classic and pop

[tommy]

hi all
I am new here and new to learning the piano.This looks like a great place for advice and discussion.The only thing that irks me is that a lot of folk here seem to disparage popular music.
I don't agree with this attitude at all.I think one of the problems is that classical music originated in Germany-the germans who are obessed with structure and method.Ever since the rest of western europe has been 'playing along' with teutonic seriousness,with straight expressons on their face whenever they play classical music.
There is also the question of class :playing music other than music that is 'highly' regarded by a certain small elite class is seen as vulgar,common.
But come on folks...lighten up!..Music is music!

[comme_le_vent]

i listen to alot of popular music, especially to chill out to. but the thing is - when your playing the piano and putting alot of work into the music - you want the music to reward you back - playing popular music is more boring, because its simply less rich in harmony in particular- thats why i still listen sometimes, but hardly ever play it.

but if you genuinely want to play pop music - you shouldnt be derided for it, and i do think the snobbish attitude of some people is pretty stupid.

[bernhard]

hi all
I am new here and new to learning the piano.This looks like a great place for advice and discussion.The only thing that irks me is that a lot of folk here seem to disparage popular music.
I don't agree with this attitude at all.I think one of the problems is that classical music originated in Germany-the germans who are obessed with structure and method.Ever since the rest of western europe has been 'playing along' with teutonic seriousness,with straight expressons on their face whenever they play classical music.
There is also the question of class :playing music other than music that is 'highly' regarded by a certain small elite class is seen as vulgar,common.
But come on folks...lighten up!..Music is music!

I wonder what would your response be to the following statement:

“I am new here and new to cookery. This looks like a great place for advice and discussion. The only thing that irks me is that a lot of folk here seem to disparage junk food and MacDonalds.

I don’t agree with this attitude at all. I think one of the problems is that haute cuisine originated in France, who are obsessed with stock, sauces and high quality wine. Ever since the rest of Western Europe has been going along with French food snobbery and dressing up to go to over expensive restaurants with small portions.

There is also the question of class. Eating food other than haute cuisine that is highly regarded by a certain small elite class is seen as vulgar, common.
But come on folks.. lighten up, food is food!”



Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[monk]

Hi Bernhard,

I'm a jazz pianist from Germany and have to fully agree with your answer!

Sometimes eating a burger is nice; and sometimes listening to pop music (or playing it) is fun. And dancing to it!! But mostly I prefer "haute cuisine" music: Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Hancock, Jarrett.

99% of pop music has very little to offer for a "music gourmet". It's just a wallpaper for the ears or an aid so that one can bathe better in one's feelings of love, depression, anger or whatever. Really good musicians NEVER play because they "want to express their feelings"; they play the music and are absorbed totally, so that in fact they feel better when playing (because they forget their shitty problems or love stories), even when playing a so-called "sad" piece.

Best Wishes,
Monk

[tommy]

lol.......thanks bernhard for the clever parody of my argument.But all I am basically saying is that it cannot be denied that there is a small,thankfully,very small group of people who have a condescending attitude to popular music for no other reason than it is not 'classical music'.
If it is bad to listen to popular music to the exclusion of classical music then I think it is equally bad to listen to classical music to the exclusion of popular music.If we get to the point where it seems that one must exclude the other then I think that something has gone wrong.
Sophisticated music can express base feelings and attitudes while simple chords and harmonies can express noble feelings and vice versa.
I must admit to being a little puzzled by monk saying that popular music is just a kind of sponge for soaking up people's emotional states not because I disagree with him but because of his suggestion that there is something wrong with a form of music which serves that function.
Tommy.

[monk]

Music is not for expressing feelings.

It's the other way round: Music is played, and feelings arise. They are different in every player/listener, although certain pieces tend to evoke typical emotional responses.
(But the emotional responses will probably totally different when the same piece is played, say, 100 years later!)

A musician who plays because he wants express feelings with his playing is usually playing inferior. Every really professional performer will confirm that. The only "feeling" (it is not really one) necessary for playing is being "calmly energetic".

Would it be different, the musician would have the problem that he would have to become sad first to perform a "sad" piece convincingly!!! See the absurdity?

And what are "base" and "noble" feelings? There are feelings I like or not; there are feelings other people like or not. But feelings are just natural reactions of the body/mind organism, and I can't see that one is more "noble" than the other.

Best Wishes,
Monk

[rachlisztchopin]

i fit into that group who hate popular music, the reason that group is so small is because there is so very few people who have an above average IQ and the majority of the people that do dont realize it...the reason i hate popular music is because its popular...the majority of humans are just average...its average music...now why listen to average music when there is good music?  and a lot of popular music goes against the laws of phsyics to produce noise with electricity instead of natural sounds, I just cant stand it...and yes i do listen to it sometimes (every1 gotta eat fastfood mcdonalds sometimes) yet i still hate it
by the way "music is music" thats true because music is sound...i could make disgusting noises with my body and it would be music (as well as noise)  i wont lighten up because music isnt always good music...i definitely have my reasons to hate pop music...by the way all those famous pianists who are trained by such as liszt fit into that category...its just a phase of being mature.. by the way we just hate pop music, not all music that isnt classical..i listen to any kind of music as long as its GOOD!!!!

[monk]

Hey rachlisztchopin,

your attitude is REALLY elitist and arrogant!

Do you hate all things that are somehow "imperfect?" Do you hate people with a low IQ? Do you hate people with ugly faces or a not-so-perfect haircut? Do you hate ant eaters because they are a dead branch of the evolution?

No, one can say that pop music is too boring for one's taste, but HATING it? Come on, you have a problem!

"...and a lot of popular music goes against the laws of phsyics to produce noise with electricity instead of natural sounds..."

That's just plain bullshit! Don't try to rationalize your personal taste with pseudo-scientific arguments! Electrically produced noised are under the laws of physics like every other sound! It's NOT POSSIBLE to produce a "non-natural" sound!

The problem with much synthesizer music is not the sounds; it's that most synth players are just not so good musicians - and because they get no foot on the ground on acoustic instruments, they obscure their deficits by buying tons of electric gadgetery.
Musicians like Chick Corea, Joe Zawinul or George Duke show that you can make really good, moving music on synths!

Best Wishes,
Monk

[Hazim]

Monk wrote:

Would it be different, the musician would have the problem that he would have to become sad first to perform a "sad" piece convincingly!!! See the absurdity?

But wouldn't you think that you can play a sad piece better when you are feeling sad?

In other words, I would like to ask you, when you play music, can your performance be really independent from how you feel? Can you always keep up the top quality of your performance? I do not think so! You must feel the piece you are playing!

And what are "base" and "noble" feelings? There are feelings I like or not; there are feelings other people like or not. But feelings are just natural reactions of the body/mind organism, and I can't see that one is more "noble" than the other.

I could not agree more! The feelings are the feelings, but I would like to add that, in my opinion, it is the CAUSE of the feelings that metter. The cause of the feelings is what makes the cathegorisation between the "noble" and the "base".


regards,

/H.

[monk]

No, you can't really play good if you are sad. Because your mind is not concentrated the way it should be, and your body hasn't the healthy tension that is needed for performing.

Yes, I must "feel" the piece I'm playing; but this "feeling" has nothing to do with extra-musical feelings like sadness, being enamored, being angry etc. Difficult to express, but I think the professionals here on the board will know what I mean ;-)

Best Wishes,
Monk

[nad]

No, you can't really play good if you are sad. Because your mind is not concentrated the way it should be, and your body hasn't the healthy tension that is needed for performing.

Yes, I must "feel" the piece I'm playing; but this "feeling" has nothing to do with extra-musical feelings like sadness, being enamored, being angry etc. Difficult to express, but I think the professionals here on the board will know what I mean ;-)

Best Wishes,
Monk

I know exactly what you mean    In fact I experienced it yesterday. I was really sad and depressed but playing in that mood doesn't do any good! Not even when you're playing a sad piece..

[comme_le_vent]

i prefer erudite/sophisticated music - a distinction has to be made though
by sophisticated and learned - i mean MUSICALLY learned - not intellectually.
there is a part of the brain that is independent from what we call general intelligence - that deals purely with music.
stimulation of this part of the brain is the prime importance when i listen to music, in reaction to the enjoyment of these pitch and rhythmic relations, i experience emotions.
music first - emotion second.

but emotion can affect your musical compositions/interpretations.

and therefore in this composition/performing state the process can be defined as follows -
emotion - music - emotion

[comme_le_vent]

whilst i enjoy both pop, folk, etc AND erudite music

i feel the dividing line between each is the conditions in which they are best enjoyed

pop music is best enjoyed while doing something else and/or enjoying extramusical aspects at the same time

erudite music is made for intent MUSICAL listening

and its rewards can only be recieved by devoted listening

with most pop music on the other hand, if you apply the same style of purely musical listening, you are left feeling bored and annoyed by the lack of richness

another analogy can be used -
one night stands, and making love with a lover

pop music has cheap thrills

but erudite music has lots more depth

[rachlisztchopin]

Hey monk, yes i am arrogant...is that a problem? I dont find arrogance a bad quality as many lowerclass people do...the reason for my arrogance is that i have watched the world for 15 years and i hate it...the majority of people dont use logic in their daily life, make fun of classical music, believe in Jesus severely as well as hell, are against such as I who are "over achievers" or "good boys", etc. I HATE IT!!! I have severe depression but i have a logical look on the world, I have thought about commiting suicide because of this crazy messed up world...luckily i am smart enough to stop myself and classical music keeps me alive...overall i am a very good person...I dont hate some1 because they have low IQ, i hate some1 because they dont use their low IQ to there full potential, I am not prejudice because some1s looks. for that is plain ignorance...i volunteer to help people who are mentally retarted...i am much like my mom who is a physician...i just simply hate normal people...and i am a very nice person in real life just to let u know so dont hate me...i dont make alot of friends because of my difference and shyness...well anyways u dont seem to be too understanding so why bother? i hope ur not one of those people who are against gay marriage
worst wishes,
ANT

[faulty_damper]

By "pop", you mean Britney Spears, right?

And by "classical", you mean Beethoven et al, right?

----

If this is correct, then I'm in the erudite side.  Pop is just that, popular.  Popular means inclusive of those within a standard deviation of the mean who like the music.  It is intentionally simplistic, short, and usually lacks multiple layers.  Pop music is not just about the music but the perceived life style of the singers - they don't just sing, they sell sex, promote drug use, promote violence, promote other dimeaning acts, etc.  Britney Spears promotes herself to the young girls and boys by showing how her breasts get bigger and bigger during her tours - she pedals sex and encourages 12 yr-old girls to follow suit.  Fifty Cents promotes violence against others as well as promote deviant behaviour and wealth by any means (sell drugs, stealing, murdering, etc.)  Pop music isn't just music, it's a life style.

This can not be said about classical music to this far a degree, though classical FM stations try to appeal to that standard deviation as much as possible by playing well-known composers: esp. Mozart, Beethoven, Hadyn, Schubert, Bach, et al.  Of course by doing this, the audience that does not fall within the "selling point" deviations won't be able to hear the music that they would prefer to hear.  But these audiences would prefer to go to concerts or have a large selection of recordings of works they want to hear.

[monk]

Accept my deep sympathy please, rachlisztchopin.

I didn't know you are mental ill. That explains your very odd and self-defeating views. I wish you that you find a good treatment so that you can love yourself and other people again!

Sorry, but as long as you are in this mental state, it makes no sense for me to discuss with you.

Really Best Wishes,
monk

[rachlisztchopin]

thanks monk, I am sorry for my mean response but I overreacted...I do that often because of my different views..I never speak my feelings and thoughts but I can definitely type them down when they come to mind
and yes faulty damper u bring a great point: by pop i mean music like britney spears thats just about sex and violence

[Hmoll]

Put me in both  the erudite, and "lighten up already!"  categories.

Love classical music. Know more about music than a lot of professional musicians (sorry, that's my erudite side coming out). I read about, listen, try to broaden my musical sensibilities be experiencing lot's of different types of music.

I do the same thing with literature - try to read classics, and quality modern literature.

There are times, though, when I want to pick up a mystery and read it, or put ABBA, Bob Dylan, or The Pogues on my CD player. And anyone who objects to that can stuff it.

[tommy]

Hi
nice to see and read all the replies to my original post.Very interesting range of views on the topic.Don't quite agree with you monk,saying that there is no point in discussing further with the rachlistchopin guy....he is mentally ill,not stupid and you often get more deeper insights on a variety of things from mentally people than the 'normal', whatever that is.
So to conclude I will just say keep up with the disciplined rewarding world of classica piano and music but don't be afraid to tell Beethoven to roll over now and then!
Happy Easter.
Tom.

[rachlisztchopin]

i have to agree with tommy there...im not stupid and i do have way deeper insight then the majority of people on subjects such as this

thanks tommy

[bernhard]

I've just read this on todays "Independent", and I thought it was somehow relevant to this discussion (not that I necessarily agree )

The leading British pianist John Lill has made a powerful intervention in the educaiton debate by criticising the lack of arts, and classical music in particular, on the curriculum at schools and universities and on the BBC [...] Lill began: "As Plato said, life without art is legalised barbarism. [...] I get annoyed that calssical music is described as elitist. Concert prices are high, but people don't complain about paying a fortune for football matches and pop concerts." The latter atracted further ire from him. "Pop mucus is not music. I find baging on drums and screaming for sex extremely insulting. Standards of melody have plummeted."


Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[comme_le_vent]

pop mucus?

somehow your typo seems apt

but i find his views rather stupid - anything with rhythmic/harmonic/melodic content is music.

pop music is music, banging on drums - yes they bang, but they bang out appealing rhythms...

some artists may utilise a timbre of their voice which may sound like screaming - when in fact they are actually singing - just with a different tone.

pop music is art, i dont dispute that

john lill should back up his useless argument that pop music isnt music.

and yes i have seen a john lill concert, really good pianist, but his views arent all that 'good'.

[monk]

pop music is art, i dont dispute that

Some pop music is art - a small percentage.

Happy Easter,
Monk

[rachlisztchopin]

well if we want to be technical: music is any sound made..it doesnt have to have melodic/harmonic/rhythmic structure to be music...maybe to be art, but not music
so i guess pop music would fall into to the category of music and it does have does have melodic/harmonic/rhythmic structure so it falls into the category of art too, but very simple art for the music usually just repeats itself over and over again for a structural form of A, A, A, A, A, etc and maybe a coda and introduction whereas u dont see any classical music with a form so boring and ordinary as that (scherzo for example: A, B, A but usually a very complex A B A with tiny letters within each letter (tiny sections within each section) so this brings me to this question: why is pop music so popular?  this is the reason why i made the comment on the majority of people being average with an average IQ...thats my theory of why pop music is so popular...they just cant handle complex art...and admit it: a lot of u dont like atonal music or bachs music because its polyphonic or just crazily complex...it might have to do with not being able to understand the music (im just now beginning to understand bachs music and just now getting into modern music) well i dont know what else to say on the topic but i would like to see ur thoughts on my theory
actually: wouldnt popular music be more interesting if it used more complex structural forms?  I would love to see a song written in A B A form or something even more complex (like A B A B1 C D E A B2 A B2 etc (this is the structural form of Schuberts op. 142 2nd impromtu))
I hope u guys understand what i mean when i use letters for structural form fore it is commonly used by composers and i am just begginning to compose

[bernhard]

pop mucus?

somehow your typo seems apt

but i find his views rather stupid - anything with rhythmic/harmonic/melodic content is music.

pop music is music, banging on drums - yes they bang, but they bang out appealing rhythms...

some artists may utilise a timbre of their voice which may sound like screaming - when in fact they are actually singing - just with a different tone.

pop music is art, i dont dispute that

john lill should back up his useless argument that pop music isnt music.

and yes i have seen a john lill concert, really good pianist, but his views arent all that 'good'.

It was not a typo. He actually said pop "mucus"  (I must remember that! )

As for backing his arguments, this was just a little note on the newspaper and the reporter just gave that small quote - apparently he was speaking at the lauch party for the Hampstead and Highgate Festival. So in his complete speech he may well have given well thought out arguments, but unfortunately newspapers can't really be bothered with that, they tend to just print the sensational stuff.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[comme_le_vent]

'well if we want to be technical: music is any sound made..it doesnt have to have melodic/harmonic/rhythmic structure to be music...maybe to be art, but not music'

this is just wrong!

[comme_le_vent]

you should check out some prog rock, they have more complex structures than usual.

why most people listen to pop music isnt because they are stupid.

there are so many reasons not to listen to classical music -

it is culturally forbidden, none of your friends like it and if you do like it they may treat you like an outcast

they simply havent been exposed to enough of it - to realise the range of emotion -
eg - before i got 'into' classical - i was into rock, and i realised after listening to the finale of beethoven's moonlight sonata, the intense emotions possible in classical music.

when you say intelligence your completely wrong - classical music is not greater because it is more intellectually stimulating - it is because it is more MUSICALLY stimulating.

some people havent got the musical capacity to enjoy classical music, it demands a trained musical ear, and more of an innate musical talent.

everyone who can enjoy music MUSICALLY to a great degree, already has a great musical talent.

being musical means your brain has a certain proficiency in some areas that others may not have(eg the aural cortex), but this cant be called intelligence - at least not in its traditional meaning - i just call it musicality.

there are other factors of course - you have to approach classical music with a certain sensibility if you are a newcomer, you have to understand that you need to be patient to be rewarded - many people dont think this way, so their appreciation may be stunted.

so id say the main reasons for people not liking classical music are-
cultural(most kids your age dont like it-so you dont)
musical(a lack of musicality)
frame of mindical(you need to be open minded)
taste(some people just dont like certain styles, and certain classical styles prevail over others in popularity - some people have only heard styles that dont appeal to them - i believe there is something in classical for EVERYONE that is musical, you just sometimes have to find it)

another thing - back to why pop music IS popular -

it is simply the most appealingy type of music to the vast majority of people, it is simpler, it is more immediate, it is culturally 'hip', many extramusical factors - such as britney spears' breats which invoke serious groinal pleasure if looked at for lengthy periods.

most people arent as musical as us classical lovers - they are actually better off listening to pop because it is more rewarding to them.

and i dont mean that they are less intelligent people, just less MUSICAL people(they have lesser musical capacity)

other factors abound - greater(at least less subtle) timbral variation, the BEAT which is dancable and brings people together in a ritualistic way to shake their butts.
etc etc

more people should understand this.....

[rachlisztchopin]

oh i understand...but ur contradicting urself..u are in a way agreeing with my argument that people with less musicality listen to popular music...i asked my mom because i was afraid u might be right about musicality not being an aspect of intelligence...well guess what? it is a big aspect of intelligence so u really are agreeing with my argument (my mom is a physician/a researcher of the brain: she would know, shes been to medical school for years...i must admit guys i do like popular music but i just think it is a disgrace to classical music...if you havent notiticed this yet: most intelligent people like classical music (but also like popular music just because it is simple but simple is still good) oh by the way classical music is great to dance too also!!!! i dance to it all the time!!  

[JustinTimberlake]

Ohh, I never care about what other people think. I just listen to the music i love. When people tell me that listening to either pop or classical is stupid, I just say: "It's none of your business. It just suits me and I like it very much. You should mind your own business.". Classical and Pop, who cares what they are? Just listen to what you feel like listening. People would treat me like an outcast if I listen to classical? Ohh please...it never happens to me. My friends just don't bother what I listen to. In fact, some of them who aren't classical lovers would just see what's in my CD player (most of the time, it's classical music), then they'd just turn it on and listen to it while studying.

[tommy]

Mr john lill is entitled to his views but in  saying something,like pop music,is rubbish he is not arguing any point but merely expressing his preference for classical music.
When he says that standards of melody have plummeted does he mean melody in pop or classical music?
As for his views on the lack of proper musical education in schools..well I don't want to get too political but I imagine one reason why many schools don't have funds for music education is because the ruling class that mr lill belongs to by the way,pockets most of the resources of this and other countries.
tommy.

[rachlisztchopin]

you are very laid back justin
i however must strongly defend classical music for i believe it is the most important music
another thing i hate about normal people (pop lovers) is when they say classical music is relaxing
IT IS SO NOT RELAXING!!!

[rachlisztchopin]

I get annoyed that calssical music is described as elitist.

I do believe that classical music is rather elitist while thinking about my theory

[faulty_damper]

Classical music is more about the music than pop music.  Pop music is not just about the music but about the lifestyle that the music accompanies.

Is there a "classical" lifestyle?  Not really.

Is there a "pop" lifestyle?  Absolutely!

So what?  Why is pop simplistic?  Because it must be.  It is just an accompaniment to other aspects like sex, drugs, violence, and whatever the pop music connects to.

Classical music does not do this.  Classical music is not associated with sex, violence, drugs, etc.  So because the focus is on the music, the music can be significantly more complex than pop music.

I think this explanation is sufficient enough since many of you are more intelligent than the pop crowd and can understand and inter-relate to your understanding and knowledge.

[rachlisztchopin]

Classical music is more about the music than pop music.  Pop music is not just about the music but about the lifestyle that the music accompanies.

Is there a "classical" lifestyle?  Not really.

Is there a "pop" lifestyle?  Absolutely!

So what?  Why is pop simplistic?  Because it must be.  It is just an accompaniment to other aspects like sex, drugs, violence, and whatever the pop music connects to.

Classical music does not do this.  Classical music is not associated with sex, violence, drugs, etc.  So because the focus is on the music, the music can be significantly more complex than pop music.

I think this explanation is sufficient enough since many of you are more intelligent than the pop crowd and can understand and inter-relate to your understanding and knowledge.

yes! iv been waiting for someone to say this! i was going to say it myself but u said it first faulty damper. ur absolutely right! we do classical music for the love of it: not for famousity or money

[faulty_damper]

Just to clarify, I made no judgement as to the difference of the two in the prior post but stating that pop and classical music are different and cannot be compared to each other as the same.

I also started a post responding to the question: what is music?  I haven't finished it yet.    It's a long post.  It explains why plants grow faster when Mozart is played and slower when rock and roll is played.  I wonder how Britney Spears fares... :-/

[japzz]

A little comment on classical elitists like Mr. rachlisztchopin (what's in a name....)

There is something really disturbing for me when I read comments on "pop" music by

classical music adepts,it's the complete lack of knowledge about what they call "pop"

music when they group all pop music under the Britney Spears umbrella.
It took classical music centuries to develop into what it is now and during all those

centuries a lot of different styles developped which are still played today :from

renaissance music played on original instruments to serial music played by ensembles

with traditional acoustic instruments AND synthesizers.So luckily enough there are

classical musicians with a mind open enough to incorporate electronical instruments into

their music instead of  considering electronic instruments as devices which produce

unnatural sounds in an unnatural way.(btw the person who made this statement,claiming

his high IQ,isn't that highIQed as he claims to be by making this statement).Also there are and have been lots of composers who got inspired by sounds and music they heard in the streets to create their masterpieces instead of continuing to observe their own bellybutton,staying in their small classicalmusic box with tons of rules about what and what not has to be done to create music which is comform to those rules.
So when I say :"I hate classical music",I throw centuries of music in the garbage can
,probably not knowing the difference between a Bach prelude and a string quartet by

Alban Berg.And by saying this,I put myself on the same level of tunnel-view as any

classical elitist saying "all pop music is inferior"
Instead I could say "I prefere chamber music to big symphonic productions although there are some symphonic pieces I do like" or "I like 19th century romantism but I prefer Schuman to Mendelssohn although there is one piece of Mendelssohn etc....".
As for pop music,same idea :"I like the weirdness of Robert fripp more than I like the avarageness of Britney Spears" or "I'm not a great Abba fan but I have to admit that they really knew how to build a good popsong"...."Anyone who followed a little bit the evolution of popmusic in the 20th century will agree that pop-music,like classical music, is a very general term for what we call  new orleans jazz,30ies bigbandsmusic,fifties cooljazz ,fifties RnR ,sixties pop ,psychedelic rock,soulmusic,funkmusic,experimental electronic dance s,I could go on... and off course a lot of commercial middle of the road stuff for large audiences.Just take some time to look at some interviews and programs on youtube about Leonard Bernstein and what HE has to say about this subject.
So dear Mr. classical elitist,before you make ANY statement about what you call "pop music" please do your homework first and listen to Beatles,Who,Yes,King crimson,Robert Wyatt,Radiohead,Zappa,Deus etc... and you'll discover there is more pop music than just Britney Spears or spice girls,maybe you'll even discover that pop-music isn't that inferior as you may think.
Or maybe you're just jalous at Britney Spears who makes millions by making fool of herself while you,playing the piano for 30 years each and every day for hours and hours,have to turn each dollarcent to be able to make ends meet by the end of the month.