Has there ever been a rock or metal album as interesting (formally, melodically, and harmonically) and as masterfully crafted as classical music tends to be?Is there a rock Metamorphosen? A metal Pathetique? Or are these things still waiting to be created?>inb4 my personal favorite albumBut is it as *great* as the classical masterworks?
>>129090510Jar of Flies is the closest, you could argue Appetite for Destruction i suppose
>>129090525Please tell me you're joking
>>129090510Yes.
>>129090510Holy wars mogs
>>129090635>Jar of Fliesi was really suprised by how good this was when i first heard it but my expectations were close to 0 to be fair
>>129090762It's a great album, I don't disagree. But it's nothing like classical.
>>129090510No, because compare to classical, metal usually doesn't have an ensemble behind to create the harmony you classicalfags love. Also, metal doesn't follow the musical language academic music uses. Therefore, stop asking retarded questions
>>129090786Your typical metal song has like 4 guitar tracks, a bass track, and vocals. And then possibly synthesizers.>metal doesn't follow the musical language academic music usesRomantic music doesn't follow the musical language that baroque music uses either.
>>129090786How many metal artists actually know music theory?
>>129090809Idk ask them, use the internet. Why do you keep asking retarded questions?
>>129090809How much do they need to know to qualify as "knowing" music theory?
>>129090510Ofc not. Classical(not the period obviously) is and will always be superior. Now you can close your shit thread and sleep tight
>>129090809the best modern guitarists are pretty much all prog metal players
>>129090510Funnily enough, you posted Tchaikovsky who is a supreme melodist but hardly a composer whose main interest lies in formal rigor or harmonic innovation.Anyway, your entire question rests on a false premise. You're comparing apples and oranges. Most popular music simply doesn't operate on the same structural level as most classical music, but you're asking it to be judged by criteria that belong to the classical tradition, i.e. large scale form, thematic development, long range harmonic planning, etc. There *are* metal and rock pieces that gesture toward things like sonata form or extended development, but you'd probably dismiss them as noise before engaging with them seriously anyway.I'm not here to tell you you're completely wrong. I *am* telling you to stop asking an asinine question. There's no rock Metamorphosen or metal Pathétique because the premise itself is incoherent. Popular music is structurally and aesthetically inferior to classical music in most of the dimensions we're working with here. That doesn't mean it can't be enjoyable, effective or even interesting.
>>129090982>you posted Tchaikovsky who is a supreme melodist but hardly a composer whose main interest lies in formal rigor or harmonic innovation.I'm aware of what Tchaikovsky's music is like. I've listened to it before.>There *are* metal and rock pieces that gesture toward things like sonata form or extended development, but you'd probably dismiss them as noise before engaging with them seriously anyway.Anon I listen to rock and metal. I'm asking in earnest.
>>129091016And I'm telling you in earnest: stop asking asinine questions based on a false premise.
>>129091035I just want popular, new (ish) music as interesting as my classical.
