Pop vs. classical

[jas]

Hi all,

Does anyone know any online resources about the relationship between pop music and "classical" music? I haven't been able to find out very much. And the number of books on the subject seems to be minimal. Any help would be much appreciated.

Jas

[prometheus]

They are both part of western music.

[Siberian Husky]

i doubt there are similarities or anything really interwtining these two genres..all music, regardless of its catagory or indentity shares a common element of sound..this is the only foundation i can give you, a foundation im sure your already aware of. Your best bet, in my opinion, is to read up on pop culture movements starting from even the 20's..Roaring twenties to be exact..and work your way up..disco..begning of rock..blues jazz hip hop etc...

the term Pop has had many forms...hell..when mozart when was composing and performing..people would flock to him as people flock to britney spears now..so back then..he was Pop music..this goes for liszt as well..the beatles were pop even though they were rock..jay Z is pop even though he is rap..etc etc..you might want to better clarify what your intending on disecting

[jas]

They are both part of western music.

Thank you, I'll bear that in mind.

you might want to better clarify what your intending on disecting

Well, really just where the lines between the two have blurred in the past 20 or 30 years. Pop music influenced by classical, artists who dabble in both, dumbing down of classical music, stuff like that. I realise it's a big topic! I'm trying to narrow it down, but until I get more information I'm trying to keep my options open!

Cheers,
Jas

[stevie]

by and large - classical = more complex, pop = more simple

randomly thats the most universal quality that seperates them, and still there are random exceptions

[alzado]

I did have one comment . . . don't know if it is very good or not.

I think when you say "pop" you might want to distinguish between pre-rock and post-rock.

Rock almost seems to try to convey the IMPRESSION that the musicians and composers are musically illiterate.  Actually, that's just part of the presentation.  So many rock singers sound like the last turning of a rusty hinge.

Rod Stewart did many very hard-rocking songs, but has recently done four albums of pre-rock "standards"  -- they have all gone platinum, I think.

On these pre-rock pieces he sounds like a big-band singer, almost totally different than in his rock hits like Maggie May.

He was recently interviewed and asked how he could compare his rock albums with his "old standards" albums -- pieces like "Stardust." 

He said the older (pre-rock) pieces were more complex, more sophisticated, and took much longer to learn.  In effect he was saying that there's much more to them. 

Rock is after all just half music-- and the rest is performance.  That is, "stagecraft."  This isn't intended as a slam, just an observation. 

Your question is hard to answer without some qualifying, because "pop" can mean almost anything.

He was interviewed recently

[jas]

Post-rock, I think. Well, progressive rock is the kind of thing I'm talking about, with its classical influences. Or, Nigel Kennedy playing Jimi Hendrix. Or where jazz fit into all this. Anything along those lines. It's the last 20 or 30 years I'd like to know about, up to the here and now. I've been alive since the mid-80s but was too young to register anything that was going on then! Plus, my knowledge of pre-90s music ("classical" notwithstanding) is pretty slim.
I've been googling but it's quite a difficult topic to find out about. I also have library books and journal articles and things but the thing about the internet is that it's more up-to-the-minute than books, so for the present time it's my best source of information. If only I could find it!

[cfortunato]

Maybe the distinction is fake, or at least arbitrary.  They both use major and minor scales, they both use chords, a whole lot from both genres revolves around 1-4-5.  Some pop music is pretty sophisticated;  and Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn, etc, all wrote some stuff that was singable and simple.

[[Rock almost seems to try to convey the IMPRESSION that the musicians and composers are musically illiterate.  Actually, that's just part of the presentation.]]

They aren't illiterate - just often self-taught.

I was self-taught myself, and was a rock musician BEFORE I took classical lessons.  And you know what?  I was originally surprised at how little many classical students knew about very basic theory: they are basically taught to read music and play what it says.  Rock n roll, on the other hand, is usually worked out improvisationally by the band.  So a classical student will play C-E-G because it's on the sheet, but may have no idea that it's called a C major, and that it has a special relationship to F major and G major.

I one had a guy who had taken quite a large number of lessons ask me, "How do you just know what to do?"  (He was the the backup pianist when I played in church - all three-chord stuff, worked out on the fly.)

I remember when I took my first theory class.  My reaction was:  "This is it?  How to build chords, and relationships and intervals?  But I know all that." 

Almost all rock and blues musicians - at any level - know theory, even if they don't know that they know theory.  Theyhave just picked it up.  By necessity, because improvisation is the foundation of what they do.

[rc]

Edgard Varese was a composer who pioneered electronic music. That's all I know. But you could probably do some research linking this guy with modern electronic music. The site I found says Zappa, Charlie Parker and the Beatles were inspired by Varese... That could be a good topic.

Give it a google.

Damn tricky subject!

Almost all rock and blues musicians - at any level - know theory, even if they don't know that they know theory.  Theyhave just picked it up.  By necessity, because improvisation is the foundation of what they do.

...So in short, musically illiterate

An illiterate person can still speak (I heard on the news the other day that some famous hockey-guy admitted to being illiterate his whole life), just not read signs or write letters. Because a musician can play doesn't make him musically literate. It's not such a horrible thing, the main handicap I can think of is that a musically illiterate person will have troubles communicating with those who understand the language...

[jas]

Thanks for all the insights, everyone! There's some really helpful stuff here.

The site I found says Zappa, Charlie Parker and the Beatles were inspired by Varese... That could be a good topic.

I knew about Zappa being classically-influenced, but not the Beatles. The thing about the Beatles is that someone like me (ie. someone who knows nothing about them) can't really include them in an essay without some serious research, because they're so well known! I'll do some research on Charlie Parker and Varese, though. At least I've got somewhere to start now!

Cheers,
Jas

[cfortunato]

I don't know about Varese, but I have heard that Eleanor Rigby was intended to invoke Vivaldi.  And of course, there is the baroque piano break in "In My Life."   I think the Beatles main non-rock influence was the British Music Hall, though.

[apion]

I don't think there's even a universal, uniformly accepted definition of "classical music."

[cfortunato]

rc:  Okay, so...ummm...you were using "literate" - uh - literally.

The nerve of you, using words as defined by the dictionary.

[brahmsian]

Check out Yngwie Malmsteen. Not only did he write a concerto for Electric Guitar and Orchestra, but most (all) of his licks are stolen from either Bach or Paganini. In the 80's there was a whole realm of metal known as neo-classical, basically people stole motifs or passages from classical composers and played them on the electric.

The first part of Malmsteens song "Adagio"(?) is a note for note rendition of Paganini's fourth violin concerto.

Also check out Paul Gilbert. He has a song entitled "Whole Lotta Sonata", which is the third movement of Mozart's K.330 piano sonata, and another called "Gilberto Concerto" (it's not really a concerto)..... I can't remember which piece it is based on. Another called B.R.O. (Bach Rip Off). There's some sweet shredding at the beginning, then he launches into Bach's Prelude BVW 926.

Randy Rhoads, Ozzy's guitarist in the early 80's also introduced many classical ideas into mainstream rock.

Jason Becker is another good guitarist to check out. His song "Opus Pocus" is kinda cheesy, but it is loaded with classical motifs. 

[rc]

rc:  Okay, so...ummm...you were using "literate" - uh - literally.

The nerve of you, using words as defined by the dictionary.

It was low, I know...

 

[prometheus]

Zappa, Parker, Becker etc are pop music? Doesn't pop mean popular? Doesn't it mean music eager to please?

If you are going to label everything western outside classical music as pop music; some of this stuff is occasionally much more complex than classical music is in general. And much much much less popular.

BTW, the best guitarist known to me is called Shawn Lane. Most major famous guitarists agree.

[musik_man]

Zappa, Parker, Becker etc are pop music? Doesn't pop mean popular? Doesn't it mean music eager to please?

If you are going to label everything western outside classical music as pop music; some of this stuff is occasionally much more complex than classical music is in general. And much much much less popular.

BTW, the best guitarist known to me is called Shawn Lane. Most major famous guitarists agree.

Pop is one of those terms that changes meaning based off who uses it.  I've seen some people label everything outside Classical as pop.  Others everything outside classical and jazz.  Others everything besides classical, jazz, and prog rock.  Among many other definitions.  It's not a real accurate term.

[jas]

Zappa, Parker, Becker etc are pop music? Doesn't pop mean popular? Doesn't it mean music eager to please?

If you are going to label everything western outside classical music as pop music; some of this stuff is occasionally much more complex than classical music is in general. And much much much less popular.

It depends how you define pop, doesn't it? What "pop music" actually means and the contexts in which the term is used are often two completely different things. And there are many who'll label all Western music that doesn't come under the pop/rock category "classical." For many people, the terms "pop" and "classical" are all-encompassing. In my experience a lot of the subcategories (not the main ones; the really, really miniscule ones) are arbitrary and just confusing.

Jas

[cfortunato]

And just to add another wrinkle, "classical" has no real definition.  It mean old stuff that's still around.  Pop music BECOMES classical music after a while.  E.g., I've seen John Dowland listed as classical music, and that was pure pop.

[superstition2]

Speaking of Rod Stewart... He's the perfect example of someone who is not a classical singer. Lol. He'd last 5 seconds in an audition.