergs like OP
Classical music is today's classical music
Better read it again, because you clearly failed to understand it the first few dozen times.
No, they are not and I'm certainly not saying that out of arrogance
Pretty sure you haven't listened to the song I posted otherwise you wouldn't spout such inane bullshit.
Actually no, it isn't.
wtf is even going on here
am I supposed to click on this and not notice the bigass section in the middle where the main guy who uses this (frankly, unsettling) term goes out of his way to stress that it's not a hierarchical distinction
am I supposed to ignore the fact that this chart portrays Shakespeare as not being for entertainment purposes
I love orchestral music but this is a hot fucking classicist mess and you need some Edward Said in your life
>art music isn't "better" than popular music
it is, however, better
subjective opinion
>subjective opinion
is that in itself a subjective opinion?
Must you inject your racist beliefs into everything you do?
Please gouge your sensory organs out with a broken-in-half pencil you insufferable twats
You my friend are the dumbest of us all, obviously people continue to reinterpret and re-record the works of the "masters" as some might say because there is something there that they feel has not been expressed properly, or because they have a different way of playing things out which they think is worthy of their time (or might make them some money).
As for the painting analogy which has come to rise in this thread,
1. People do in fact reinterpret old works in the same way, tweaking or perhaps just struggling to attain the same prowess as the original artist, analogous to the composer here (though not nearly perfectly, see point 2).
2. This comparison is half-moot. The painting is not a script or a blueprint for an act or recording of art as a composition is to a recording, but is the art itself, as well as a blueprint for reinterpretation if one wishes to look at it as such.
no
No, because there are objectively such things as objectivity and subjectivity
prove it
...
subjective opinion
How does it feel having a shit band as your favorite?
>Go listen to Chimp-Hop, you nigger-loving white slave.
Damn nigga slow down
According to what reasoning?
>songs
spotted the uncultured plebeian