Classical music is so evidently superior to all other kinds of music, yet we keep lowering the standards when we talk about other types of music, to avoid the uncomfortable situation where the butt rock dude or the druggy EDM boy gets anal pained when they are told the great masters are better than their shitty hedonistic hero.Instead of white guilt, in the music world there is "classical" guilt. We keep lowering the standards for other kinds of music to compensate and preserve our dream of marxist culturalism. Of perfect musical relativism. Guess what? It isn't true and the compositional talent and imagination displayed, which is all that counts in the end when we have to say what is worth being saved and what not, is infinitely superior in classical music than in any other form of music.If your shitty pop muzak is an 8 what the fuck are Beethoven's late string quartets? a 400? most music is barely a 1 to 3, the Beatles fall in here and so do most other popular music with very few exceptions that reach a 4, even a 5. Bartok string quartets would be a 6, 2 degrees of magnitude higher you have works by Brahms and other great masters. Then 9 and 10 are reserved for the highest achievements of human race like Beethoven's late string quartets or his Missa Solemnis or Mass in B minor by Bach or his Brandenburg Concertos.
>>123941544I tryed getting into classic a couple times, I didnt get it.on the other hand, I enjoy boomer rock a lot. no hate for anybody on my behalf, litsen to what you like
>>123941544Because I'm not a fedora wearing poser
im listening to classical music rn LOL
>>123941581what piece
>>123941694Feierlicher Marsch zum heiligen Gral aus Parsifal, WWV 111 by Wagner, S 450 (1882)liszt trasncription
>EVERYTHING I DON'T LIKE IS CULTURAL MARXISMhow are you any different from leftists who call everyone they disagree with nazis
>>123941581Rachmaninoff Concerto No.2 and 3 for today
because I wanted to listen to something else right now
>>123941544>Beethoven's late string quartets?Overhyped thanks to Adorno and pedantic K-words. His prime was around late-mid to early-late.
>>123941544why listen to something so boring when you could listen to Miku instead?
>>123941544But I am.
Classical music is great, but it fails to capture all vibes. It especially lacks in being concise, visceral, and unwilling to break with form even in its most experimental takes. Also classical is actually much easier to make, that's why composers have 100s of works. While there's popular music that's equally as lazy, there's also popular music that takes far more into consideration for various reasons like:1. You got a lot less to work with cuz you have to be concise; adding/removing parts is a much more important decision2. Your instrumentation is atypical relative to concerto, quartet, symphony orchestra setups3. The complexities of mixing, mastering, and production techniques in general
>>123942592>concise, visceralClassical can be both of these things, minimalistic and simple that is, Satie, some of Chopin preludes and Nocturnes, Mozart's Serenades etc.And even when it is complex, I mean especially* when it is not simplistic, it can evoke more emotions than any other form of music. You just haven't given it enough chance and time.>unwilling to break with formForm is fundamental to musical coherence. You can't have good music without form. Even the music you enjoy has that same form, but (almost) infinitely inferior, because of lack of knowledge about harmony and composition.>classical is actually much easier to make, that's why composers have 100s of works. That is utterly wrong. Classical composers study music for years, play on instrument daily for hours, from early childhood almost always, and they make music their primary job, that is why they can and do produce so much music. Now compare the amount of geniuses in classical music to the vast amount pop artists. Pop/rock music doesn't require genius mind, it's just dumbed down version of actual music. >You got a lot less to work with cuz you have to be concise; adding/removing parts is a much more important decision???>Your instrumentation is atypical relative to concerto, quartet, symphony orchestra setupsAbsolutely not. Each of these genres require careful orchestrarion and composition. Not every good composer was a good orchestrator. Schumann and Chopin for example(although the former was much better).>The complexities of mixing, mastering, and production techniques in generalRecording, producing albums is just as hard, if not harder for classical music. The time that goes into practice of each musician alone outweighs anything else.
>>123942592>vibes
>>123942592>it fails to capture all vibesNo, it doesn't. Classical music is everything from medieval ages to contemporary academic nonsense. It's the music that captures the most vibes.>lacks in being concise, visceralRomantic and post-romantic miniatures are both concise and visceral.>unwilling to break with form even in its most experimental takesThere are examples of completely formless classical music.>Also classical is actually much easier to make, that's why composers have 100s of worksThis is genuinely one of the most retarded things I've ever read on here, congratulations. The prolific composers worked on their opuses 24/7 for 30-60 years, and there are plenty of composers who only have a few works.>You got a lot less to work with cuz you have to be conciseSee above.>Popular music instrumentation is atypicalNo.>The complexities of mixing, mastering, and production techniques in generalNot a question of music or composition, so a moot point.
>>123942592kys retarded poptimist faggot
>>123942592Absolutely BTFO and annihilated by >>123943296 >>123943380 >>123943400
>>123943296Your examples aren't visceral, in fact they are the opposite. There isn't a superior or inferior form, but being stuck to one is limiting in creativity. Pop absolutely has geniuses, too. Classical already has orchestration considerations built out and rarely ever challenged nor shifted in the way popular music does it even with the same set of instruments. Instrumental practice alone is not the bulk of recording, there's a TON of action in the studio in the modern era that classical is too simplistic to use.>>123943400Long history does not mean most variety in vibes. There are large orchestral romantic/post-romantic works but they don't reach the visceral energy of even the most simple rock. The formless music is explicit in its desire to not chase form, which is different from working in a variety of forms not limited by tradition. Even if somebody works on their compositions 24/7, this is still quantity over quality, like those people who only make commercial ditties. Pretending that the things that affect timbre in recorded music isn't a question of music is as delusional as it gets.>>123943418>>123943470Lmao no real points or arguments
>>123941544I want to hear classical-type compositions made with SOPHIE sounds and production now...
>>123943545>Your examples aren't visceral,They are. What kind of retard doesn't feel at least a little bit moved by Chopin's 2nd Nocturne? Hell, it is the most normalfag classical piece and it's still damn good (although inferior to late Nocturnes and many other Chopin pieces)Satie's Gymnopedies is nothing but visceral. So much so that it is hardly appealing to classical listeners.https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=kzHNkD0iHbMAnd again, complexity only makes it stronger both emotionally and intellectually.>There isn't a superior or inferior formTo a human mind, there is. Hundreds of years of careful construction and adjustments to 'music theory' has provided us with fundamental principles which make music sound more satisfying to ear. These rules is why pop musicians even have their career, except that they don't fully study the rules and only learn bits and pieces which are easier to grasp.>but being stuck to one is limiting in creativity.Exact opposite. Limiting yourself to certain rules allows more creativity AND success. And as the other anon pointed out, there are formless classical pieces too, so you are wrong either way.>Pop absolutely has geniuses, too. lol.>Classical already has orchestration considerations built out and rarely ever challenged nor shiftedWrong. It changed a lot of times, and there were attempts to bring back the historically accurate(or rather, informed) versions, the so-called HIP recordings are out there and they sound vastly different. And I'm certain some post-modernist schizos utilized and arranged both orchestral and synth elements much better than any pop artist, however I don't really care about it.>Instrumental practice alone is not the bulkIt is the core and takes years of practice, if that is even to be considered while discussing quality of music.>there's a TON of action in the studio in the modern era that classical is too simplistic to use.None of which is really related to music itself, so try again.
>>123943868>They areIt's just chill wistful stuff. Satie isn't opening at the club or getting people moshing any time soon or truly exploring actual complex emotions/philosophies. Sounds like you're saying pop music further optimized classical theory, which I agree because it borrows while not being too enslaved to theory or too vehemently against it. I already mentioned my opinion on formless pieces. Limitation breeds creativity, but being stuck to the same forms/orchestration for centuries is stale. HIP performances are more for pre Common Practice, and even then the orchestrations don't change as much as between two pop songs that use a piano. It seems like I am talking to robot NPCs, cuz the other guy bitched about studio =/= music when it is fundamentally changing timbres themselves, to think that doesn't affect music is delusional. Like you can't go on about muh HIPs then say studios don't affect music when the later affects it at a greater level than the former.I actually like classical, but it's pseudo intelligence spewed ITT by NPCs like this guy that the music somehow attracts like flies. Like people who listen to classical to appear intelligent rather than actually liking the music.
>>123943938>Satie isn't opening at the club or getting people moshing any time soonOh, so you need a dancing music, should've said from the beginning. Mozart has dance music, then there are Ballets.>actual complex emotions/philosophies.Complex emotions are contained within each Bach's fugue or Mozart's concerto.>you're saying pop music further optimized classical theoryNo, I am not. What I'm saying is the exact opposite, pop only learned the surface level, just enough to grab the attention of shallow individuals.>it borrowsNo. It exists solely because of the said music theory. All the harmony, triads, chord progressions, voice leading stems from the classical masters.>but they don't reach the visceral energy of even the most simple rock. Says who, someone who hasn't listened to classical music beyond what, Four Season? Even Vivaldi has more "visceral energy" than any pop.>being stuck to the same forms/orchestration for centuries is stale.Already explained why form is a good thing and should not be tempered with, you are however, dumb. You couldn't even explain or sing a single Sonata piece to save your life, you have not taken enough time and effort to actually understand any of it. Already explained how orchestration changed and so did the timbral quality, which is by far the most diverse and more organic to human ears than any synth produced sounds.>and even then the orchestrations don't changeThey do change more than a pop song. In fact a single Brahms symphony might contain more textural diversity than entire pop sub-genre. The timbral diversity is more than enough in classicsl orchestra.>to think that doesn't affect music is delusional. It does affect the music. Think about that. It affects the MUSIC, which has to be GOOD in the first place, which is not true in the case of pop/rock music.>I actually like classicalYou only like the surface level, therefore I don't see any point in this dicussion anymore.
>>123941544bot thread, grim
>>123941544I prefer vidya music
>Bartok string quartets would be a 6stopped reading here.
>>123941544bc im not a boom boom.
>>123941544If I put on clasical music it wouldn't sound good because I would also be listening to rap music and I'd rather only be listening to rap music.
>>123945608Retard.
>>123943545>Long history does not mean most variety in vibesYes, it does. More music = more variety.>There are large orchestral romantic/post-romantic works but they don't reach the visceral energy of even the most simple rockThat's retarded and wrong and you're a rockist faggot who is a soulless robot.>The formless music is explicit in its desire to not chase form, which is different from working in a variety of forms not limited by traditionWhat are you even trying to say here? Every kind of music has a tradition of form; it's just that popular music is mostly simple verse-chorus or ternary form. It's even more "limited by tradition" than classical.>Even if somebody works on their compositions 24/7, this is still quantity over qualityNot necessary at all. Some composers have written nothing but garbage and some have mostly great works in their catalogues. Arguing in any direction here is futile, it depends. However, your "logic" that because (some) composers have 100s of works, it must be easier to make is absolutely retarded.>comparing classical music to commercial dittiesYou are absolutely retarded and a massive faggot and should kys.>Pretending that the things that affect timbre in recorded music isn't a question of music is as delusional as it getsNot really. Production has nothing to do with composition; you're not critiquing the work and its musical content here. Besides, recording classical music is a wholly difficult endeavor in itself.You may have addressed most of my points by replying, but you've said nothing of worth and have no real arguments, only delusions.
>>123943938>Satie isn't opening at the club or getting people moshing any time soonIf you think that's the entire extent of what "visceral" means, you're even dumber than I thought. Stop embarrassing yourself and stop posting because you're a low IQ bugman.>truly exploring actual complex emotions/philosophiesClassical music (with some very rare examples of exceptionally crafted jazz, folk, popular music) is pretty much the only kind of music that can explore complex emotions and philosophies. What the fuck are even talking about? What kind of music do you think is better at this than classical? Give examples so we can laugh.>Limitation breeds creativity, but being stuck to the same forms/orchestration for centuries is staleThe fact that you think classical music has ever been "stuck to the same forms/orchestration for centuries" proves what a gargantuan fucking retarded and historically illiterate faggot you are. You have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about, you are actually clueless to the progress classical music has made in all its aspects through the centuries and across all genres and stylistic movements.>I actually like classicalNo, you don't. In any case, you're clueless about its essence and history.>Like people who listen to classical to appear intelligent rather than actually liking the music.No one pretends to like anything. This is all just intellectual insecurity and fear of missing out because you saw someone appreciate something you don't get. Every post like this is pure projection and intellectual insecurity. You are a retarded rockist pleb who feels intimidated when people appreciate something beyond your ability to understand, so to protect your ego you conclude that they're faking it, that no one could ever actually like something that filtered you. You feel that way because classical music provokes an intellectual insecurity within you. It has nothing to do with others, only yourself. You are a fucking retarded faggot.
Classical isnt music, it's about as much music as african tribes' clicks and whistles and tapping sticks together. it's just people playing old instruments. it's deeply outdated. the only people that pretend to like it when much superior music exists now are tryhard larpers who want to feel le big brained and intellectual and superior.classical music is inherently limited compared to modern music. you may cope but this is factual. listening to it in 2024 is deeply cringe and antithetical to what music should be, which is progressing and building upon ideas that came before and expressing them in your own way. every good piece of classical music that can ever exist has already been written hundreds of years ago. it's obsolete.>inb4 youre le brown/redditor/trannyExactly, you listen to classical music because it fits the image you want to project and ties to your ideological beliefs. not for the musical quality. I care about music. you care about looking like a le refined intellectual.
>>123942232>>>/a/
>>123948349Shut the fuck up, retarded lupinfag spammer
>>123948349Low IQ pasta
>>123948415>>123948645Literally cant prove it wrong lmao, classicalfags are idiots
>>123948724In every crap thread you've made, you've been BTFO by several anons. You're obsessed, pipe down.
>>123948780More like every thread classical psueds screech autistically while i make arguments and facts
>>123941544Only live performances can do it justice so it's kinda limiting.
>>123949084What a retarded take.
Needs bass and beats.DnB > Trance > Metal > Classical
>>123949084>Only live performances can do it justiceWrong>so it's kinda limitingThat would make it better (more special), if anythingeither way you're wrong and retarded and gay
>>123945557>vidya musicNo such thinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgqrcW_bkPA
