Slightly different spin... Can you appreciate Bach?
Who?Bäuchlen?
So according to what you're saying, good taste is having the same taste as everyone else. I'm not gonna blindly say that something sounds good just because everyone else thinks it's good
The reason why Bach, Mozart and Vivaldi are great is because a lot of people have SIMILAR taste which is the social norm.
Anyways, some cultures don't even consider the "Great composers" as actual musicians. Because according to them, true music is something you only improvise, and it's looked down upon if it's arranged.
Everyone receives music differently which is why there is no such thing as good or bad taste. Bach and Mozart might mean something to you, but it doesn't mean much for me because I just think it sucks. No actually, Mozart might not mean anything for you either, but just because everyone told you that they're good, you followed everyone else like sheep and just convinced yourself that you like them.
Saying otherwise makes you a music snob. People like you are the reason why classical music is such An elitist genre, and deters audience. We don't need your kind.
Let me ask you this: Do you like Liszt, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Prokofiev, Alkan, Thalberg, or any composer for that matter? Chances are there will be one which you'll like less than another, say Bach.
What if Bach were the most unpopular music amongst us. And you would like it. Then, according to your statement, you would have bad taste and you are the reason for which so many do not like classical. Fucked up, isn't it?
Just because someone is different than the norm doesn't mean that this person has bad taste. It sometimes means the opposite.
Actually, I don't come from a musical background. When people in my environment(probably to be with the in-crowd)listened to rap & house I was listening to the Beatles. And it was only with the advent of the internet I discovered Classical music. Perhaps I'm even judging those people that were into house etc unfairly. I can see how some people don't really care about a good melody and they prefer a good beat but in your case it seems to be disliking what sounds good and going for a Rachmaninov, Cage or Schoenberg, coz you're 'so special', you're 'not a sheep'. Which in a way confirms that your reasoning for liking or disliking something has very little to do with the actual music.The pot calling the kettle black. If anything I'm the exact opposite. Ëlitists generally do what you do, dislike something that's 'too mainstream', whereas the general public are often afraid to admit they like classical music because there's been so much negative propaganda against it. Some won't even bother to take the time to listen coz they'd be worried what other people would think. Neither of these reasons has anything to do with music so I'd say a more accurate description of yourself
. No you do the opposite. No the reason they are great is because their music is based on universal principles of proportion and harmony etc that are pleasing to the ear. These principles can also be found in architecture(pyramids, Gothic cathedrals etc). So there is a reason why, at least with music lovers, this music resonates with people Name a composer that wasn't a great improviser as well?Actually, I don't come from a musical background. When people in my environment(probably to be with the in-crowd)listened to rap & house I was listening to the Beatles. And it was only with the advent of the internet I discovered Classical music. Perhaps I'm even judging those people that were into house etc unfairly. I can see how some people don't really care about a good melody and they prefer a good beat but in your case it seems to be disliking what sounds good and going for a Rachmaninov, Cage or Schoenberg, coz you're 'so special', you're 'not a sheep'. Which in a way confirms that your reasoning for liking or disliking something has very little to do with the actual music.The pot calling the kettle black. If anything I'm the exact opposite. Ëlitists generally do what you do, dislike something that's 'too mainstream', whereas the general public are often afraid to admit they like classical music because there's been so much negative propaganda against it. Some won't even bother to take the time to listen coz they'd be worried what other people would think. Neither of these reasons has anything to do with music so I'd say a more accurate description of yourself
I cannot speak for R-4, but you sure do sound like a snob
Isn't Rachmaninoff pretty maintream btw?
That statement is FALSE. Music is NOT universal. They're considered great because their music is based on WESTERN principals of proportion and harmony, and those principles are found in WESTERN architecture etc.
I'm still confused, is it to show how bad your taste is or is to underline the shitty composers you like?
All the above composers, with perhaps the exception of Thalberg coz I've never actually heard anything of his are captivating to watch performed, but to actually listen to...no thanksIt's a hypothetical statement, he's not and rightly so as I mentioned in my comment to R4ever. And again, the reason many don't like classical is for other than musical reasons. Being different from the norm is a good thing, coz that means you're not influenced by group-think.But say someone who wants to be 'special' goes around places that smell good and starts smearing those places with sh*t, if he said that smelt better would you say the same thing? Hmm, he is kind of special, perhaps he's got a point, maybe sh*t really does smell good and the smells that 'all those sheep like' are perhaps inferior to his special smelling sensitivity. He's right, dogs like sniffing sh*t too and their sense of smell is far superior to ours.Ok, I think I'm starting to understand where you guys are coming from, where your love for shitty music comes from Compromise...you don't have bad taste, you just like shitty music
This thread certainly took a turn for the worst.More on the point, though, I'm curious as to why its so specifically Bach. The previous example I had made was to demonstrate that, given a near identical style and no name, it wouldn't exact the same ire. The machine example was a musical form of the Turing test, a way of showing that, given the same formula as the real thing, a point is eventually reached where no distinction can be made.I also wonder if, given a Bach piece obscure enough to him (chances are that something in the 1000s or first few hundred of the BWV wouldn't be familiar), would Rach hate that piece, if unaware it was Bach? I sincerely doubt it would be very easy to glean the composer by ear.On a similar vein, I'd assume Rach would like something from the over 1000 works of Bach. Even a tune whistled would be something. I state this because I don't like Mozart, Alkan, and Brahms, yet I like at least one piece from each of them (The Requiem, Comme Le Vent, and Wiegenlied respectively).
This thread certainly took a turn for the worst.
How do we evaluate the worth of a piece of music? Can it even be done objectively?
I find it quite strange that anyone who claims to be a music lover would write something like this...Knowing that R-4 likes Beethoven, Scriabin, Rachmaninoff. Only one of them is dear to me personally, but still, I would not call any of them "shitty" I wouldn't call Bach or Mozart shitty either, even if I do share some of R4's views (although I may express mine in a more mature way due to my age).
Oh, where have I ever mentioned which music I like? You just shot yourself in your own foot lol, I love Bach. You call Bach shitty music?? Get it on pregnant dog
No they ' suck ' right? And it's not due to your age, but perhaps coz youre too snobby?Looking forward to your thread with 'Chopin sucks' or some other great composer coz that's after all what you're defending. I don't come here very often, for obvious reasons it appears(my 'kind' apparently don't belong here). And you and your buddies have a lot of sucking to do.
Actually though, I don't care how overplayed it is, the Tocatta and fugue in D minor is freaking awesome! That thing is something else man.
forte88 you're as opinionated as the person you're arguing against.. maybe you should suck up the fact that not everyone likes Bach, or Chopin.
I have read that Bach did not compose it, so that might explain why you think it is freaking awesome.Thal
You know how highly I value your opinion, now I'm not going to be able to sleep tonightProbably everyone has heard of him, but how many can actually whistle a tune of his?Or do you mean mainstream with conservatory pianists?It's actually ancient knowledge that wasn't just found in Egypt(if you can consider that western) but in South America and Cambodia as well. Universal as in mathematical principals found in nature and in the Universe. Just coz, thanks to Pythagoras, the western world was able to derive these principles into music doesn't mean it isn't universal. The universality refers to how it affects body and mind.I'm not on this forum very often, but the times I have been I continually see childish threads authored by your highness about blabla I hate Bach blabla childish nonsense. And then another thread with similarly retarded stuff on your hatred of Mozart. Ok, so if it's not to show how special you are what's the point of attacking composers that you probably know yourself a large portion of the music-loving forummembers are fans of?I'm still confused, is it to show how bad your taste is or is to underline the shitty composers you like?
The Bach that I did for auditions and the one that I'm doing for jury are the ones I like.Whenever I'm assigned a piece by Bach, I only play the stuff that I like from him. No actually, it's the stuff that doesn't hurt the most to play.
So, If I read that correctly, you do like a piece by Bach once you have played it up to sufficient standard to get a grip on it. You just don't like the ones you haven't done that with.I'd suggest you don't actually hate Bach at all, you're just a bit slow on the uptake.
No, I only play the ones that I like.
Yeah she hates Chopin. SO??? Sure Chopin is considered a "great" composer, but it's not a big deal! It doesn't mean she has bad taste, it means that she just doesn't like Chopin, period.
the walzes and mazurkas mainly, because I don't like that style of music.
It can. Fairly objectively. It can't get too precise though -- For two pieces that are close in quality you can't say one is a little better than the other.I had a professor who had a list of criteria. It's things like balance, development of an idea, interest from a new idea in the work, etc. Technical aspects.... Like writing for the instrument(s) in a way that might be challenging but not impossible. It does assume some things by using ideas like unity and balance, but... If you start a piece in one key and end in another, is that bad? Or if the style changes radically? Or if it's written in a way that's impossible to play... Isn't that lower quality composing?The interesting part was enjoyment wasn't part of that list. (I don't think it was. It wasn't the most important part of the list if it was.) Accessibility is from having a nice melody and a steady beat. If the piece isn't about those things, that doesn't make a it a bad piece, esp when that's purposely *not* the goal. That was a long time ago when I saw that list. I may have posted something about it before, years ago.
Things in 3/4 time?
Now that you mention it...I much prefer things in 6/8...
What you are talking about here is composition skills (and defined from a rather narrow perspective), I don't think it is what constitutes the worth of music. It's only one part of the equation.
What's the rest?
I DO NOT HATE CHOPIN He's one of my favorite composers...I just don't like everything he wrote (the walzes and mazurkas mainly), because I don't like that style of music.I apologize for not being able to express myself more clearly. I do have the excuse of writing on a foreign language though...
mazurkas have different (off-beat accent? or something, you feel it in 2?) than a valse
Am I the only one who thinks rhythm is a very important part of enjoyment in music and some rhythms are less enjoyable than others?
For some reason I especially dislike waltzes. I can only think of a couple of exceptions.
That's a couple more than I can manage.
Though I agree it takes time for them to grow on you (especially the mazurkas), but once they do, they're the greatest things ever.
Am I the only one who thinks rhythm is a very important part of enjoyment in music and some rhythms are less enjoyable than others? For some reason I especially dislike waltzes. I can only think of a couple of exceptions.
Obviously a very long time, if 30 years is not enough
Lol, fair enough. One of my favorite works by Chopin are mazurkas. I find it odd that you dislike his Mazurkas (well, most), pretty much all of his music in other forms are heavily influenced by Polish folk music. They're like the backbone of his keyboard language.
If really think about it, there are few dance forms I do like...minuets are often rather annoying also...but one of my favorite pieces to play is a gigue...