Violin Concerto Editionhttps://youtu.be/eUUxKclwS8A>How do I get into classical?This link has resources including audio courses, textbooks and selections of recordings to help you start to understand and appreciate classical music:https://pastebin.com/NBEp2VFhPrevious: >>122844395
christ this cover; great recording so far though!
Oops, forgot to change the edition. Oh well.
>>122868205lol
>there are people who like the harpsichord>unironically
>>122868307People who wanna feel like they're in their favorite medieval RPG I guess.
>>122867957My dude, I don't care about Bruckner.
>>122868399>admitting to trying to start a bitchfest about interpretation of a composer you know nothing aboutschizo sisters just on a downward spiral today
>>122868422Weird coping mechanism, but if it makes you feel better go ahead and boogeyman me.
>>122868445>i don’t care about this composer, but let me try and school you about how different interpretations of this composer’s music sound because you made fun of my favorite zionist!lmao
>>122868191who was the most talented teenage girl in the history of classical music?
>>122868456not him but Barenboim is strictly anti-zionisthe specifically founded an orchestra made up of palestenians and other anti-zionist Jews to play Wagner since it's informally banned in Israel.he's an ultra shit musician but he's actually a pretty cool guy
>>122868752i must be confusing him for someone else, i more or less could only recall that he was a huge jew in one way or another and apparently gambled on the wrong kind. oh well, not like i give a shit about israel to begin with LOL
>>122868752Based Barenboim. Remember when he had to apologise for performing Wagner in Israel?
>>122868307People like BACH
>>122868307https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9gpVM92Ncgyeah
Beethoven literally referred to himself as a tone-poet. Yet people have the gall to deny the programmatic spirit behind most of his music.
>>122868985the term tone poem did not exist back then as it does today. i’d love to see the source and original untranslated version of the claim regardless.
>>122868857he is unalived tho
>>122868463lili
Well tempered Brahms.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7AoF3zvcaIWhat is /classical/'s take on the equal-temperament vs unequal temperament debate?
>>122869573an irrelevant gimmick designed to distract listeners from the fact that the actual performances usually suck
>>122869020The term existed back then because he originated it. Asking for the untranslated source is just a dirty attempt to disavow any evidence, which will obviously appear in English on an English speaking website. The word is 'TONDICHTER', as you would expect. You can find it in Jan Swafford's biography.
>>122869740LOL, beethoven did not invent the term tone poem, nor did he define the term tone poem, nor did he ever write a tone poem. >Asking for the untranslated source is just a dirty attempt to disavow any evidenceactual schizophrenia. i want an untranslated source so i can confirm that the original word in german is in fact tone poem and not a faulty translation pushed by a retarded /lit/ tourist.
>>122869942No one's talking about tone poems, as defined by Strauss. We're talking about Beethoven referring to himself as a tone poet, and you can say he never wrote a tone poem if your definition is for the Strauss form, but that has nothing to do with invalidating its usage to mean something else. Jan Swafford uses the original German word, and it's common knowledge that Beethoven thought of himself as a tone poet, so please continue to seethe at your own ignorance on Beethoven.
>>122870013so if beethoven thought of himself as a “tone poet”, but the usage of the term has no relevance to the romantic era tone poem, then beethoven’s nomenclature obviously has no connection to program music or otherwise as the modern term does. case closed. i’m glad we could come to an agreement. >as defined by Strausshilariously false for someone obsessed for semantics. >The first use of the German term Tondichtung (tone poem) appears to have been by Carl Loewe, applied not to an orchestral work but to his piece for piano solo, Mazeppa, Op. 27 (1828), based on the poem of that name by Lord Byron, and written twelve years before Liszt treated the same subject orchestrally.so, “tone poet” or otherwise, the first modern usage of the word tone poem dates to after beethoven’s death. his usage of the word could not be less relevant. >and it's common knowledge that Beethoven thought of himself as a tone poetno, it’s really not, not that it matters since this definition of tone poet has no relevance to program music or the romantic era tone poem.
>>122870053>so if beethoven thought of himself as a “tone poet”, but the usage of the term has no relevance to the romantic era tone poemAlready you're wrong. Quite famously the first generation of 'programme composers' described Beethoven as the inspiration and origin of their ideas about programmatic music, that's an objective relevance. But it's irrelevant here, since whether or not Beethoven's musical expression of the romantic culture of his time fits the later definitions of programme music does not change the fact that his music was indeed programmatic. We are talking about programmaticism in a broader sense. This is what you're continually confused by. If someone uses the phrase 'programme music', you insist on connecting it with the specific kind that came later, just as if someone uses the word 'tone poem' you have to connect it to the specific kind that came later, which is deeply autistic and shows that you can't understand words having variable meanings. Beethoven's nomenclature might have not structural relevance to later programmatic music, but it does signify that his music was programmatic.>hilariously falseI assumed you were pointing towards Strauss, since Liszt did not refer to his music as tone poems, and you were insistent on only using the term according to a specific later meaning, despite Beethoven's own meaning for it. Why on earth you would use the meaning of it defined by Carl Loewe I don't know.>this definition of tone poet has no relevance to program music or the romantic era tone poem.Yet it is still programmatic, which has relevance for romantic music at large.
>>122870212>Quite famously the first generation of 'programme composers' described Beethoven as the inspiration and origin of their ideas so beethoven inspired the wagnerian school and their program music, but he himself did not write program music outside of the operas, sacred music, the pastorale and the les adieux. none of this is controversial. >We are talking about programmaticism in a broader sense. no, this is what YOU are confused about. there is no “programmaticism in a broader sense” as defined by anyone who has ever written program music nor anyone who has ever written about it. the definition of program music has always been extremely clear as music that breaks away from absolute forms to follow a defined series of ideas or events, from the conceptual imagery of the les adieux to full blown operas where chronological events are portrayed in detailed fashion. there is no definition of program music in the world that involves “it ends in a loud climactic finale so it’s programmatic”. you invented this. >just as if someone uses the word 'tone poem' you have to connect it to the specific kind that came laterif someone after the invention of the established modern term “tone poem” uses it, it is entirely reasonable to assume that they are obeying the conventional definition of the word. likewise, if someone prior to the establishment of the definition uses the term, it is completely reasonable to question what their definition of the word is and dispute the relation between their usage of the word and the modern one. >Why on earth you would use the meaning of it defined by Carl Loewe I don't know.because carl loewe is the first documented composer to use the term in per the modern definition, you retard. >Yet it is still programmaticfalse
>>122870265>but he himself did not write programOnce again, you're begging the question by unnecessarily constraining the definition. However, what allows us to call Beethoven programmatic is certainly joined to later programmatic music by their romantic culture, and for this reason you at first denied this relevance of Beethoven to them, since it would blur the distinction, but now you have gone back on this.>there is no “programmaticism in a broader sense” as defined by anyone who has ever written program musicThat's not true, but if you really believe this, let's use a different term then. Since you're not arguing against the content of my statement here, you're just autistically arguing against what you see to be inaccurate classification. To remove your autistic obsession with terminology, let's get to the essence of the disagreement by framing the question this way: Do you think there is more poetic significance to Beethoven's music than in the music of his predecessors? I believe the answer to be obviously yes. I believe Beethoven was conscious of this significance, as evidenced by his own terminology and by his explorations of music that could be called more definitely 'programmatic', which differed little in its creative process from his other music, hence the assumption of poetic significance underlying ALL his music.>if someone prior to the establishment of the definition uses the term, it is completely reasonable to question what their definition of the word is and dispute the relation between their usage of the word and the modern one.That's fine then, but I've repeatedly explained the definition I'm using.>the term in per the modern definitionWhen we're discussing a use of the term prior to Loewe, it doesn't really matter who was the first to use it with a 'modern definition'. But I wont reply to your response here, to avoid expanding the discussion too much.
>>122870536>Once again, you're begging the question by unnecessarily constraining the definition. no, i’m falling back onto the literal established definition, you fucking retard. you don’t get to change it just because you feel like it this is like complaining that someone is unnecessarily constraining the definition of a square by not counting trapezoids as squares. >what allows us to call Beethoven programmatic is certainly joined to later programmatic music by their romantic culturethis is some insane fucking circular logic right here>why is beethoven programmatic? because his music is romantic and therefore linked to later (actually) programmatic music>why is beethoven’s music romantic? because his music is programmaticare you fucking listening to yourself with this bullshit?>you're just autistically arguing against what you see to be inaccurate classificationhow the fuck is this an autistic argument? i’m following the LITERAL definition of the term programmatic and pointing out that you’re bastardizing it to push an agenda. the entire crux of this whole “beethoven is a romantic” bullshit that you began is that he apparently writes program music even on pieces with no explicit programmatic intent, and now you’re effectively conceding by claiming that somehow my entire point this whole time, that your argument is based on a faulty premise and incorrect definitions, is some sort of autistic semantic nitpicking. go fuck yourself. (1/?)
>>122870536>>122870646>Do you think there is more poetic significance to Beethoven's music than in the music of his predecessors?in which pieces? there are obviously works with clear programmatic intent like the pastorale or the les adieux, or even individual movements like the fugal finale of op. 110 or the heiliger dankgesang that have clear extramusical intent that can be construed as literary or even programmatic. does this apply to his non-programmatic works? no. there is nothing about the hammerklavier or the grosse fuge or the diabelli variations or any other work you can think of that is inherently “poetic” moreso than mozart or haydn. all these works obey the rules of musical logic per the classical era. they are music about music and nothing more, drama and pathos does not change this. >I believe the answer to be obviously yesthat's your interpretation, jackass. nothing about anything you've said on this topic is objective. >I believe Beethoven was conscious of this significancesource?>as evidenced by his own terminologyprove that his definition of "tone poet" had any relation to program music, or even poetry as a romantic mindset, instead of a concept of musical or compositional craftsmanship or excellence. >and by his explorations of music that could be called more definitely 'programmatic'beethoven there are obviously attempts by beethoven to introduce programmatic elements to absolute music. this does not betray any sort of preference towards program music over absolute music, nor does this mean that all of his music must secretly have some sort of underlying programmatic intent. it just means that the individual works and movements with programmatic titles and structures are just that, individual works and movements. the first movement of the 9th is still a masterclass in absolute sonata form and dramatic impulse regardless of the programmatic status of the finale. (2/?)
>>122870536>>122870646>>122870714>That's fine then, but I've repeatedly explained the definition I'm using.and your definition is fucking wrong, that's been my point for the last 48 fucking hours. come up with a new goddamn word, use some farthuffing bullshit like "poetic" if you must, but program music is an established term with an established definition that you are obviously and deliberately mongrelizing. >When we're discussing a use of the term prior to Loewe, it doesn't really matter who was the first to use it with a 'modern definition'. it does, because we first have to establish that beethoven's usage of the term is totally divorced from the romantic era definition of a tone poem. it is only after it is clear that we are talking about a completely unrelated usage of the same words that we can begin to discuss what beethoven actually meant, and once again, this is your invitation to prove that beethoven's definition of his "tone poet" aligns with your interpretation of his music and personal philosophy. if you can't, then the word may as well have been something nonsensical like boogiewoogie or crackerjack. (3/3)
Both of you are gay as fuck
>>122870887I've enjoyed reading along but I'm also an autist.
now playingstart of Kinderszenen, Op. 15:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DifJwE9a3c&list=OLAK5uy_l6GgL-m6t6ZTWIMYf5wCjy4C3Y1OzpcU8&index=2start of Davidsbündlertänze, Op. 6:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq9iIUsp1ZE&list=OLAK5uy_l6GgL-m6t6ZTWIMYf5wCjy4C3Y1OzpcU8&index=15start of Piano Sonata No. 2 in G Minor, Op. 22:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wyrp_6tJce4&list=OLAK5uy_l6GgL-m6t6ZTWIMYf5wCjy4C3Y1OzpcU8&index=33https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_l6GgL-m6t6ZTWIMYf5wCjy4C3Y1OzpcU8I love Hewitt's piano playing, especially her performance of the 2nd Piano Sonata here.
>>122871108Out of curiosity, are Ravel's Piano Works by Jean-Efflet Bavouzet available in your country? For some reason, the record doesn't show in my search results.
>>122871234Can't find it on YouTube either, nah.
Will music ever reach the artistic heights of literature?
>>122871529not /classical/, try >>>/lit/ instead
>Yuja, my queen, my love, my divine mistress, please, just one quick whiff of a bare toe...
>>122871562Imagine getting a smell of her pits after a concert haha
/film/ is making fun of us again
>>122871562>>122871585do you think she ever has gas and farts quietly while performing, or lets out a couple drops of pee in her panties...
>>122868307>there are people who like operatic vocals>unironicallyAlso did I mention that harpsichord is better than piano?
>>122872345not liking operatic vocals just means you don't like proper singing
>>122872906it means she’s a HIPster sister
Beautiful playingBeautiful bodyBeautiful dressesShe's the Queen
>>122872906Bullshit, I'm not a huge fan of singing either way>>122872955Exact opposite sis.
>>122873125not liking classical singing just means you don’t like classical music. the entire tradition was founded upon sacred vocal music, where else do you think the term voice leading comes from? instrumental music is fundamentally just an abstraction of this concept, removed from the limitations of the human voice (breath, needing to be set to text, etc.), but all classical music at the end of the day is indebted to the classical vocal style.
>>122873211Chanting monks is not quite the same as bel canto now is it?
>>122873317no, but if you cannot even tolerate something as simple as choral music (which is the closest thing there is to renaissance polyphony post-renaissance), then your preferences are clearly at odds with the fundamental ideas behind western art music.
>>122873211>>122873340I'm fine with you thinking I don't like classical music(while I listen to it daily). I still hate opera vocals, and barely tolerate choirs, I don't see the point of arguing about this either way lol.
>>122873038Does she play anything else than virtuoso concertos?
>>122873356i can believe that you like the sound of classical instruments and maybe even the styles of certain classical eras and genres while also fundamentally not agreeing with the philosophy and concept behind western art music as a whole.
>>122873400Why would such a talent waste time on easy pieces?
>>122873520Why would you waste time listening to a Rachmaninoff concerto more than once?
>>122873723Listenig to some of the greatest concertos ever written is hardly a 'waste of time'
>>122873740lol
NOT listening to Rachmaninoff every day is a waste of time desuhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8mP5B-ws2s
>>122868191How long does it take for /classical/ to click for you guys? I swear I've listened to Goldberg variations like 10 times and nothing has really jumped out at me.
Did Bach think of tonal harmony when writing his fugues, or did he think modally and it happened to align with tonality?
Wagner's Overtures prove that he could have written some great symphonies. I don't really get why he never did so.
>>122874520Symphonies didn't fit his vision for what music could be.
>>122874520His operas are symphonic, what more do you need?
>>122874135Listen to Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto No. 2 couple of times and it'll click I can guaranteehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8mP5B-ws2sFor Bach I personally prefer WTC and Organ fugues by A LOT, not sure why Goldberg Variations is more popular. You have to listen to WTC little by little, not entirely. Playing on piano also helps. Bach's Keyboard Concertos are also easier to digest so listen to these as wellhttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLF81B6EFFAE902A3BI've always liked Classical but personally it was Chopin(ballades, nocturnes, preludes) and Beethoven(sonatas symphonies) who made me love and appreciate piano music
>>122874977>symphoniessconcertos* lol
>>122874658Opera singing is a little gay though
>>122874977The little fugue is very good
>>122874135I can generally tell the reason for why I don't like something, whether I think it's something that can be remedied with repeated listening or a different recording, so really it depends, but these days with the backlog of things I wanna listen to and the music I love already which I'm always dying to get back to, I'll try once or twice if I think a repeated listening will help and if still nothing then I'll consider trying again at a later date. Sometimes you can just tell if something isn't for you, though.
I am not saying that Graun "stole" anything. This is not about "stealing." Quite to the contrary, he followed the Italian Neapolitan tradition. I would not call it stealing. That is why I like his music so much. It's fantastic. For comparison, it is often said that Schuetz was the first great German composer. But what they forget to tell you in the history books is that Schuetz would only recognize one teacher all his life: Gabrieli. He said it again and again. Schuetz's music is so good because it is Italian. So is Graun's. Modern western music is entirely owed to the Italians. That is not stealing. As even the greatest scientist of all time, Isaac Newton, stated: we all stand on the shoulders of giants. Later than Graun, from about 1800, it can be documented meticulously (but nobody reads it anymore) that German musicologists massacred the Neapolitan tradition and in general the Italian tradition. To use your metaphors, this not about stealing. It is about killing. It can also be documented in great detail that 100 years or so later some German musicologists felt killer's remorse. The eminent Kretzschmar of Berlin felt really bad about it and wanted to resurrect it. The great Leipzig musicologist Hugo Riemann stated that one can hear Pergolesi phrasing in ALL of German nineteenth music. You talk about "puristische Unsinn." Let me talk to you about "puristisch." Political Pangermania "puristische Unsinn" ended in a bunker in Berlin in April 1945 with a single bullet to the head. It is time for musical Pangermania "puristische Unsinn" to come to an end. There is nothing wrong with German music. I have nothing against Beethoven and Schumann and Brahms sonatas. Aber warum koennen wir auf dem Radio nichts anders anhoeren. Was ist ja los mit diesem bloeden puristischen Unsinn"?
>>122875536I read this in the voice of Klaus Kinski.
>>122875208and you're a bit of a stupid fuckwit
Barcarolle Op.60 is so beautiful and nostalgichttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r5gD4iZjVcThis truly is the 'fifth' ballade
>>122875977Better than being a massive fuckwit like yourself
Mozarthttps://youtu.be/18pTBHmyVtE
>>122874520not really, his sole complete symphony proves that he didn’t have it in him to write absolute music. overtures are a completely different affair
What is some classical that insists upon itself?
>>122876481Well, I feel the Overture to Der Fliegende Höllander would have made a fine opening movement to a symphony.
>>122876556I think the idea is the rest of the symphony would be the issue or roadblock. But yes I feel ya, would be neat if he had some quality ones.
>>122876556it really wouldnt have, considering it’s just a structureless concoction of themes relevant to the opera. without the opera to provide these themes context, they lose their meaning with relation to the characters and plot of the opera, and therefore their gravitas. >>122876637this is another issue, but one less pressing than the inherent fact that overtures are inherently not self-contained works the way individual symphonic movements are expected to be.
>>122876546Atonal music
I realise now what sisterposters objection was to posting Glen Gould's Goldberg Variations was-Glen was playing on a modern piano and as well know Bach specifically indicates the piece to be played on a harpsichord. So here it as Bach wanted it to be heardhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq-ahSRT1lA&ab_channel=Bachology
>>122877953tranime sisters are so fucking retarded holy shit
>>122877953Just listen to this one. In fact might do that myself after this Mahler 9 ends, been forever since I've heard the Goldberg Variations.
>>122877953>>122878005And since Angela Hewitt is female, you can pretend your favorite anime girl or waifu or whatever is the one giving the performance! with its dash of feminine approach
>>122878052please stop
>>122878060Hey it's not what I'm into, I'm just trying to help out the anime-anon.
>>122877962There's no way can have listened to it all. For you all you know it's the best version out there
does nettspend count as classical music
>>122878071just don’t>>122878074what the fuck are you even trying to say
Jon Leifs Organ Concertohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ufEV9sl4Qc&ab_channel=StavangerkonserthusOrgel
>>122869573based and lehmanpilled
Einojuhani Rautavaara - Annunciations (Organ Concerto, 1977)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_ClD4b_LJs&ab_channel=Portmantonalthank you sister music
dO FIlm and tv soundtracks count as classical music? Assuming they're symphonic music
>>122878974no
>>122878974No. That classical music has been historically written for orchestral instruments is just a matter of convention.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_2PwYmmbXI&ab_channel=SohanKaliraiSteve Reich - Different Trains (1988)I can think of a train Steve should have been put on
Actually I'm dumb, thats exactly what the Steve Reich piece is about
>>122879146what, about trainspotting? sounds like an appropriately autistic and mindnumbing subject for minimalism
>>122878974Yes. If it's symphonic with classical orchestration then it is classical music. Some of it can be compared to minimalism, but then there are genuine masterpieces.Don't take some random ass anon's word for it, Shostakovich himself said so. And then think logically, if an opera is classical music, how different is a movie score to an opera? tl;dr yes it usually is
>>122879213the absolute state of tourists
>>122879176It's about how as a kid, in WW2 he went on a train journeys from New York to Los Angeles to visit his separated parents, but he ponders how had he been living in Europe he would have probably been taking a train to Auschwitz
>>122879228and people complain that mahler has too much of his inner turmoil in his music, fucking christ. what an insufferably narcissistic program.
>>122879227The absolute state of seething contrarians trolls
>>122879282it’s time for you to go back to >>>/mu/, tourister sister
>>122879261I'm prejudiced against Steve Reich cause of the atrocious Come Out piece, but I'm actually enjoying that Different Trains Piece-it's pretty impressive stuff
>>122879296You've told me that before. I've been here since forever, maybe you should seek a refugee elsewhere instead, sis?
Any more like this?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDhwFTw4VnI
>>122879315what come out of the piece, did he write some pride month themed bullshit or something?>it's pretty impressive stuffthe only thing minimalism has ever impressed me at is being impressively revolting>>122879337a strangely loose definition of forever, most people usually categorize it as longer than 2 weeks. your visa has expired, tourist, it’s time to go home.
>>122879349https://youtu.be/zpMdr9nBJc0?si=eM2-OLIFPux9_kBR
>>122879367You're so funny
>>122879351This is my home and you're the invader sis, it's time to leave, shoo
>>122879351This piecehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0WVh1D0N50&ab_channel=leehy39
>>122879389you seem confused. this is the classical music thread, and you’re not a classical music listener, you’re a tourist. go back to >>>/mu/. >>122879410i kinda don’t want to click on it, just summarize it for me so i don’t have to tolerate this dumb kike’s nonsense.
now playing (the Serenades and assorted overtures and orchestral pieces by others)start of Serenade for String Orchestra in C Major, Op. 48, TH 48 (but links to playlist containing Tchai's 2nd and 5th and the other pieces):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3HaBS44jMs&list=OLAK5uy_l6pwq4KOx-bbug7H0Cr7lFYIotZmBSF3w&index=10https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_l6pwq4KOx-bbug7H0Cr7lFYIotZmBSF3w
Sex starts at 0:1 btw!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjIX9mwcyPE
>>122876314>The most tremendous genius raised Mozart above all masters, in all centuries and in all the arts. A light, bright, fine day this will remain throughout my whole life. As from afar, the magic notes of Mozart's music still gently haunts me. He is the highest, the culminating point that beauty has attained in the sphere of music as for one moment in the history of music all opposites were reconciled; all tensions resolved; that luminous moment was Mozart.>Mozart creates music from a mysterious center, and so knows the limits to the right and the left, above and below. He maintains moderation. It always sounds unburdened, effortless, and light. This is why it unburdens, releases, and liberates us. He never abandons himself to any one sense; even at his most ecstatic moments his mind is vigorous, alert, and on the wing. He dives unerringly on to his finest ideas like a bird of prey, and once an idea is seized he soars off again with an undiminished power. It does not give the listener time to catch his breath, for no sooner is one inclined to reflect upon a beautiful inspiration than another appears, even more splendid, which drives away the first, and this continues on and on, so that in the end one is unable to retain any of these beauties in the memory. It is particularly difficult to perform.
>>122879604>His admirable clarity exacts absolute cleanness: the slightest mistake in it stands out like black on white. It is music in which all the notes must be heard. Free of all exaggeration, of all sharp breaks and contradictions. The sun shines but does not blind, does not burn or consume. Heaven arches over the earth, but it does not weigh it down, it does not crush or devour it. Easy to read, but very difficult to interpret. The least speck of dust spoils them. They are clear, transparent, and joyful as a spring, and not only those muddy pools which seem deep only because the bottom cannot be seen. His simplicity is merely purity. It is a crystalline thing in which all the emotions play a role, but as if already celestially transposed. Moderation consists in feeling emotions as the angels do.>Mozart makes you believe in God because it cannot be by chance that such a phenomenon arrives into this world and leaves such an unbounded number of unparalleled masterpieces. It represents neither the prolonged sigh of faith that characterizes so much of the music written before his time, nor the stormy idealism which cloaks most music after him. Rather he is that mercurial balance of the skeptic and the humane. Like him, and in him, we can always discover new worlds.- Maho Hiyajo
>>122879427Come out and show them Probably easier just to click it and see how long you can listen >"I remember reading about a composer named Steve Reich who came up with a new idea called phasing, which is like windshield wipers going in and out of synch. Apparently he was caught in a traffic jam one rainy day and the rhythm of the windshield wipers caught his attention and he applied what he heard to his musical compositions. He has had a significant influence on contemporary music, and I think he's a great example as an innovator. Sometimes new ideas can come from something as mundane and functional as your windshield wipers. The key is to pay attention and keep your brain and senses open to new stimuli."Donald Trump
Some people call him Mauricehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH5ouZCA_Ec&ab_channel=ArnoldvanderWaalsMaurice Ravel, Sonate posthume pour violon et piano, Régis Pasquier/Brigitte EngererHis first sonata written for piano and violin but not published till 38 years after he died, which can only mean he thought it was just too good to share with the world
>>122879687or maybe he thought it was bad and was embarrassed by it
So what instruments do you people actually play
>>122879513Wow, the Borodin Overture from this is really nice, gorgeous piece:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TErS0ozafdY&list=OLAK5uy_l6pwq4KOx-bbug7H0Cr7lFYIotZmBSF3w&index=17
>>122879629did trump actually say that? ain’t no fucking way, that’s hilarious.
>>122880191It was in one of his books
>>122880337it does sound like something he’d say, it reads more like he likes the concept of the music and likens it to some weird 80s businessman innovation mindset than he comprehends it as an actual piece of classical music (of which it barely counts).
Don't you hate when you want a recording of a symphony, but it's only available in a boxset with the whole cycle and you end up with multiple sets of the same cycle?
>>122880467Yes there's no danger he listens to Steve Reich, probably didn't even hear the piece. It's not bad advice though
I really like Bach. Are there any other composers whose music has a similar level of clarity and robustness? Most of the other classical music I’ve listened to sounds cluttered and hazy, almost formless, by comparison. I hope I’m making sense. I’m still quite new to the world of classical music, so I don’t know all the proper terms yet.
now playingstart of Piano Concerto No. 2 in G Major, Op. 44:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsAUC4dnX9c&list=OLAK5uy_lxlrnZ865QGYk9b_Si9fJ5aztpg8Ajho0&index=2start of Concert Fantasia, Op. 56:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ0BJYsuono&list=OLAK5uy_lxlrnZ865QGYk9b_Si9fJ5aztpg8Ajho0&index=5https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lxlrnZ865QGYk9b_Si9fJ5aztpg8Ajho0Listened to the Currentzis Tchaikovsky 6 again just before this and this time it completely blew me away, an absolute dramatic thriller of a recording, love it.>>122881179Mozart and Beethoven of course. Probably avoid the romantics for now, like the music in my post above. Not that it is actually formless but I get what you're getting at, especially in comparison with Bach and, imo, the other two of the Big Three.
>>122881000no? what’s wrong with owning multiple beethoven or brahms cycles? >>122881179handel is his most obvious contemporary
>>122881179Handel, like the other Anon said, but also check Buxtehude Corelli Vivaldi and Telemann out.
>>122880120piano
>A characteristic Baroque form was the dance suite. While the pieces in a dance suite were inspired by actual dance music, dance suites were designed purely for listening, not for accompanying dancers.
Are there really no recent traditional recordings of Bach's choral music? It's really all HIP? Is Rene Jacobs really the closest there is in this day and age to a traditionalist rendition?
>>122883449bach performance has been more or less completely overrun by the HIPsters, yeah
>>122883458I guess we should just be happy with the recordings we've got, it's only because I think that big orchestral, divinely-inspired sound would be amazing with modern production. Oh well.
>>122883477modern productions sound terrible compared to the golden age of stereo across the board so i don’t see how modern recordings with inept modern orchestras and even more incompetent modern conductors would sound any better than existing stereo recordings.
>>122883449>Jacobs>traditionalistLol?
>>122883449>rene jacobshe is the HIPpest of all, what are you smoking?
>>122883458shame, after the '90s it's only HIP, HIP and more HIPhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krmo2JQ6ucw&list=OLAK5uy_n2yf7k46K4UGm2C52L37Cb3iQuAfi6ICU&index=9i mean does this sound bad?
>>122883713i’ll take a 60s philips or RCA living stereo production over that any day of the week, it’s not even close.
>>122883784post one as example if you will
>>122883805of what, a great sounding 60s recording? you already posted the jochum st matthew passion, what more are you asking for?
>>122883817I mean of that motet (BWV 229) in a great 60s recording in particular
>>122883827i hate to say this but i don’t have a list of great sounding (nevermind interpretation) recordings of a specific random bach motet memorized at the moment.
>>122883524>>122883709No wonder I didn't like it! Someone insisted to me Rene Jacobs was HIP with some traditional elements with the choruses, or something of the sort. Then it's even more barren then I thought!>>122883713Modern motets do sound amazing, and cantatas are hit-or-miss.
>>122883839why so brash? I just thought you knew one by your post here >>122883784 that's all
>>122883931i’m just saying that in general i think the best analog recordings of that era sound a lot better than the best digital recordings from the 80s and 90s and onwards, and especially so for modern day recordings; so i fail to see why a modern bach recording with traditional orchestral forces would sound any better than richter, klemperer or jochum.
>>122883827mm i guess richter or raminmaybe munchinger
Hindemithhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jv6MNeRa6w&list=OLAK5uy_kkHQmIp2Bpaxf1OYiPBCR2virrQdwN_ik
Brouwerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf3Bkm2vLzg&list=OLAK5uy_mcWQ_daug2OvpIkNa8MEg58ZZlXwU9Q7I
let's get HIPsuch a great album cover
>>122885045if only the recording was worth a shit
Greatest Mozart Violin Sonata recording?
>>122883458>>122883449>>122883713>getting closer to the composers original intent le BAD
>>122887361Fuck off tranimefag
>>122887569Fact check: false
>>122881155
What CD was she listening to?
>>122888300>listens to the sonatas and not the concertosLiterally why, Beethoven was the one to make piano sonatas worth a shit. Mozart excelled in his concertos
>>122885045>thing
>>122888308are you really too autistic to imagine why someone would want to hear piano sonatas written by Mozart?
>>122888403I can imagine a retard
>>122888459yeah autists have an easier time thinking about themselves than inferring things about others
>>122888489Autism is being a retard, im smart, checkmate baby
now playinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSNYT1BZlyc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz4bqzMYFoo
>>122888300Mozart the piano sonatasDuuuuh
>>122888580>Autism is being a retardnot even close, retardation and autism are extremely different conditions.>im smartclearly not the case
>>122883839>not familiar with the six motets BWV 225 - 230 + 118 and Anh. 159fake Bach fanbest recordings are Wilhelm Ehmann and Gary Graden btwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b3wYxZhL1Ungss
why can't we just talk about music instead of shit flinging?
>>122888976Ok, whats a really nicely mastered Organ recording? I like the Hans Otto silbermann recordings
>>122887392>HIPshit>close to the composer’s original intentLMFAO>>122887569based>>122888595>>122888976no one asked, pathetic loner>>122888968do HIPsters seriously
>>122889455>do HIPsters seriouslydid you reply to the wrong post? that is not a HIP recording
>>122889455>>HIPshit>>close to the composer’s original intentYes? Moreso than "traditional" faggotry kek
>>122889693graden is HIP>>122889750hilariously delusional, HIPsters truly do live in another universe
>>122889757Prove me wrong, tradtard
>>122889820or may i won’t so that you can continue huffing your own farts and looking like a fool for listening to intentionally shitty sounding recordings while i stick to my actually good sounding recordings.
>>122889757why did you only comment on the HIP one? why do you tend to focus on what you dislike so much?
>>122889849HIP sounds closer to the composers intention, therefore objectively better. You say I look like a fool but you hang on to outdated recordings and their horrid inaccurate sound that destroy compositions. And you cannot even prove this wrong, just embarassingly hang on to a completely subjective opinion on that you think these objectively shit, music destroying recordings sound good.
>>122890103i can't take anyone who shills for HIP seriously i'm afraid>>122890170keep huffing, fart huffer. your ass only smells better and better the more you sniff.
>>122890192>F-Fart huffer!Literal bot, kek. No original response in you
>>122890385i mean, that's what you are. you're not interested in good sounding music, you're interested in pretense (authenticity, an unattainable moving goalpost) and use it to justify your opinions. which is exactly why you're a huffer. why should i call you anything other than what you are?
>>122890436HIP recordings sound better, though. When I listen to Bach, I don't exactly wanna hear a chicken wobbling and being unable to stick to a single tone. HIP performances tend to be the only ones with listenable singing.
>>122890471you're not fooling anyone with this, vibrato isn't nearly as significant in recordings from the 50s and 60s. vocal talent was much more capable of projecting and competing even with large orchestras, and producers like walter legge frequently used overdubs to achieve effects impossible in live concert settings (see the sanctus of klemperer's missa solemnis, one of the only recordings to have the soloists carry the pleni sunt coeli fugue as beethoven indicates in the score). if anything, the move to HIP is in part a coping method of minimizing the effects of a shrinking and weakening vocal talent pool in the modern era; all you're doing is covering the problem up, not actually solving it or achieving "authenticity" (which again, doesn't exist).
>>122890530There is no mass in b minor recording from the 50s and 60s that has singing as good as the Rifkin recording of the piece.
>>122890621there is no mass in b minor recording form the 50s and 60s with counter tenors, so i'll take those instead, thanks. >b-but authenticity!again, a moving target, especially for a piece that was virtually never performed until the mendelssohn bach revival. what performance practice are we supposed to be reviving exactly?
>>122890653>>b-but authenticity!>again, a moving target, especially for a piece that was virtually never performed until the mendelssohn bach revival. what performance practice are we supposed to be reviving exactly?The same way Bach would have performed his cantatas and oratorios? What kind of retarded question is this?
https://youtu.be/eAWRT-SxbXgSuch contrapuntal beauty. It makes me wonder if Mozart might have been inspired by Bach's French Overture when writing this. I know that he had a copy of the Well Tempered Clavier, but did Mozart have a copy of Clavier Übung I or II?
>>122890677>a 2 hour long mass requiring larger forces than any of the cantatas is supposed to have identical forces to themLOL, the absolute state of HIPsters. also, as if the very forces for said performances of the cantatas and oratorios weren't moving targets in and of themselves and entirely dependent on what was actually available to bach at a given time. the unfortunate fact is that there is no representation of bach's ideal assuming unlimited resources as we essentially have today. every HIP performance is a bastardized amalgamation of various aspects of the limited resources that bach had; in effect, (badly) recreating the sound of country bumpkins moreso than it does anything bach might have truly intended (which, again, is an impossibility).
>>122890725>>a 2 hour long mass requiring larger forces than any of the cantatas is supposed to have identical forces to themThat's why I said Oratorios you lobotomite>. the unfortunate fact is that there is no representation of bach's ideal assuming unlimited resources as we essentially have today. every HIP performance is a bastardized amalgamation of various aspects of the limited resources that bach had; in effect, (badly) recreating the sound of country bumpkins moreso than it does anything bach might have truly intendedDoesnt matter, that is how Bach played it, that is how it should sound.
>>122890765>That's why I said Oratorios you lobotomitethe oratorios also had completely different forces depending on the given performance. which one is correct? >Doesnt matter, that is how Bach played it, that is how it should sound.except it's not how he played it; he never played it in full at all. i assume your unwavering dedication to purity means that we shouldn't play the mass in b minor aside from the sanctus, the only movement he ever performed publicly.
>>122890796Pure idiocy
>>122890830i agree, HIP is nothing more than a display of the idiocy of puritanism in adhering to a performance practice that never existed.
>>122890839Retardation: The post
>>122890845i agree, nothing could be more retarded than HIP, although you seem to have misquoted >>122890170
now playingstart of Glazunov: Violin Concerto in A minor, Op. 82https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8Lo0DF5dTI&list=OLAK5uy_l83bQcb7SSInJ_eiRNT7hUuaDbYDNnRmo&index=2start of Kabalevsky: Concerto for Violin and Orchestra in C major, op.48https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBYlU2kpHYY&list=OLAK5uy_l83bQcb7SSInJ_eiRNT7hUuaDbYDNnRmo&index=5start of Tchaikovsky: Souvenir d'un lieu cher, Op. 42https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b395FM_ddlk&list=OLAK5uy_l83bQcb7SSInJ_eiRNT7hUuaDbYDNnRmo&index=8Tchaikovsky: Valse-Scherzo, Op. 34https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qO6p8m0EMU&list=OLAK5uy_l83bQcb7SSInJ_eiRNT7hUuaDbYDNnRmo&index=11https://music.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_l83bQcb7SSInJ_eiRNT7hUuaDbYDNnRmo
>>122885358I thought it sounded pretty good, actually. Not enough to supplant by usuals but definitely enjoyed it.
>>122890875it's one of the few suzuki recordings i have in my downloaded library and i don't know why because it's abysmal. even his earlier johannes passion is better, and that's not saying much.
>>122890886Oh I'm surprised you've listened to it, I thought you outright avoid these types of recordings. Well, you know me, most recordings sound good to my ears, lol.
Mozarthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPQgu3W1Ud4
>>122890909well, if nothing else, you can't accuse me of not knowing thine enemy.
>>122890939lol hence why I try to listen to one of those kinds of recordings every so often. I suppose I should finally try Gardiner next.
>>122890963be my guest, but don't say i didn't warn you.
>>>/fa/18186386>>>/fa/18186412
>>122890913who is this girl
>>122891050Maho-tan
>>122891050tranime pedophilia
>>122891282Maho is 21 thoughbeit
>>122890765>Indeed, a recent controversy about the execution of Bach's choral music centered on whether the works were written in terms of the very limited forces that Bach was generally able to command at the Thomaskirche in Leipzig or in terms of the forces that he explicitly said he would like to have. To a certain extent this is a false problem: every composer is influenced by his knowledge of what the piece will actually sound like from poignant past experience of the conditions of performance, but no interesting composer resists the repeated temptation to transcend these conditions.
>>122891286thank you tranime pedophile>>122891320this kills the HIPster.
Whenever I give HIP recordings a try, I don't really give a damn about whether its historically accurate and how the piece 'ought to' sound -- I just care if it sounds good, and I think the lighter, more playful approach has some potential which is why it interests me.
>>122891320One Voice Per Part does show the counterpoint way more clearly, though. When its done with big ass choirs, it loses a lot of the contrapuntal beauty and just becomes noise
>>122891493translation: my hearing sucks and i can’t comprehend more than 2 things happening at once
>>122891527less is more, objectively
>>122891542i'm sure you'd like to believe that to excuse away your double digit IQ score.
>>122891493About the six-voice ricercar of the Musical Offering>A constant aural perception of six individual parts is neither a reasonable nor a desirable goal. An understanding of the achievement of this fugue and of the fugue in "antique style" in general depends on the knowledge that behind what one hears - the mass of sound and the intermittent prominence of the individual voices - lies a perfect musical structure of six voices, each beautiful in isolation as well as in combination, a structure that can never be completely realized in sound.
>>122890530>vibrato isn't nearly as significant in recordings from the 50s and 60s depends on the performer>Legge frequently used overdubs to achieve effects impossible in live concert settingsi dont necessarily think that's a good thing, dishonest engineering and all that. the effect is nice, though.if Legge was going to used the studio to project effects otherwise unheard of in live settings, the least he could have done is made the organ stand out on that recording. as usual, it's buried in most of the places Beethoven wants it>the move to HIP is in part a coping method the HIP movement began in the 50s when there were still plenty of talented vocalists flying around, so I doubt it. even Klemperer made note of how bloated performances of Bach were at the time, which is why his St. Matthew has reduced forces compared to what was used at the time.
>>122891640>i dont necessarily think that's a good thing, dishonest engineering and all that.i agree, i was simply making a point about vibrato or otherwise and vocal projection in the midcentury vs today. >the least he could have done is made the organ stand out on that recording. that's the case on most missa solemnis recordings, frankly. it's basically a piece for orchestra and voices for me at this point. >the HIP movement began in the 50s when there were still plenty of talented vocalists flying around, so I doubt it.i'm saying this moreso in reference to the motivation for the continued paring down of instrumental forces in HIP, rather than its initial impetus. besides, i strongly doubt anyone is thinking of karl richter in a discussion about HIP, even if he is technically "historically informed".
>>122891604>The art of J. S. Bach at its most learned - as in this ricercar - is based on a relation between the audible and the inaudible. The independence of the voices in a fugue of this kind is absolute, but it can only be partially heard. The junction of two voices in unison, wonderfully employed in the six-voice ricercar but a frequent effect in all contrapuntal writing, marks an extreme: the independence of the voices here passes over from the intermittently perceptible to the absolutely inaudible. The highest art of the composer is to make the counterpoint blend together into a continuum out of which the individual voices rise and are set into relief.
>>122891604>>122891733Bunch of gobbedlygook to cope with being a shit performer that cannot play a fugue properly with caution and care.
>>122891806i’d sooner take seriously someone who understands the importance of the role of the subject and subordinate voices in a fugue than a dilettante who struggles to listen to counterpoint with more than 3 voices at once
What are some excellent recordings of this Ricercar á 6 please?
>>122892041https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjxKy3pP41w
>>122891720>i strongly doubt anyone is thinking of karl richter in a discussion about HIP, even if he is technically "historically informed".whathowin what capacityis he HIP
>>122892076he said excellent>>122892088he is historically informed in the use of harpsichord and swifter tempos than the likes of klemperer or karajan. like i said, he is not HIP by modern standards, but in his day he was as "authentic" as bach performance practice got.
I wouldn't classify harpsichord as "HIP". It is just another instrument, with its own timbre, harpsichord is not a 'performance'
>>122892282>swifter temposInteresting. Richter can still sound comically slow to me, like in Zion hört die Wächter singen from cantata 140 for instance, but most modern day hip recordings are completely over the the top fast of course.I think Rotzsch generally gets the tempi just right in his recordings of the cantatas.
>>122892371using harpsichord over piano is absolutely a decision influenced by historical performance, which is precisely the definition of HIP. it's more of a question of how much influence historical performance has over the performance decisions that defines what we consider HIP today. >>122892390like i said, it's all relative. my whole point from the start i wouldn't include richter (or even some other early HIP that's considerably more like modern HIP like leonhardt) to be what people are referring to when discussing HIP; as far as i'm concerned, that discussion begins with the likes of pinnock, gardiner, harnoncourt etc.
>>122892472>using harpsichord over piano is absolutely a decision influenced by historical performanceIt can be just a personal preference of timbre. I really like Harpsichord's sound personally whereas I dislike HIP recordings.
>>122877953No I object to Glenn Gould because his playing feels dead and lifeless to me.
>>122892553you’re not getting my point. i’m literally saying that usage of the harpsichord is not enough to fall under our modern definition of HIP, just that it is technically speaking a historically informed performance decision. i agree entirely that the harpsichord can and does sound great, and that what we consider to be HIP under the colloquial definition is generally garbage.
>>122892282it is excellent
>>122892616>NBS>excellentLMFAO
>>122892621literally the best bach recordings, cope harder kek
>>122892656you're only embarrassing yourself, lil guy
>>122892722How does it feel being in the minority outside this shitty general?
>>122892744i can assure you that the average joe does not give a shit about HIP, or bach, or even classical music as a whole.
>>122892744lol. What are you going on? The comments on their youtube channel?
finally, sistersister meet her match in terms of idiocy
>>122893272not sure what you mean, you've clearly been here all along, ESL.
>>122890989>Gould is the condom of classical music. Filters out any bad seed from besieging the purity of the womb of classical. W
>>122893585More like the condom I tossed into the trash yesterday.
>>122893585Who are you quoting?
The sisters are demanding more Glen Gould:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUsJFartqsw&ab_channel=DanielPoulinSonata No.30 in E major, op.109
>>122893943embarrassing tranime gould ghoul
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4gtSxnXn6UWhat's with the Squidward voice?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xge7XBg3MgU&list=OLAK5uy_ksNd7GrVm8QG_DqrBlwRxS3fWYCKHZ-4g&index=4vgh...sovl...
>>122893585If you are a newfag here, just remember to ignore Wagnerians. Most importantly ignore the "W." poster.
>>122894135the recordings on this release are all an unbelievably important document regarding string playing in 19th century vienna, but why is the transfer a semitone sharp?
>>122894333beats me, the symposium release sounds the same
>>122894333It's either being played back at the wrong speed, a bad disc/transfer, or just the tuning that they played it. Europe, especially at that time, and even somewhat today, has incredibly variable tuning. A=440Hz is the standard these days, but even back in the 60s and 70s, Karajan's Berlin was operating at A=448.5Hz.Vienna tunings could go from 442.5-449.5Hz depending on the decade.Some transfers equalize the pitch back to standard modern tuning, but to do this without affecting the music too much you also have to lower/raise the speed of the signal, which means you're somewhat changing the performance by making it slower/faster.
>>122894436>>122894455i have a suspicion just based on listening alone that this may have been the actual intonation of rosé and the vienna philharmonic in the 1920s. the tempo doesn't sound nearly fast enough on any of the performances for it to be a sped (and pitched) up transfer.
Would you call Koyaanisqatsi classical music?
>>122894737i would consider it bad
>>122880120Organ (badly)
this confuses jazz "musicians".
How should I get into contemporary opera? I saw a performance of Akhenaten some years ago and it’s stuck with me despite not being a huge Glass fan. I know he’s got a couple others but I’d like to branch out
Bach - Brandenburg Concerto no. 4 in G major BWV 1049https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSZJ__GIbms&ab_channel=NetherlandsBachSociety
>>122895660https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrPMAdIulNw
>>122895660HIPsters really are just the most insufferable ideologues out there>>122895694right next to this guy. no one asked, pathetic kraut
>>122895977Ideologue? That sounded brilliant and you can't argue with that.
>>122896008no, it really sounded like shit. i’ll take fucking i musici over that crap anyday, and that’s not saying much.
>>122895660https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0oV0ijP4xQ
>>122895636https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nlx9V2vNxY&ab_channel=MichelvanderAa
>>122896351never post here again.
>>122896603we’d all appreciate it if you did just that, delusional kraut
>>122896640synth pads and ambient music fucking suck.
Listened to /our queen/ Yuja Wang's entire 2.5hr Rachmaninoff cycle today, pure bliss, I've never heard such unbelievably beautiful piano playing.
>>122897041dumb coomer
>>122896846and so does your “music”, delusional kraut>>122897167don’t reply to the yuja wang coomers
>>122897196>>122897167seethe harder coomers run this site
let’s not even talk about running a website, you can’t even run to mcdonalds to buy yourself a double cheeseburger because you’re too busy gooning to bbc tranny porn like wings of redemption, you fat fuck.
the absolute state of this place.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuqdXbMha4A
>>122897374don’t let the door hit you on your way out, blockhead
Now Playing - Eduardo Fernandez Plays Giulianihttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqv8-xwHuJ8&list=OLAK5uy_kx-_eUsIcm_6jNzlhVRULQZsqkFx2qBAM&index=2
>>122897374https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgrhigY2GFA&ab_channel=Kris
Do I like this recording?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EL3QYeIBfI&list=OLAK5uy_mQwQcb5usbqleYHU8yI0j31UxLvDttvks
>>122898373no
>>122899581not /classical/, maybe try >>>/mu/ instead
>>122899581I've one thing to say: jazz fucking sucks cock and you're a gigantic faggot lol
>>122899645>gay meme answer with no pointalso miles davis and coltrane are more high test than mozart, schubert and fagner combined. You’re just a tranny orch-dork who can’t make a good point or a funny reply.
>>122899673not /classical/, maybe try >>>/mu/ instead
>>122899581I have a low opinion of jazz musicians despite the fact that some of my earliest lessons in theory were with a jazz pianist. jazz theory is mostly rote learning and the reasoning they use to arrive at a result is often wrong.
>>122899673No serious answer is needed for a jazz clown tho
>>122899878jazz "musicians" can't even spell chords correctly. lmao.
>>122899745>rote learningYou could make the same argument with guitar driven genres like metal. Repetition and improv is a bell curve thing. Also some jazz has interesting use of pandiatonicism just like classical >>122899836>le suspended 7th chord BUT WITH A RAISED 11th??!!!who is this supposed to impress? Lots of jazztards slap 11ths and 13ths on their 7th cords whenever they’re improving.
>>122899878>im looking down on you. I’m not a boring shitflinging faggot with the IQ of a teenage girl I swearkeep coping lol
>>122899929the difference between jazz musicians and classically trained musicians is the fact that we: a.) know how to correctly spell chords/scales andb.) understand harmonic functions and inversions on a deeper level.The jazz pianist who I once had lessons with would, for example, spell a IV11b9 chord as an Eb9#11, G7b9#5, and so on. Such an approach is very sloppy and unprofessional in my humble opinion.
>>122900073*IV11b7*
classicalniggers are the biggest fucking posturing pseuds everthey're literally the musical equivalent of audiophiles who think they can tell the difference between encodingsgrading different recordings LOLmmm yes the dulcet and sumptuous tones of poowitz stands in stark contrast to the rather restrained gently percussive playing of hershsteinthese massive retards actually think they can tell the difference between violin manufacturers with their sophisticated golden earsi guarantee 100% if you a/b tested the classical population the vast majority wouldn't even be able to discern composers never mind fucking recordings or stradivariuses
now playinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG99k8BFwS8
>>122900166strawman.
>>122899941>im looking down on you.Correct. I'm looking down on all clowns.
>>122900198jazz "musicians" are a joke. They claim to be great improvisers but the only thing they know how to improvise is jazz music and jazz "music" is fucking sludge.
>>122900166Fact check: false
fuck jazz.
NEW THREAD>>122900561>>122900561>>122900561
>>122900570Based
>>122900467More like azz
The jannies are racist to us anime enjoyers...
>muhh mozart>muhh animeKill yourself you ugly bitch.
>>122900829Seethe
Mozart's operas are the anime of his time
>>122900868>>122900868>>122900868
>>122900892>>122900892>>122900892
>>122900874>>122900898Both early thread faggots
apparently, we're not allowed to make our own threads. fuck jannies.
>>122901012Not until bump limit is reached
>>122901034
NEW THREAD>>122901034>>122901034
