why modern music is hardly accepted by audience nowadays?

[cmg]

Guys like Bach and Beethoven were, to some extent, firebrands relative to their own time periods' music tastes and expectations.

Strictly speaking, Bach wasn't a "firebrand."  He was reactionary and regressive in compositional techniques, drawing together the entire history of contrapuntal writing and demonstrating with every note how the "old ways" were still viable.   Even Bach's sons rebelled against his old-fashionedness, and became the harbingers of classicism.

Bach fell into neglect -- until Mendelssohn re-discovered him -- because of his reactionary approach to composition.  He was considered an old fogey.

Still, I think his "archaic" tendencies were shockingly avant garde for his times.  So, we do rather agree.  And we do definitely agree on the major thrust of your argument.

Sorry to nit pick.

[indutrial]

Strictly speaking, Bach wasn't a "firebrand."  He was reactionary and regressive in compositional techniques, drawing together the entire history of contrapuntal writing and demonstrating with every note how the "old ways" were still viable.   Even Bach's sons rebelled against his old-fashionedness, and became the harbingers of classicism.

Bach fell into neglect -- until Mendelssohn re-discovered him -- because of his reactionary approach to composition.  He was considered an old fogey.

Still, I think his "archaic" tendencies were shockingly avant garde for his times.  So, we do rather agree.  And we do definitely agree on the major thrust of your argument.

Sorry to nit pick.

You got me here. I guess I'm guilty of confusing Bach's later appeal with his in-life behavior and historical context. When I speak of Bach, I'm always thinking of things like the cello suites and violin sonatas vis-a-vis other baroque pieces. I'll be the first to admit that I'm no genius regarding that period but I know very well that Bach's influence reaches even the most sophisticated modern composers, so he definitely stands out amongst his peers for some important reasons.

[nanabush]

   I was reading back at your post about the music teachers at your school indutrial, and I'm in the same position.  Other than my teacher, and a clarinet teacher who is an excellent pianist, I'm the only one who has students doing the Royal Conservatory student.  I keep getting these students from other teachers who are on like the 4th method book, doing basic chords and hand positions; I give the kid some grade 5 stuff to play, and he has it in 2 weeks.  Annoying as hell when the owner of the place hires people who barely have the technique to play Chopin's Prelude in E minor (one 'teacher' was practicing this saying it was for her exam - grade 7 piano aahhgh)

   It's also annoying now because one student heard a teacher in another room playing the 'Hannah Montana'  music to her student... my student is like "oh I want to play that"... she buys the book, and I realize it's for at least grade 3... so now the girl and her grandmother are saying they'd rather play 'popular' music... but jesus you need at least some basics... I don't even think it was this bad five years ago; I barely hear any classical music being played, except by me, my teacher, and a couple of my teacher's advanced students. 

  If people are that against classical music (I'm talking about Bach, Chopin, and even 'scales' goddamnit), then I can't imagine them liking Modern classical music lol.

[healdie]

   I barely hear any classical music being played, except by me, my teacher, and a couple of my teacher's advanced students. 

  If people are that against classical music (I'm talking about Bach, Chopin, and even 'scales' goddamnit), then I can't imagine them liking Modern classical music lol.

I don't think people are against classical music atendances at classical concerts are up 44% in the last 5 years
i am doing a popular music course at college (the only thing they had music related) and my parents thought i would be isolated been a fan of the classics but i wasn;'t the other students (who all are into popular) more genuallyy interested in what i knew because thay had no exposure to classical music the teacher was trying to arrange a trip to see an orchestra and he asked the class how many people would be interested and i would say about 70% of the class said that they would like to see an orchestra as  (apart from me) no one had

so kids are not been exposed to as much classical music but now a few of the guys will oppen;y say that they like Bach and so on

I kind if feel like a preacher converting people and bringing them to the light

[general disarray]

I don't think we have to worry about converting the unwashed masses to Schubert or Carter. 

Art, of any kind, has never had mass appeal.  It never will.  In any major city -- like NYC, Berlin or London -- you have audiences for the most esoteric of things.  Why?  Because people who want more out of life and art have always gravitated to major urban centers.

I don't want to convert a "pop culture queen" to serious stuff.  Why bother?  It's like teaching a pig to sing:  it just annoys the pig and it wastes your time.

Relax.  Art will go on forever.  And the appropriate audiences will find it.  They always have. 

[rc]

Strictly speaking, Bach wasn't a "firebrand."  He was reactionary and regressive in compositional techniques, drawing together the entire history of contrapuntal writing and demonstrating with every note how the "old ways" were still viable.   Even Bach's sons rebelled against his old-fashionedness, and became the harbingers of classicism.

Bach fell into neglect -- until Mendelssohn re-discovered him -- because of his reactionary approach to composition.  He was considered an old fogey.

Still, I think his "archaic" tendencies were shockingly avant garde for his times.  So, we do rather agree.  And we do definitely agree on the major thrust of your argument.

Sorry to nit pick.

I've heard this view before, but then the Bach bio that I read gave a different impression.  It seemed that young JS began with the current music of the time and developed it to awesome levels.  It's just that he stuck with his style, and as he grew older the tastes of the time were shifting towards the rococo and style galant...  It's like how most people I meet of a certain age love G'nR and that epic 80's sound, I'm totally out of touch with my younger brothers music, and nobody likes the same music as their parents.  I'm pretty sure that Beethoven was also being seen as a relic in his later days.

The Mendelssohn rediscovery I'm less familiar with, but I think it might have been more about bringing Bach to the concert.  I think Bach was always fairly well known among the musicians.  CPE Bach's essay was very popular, and in it he gives a lot of high praise to his father.  Beethoven used the same essay with his pupils, and played a lot from the WTC when he was learning piano.  I believe Chopin also used to assign Bach works to his pupils...  In Mendelssohns time it was also more common for performers to be playing their own works, and less of others, no?

[healdie]

  In Mendelssohns time it was also more common for performers to be playing their own works, and less of others, no?

Mendellsohn became more famous as a conductor in his life than as a composer in his own right, he found more fame conducting the works of Beethoven etc than his own. He conducted a performance of one of the bach passions which led to the Bach revival in the concert hall, but because his conducting, and other various commitments Mendelssohns own compositions suffered as Hans Von Bulow said "Mendelssohn began life as a genius and ended a talent"

Also Chopin probably gave his students Bach to work on because his teacher gave him Bach when he was young, his teacher was very old fasioned and gave him the works of Mozart and Bach which at the time were very unfasionable

[danny elfboy]

I don't think we have to worry about converting the unwashed masses to Schubert or Carter. 

Art, of any kind, has never had mass appeal.  It never will.  In any major city -- like NYC, Berlin or London -- you have audiences for the most esoteric of things.  Why?  Because people who want more out of life and art have always gravitated to major urban centers.

I don't want to convert a "pop culture queen" to serious stuff.  Why bother?  It's like teaching a pig to sing:  it just annoys the pig and it wastes your time.

Relax.  Art will go on forever.  And the appropriate audiences will find it.  They always have. 

You're assuming too much there.
Are you interested in animation?
Most people interested in animation gravitate around major urban centers because the province is less likely to provide alternatives to the basic things either because the places are too small to get a big enough variety of people and the small number of people favours (to a certain extent) conformism and either because there's a lack of infrastructures. That being said is a person not interested in animation ignorant? Or to follow your analogy a pig impossible to educate?

There are so many art forms that to expect art to pass necessarily through music is crazy. And there's so much artistic music and music ideologies that to expect art in music to pass necessarily through schibert or carter or xenakis is twice as crazy.

[eastman_grad]

I've heard this view before, but then the Bach bio that I read gave a different impression.  It seemed that young JS began with the current music of the time and developed it to awesome levels.  It's just that he stuck with his style, and as he grew older the tastes of the time were shifting towards the rococo and style galant...  It's like how most people I meet of a certain age love G'nR and that epic 80's sound, I'm totally out of touch with my younger brothers music, and nobody likes the same music as their parents.  I'm pretty sure that Beethoven was also being seen as a relic in his later days.

Rather than judging by the contents of some book, I would advise looking at the music itself. There are many progressive features in the music of Bach, AS WELL AS refinements of earlier styles. As usual, it's not black and white, but rather a shade of gray.

[quasimodo]

I don't dig 'conceptual' art.
Art has got to be a means of transmission of something the artist has fundamentally inside him/her.
I love prokofiev, Shostaxovitch, Messaien and lot of others even some much more recent because they were not composing in the mere idea of experimenting but really with the intention of expressing themselves.
"modern music" is too often disconnected of that of that personal dimension of artistry. some folks just decide " today I try this or that " as a concept but they have nothing else to say.
Mind you, it's not only in modern era that it happened. But it happened much more in modern era. Innovation is great but not just for the sake of innovation. It's got to have a 'humanist' content.