[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/lit/ - Literature



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: Bach.jpg (59 KB, 480x591)
59 KB
59 KB JPG
Can literature compete as the universal legacy of Men with Music?
How can we compare Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Dickens, etc. with Bach, Beethoven or Wagner?
>>
>>10492190
why not women in music
>>
>>10492190
Yes, they can.
>>
>>10492190
Western Art is a project in which each form developes on the other. Music without the awareness of Literature is nothing elevated over the the drum orgies of negroes. Literature without music is just a judaic egotistical ranting.
The West if it has amounted to any glory has been in exactly the musical nature of its Literature and the literary nature of its music.
>>
>>10492190
>Bach, Beethoven, Wagner

We see you pushing your wagner agenda, pleb
>>
>>10492205
Because in the last one thousand years there was literally one great female composer. In here defence, she was once GOAT, only being surpassed by Pérotin almost 100 years later
>>
File: 1387249741826.jpg (19 KB, 333x280)
19 KB
19 KB JPG
>>10492190
literature probably surpasses music in its use of words, but I think music is better at using sounds
>>
>>10492217
The Ring Cycle is arguably the greatest work of art of the last 200 years. No other work could fusion so many forms of art in one.
>>
Bach has more in common with a woodworker than he does with a writer.

>how can we compare writers with composers

apples and oranges, not to be compared

(I wonder why we associate "writer" and "composer", both of which occupy positions of prestige in our culture that, say, a successful businessman does not. It's as if artists-- writers, painters, composers-- are the subset of the entertainment industry that purport to provide "cultural enrichment" for the bourgeois)
>>
>>10492237
> but I think music is better at using sounds
You can say that to my Nobel, fatty.
>>
File: 1389937553993.jpg (17 KB, 512x384)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>>10492241
have you ever actually sat down and seen a full production of the ring cycle?
>>
>>10492216
>drum orgies of negroes

pls tell more
>>
>>10492305
Start with Lovecraft
>>
File: 1509933759370s.jpg (7 KB, 250x241)
7 KB
7 KB JPG
>>10492241
fuck off with your nouveau riche smugness
>>
>>10492298
You know a whole performance of The Ring Cycle takes 15 hours, right?
>>
I love them both so much, why compare them? What common aspect are they expressing, and do we judge on how well it is mediated? Music is stronger, more direct, ineffable. But literature has so much depth, so much more. They're different!
>>
>>10492190
No, it can't. Art forms don't "compete". I might accept your hierarchy of art forms in case you have a PhD in philosophy and a whole philosophical system with aesthetics, plus excellent theoretical knowledge of each medium. Otherwise your hierarchy is guaranteed to be based on your feefees and most banal thinking, and you can shove that back up your asshole.
>>
Music is a pure art form, it has no real representative capacity (that's why tone poems tend to be awful). However, its means of communication is far different than that of literature, and for this reason the two are not directly comparable.
>>
>>10492326
so?
>>
>>10492408
>you have to have a magic piece of paper then I'll uncritically accept your opinion
>>
>>10492408
/thread
>>
>>10492253
>(I wonder why we associate "writer" and "composer", both of which occupy positions of prestige in our culture that, say, a successful businessman does not.
because artists (...great ones) are entirely unique and one of a kind: there are many professions where just about anyone can do it, or many different people do the same things. If you are talking about 'inventors', then yea, they are not celebrated on tv as much as pop singers, but they still get their millions of dollars
>>
>>10492205
There haven't been that many great women composers (women musicians, as in performers, is another matter). Hildegard was the only one worth talking about up the 20th century, but even then, Seeger didn't compose much, and Gubaidulina, Ustvolskaya, Chin, Saariaho, Oliveros, Radigue, and Soper, who might all be considered among the most important women composers, are either recently deceased or still active, making it very difficult if not impossible to assess their impact and thus real importance and canonicity.
>>
>>10492217
I see, you hate him because le Hitler's favorite composer, right?
>>
>>10492779
I literally said that I *might* accept your opinion if you have a PhD and that I also expect knowledge very much outside of the typical philosophy university course.
Your aggressiveness implies certain frustration(s). You should try to deal with that.
>>
>>10492913
no not at all, actually i thought for a long time that i didn't like him because i wasn't mature for him yet (i'm only a tint bit over 18), but now that i like basically everything but him and shitty new age stuff i think he's just shit
>>10492241
WTF. 200 hundred years? even in music only that's ridiculously wrong. the fucking late quartets are less than 200 yo you fucking mongrel how can you dare to say such a stupid fucking thing. wagnerboos i swear
>>
>>10493231
>ly i thought for a long time that i didn't like him because i wasn't mature for him yet (i'm only a tint bit over 18)
You aren't even mature enough for this boy, lad, look at the way you write, try Reddit.
>>
>>10493258
Wagner's music is pompous as fuck. I'm not surprised you think he's great.
>>
>>10493268
Can't you honestly like this? Only the very first minute.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsZQBiU9llo

Shit gives me goosebumps everytime.
>>
>>10493258
ok big boy ;) (im right tho)
>>
>>10493278
brb, off to invade poland
>>
File: 000aaa.png (308 KB, 532x561)
308 KB
308 KB PNG
>>10493231
>(i'm only a tint bit over 18)
>>
rate my song

https://clyp.it/3aoemkvv
>>
>>10493546
Pretty good actually.
>>
File: 0000.png (551 KB, 777x597)
551 KB
551 KB PNG
>>10493231
Listen to all these in their entirety and then report back your opinion. Can you promise me, if you promise me you Love Music, you will do that? Even if it takes a few days (no longer than 3 weeks, and each video in full shall be listened to, and then report back with your opinion: and then do the same in 2 years. And then do the same in another 2 years. And then do the same in another 2 years. And then do the same in another 2 years. Ok, deal?)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CNBIJj1CFM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjIX9mwcyPE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB-P6lqP76k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkOiKy6sXfM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2xe07RFX0o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTM7E4-DN0o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-qoaioG2UA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twGxmFNiMEo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqk4bcnBqls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A-Y6ULx3YI
>>
>>10493546
Are you performing or just composing? In fact I find amazing someone with such a great talent is on /lit/. The composition is very good, and the performance is even better.
>>
>>10493546
fuck me thats good
>>
>>10493573
surely you're messing with me. i'm not even good. i just started piano six months ago so i can make compositions.
>>
>>10493583
are you serious???
>>
>>10493583
> i just started piano six months
I really hope you're only 11 so you still can be our new Chopin.
>>
>>10493593
>>10493587

i'm 18.

honestly i expected to get shat on. /mu/ are a bunch of jealous cunts.
>>
>>10493573
the song and recording was me. it took like four hours to get a recording that didn't have at least one mistake.
>>
>>10493583
Surely you jest, I've been playing for years and couldn't imagine learning the piano to that degree, much less composing with just 6 months experience. Get off 4chan and make yourself known, you have talent.
>>
>>10493656
> /mu/ are a bunch of jealous cunts.
/mu/ is dying board that worship meme tier rap and K-Pop. If they don't like that's a good thing.
>>
>>10493664
>get off 4chan

nope. 4chan is a comfy place.
since it looks like people actually appreciate my stuff here, here's my other one.

https://clyp.it/yv2dl3ej

and i need to find a violinist for this wip

https://clyp.it/rzglsdou
>>
>>10493742
The first one is really great, but somehow sounded derivative, but that's ok after all you just started six months ago. Gonna listen the second.
>>
>>10493583
this is a joke
>>
>>10492764
Music requires a listener with ears and brain and the composition of music through developed instruments and processes, and the music is either affected by the air or software. It's not pure.
>>
>>10492241
this, scene 1 of das rheingold is my favorite musical work by far, it's completely mesmerizing
>>
>>10493564
this
>>
File: file.png (266 KB, 2581x983)
266 KB
266 KB PNG
>>10493976
it's not.
>>
>>10494171
you are very good, you were born to play piano (didnt listen to your others yet besides that first one you posted: which sounds like something beethoven would have written (dont let it get to your head) so I guess I assume you were born to play other instruments and compose too), keep it up bruv
>>
>>10494001
One can read music without any of those things. It is pure.
>>
>>10493742
You have studied theory before you started playing piano? Because the first one you linked says opus 23 which was uploaded a month ago. That means assuming you wrote and recorded it in a single day and you have only been writing while you play piano that you have on average been composing more than one composition per week. If you only started learning theory when you started piano it would have taken weeks to get to anything beyond shit-tier understanding which would bump it up to two or three compositions a week to get to that number.
>>
The legacy of man is warfare. Sounds edgy, I know, but even if we solve all other issues of human struggle mankind will still fight itself over whether music or literature is more of an apex art form.
As long as there is more than one person, there will be quarrels; so long as there are quarrels, there will be war
>>
>>10494209
I don't know any theory, I think I should learn how to read music so I can't learn songs more easily.

I know i said earlier that i started learning piano "so I can make compositions". I don't really know why I entertain up typing out like that, but it's a 3/4 truth. I have been messing around with writing songs on the computer for about a little over a year, I just use the opus numbers to keep track of chronology and because it kind of makes them seem legit. The op. 21 was the first "real" song that I wrote on the piano and could play. Still, I started learning the piano specifically because I resented the fact that the only "recordings" I hadn't of my songs were dumb fake ones made on a computer.

Op. 19 was when I began learning. Now I'm at Op. 28. Basically ten songs in six months. Not that tall an order, even considering classes and such.
>>
>>10494212
anyone who is not simply and complexly happy the great geniuses of both forms gave forth their masterpieces instead of trying to say what is better, is wrong
>>
>>10492408
Video games>music>literature>film
>>
File: 1513653044608.png (95 KB, 376x371)
95 KB
95 KB PNG
>>10492190

Painting>Animation>Sculpture>videogames=literature(non-fiction)>music>literature(fiction)>film>let's plays>>>>>>>>>>>>>photography
>>
>>10494001
All art requires an audience, a creator, and a medium, that's just how art works.
>>
>>10492230
name?
>>
>>10494245
Are your classes for piano or for theory? I would highly recommend learning jazz theory in tandem with classical. If you are taking lessons in classical theory I would suggest learning jazz theory on your own, otherwise doing both on your own works. Even if you don't like jazz once you understand that the two traditions of theory are really two different ways of understanding the same thing you realise that both are useful regardless of which you like.
I can't really recommend much in the way of more rudimentary classical theory because I learned most of that from teachers rather than for books. One book I can't recommend enough though is Shoenberg's Fundamentals of Musical Composition. I had been learning theory for years before I read this book and it was a revelation. For jazz either Jazzology or Levine's Jazz Music Theory Book are decent introductions. The bonus to jazz is that as a music based almost entirely around performance there are some truly amazing youtube stuff for it where the classical stuff is usually very basic and often mediocre. Your piano playing is extremely promising by the way.
>>
>>10493546
you sure that this isn't schubert?
>>
>>10494394
jk this is retrograde trash with no direction
just rambling pastiche
>>
>>10494194
You can read music without a brain?
>>10494309
Then no art is pure.
>>
>>10494792
>You can read music without a brain?
You need that, and you need processes but you don't need anything else. It's as pure as mathematics and logic. A purely mental act. That sounds pretty pure to me.

>Then no art is pure.
Then nothing is pure that has anything to do with humans. You might have to define what you mean by pure.
>>
>>10494801
Music isn't pure because it's dependent on the physical world, math and logic weren't created, they're instrisic to the universe, and music was created by humans and is affected by the universe, meaning they're affected by math and logic, so maybe you could argue music is applied math but not anything more.
>>
Who is the /lit/ equivalent of Scriabin?
>>
>>10494308
VIDEOGAMES LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
>>
>>10494832
>Music isn't pure because it's dependent on the physical world
>meaning they're affected by math and logic
Not if you do it in your head. Also the physical universe doesn't comprise math and logic, the physical universe is comprised of physical things.

>math and logic weren't created
That's its own issue that has gone back thousands of years and isn't settled. I highly doubt that you, some random anon on the internet has solved one of the great questions of philosophy. Even if you are right I don't see how that's any more pure than music. You still haven't defined pure at all even though I asked you to in the last post. We are clearly working from different definitions.
>>
>>10494861
>Not if you do it in your head. Also the physical universe doesn't comprise math and logic, the physical universe is comprised of physical things.
You actually got me to laugh out loud.
>That's its own issue that has gone back thousands of years and isn't settled. I highly doubt that you, some random anon on the internet has solved one of the great questions of philosophy.
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling me.
>>
>>10494854
You're right, they should be ranked higher desu
>>
>>10494879
>I honestly can't tell if you're trolling me
Seriously go look it up. The debate is real and has been real for a very long time. You still haven't defined pure as you are using it.
>>
>>10494904
I don't think you know anything about that debate, considering you didn't bring up any of its arguments. You seem to think math is a social construct, that physical things aren't controlled by math, based on what you said, and what you do in your head is seperate from the physical world.
>>
>>10492190
A piece of literature dies when the language it's written in is no longer in use or can't be translated.
Capitalism is killing the culture by removing Latin and Greek from the public school common trunk. When we can no longer hear as our own voice the Greek and Roman poets and philosophers the West will be dead.
>>
>>10494938
I don't mean to be snarky, it's very early in the morning where I am. I just don't like being accused of ignorance from someone who didn't even know that this major element of philosophy existed, and they because of that ignorance they don't realise the burden of proof is upon then, and that goes on to display that ignorance by misinterpreting my position (of which I haven't even given yet) in ways which show they are unfamiliar with subject

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philosophy-mathematics/#MatLogFouMat

This is a pretty good grounding.
>>
>>10492262
Yeah, how many actual murderers did Tolstoy get out of jail?
>>
>>10495030
I'm already aware of the philosophical problem. You said the physical world isn't comprised of math or logic but physical things. Tell me what comprises those physical things, what controls them?
>>
>>10493564
ok i will thx
>>
>>10495104
>I'm already aware of the philosophical problem
>math and logic weren't created, they're instrisic to the universe
Well you either so strongly believe that you have an answer to the problem that you don't even feel the need to acknowledged the existence of it and that you can assert aposition as fact and ridicule people who hold different opinions or acknowledge the existence of the debate, or you aren't aware of it. When I mentioned the existence of it you said
>I honestly can't tell if you're trolling me.
If you knew it existed why would you think someone is trolling for mere acknowledging that it exists after you asserted your position as truth with no argument in a contentious field?

>You said the physical world isn't comprised of math or logic but physical things.
Here we are running into semantic problems that need to be clarified because I'm not claiming what I think you think I am claiming. Even the reasonably hardcore modern mathematical Platonists like Gödel do not think that mathematical objects exist in space time, nor do mathematical concepts. This is what I mean when I said that the physical universe doesn't comprise of math. This is not a controversial position and is by far the most common regardless of your position on the ontology of mathematics.

>Tell me what comprises those physical things, what controls them?
You are the one making claims about the ontology of mathematics, not me. You need to argue why your position is correct. Right now you are just assuming it is and making fun of me because I am aware that the debate is hardly settled. I have made no claims on the matter and therefore have no argument to make and frankly I have no desire to until you have defined what you mean by pure (which I have asked you to do multiple times). Then and only then can I even see if me taking a position on it is even relevant to the debate of whether or not music is as pure as maths and logic.
I literally have nothing to do until you clarify your position.
>>
>>10494363
ICan't you find out for youself after all the tips on the thread (her name was actually mentioned in fact). Hildegard von Bingen.
>>
>>10495220
Philosophers also debate whether we exist. Do you also question your existence?
>>
>>10494396
There is actually a clear structure to it.
>>
>>10494366
>Are your classes for piano or for theory?

nah dude i'm in mechanical engineering.

>shoenberg

no.

i'll check out the jazz.

I'll see if the school library has any of the books you recommended.
>>
>>10494366
>I would suggest learning jazz theory
>One book I can't recommend enough though is Shoenberg's
>For jazz either Jazzology or Levine's Jazz Music
dont listen to this serpent
>>
>>10496054
Not him but why don't you like Shoenberg? Dislike dissonance?
What are your thoughts on Stravisnky?
>>
>>10494832
>Music isn't pure because it's dependent on the physical world, math and logic weren't created, they're instrisic to the universe
But is the concepts of music the same as math and logic? In that: abstractly: Different thicknesses and lengths of strings, 'fretted' different positions, vibrations in tubes...etc... the concept of particles carrying the vibrations of a struck string: isnt the pattern, proportions, harmonic relations between these sizes and distances, tautnesses, forces, exist abstractly in 'The Totality Of What Is Pure Math'?
>>
>>10496054
Shoenberg has some good music but you dont want to learn from or copy him
>>10496067
>>
>>10492190
Violoncellist here. Music can't compete with literature.
Stay in /mu/, faggot
>>
How can I get a piano for not that much money?
>>
>>10496130
Electric pianos are cheaps
>>
>>10496140
is the sound at least close to being the same?
>>
>>10492913
I don't hate Wagner but he's not in the same league as Bach and Beethoven, not even close.
>>
>>10496160
You will not hear difference until you learn to play piano
>>
>>10496077
No, because all of that is determined by math and logic. Physics is determined by math and logic, but not vice versa. To be pure, it must be independent from math and logic, otherwise it's just derivative of something and that's impure.
>>
>>10496205
As engineer, it is always fun to see math faggots that think that they are gods when they only work for us
>>
>>10496229
not him but
>As an advertiser, it is always fun to see painting faggots that think that they are gods when they only work for us
>>
>>10496165
> he's not in the same league as Bach and Beethoven
Yeah, nobody is, but he''s the one that comes closer.
>>
>>10496236
OK, that was stupid, dude.
You should use guys who make paint and painters
>>
>>10496254
not at all you ape. Schubert, Shostakovich, Gibbons, Mahler, Schumann, Vivaldi, Palestrina, Mozart are all much closer
>>
>>10496277
no ;-) engineers use maths like advertisers use principles from the visual arts : not really.

t. Knows what actual math is
>>
>>10496281
shostakovich and vivaldi don't belong in that list
they're fine but they're just not on the same level

and the only ones on bach/beethoven level are palestrina and mozart
>>
>>10496281
>placing Mozart and Shostakovich higher than Wagner
You're embarrassing yourself, pleb
Mozart is the most overrated composer of all time. Shostakovich is even "worse". He is not the best Russian composer of all time (every single list would put Tchaikovsky), but he wasn't even the greates Russian during his lifetime, those are, in an objective analysis Stravinsky and Prokofiev. Even during the 20th century he would have many rivals, like, but not only Bartok, Shoenberg and Messiaen.

Go listen to real music before having an opinion, kid.
>>
>>10496285
>t. Knows what actual math is
Well, I have no reason to know what math is. I am engineer, I just use it to change the world.
>>
>>10496281
>mentioning Schubert, Shosta, Vivaldi and Mozart
>not mentioning Brahms, Händel,Tchaikovsky , Schumann or Stravinsky
kek
>>
>>10496289
regarding shostakovich thats a very stupid thing to say (of the I-only-know-his-waltz type), if anything he's the best of the list, and the closest thing we've had to bach since, well, bach. Listen to his 24 prelude and fugue, and his 2nd concerto, 2nd movement. regarding vivaldi i would have agreed with you like two weeks ago but i rediscovered recently and it's been very surprising. of course four seasons is shit, but listen to Il Giustino: it's incredible
>>
>>10496298
disliking mozart is one of the easiest signs of a pseud who doesn't actually know anything about music and assumes that because a lot of it sounds fluid and simple it is in fact just simple pleb music rather than unbelievably sophisticated skillful beautiful art that manages to be exactly perfectly balanced and sound as natural as water
>>
>>10496054
Schoenberg is also one of the great one of the pedagogues of musical education of the 20th century who wrote many books for people learning music theory. His later atonal music has nothing to do with this. Don't let your dislike for his piano prevent you from his excellent teaching.
>>
>>10496321
>saying someone is overrated means you dislike him
Dude, I have a fucking collection of albums of the guy and Jupiter is on my op 5 symphonies of all time.
You're not ready to browse this board, underage, learn how to read first.
>>
>>10496319
i know lots of shostakovich and have performed both his cello concertos and the sonata and various quartets
i like him a great deal but comparing his preludes and fugues to bach's is a whole world apart
>>
>>10496319
> and the closest thing we've had to bach since
Jesus Christ, you had just said the guy is better than Beethoven. You have a severe lack of education and taste.
>>
>>10496311
yea i forgot handel, decided against brahms, but please learn to read

>>10496298
Mozart is overrated for sure (he would have to be some kind of god not to be), but he's great. Now I love Tchaik (i discovered music with his violin concerto) but you're plain ignorant if you don't know at least that of all the russians shosta is unanimously considered the greatest in the classical music milieus. he's also the actual greatest but i wouldn't expect an ignorant ad hominem lover like you to understand that
>>
>>10496337
>most overrated of all time
>oh actually he's in my top five symphonies
ok good
>>
>>10496344
WTF learn how to read you fucking mongrel, i meant close in style not quality

>this the kind of people i'm arguing with
>>
>>10496341
i agree for sure, im a huge bach fanboy, but the shosta preludes and fugues are still the closest thing there is, doesn't mean it's close
>>
>>10496356
even if you're just talking about contrapuntal writing, brahms, bartok, even hindemith do it better and bachier than shostakovich
>>
>>10496345
> but you're plain ignorant if you don't know at least that of all the russians shosta is unanimously considered the greatest in the classical music milieus
Nobody does that though.
You're free to find a good list on the whole Internet that puts him in front of Tchaikovsky, or one of the greatest composers of the XXth century that doesn't put Stravinsky as the greatest (Maybe you'll find one with or another with Debussy, but he's more a XIXth century composer.

Hell, it's even hard to find a list that doesn't put the Rite of Spring ad the greatest composition of the last century and you say "everyone agrees with me".

Pleb.
>>
>>10496341
could you recommend some cello works please? for some reason i know close to nothing for this instrument
>>
>>10496371
i'm dating a professional pianist formerly at the paris philharmonic and i hang out with her friends all the time, i don't need internet lists to know what some of the best musicians in the world think
>>
>>10496205
no, I meant: the concepts of Math contain 'the relationships between possible 'strings' 'vibrating surfaces' 'against vibrating balls' and the waves they make and how those waves interact, can be described purely mathimatically
>>
>>10496392
>I-I can give any proof
>m-maybe if I give him my gf opinion he'll stop.

Even it what you said is true, Paris Philarmonic isn't even amog the top ten in the world, so you wouldn't know (though I'm quite sure most of them agree with me, you can find interviews on the Internet and every single conductor would laugh at your uneducate opinion).
>>
>>10496369
i gotta admit i'm not well versed enough in hindemith to have this discussion, and i've not listened seriously to brahms in quite some time, so i can't really argue, but bartòk i disagree
>>
>>10496408
>i never met an actual musician
>but people on yt tell me i'm right :))
>>
>>10496376
asides from shostakovichs?

the bach preludes are the best thing written for the instrument imo
also for solo cello, the kodaly solo sonata is top tier

for cello and piano i especially like the beethoven sonatas (especially the last three), the brahms sonatas, the faure sonatas, the prokofiev sonata, anything schumann wrote for it

for concertos, the elgar, dvorak, schumann, haydns, bloch's schelomo, tchaikovsky's rococco variations

i feel like i'm missing so much stuff but i'm pretty drunk and doing this off the top of my head

the best thing is to find a good cellist and just listen to anything they recorded, such as pierre fournier, du pre, rostropovich, janos starker, truls mork
(yo yo ma is good but has recorded some meme stuff)
>>
>>10496417
>i never met an actual musician
My friend, I go to my local philarmonic twice a week, stop pretending you know something about people on the Internet.

But yeah, you can find Boulez and Bernstein agreeing with me. Who does agree with you aside our possible girlfriend?

In any case, ask her friends how would they rank Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Shosta and Prokofiev.
>>
>>10496425
bach suites i mean to say....
>>
>>10496425
thanks man. how hard is it to take up cello for someone halfway decent at piano and campfire-tier at guitar?
>>
>>10496438
no idea, i started learning when i was seven

if you're seven it's pretty chill in my experience
>>
>>10496429
sorry dude you sounded kinda memey with those internet lists. I mean, i just like shostakovich a whole lot and all these professional pianists i talk with put him foremost among the russian, that's all man, don't be rude
>>
>>10496443
>tfw you took up your first instrument at 20 because you parents didn't care about you
>>
>>10495483
>I've solved one of the great philosophical questions of the world and am one of the smartest people who has ever lived
Good to know.

>>10496205
If you are going to do the exact same thing as >>10494832 you need to address my criticisms here >>10494861 and >>10495220
Otherwise you are only repeating what has already been contested. You also haven't defined what pure is. I feel like the people who think that music is pure and those that don't are doing it over semantic grounds.

>otherwise it's just derivative of something and that's impure
This is probably the closest thing to a definition that has been advanced and it's one that I, and probably everyone who advances it as pure disagrees with.
You are assuming the ontology of math and are assuming its relation to the universe. If you are a believe in non-platonic mathematics this position can't be assumed and must be argued for. Even if a platonic conception of mathematics is true, while providing a much strong case would still require some sort of argument of which you aren't providing. So even going by this sort of definition you can't claim what you are claiming without argument.

I also do not agree with that definition even if all of that were to be true. The definition of pure that I am working is one whose activity is entirely mental with no activity in the real world (outside of the mechanisms of consciousness), that is it is entirely abstract.
>>
top russian composer list

>stravinsky
>tchaikovsky
>prokofiev
>mussorgsky
>rachmaninov (underrated by people who just think of him as a schmaltzy film music composer)
>shostakovich
>schnittke
>borodin
>>
>>10496371
>Nobody does that though
Shostakovitch's music has had a troubled relationship in the west because of his image as the communist Russian propagandist. It's only been since the fall of the Soviet Union and the increase in knowledge of his personal attitudes towards his country has their been a reevaluation of his music in the west. In an incredibly short period of time he has come to be one of the most popular composers of the 20th century. If you want internet lists (which mean fuck all anyway) it's not hard to find ones that do what you ask for. He is already considered first equal as a symphonist and writer for the string quartet. His esteem is definitely below that of people like Stravinsky, Schoenberg and Strauss (though time might change that) but his regard places him at first equal with anyone below that.

>puts him in front of Tchaikovsky
This really comes down to ones conception of what are the most important elements in music. It's clear to see from someone like Glenn Gould that it's tightness of form and mastery and universality of the motive as the basic building block that every element of the music derives. It is to these kinds of people that will consider Shostakovitch better than Tchaikovsky. It really makes no sense to say which is better without weighing the different aspects of the music that people prioritise. Just so you know I'm not the person you have been arguing with. There is no reason to be angry at me.

>>10496451
No shame in this. For the really premier concert instruments like piano and violin you can start in your late 20s and still get good enough to be a concert performer.
>>
>>10496482
>Mentions Borodin and Mussorgsky, dismisses Rachmaninov criticism
>No mention of Scriabin
Dem's fighting words.
>>
>>10496547
>because of his image as the communist Russian propagandist
What? Prokofiev made film scores to commies and he is as regarded as Shostakovich.
>>
>>10496547
>tightness of form and mastery and universality of the motive as the basic building block that every element of the music derives. It is to these kinds of people that will consider Shostakovitch better than Tchaikovsky
i'm not so convinced that shosty wins out on this basis. tchaikovsky despite his big tunes and romantic sensibilities has some really good development in his best stuff
>>
>>10496445
don't dish it out if you can't take it bud
>>
>>10496555
shit, how did i forget scriabin
he's top tier, probably above tchaikovsky on the basis of his late piano sonatas alone
>>
>>10496445
>, that's all man, don't be rude
>first post "you ape"
ok anon
>>
why do some people on here act superior when i say my favorite bach is gould's? If Richter only had existed i would hate bach (clavier that is)

>>10496547
>No shame in this. For the really premier concert instruments like piano and violin you can start in your late 20s and still get good enough to be a concert performer
really? that's very reassuring
>>
>>10496581
in my defence scriabin doesn't even seem like a russian
he's like a weird russian scientology alien
>>
>>10496547
I don't think having strong conservative opinions helped Stravisnky though. Adorno hated him for exemple.
>>
>>10496586
I mean he said wagner was the second best thing to bach and beethov, i think my reaction was quite amicable
>>
>>10496591
gould is great, he's just very idiosyncratic. i would never act superior if you love him but his way of playing is kinda autistic and weird. but so is richter desu
>>
>>10496319
Shostokovichs music does not need to exist, the earth would not yearn or mourn as much for its loss. I like some of his pieces, leningrad symphony 7 is epic, I think 5 and maybe 10 is famous, symphony 9, some of his piano pieces fugues preludes, waltzes, but a lot of his music is ugly and idiosyncratic, grotesque, clunky, clinky, clanky, awkward, his piano concerto is cool good version of kissin performing it as a child
>>
>>10496298
Mozart is the much deserved Prince of classical music: he happened upon the most perfect forms of natures music, music of the spheres and what have you, the music Music itself would have wanted written if Mozart didnt do it for it
>>
>>10493564
this desu
>>
>>10496572
Tchaikovsky relies on big themes that are so complete don't lend themselves to that kind of motivic development. Taken as a whole Tchaikovsky isn't that interested in that more Germanic conception of music. Shostakovitch spent most of his life hiding that side of him because he thought it would get him killed. Compare Tchaikovsky's string quartets to Shostakovich's. Compare their symphonies. You can see how the motives that make up his themes are used to justify everything he does. This is not something that Tchaikovsky usually does.

>>10496558
Prokofiev spent a large portion of his life living in the west writing his music. When he moved back to Russian he found he didn't get very much work and he wasn't used for propaganda purposes. The Soviets styled Shostakovitch as a writer of communist music showing that Russia was superior to the west.

>>10496591
>really? that's very reassuring
If you aren't doing one of the super hardcore instruments you could probably start a lot later. Like if you to play bassoon or trombone you could probably start at 40 and end up in a professional orchestra if you practiced hard enough.

>>10496597
Adorno can hardly be called a representative of anything approaching a normal opinion on anything. I don't see how his political ideas negatively harmed peoples perceptions of his music. He is at least first equal in the minds of a hell of a lot of people as the greatest composer of the 20th century. At least.
>>
>>10496664
you know what you're talking about and you're alright
>>
>>10496547
Tchaikovsky beats them all, if you are measuring by melody and lyrically and classical beauty (which may be some of my personal favorite qualities of music). Nutcracker and swanlake alone, then there is violin concerto, piano concerto, 1812 overture, sypmphony 5, symphony 6, and others
>>
>>10496593
hes like Count Myshkin
>>
>>10496702
no way
myshkin is a pure christlike innocent
scriabin is a bizarre insanely egotistical alien who is convinced he's christ+
>>
>>10496601
Gould was a perfect piano player
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZxV78INmxE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuoaorXbXVI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtVFbmi9meQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVrUaiL2gz8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzI5eSA-Eck

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnS1i9bVGHU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEhcZmbA6Uo
>>
>>10496731
he's a fucking weirdo with an incredibly musical mind. i love how he cleanly delineates everything including lines no-one before him though were even relevant or part of the music
>>
>>10496747
im not gonna say 'Gould is what happens when you...." because he was one of a kind and actual genius, but, he is what happens when you stop caring about what your piano teacher and parents are thinking, but actually Love Music more than anyone else could possibly comprehend
>>
>>10496664
> and he wasn't used for propaganda purpose
Have you watched Alexander Nevsky? It's a great film, specially the battle, but the score by Prokofiev is one of the greatest of all tie.
>>
>>10496747
>>10496731
another must see fav:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF3nKSoiQTI
>>
>>10495439
Thanks, anon. I narrowed it to her and 2 others but then had to go to work and didn't read.

Anons bashing Mozart who wrote arguably the most lyrical music in existence, and his work in opera (that is, his strongest, most elevated genre) is impossible to discount. I know most of the popular Italian-language opera repertoire
and Mozart is really unsurpassed with the freedom he achieved when writing for voices. Der Zauberfloete is also great.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoaYVEUGQuk
>>
>>10496731
all of these except the fugue are rather far from what's best of gould tho
>>
>>10493546
I have read all that you've said in this thread and I do not believe a single word of it.
>>
>>10494850
The Russian symbolist poets are the closest, but as far as English goes it's Henry Miller.
>>
>>10496281

Chopin?
>>
>>10496996
Good post thanks, feel free to dump more like it
>>
>>10497217
surely, i didn't mean the list to be exhaustive; i would add a good 20 2bh
>>
>>10497086
That makes me feel really good about myself.
>>
>>10496669
Thank you, it's unusual to see such amiability on lit. I find I pretty much only comment on the non-book posts anyway. people seem a lot less try hard. I like lit's discussions on movies and music far more that tv and mu.

>>10496692
>Tchaikovsky beats them all, if you are measuring by melody and lyrically and classical beauty
While I still don't agree, I believe that figures like Handel and Mozart would be superior I do get your point. I wasn't saying that Tchaikovsky was better or worse than Shostakovitch, only that the chief aims of their music is different. One would need to examine what aims they believe to be better before could begin to make such value judgements.

>>10496848
Okay, I exaggerate but nowhere near the extent of Shostakovitch and considering his fleeing from the USSR and time spent in Europe he was perceived by everyone as being different from someone like Shostakovitch who to the west was nothing more than a petty mover of Russian ideology. People always have separated him from the USSR, he has always been popular in the west even during his time in the Soviet union. He had a presence separate from the state. Shostakovitch never had that.
However I did say something that is outright wrong after I went back to check. He did get a lot of work while in the USSR.
>>
>>10494186
>which sounds like something beethoven would have written
more like endless regurgitation of scale like gimmicks
>>
>>10492772
I think he's implying that he hasn't acutally sat down and seen the full production. In other words, he's a memer.
>>
>>10497721

>regurgitation

t. jealous

i invented them myself.
>>
>>10492305
I know the right place for you lad >>>/gif/
>>
>>10492190
>Wagner
If you've known him this thread wouldn't exist
>>
>>10492205
Mozart had a sister who was a musician as well and she even composed stuff based on the letters sent to her brother. She gave up on her career once she was old enough to marry though because she was more submissive to her father unlike Mozart.
>>
>>10492408
Ah, the rare good post.
>>
>>10492408
Correct.
>>
>>10497024
your counter examples have left me speechless
>>
>>10496298
>Mozart is the most overrated composer of all time
Become educated for our own good please
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGo_faB5bOQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IugFH6PxeMQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDqFkQRIqTU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoLuDhuHZ_Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crTNJaTur1U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN9C4hJ96qw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78KtEjdAszw
>>
>>10497024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBl0N6NJpZo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF1BbFb6iy0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyodQqilqyU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSsJEZInWXc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjIX9mwcyPE

>>10497238
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crQ8YEUkUjg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_y6q4m0vew
>>
>>10497024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIjesjmMq_g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_8Y_8qthEI
>>
>>10498223
>>10497721
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEhGKQ2ZU9I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr9JSnQ0wHI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpFMvd7pPZo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENvnrg0JnLk
>>
>>10499981
Explain
>>
>>10497238
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGMMhJOq5oU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkn-1OS9lRM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF3nKSoiQTI
>>
File: 1510266442786.jpg (25 KB, 400x400)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
>I rate Tchaikovsky
>>
>>10497238
>>10500206
* this goes second;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVUSNnZ1fIQ
>>
>>10497238
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fHi36dvTdE
(theres multiple parts you can likely find on the side in related)
>>
>>10499070
Mozart dad is quite decent.
Check the toys symphony
>>
>>10499624
either i dont i get what you're saying or you're confusing anons, anon
>>
>>10499902
>>10499867
still quite far i think. 910, 911, 914, 1052, 826, 976 or the fugue in B from book one are what I was pointing to. His gibbons and schoenberg, too
>>
>>10492205
Being a composer takes a hell of a lot training and education which wasn't given to women for the most part. Also before Beethoven composers were more like craftsmen. It was a job. None of the places that employ composers would have hired women to do it.
>>
>>10500975
Thanks for the recs I will check the ones I am not familiar with. I am severely glad I dont share your opinion
>>
>>10501296
why's that ?
>>
>>10501320
>still quite far i think
just a meaningless, unnecessary distinction. As if you were implying you did not enjoy the existence of the videos of Gould I shared. Maybe you were just saying: there are Gould recordings rated 100, which you provided, and then ones I provided you would grade, 50, or 40, or 30... Most of what I have seen of his I grade 100, so we just dont share opinions, and I am severely glad, because my life would be significantly worse if I graded that content as such
>>
>>10498222
Not everyone lives near a place that puts on such productions. Not to mention the costs and the likely poor quality, if it is even put on at all.
Does this make someone incapable of understanding art?
>>
>>10496254
Part is better. Back and Beethoven have been surpassed. Arguably by a few others as well.
I'll give a couple reasons, because no one seems to be suggesting why the greats are great: depth, spiritual meaning relevant to the times.
Now prove to me why I am wrong. What did they say that was so great?
>>
impossible.

vastly different subjects
>>
Put another way, I can't imagine Bach being played anywheres but a castle where the women are trying to drown out the noise of impending doom.
It was the mall muzak of its time. Deet-deet-da-da-buh-bu-deet-deet-da-duh-buh arranged in a few different patterns for 200 hours of music doesn't make you great.
>>
>>10501573
you're wrong m8. almost all of the pieces you shared i have known and enjoyed thoroughly for years. see things the other way around: you think all of these are 100; i think what you shared is 100 and what i shared is 150. nevertheless putting gould's mozart on par with his bach is, i'm sorry, simply, again wrong. G himself would've laughed at the very idea
>>
>>10501735
kek
>>
>>10501819
now I see you are a troll (whether you know it or not)
>>
>>10501819
if you are serious you are such an idiot it hurts, this little glimpse into your existence hurts me so, I cant imagine what those in close proximity to you must endure, for even a minute, let alone those who have been in your presence for more than a day
>>
>>10502219
>>10502222
fuck you, fuck your rudeness, and fuck you shitty taste you samefagging asshole. read his rolling stones interview, read what he said on Mozart and kill your nasty pathetic self
>>
>>10496482
>Shostakovich beneath Rachmaninoff and Mussorgsky
>>
>>10502236
out of all the gould vids I posted 1 was mozart
>>
>>10502236
listen I am sincerely sorry. I didnt mean to be rude, but you severely offended me multiple times, and then were excruciatingly stubborn, obtuse, and pedantic. I offered some of my favorite music and videos for me to experience and hopefully for others to see for the first time and enjoy, and you just shat on them, absolutely pointlessly for no avail. Its as if you have to hold an opinion, or you think your views of the value of the music is accurate or significant or objective. I like pretty much all of Goulds output. He can say he personally didnt like composer x and much as y, but he recorded both absolutely supremely. And I supremely enjoy them both. Also he was an idiot for hating on Mozart. He was supremely close to perfect, but then I suspect he got this same sort of "I need to hold strong opinions to assert myself in some way as some authority of sophistication and maybe some contrarianism will aid in that endeavor" (likely because he was close to a failure as a composer in his own right) (and dedicated his life to being Mozart (amongst others) bitch.
>>
>>10502236
like I said, a large reason why he would have said he didnt care for mozart as much, or didnt like him anymore (there are videos posted in the thread of him speaking positively of him, and he certainly understood his supreme legitness) is because he had to play mozart 7 hours a day since he was 3, its understandable
>>
>>10502406
i don't care at all 2bh but if you took offense from "i think this is far from what's best of Gould" you have some serious stuff to deal with. Talk to someone.

>>10502423
>>10502406
>this guy said something I disagree with so i'll just bring up some obscure reasons why he was somehow lying about his own opinion
>>
File: 1515012499026.jpg (14 KB, 390x377)
14 KB
14 KB JPG
>>10492190
>Bach, Beethoven or Wagner?
Homer has had more influence than all of them combined.
>>
>>10502475
Moses has had about a thousand times more than all four combined
>>
>>10502491
Jeses crist has more influence than Moses times a million
>>
>>10502236
furthermore Gould is well known mostly for his Bach, so those are obvious choices, well tempered klavier and goldberg variations...obviously... and as he is over mozart I am over them, from listening to so much bach and gould, so like to hear gould play all the other stuff, of what I showed.
>>
>>10502457
>but if you took offense from
I took offense to it the same way I would take offense to a retarded homeless women puking the literal shit she was eating onto my brand new shoes on the bus
>>
>>10502502
yeah but Mohammad could beat Jesus up easy
>>
>>10502502
not at all, assuming the bible is somewhat historically correct. first, because jesus was a jew. he simply wouldn't have existed without moses. second, a good chunk of christianity is,up to a number of relative subtleties, contained within mosaic thought. love thy neighbor is in the OT. third, because all of jesus' though is a response to moses'
>>
>>10502504
I don't understand what this guy is on about but if he's pretending to be me, he's not
>>10502512
just go see a psychologist, ok? or have a chat with your mom. stop talking to me
>>
>>10502475
Influence ain't quality though. There are better stories the ones by Homer.
>>
>>10502586
>>10502586
>because jesus was a jew. he simply wouldn't have existed without moses
Not that guy, but that alone doesn't make him more important or influent than Jesus. Pioneerism is important, but the first aren't always the most influent.
Newton or Einstein didn't invent Physics, but they are far more important than Democritus or any Greek.
>>
>>10502781
Physics is different because there is a sense of well-delineated progress. Had Newton died in infancy, his mechanics would've been discovered by someone else. In the history of idea not so much. My point is stupid, that I will say but it stands. Which is quite fitting since debating historical figures in terms of their 'influence' is a rather stupid endeavor to start with; I just wanted to pick on the anon who said Homer is more influent than Bach or something.
>>
>>10492190
itt: ''the quality of music is determined by how many feelsies it gives me :)''
>>
>>10502812
it's true tho. technical stuff is only a way to deal abstractly with feelsies and debate them
>>
>>10502781
I missed the world 'alone'. of course i agree with you my dear anon
>>
>>10502818
this ''technical stuff'' can be aesthetically pleasing on its own, you'll understand this when the emotional power of tchaikovsky and rachmaninov wears off and you find that underneath lies relatively uninteresting music (emphasis on the ''relatively'', it's not as impressive as bach but still well composed in its own right)
>>
>>10502835
really? how does attain this stage, then?
>>
>>10503063
Not him but one has to be extremely well versed in music theory. Think of it like this. Two men are watching a chess match but only one of them knows the rules. The uninformed one after watching a few games says which ones are his favorites. He points at some that have an interesting configuration of pieces, or an interesting looking move. The informed person points out the game with the most sophisticated play. Or you if you like you can repeat the scenario except two people are listening to some poems read in a foreign language where only one understands.

It's not really a stage rather than a spectrum. The more advanced ones musical knowledge the more sophisticated ones ability to discern the intricacies of what happens and the more I appreciates what was before the musical equivalent of a chess game when one does not know the rules or the poem in a language one does not understand. You have gained new ways to appreciate music.

>how does attain this stage, then
You slowly progress by learning and applying music theory. It's really that simple.

>>10502835
Even though you spoke first I wanted to quote you second because this ties in to what I was saying.

>this ''technical stuff'' can be aesthetically pleasing on its own
There is no separation between the emotional element of music from it's construction. It's not that you learn to appreciate something that isn't emotionally impacting because the way it's constructed is intricate. One learns from music theory that what you thought wasn't very expressive actually is and what you used to find emotional in simple music isn't as emotional as you thought.
>>
>>10502812
"Complex" music doesn't mean better music. If that was true, chamber work would always be worse than orchestral music, and that's obviously not true.
>>
>>10493659
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RejvJkGh2NM
is this you by any chance?
>>
>>10503777
>more instruments = more complexity

You don't know much about music, do you?
>>
>>10503777
Or, how I argued in favor of the obvious with the stupidest idea I could find
>>
>>10503777
Except that chamber music has the same amount of melodic layers, in an orchestra all the instruments are just doubling eachother.
>>
>>10502594
more than anything, having to do with music, truth, or value; you wanted to hold an opinion. Further more, one that makes you appear sophisticated and smart.

You dont [italics]truly[/italics] care about music. You read somewhere that Gould did not like playing Mozart as much as some other composers: Hold on to that nugget! Wait...what is this, an opportunity for you to appear as if you posses sophisticated knowledge? Why it is! Dump that nugget and stand by it at all costs, no matter how much you actually dont understand how much you actually dont understand, your reputation is depending on it!

Wait... is that Gould that is not Bach? I think I know that Gould liked and played Bach the most and is acclaimed highly for his Bach...but these videos are not him playing Bach...therefore I can interject my intelligence knowledge, to take part in this discussion, feel good about myself for knowing about a sophisticated topic, and call it a day. "Excuse me good sir... but those videos you posted are [italics]far[/italics] from Goulds best (because I read from Gould that towards the end of his career he enjoyed playing some atonal music and obscure 15th century music and Bach, as also corroborated by all the masses that know him due to his Bach....therefore the (((Perfect...Best Versions..))(but keep in mind I am ignoring quality, because I do not have grounds to judge such in the first place, and in the second place, I have heard multiple misunderstood conjectures which now form the basis of my nougat))) music you posted must be far from his best.

Actually I take it all back... you are likely right...and I am falling victim as I expressed already to what Gould fell victim to later in his career the tire of the played out over done obvious: of course his bes-....his lots of great recordings are absolutely perfect pristine studio recordings... but I like live performances,, and to see the man in action...and so I personally value these equal or more to the pristine recordings...and so I posted a bunch of my favorite videos showcasing one of the best recorded musical entity in flesh and blood action.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.
>>
>>10503777
>chamber music
>less complex than orchestral
Anon, I don't know how to break this to you.
>>
>>10503805
No.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_E7R0epHo8EkxLfQ_9s0gw

I just use it as a file dump.
>>
>>10502594
are any of these closer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY9dWhvEttM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZX_XCYokQo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_bP6vlypIM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnRIU4u7B9o
>>
Literature and music are the only non physical art worth bothering with desu
>>
I like painting, interior design
>>
>>10504382
I didn't read the whole thing, but, anon, I said I really don't care. Please do understand, though, the dangers of projecting your insecurities onto others, especially this hard. Being a pedantic asshole who reads and listens to music to show off is one thing, being a insecure asshole who sees pedantry everywhere and thinks all the time that everybody only wants to show off is also shitty behavior; it merely shows everybody you didn't fully get out of your initial pedantic attitude. Heed this advice, anon.
>>
>>10504884
Yes
>>
>>10492190
Music makes you escape from your mind, which is much more palatable to the masses than literature which makes you go inside your own mind. Great literature requires effort and a level of basic discipline that the soft average person of today would consider "courage". So let music claim to be more "universal", accepted by the soft masses, and reserve the truly greatest form of human expression to those who earn it.
>>
>>10506263
>Music makes you escape from your mind
You know you're a pleb, right?
>>
>>10492241
this.
>>
File: 742724742.png (165 KB, 476x440)
165 KB
165 KB PNG
<^>
>>
>>10506263
I've probably never seen a goofiest attempt at LARPing as a patrician.
You're cute :3
>>
>>10492190
Hmmm. I think, just offhand, only Shakespeare and Milton can compare to the composers you mentioned. Writers need a poetic voice to reach the sublime heights of composers such as Bach and Beethoven. Wagner and most of the other Romantics however are just idea-men like Tolstoy and Dickens.

Wagner and Dickens are great (I loathe Tolstoy and all other overrated Russian novelists) but they lack the sublime quality other writers and composers from earlier centuries have.
>>
File: Picture 2.png (325 KB, 651x520)
325 KB
325 KB PNG
>>
File: 00000sgds.png (209 KB, 600x427)
209 KB
209 KB PNG
A Beethoven piece not talked about often by the joes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u1EduLH7L8
>>
>>10508489
So, Baroque =good
Romanticism=overrated
Sorry, but that sounds more like your opinon.
>>
>>10492205
this but unironically
>>
File: eliane radigue.jpg (15 KB, 400x319)
15 KB
15 KB JPG
>>10492205
>>
File: 00000dhdfhd.png (214 KB, 477x401)
214 KB
214 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgIjGSPmk7I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uliun1CMR8s
>>
>>10492800

>entirely unique and one of a kind

get outta here, you serious?
>>
food>music>literature>...>...

>...women.
>>
>>10512341
>get outta here, you serious?
yeah, who else would have created Bachs greatest works? Who else would have created Mozarts greatest works? Who else would have created Beethovens greatest works? Who else would have thought of a Hieronymus Bosch painting?
>>
the most /lit/ symphony

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGSneckToOE
>>
File: 0000000dhshds.png (85 KB, 300x400)
85 KB
85 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp_h649sZ9A
>>
>>10492262
>tfw your music the best literature
>>
>>10492190
There isn't really a competition going on.
>>
File: 347373.png (99 KB, 264x260)
99 KB
99 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQn4Qfy_Bek

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWDY-6u9LWs
>>
File: 000004w4w.png (100 KB, 599x279)
100 KB
100 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9YowLzeC0c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buphLvhen2g
>>
File: 000000dhdh.png (309 KB, 522x389)
309 KB
309 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT1y0_9qpeY
>>
File: 6fdi6s65s6.png (228 KB, 522x430)
228 KB
228 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I9LyiGrclc
>>
.
>>
File: 1488656895986.jpg (132 KB, 484x768)
132 KB
132 KB JPG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpOOJWTT_LY
>>
File: IMG_1362.jpg (17 KB, 180x231)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>>10510742
i am madly in love with this woman
>>
>>10492216
Beautifully put.
>>
File: 8765087678.png (67 KB, 200x247)
67 KB
67 KB PNG
>>
File: 1484900636643.jpg (349 KB, 1500x1124)
349 KB
349 KB JPG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLtCPLIMYtc
>>
File: 1484917251120.jpg (134 KB, 960x916)
134 KB
134 KB JPG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk-SfRPsKFE
>>
File: 7657949.png (462 KB, 535x626)
462 KB
462 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK9581RGd74
>>
File: 7576579.png (581 KB, 745x554)
581 KB
581 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS5YCVdPxCk
>>
File: 3568383.png (170 KB, 410x391)
170 KB
170 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBjDdKdq_tQ
>>
File: 5353838.png (321 KB, 544x525)
321 KB
321 KB PNG
>>
Obviously video games are the highest art form,
since they are a super set of all other art forms. They can contain music, they can contain text, and they can be interactive.
You could write a literary masterpiece, and code a videogame that is nothing but a book simulator for it, but you can do everything else too. I am the best argumenter.
>>
>>10492408
/thread
>>
>>10522942
Theoretically this is true, but there is no game that equals (for example) Shakespeare in its writing, Bach in its music, and Dreyer in its visual direction, all while maintaining the primacy of interactivity. It is actually impossible for games to achieve the Gesamtkunstwerk and still be playable, because the whim of the player always overrides authorial intent—which itself is split between multiple people and only reaches finality by compromise and consensus. Even if there were a single person talented enough in all the required fields to pull it off, the amount of time it would take would render it technologically outdated by the time it was finished.

Video games also age worse than any other kind of entertainment. A musical score or a book proof is very easy to reproduce, the hardware (which probably breaks down to a barely functioning state over about 20 years) required to play somewhat old games is not so easily reproduced. The field is not even half a century old and it already has dedicated preservationist organisations trying to save its oldest products from ceasing to exist.
>>
>>10523591
>Video games also age worse
not necessarily, if I could have any video game systems appear in my room granted by a genie it would be super nintendo
>>
>>10492241
>No other work could fusion so many forms of art in one
>literally hasnt seen a single movie
>>
File: 1514441488269.jpg (66 KB, 600x857)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOc6I7rxAO8
>>
>>10523860
Name me one movie that does not have perfunctory music that is subservient to images and words. It has not achieved synthesis, merely assembly. Wagner didn't achieve synthesis either, the Gesamtkunstwerk is an ideal to strive for, not a reality.
>>
>>10515361
number 9 is a really good one.
>>
>>10492190
>implying music has no grammar that needs to be learned through cultural impregnation
How low into the pleb can you get before shattering on its bottomless pit?
>>
>>10523591
>Video games also age worse
Wrong. And even if it were true, that still wouldn't mean anything since we're approaching foto-realism (which is a dumb meme imho) anyway.
Also your whole argument about technology is irrelevant, there used to be a time were music needed to be performed irl.
>>
>>10510686
its just true
>>
Do people realize that "classical" music is merely the noise of decadence?

Especially to compare a writer like Dickens and even Tolstoy to the likes of these composers seems quite comical
>>
File: 1485116103430.jpg (719 KB, 1513x903)
719 KB
719 KB JPG
>>10525875
you listen to 10 too, the second vid? Its supremely good as well, less energetic, wild, frenetic, crazy, crazed, charged, fierce, and more mellow, beautiful, pretty, sublime, delicate, I think they are both tremendous masterpieces.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ooSBDXglqg
>>
>>10525943
Whats wrong with decadence?
>Dickens and even Tolstoy
Very decadent, all the essential data of their stories could have been told in less than 50 pages, in greentext really
>>
File: 1484897567531.gif (651 KB, 500x373)
651 KB
651 KB GIF
>>10525875
also if you never heard this you may like it, one of my favs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mewrk4qi2yc
>>
>>10525905
You're talking about graphics, I'm talking about literally you have to play it on shit that is designed to break so that they can sell you the next one, which at some point stops playing the old games. The culture of disposability means that already third party preservation efforts are necessary, and also that they will not last.

There's some debate as to whether music needs to be performed or not. If you take Celibidache's view, music has a transcendental potential that is not achievable outside of a live context with a fully present audience. The atomisation of society means that most of us listen to recorded music at home with headphones, as isolated as it is possible to be. The physical presence of the instruments in a space is rendered in two dimensions and literally clamped onto our heads. We have mostly lost physicality of music, which may not be such a great thing.
>>
Bach has been on /lit/ for 7 days. This board is salvable.
>>
File: Picture 3.png (247 KB, 496x554)
247 KB
247 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK4haQc9c-Y
>>
>>10496229
Physics here, we took advanced engineering classes to boost our gpas because they were so fucking easy. This is at a top 10 school. You guys learn a bunch of watered down math and then contract out people who actually know what they're talking about to do anything complicated.
>>
File: 1485029458891.jpg (219 KB, 1024x683)
219 KB
219 KB JPG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMFg8eEmIvs
>>
File: Picture 6.png (490 KB, 512x784)
490 KB
490 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3rI-nFMFZE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16Rn-uhmcRU
>>
stop bumping this embarrassing thread
>>
>>10492205
w*men are inferior
>>
File: fgjsfgjfs.png (136 KB, 455x427)
136 KB
136 KB PNG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehbar90jHz8




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.