Classical and Rock/Pop - Composers and Interpreters

[stormx]

Hi !!

When a Rock/Pop band ONLY play covers of well known songs, it is poorly considered. It seems that in this music genre, you HAVE TO PLAY YOUR OWN COMPOSITIONS.

However, in classical music, 99% of us just play other's music. Almost all famous pianists are just interpreters, without having ever made any composition (at most, they make some piano reduction). Of course, i am talking about XX century pianists.

I wonder why is this differenece in public appreciation...

My idea:

Clasical music is so complex and rich, that just interpreting it is by itself a highly creative work, needing lot of practice and musicality.
On the other hand, making covers of The Beatles (for instance) does not require the same amount of creativity and practice.

What are your thoughts on this subject?

[cfortunato]

[[Clasical music is so complex and rich, that just interpreting it is by itself a highly creative work, needing lot of practice and musicality.
On the other hand, making covers of The Beatles (for instance) does not require the same amount of creativity and practice.

What are your thoughts on this subject?]]

I think it's more familiarity.  Any piece of music is particularly good when heard a certain number of times, but played out after that.

The audience has heard Johnny B. Goode a thousand times.  But even a classical audience has only (say) Schumann's "Kreisleriana" a few times, or not at all, so it's fresher.

You will notice that classical musicians only play the ultra-familiar stuff like "Fur Elise" as an exception.  The Beatles catalog is ALL ultrafamiliar stuff.