Is classical music superior to modern music?

Is classical music superior to modern music?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=7XdaFR6mIC4
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Sure, if you're a pseud.
Also, contemporary/modern classical >>>>>>>>>>>>>> common practice classical

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Classical music. The notation is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of music theory most of the jokes will go over a typical listener's head. There’s also Bach's pious outlook, which is deftly woven into his fugues- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Protestant literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these pieces, to realise that they’re not just beautiful- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike classical music truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the humour presented in such works as "Leck mich im Arsch” which itself is a cryptic reference to the poetry of Goethe and a callback to Germanic folklore. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Beethoven's genius wit unfolds itself in their headphones. What fools.. how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, i DO have a Mozart tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid

Lol

In every possible way.
>steve reich, phillip glass, john cage, stockhausen, le list goes on XD

You tell me, Mozart you motherfucker.

>Mozart, Beethoven, Bach le list goes on xD
Great argument, fucking idiot.

Fuck off clueless avant-teen

If Mozart or Bethoven lived today he would be listening to something else instead.

>but muh high iq for classical music
Nope

I just want someone who knows theory to say what makes classical so good. Obviously there's no one who knows theory on Sup Forums

Surviving on borrowed time for centuries, common practice music was deftly felled in the early 21st century by a hero who remains unnamed. Humanity rejoiced as it shrugged off the shackles of fake enjoyment and archaic snobbery to embrace the minimal, the atonal... the indeterminate. Truly, this Cadillac of men is a champion of intellectuals and the common man alike.

mozart got famous from abusing the I and V chords over and over. You can't just put him into the group of "classical" and say that makes him better or worse. Classical had its simple and complex music just like today

Metal = electronic dance music = contemporary/modern classical music>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>common practice period = classical music from other cultures>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Other forms of popular music>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Folk music

Anyone who thinks that common practice is even worth keeping near modern classical doesn't actually listen to enough of either to realize how annoying repetitive the earlier is in terms of being overly formulaic on an artist to artist basis.

I know theory. Theory doesn't make classical music good. The music makes it good. Theory can help you understand how complex music is, which offers its own level of appreciation, but knowing it doesn't suddenly make the music prettier or more moving

Just because classical music uses non mainstream instruments or different music theory means its better.

What do you mean by modern though? 21st century? Or everything from Romantic onward?

No, there are pieces in classical music that are amazing, but likewise there are songs in the current age that are good. It's all subjective, and I love myself some Ryuichi Sakamoto and Erik Saite.

H O W E V E R

Literally 90% of the crap past the 2000's is garbage, it's all recycled/copied from other sources. As the industry is doing whatever it wants and pushing out crap out at an alarming rate, it's very much evident that we'll come to a point where music will be wholly synthetic, with even the voices just being replicated from famous artists or created from nothing.

only redditors say "pseud" you fucking pseudointellectual parrot
all you can do is regurgitate words you've heard recently for cred

I made a differentiation between common practice and contemporary/modern. That enough should be tell you that modern is everything that comes after Romantic as common practice is Baroque, Classical, and Romantic

>Literally 90% of the crap past the 2000's is garbage, it's all recycled/copied from other sources.
t. le wrong generationer who can't into finding the good stuff; fuck off
> I love myself some Ryuichi Sakamoto and Erik Saite
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

If classical is so good then why do a bunch of monkeys make catchier tunes?

...

>beethoven would have been listening to something

kek

I can only truly appreciate Western art music on psychedelics. Listening to Barenboim leading a performance of Beethoven's Symphony No. 3 under the influence of 8~ grams of psilocybin mushrooms was one of the most triumphant listening experiences I've ever had. There's no way I could recapture that ecstasy, or the deep understanding of themes present in Beethoven's compositions.

based Zappa

t. butthurt pseud

Recommend some contemporary classical composers to me.

You'd have to be an absolute idiot to think that music in all three of those eras is repetitive and formulaic. You want to say that most composers in just baroque or classical are those things fine. But you're retarded if you think Ravel sounds anything like Beethoven, much less think a romantic composer sounds like Bach

>There's no way I could recapture that ecstasy, or the deep understanding of themes present in Beethoven's compositions.
In sobriety, I mean.

alright, what makes it good then? Because academics don't give a shit about rock or pop, they only teach classical and maybe jazz

Ravel's not common practice though. He's Impressionist, which started at the end of Romantic but isn't common practice. I also didn't say that Baroque, Romantic, and Classical guys sound exactly like each other, that's dumb; we wouldn't have separations of eras like we do if that was the case.
Contemporary in what definition? Anything 20th century and after period? Or people that have made 21st century stuff worth checking out?

How am I supposed to explain what makes it good? It's transcendental beauty? It's depth of color? It's meticulous development of complex and and emotional themes? The same things that make other music good make classical music good. I feel like people that don't like classical only know the meme Classical era pieces. Listen to some Debussy, Strauss, Bach, Schnittke, there's so many eras and composer that do entirely different things. Not to mention within those things there are so many different arrangements. Symphonies to boring? Try a string quartet. Try piano or choral music.

21st century.

Not because of something inherent to the genre. It was just random chance that the greatest composers of all time (your pic) happened to be born in that period relatively closesly to one another.

Ok Rick and Morty

I think it depends on tastes and what type of modern music. Music is built upon previously established rules. That's why the 20th century was a turning point, they disregarded those ideas that were built upon for the past 1000 years. But some pop music incorporates common practice into their style, Baroque pop is an example but then now we have music where they try to use gimmicks. Not that gimmicks were unheard of back then, but like you know what I'm talking about.

I think we've progressed and have the ability to make far superior music than back then. But it depends who is at the helm of the writing I guess.

Well it modulates, that's the main thing. Show me a recent pop song that modulates, haa secondary dominants, any quality of chords beside major or minor, or even any chords beyond I IV V and vi.

Also he would know, though to be fair it was the pop music of it's day.

Exactly.

don't get me wrong I liked what I listened to, some Mozart, Beethoven and especially Rite of Spring. It's just that, when teaching music, and talking about what makes it art, no one ever mentions rock music there. The "intellectuals" and academics will only ever teach classical and jazz, even though plenty of rock music has gotten to a high level. They just ignore it as if it doesn't matter. So I guess I'd like to ask them "what music is worthy to be considered art"

Here's my expert analysis: classical is boring and fucking gay as shit. Metal and nigger rap music are better.

I'm glad we've come to an agreement that you're a pseud.

Well it is great we have an expert on gay shit here today.

Some of my favorite 21st century compositions:

Friedrich Cerha - Momente (can be found on Spiegel-Monumentum-Momente CD)
Sofia Gubaidulina - Pentimento (can be found on Chamber Music With Double Bass CD)
Brian Ferneyhough - String Quartet No. 5 and String Quartet No. 6 (can be found on his Complete Works For String Quartets And Trios CD)
Julia Wolfe - Anthracite Fields (LP's on her bandcamp)
Salvatore Sciarrino - Shadow Of Sound (can be found on the Orchestral Works CD 3)

I see, my bad. What are you basing this on? As someone actually studying music, at a purely music school no less, I haven't found this to be the case at all. I have heard several concepts exemplified by rock music. My theory professor had a whole lecture spent analyzing Beethoven's Waldstein sonata that culminated with him playing it on piano on top of Hotel California. I don't think any serious, grounded musician ignores other genres at all, because of course classical isn't the only sect of music to reach those heights

Only opera is good.
Unfortunately Beethoven made only one, the hack.

The chorus of chandelier is in F# lydian, and it incorporates a phrygian minor, rather than the more common aeolian minor. It's not amazingly complex, but it breaks the I V VI IV pattern.

Also, MMMM MMMM MMMM MMMM by the Crash Test Dummies is a deceptively complicated pop song, modulating between G# lydian and Bb lydian over changing time signatures.

...

It is neither superior nor inferior.Classical music has its own complexities and it is only fair to say that a lot musicians were influenced during the years by classical music.

>Like modern classic
>Calls people who like old classic pseus
Maybe you get to add few more points to your IQ score in the next life

yeah he is right user,grow up.

Stop shitposting

>If
Still naive,sweet 16.

You have google for this you dipshit,we are not here to school you and the rest of our summer friends.

Why you bother,new here?

>What are you basing this on?
nothing really just anecdotal evidence of what other people say. I'm glad it's not true though, if professors actually teach concepts from rock

>Calls people who like old classic pseus
That's not what I did. Nice reading comprehension.

Literally who?

Perhaps you should stop referring to current popular music as "modern music". There is a thing called contemporary classical you know.

But that's what you did,learn to express yourself in a proper manner,dyslexia can be treated user.

But yeah,sure i get it,what you said makes perfect sense to you but only inside your head and i just had a shower,i am clean and everything,definitely not interested to visit a shit hole like that.

How have you not heard Chandelier or MMM MMM MMM MMM?

OP asked if classical is superior to modern music, not if classical music is good. The response was, "Sure, if you're a pseud," making the claim that you're intellectually pretentious if you think classical music is inherently better than "modern music." I never said that listening to or liking classical makes you a pseud.
You are seriously in no position to insult anyone's intelligence when you can't comprehend a simple fucking post correctly.

What if they made an album together?

Yeah?
My library is 1/3 classical music and 2/3 stuff from 1950 to today, but i still think that bach or beethoven annihilate everything else

Wow, I never knew there was a musical counterpart to the pretentious delusion of high class contemporary visual arts.

>You are seriously in no position to insult anyone's intelligence when you can't comprehend a simple fucking post correctly.

Says the guy who used the term "modern music".What is "modern music" considered to be?When you use such a vast term you better not hit the post button and try to re-read what you wrote .

Oh man i am feeling sorry for you every time you reply,please stop.Love yourself for who you are,you don't have to prove anything here,we already established that you are not so bright..

>Says the guy who used the term "modern music"
I used it because OP used it, you absolutely retarded ape.
Is this bait?

Yeah, I feel you. People are indeed delusional as fuck as they parade around Radiohead, The Beatles, Pink Floyd, *insert popular music artist paraded as high art here*, etc.

I actively avoid hearing pop music

youtube.com/watch?v=7XdaFR6mIC4


I like this this one

>OP is the retard
>Not me
>I just used his words

Grow up kid and start using your brain on a daily basis.

It's called quotation which is why he used quotation marks.

Jesus,who opened the chest in which all you retards were kept?

I doubt you are the one i am calling retard for so long,you are way more special.WHERE THE FUCK DO YOU SEE QUOTATION MARKS ON HIS FIRST COMMENT?

I am leaving,i can't take it anymore.

By the way just so i justify why i think of you as a special one,this is his first comment i am referring to

How can you claim that pop songs never modulate, if you never listen to pop songs?