People still get mad for calling a piece a song?

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I was walking to class today and I overheard these two people talking.  One of them was a pianist and the other one was just a normal dude.  So apparently the pianist was showing him some fire on his iphone that he finished learning and the other dude was like 'that's a pretty song'.

Then the other dude gave him a whole few second lecture about why he's wrong for calling it a song and made a big deal about how he thinks he's the sh*t cause he can play it.

...
...
...

WHO CARES???  Dude I'd freaking play the living daylights out of whatever you were showing him and I'll still call it a song!

It's 2016!!!  We can send robots to Mars, detect gravity waves, and 3d print sh*t from our phones but we STILL get mad over someone calling a piece a song?

[visitor]

I know right?!
I would tell him, its a song [for piano] in your hands since you can actually make the instrument sing .

[thalbergmad]

Anyone who uses that expression should be immediately put to death along withh all their family in order to stop the bloodline.

It is a sign of feeble mindedness and warrants extermination.

Thal

[outin]

You are only allowed to call it a song if you can actually sing it!

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Anyone who uses that expression should be immediately put to death along withh all their family in order to stop the bloodline.

It is a sign of feeble mindedness and warrants extermination.

Thal

Damn dude it ain't THAT serious

[adodd81802]

.

[briansaddleback]

Anyone who uses that expression should be immediately put to death along withh all their family in order to stop the bloodline.

It is a sign of feeble mindedness and warrants extermination.

Thal

I'm sure you are cynical of this, but in the end, you will be judged, not by your actions per se, but according to your intent, heart, line of thinking..and what you could have acted upon if you were given that sort of power in your feeble life.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I'm sure you are cynical of this, but in the end, you will be judged, not by your actions per se, but according to your intent, heart, line of thinking..and what you could have acted upon if you were given that sort of power in your feeble life.

Dude he's joking...

[iansinclair]

So... Beethoven's 9th symphony is a song?  Please... or should that be written pLease these days?

[tinyking12345]

IMO calling a piece a song is a bit like calling a viola a violin...
they are 2 different things...

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Dude it's not even that big of a deal.  Who cares if someone calls a viola a violin?  Just be like oh that's a violin.

I still catch myself calling piano pieces songs and I'm studying this sh*t.

If it has nothing to do with the convo you don't need to get all superior and snobby about it.

[timothy42b]

IMO calling a piece a song is a bit like calling a viola a violin...
they are 2 different things...

No they're not.  It's just that viola players have a smaller head. 

[worov]

So... Beethoven's 9th symphony is a song?  Please... or should that be written pLease these days?

Well, I don't know if it is a song, but there is some singing in it.

[minor9th]

Much like "motor" and "engine," song and piece are not interchangeable.

[jimroof]

Anyone who calls all music a song is just showing their lack of understanding and knowledge.  It personally bugs the daylights out of me, but if someone heard me play the piano and then said "That was a beautiful song" I would just nod and thank them for the compliment.

However, if they heard me play and said "That song sounded like someone just dumped a crate of crescent wrenches on the floor of a large public restroom", I would probably lecture them on the topic...

[timothy42b]

Much like "motor" and "engine," song and piece are not interchangeable.

Yes they are.

 However, concrete and cement ARE NOT SYNONYMOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, I'm an engineer.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Anyone who calls all music a song is just showing their lack of understanding and knowledge.

FALSE

My former teacher has a freaking masters in piano and he still calls pieces songs.  I'm a junior in music school and I'll still call pieces songs.  I use them interchangeably.  Depends on the situation.  

Do we have a lack of understanding and knowledge?  No.  it just means that sometimes we say song and sometimes we say piece.

It's like sometimes I'll use double negatives or say ain't or finna.  Sure it's 'incorrect' but who gives a sh*t?  You still know what I'm talking about.

[thalbergmad]

FALSE

My former teacher has a dreaming masters in piano and he still calls pieces songs.  

He could have 85 degrees and 6,000 letters after his name, or he could be illiterate, but it is still wrong and always will be.

Thal

[visitor]

He could have 85 degrees and 6,000 letters after his name, or he could be illiterate, but it is still wrong and always will be.

Thal

sort if like saying banjo =guitar =ukelele
which is not ajd sadly have heard some dufases use

[rachmaninoff_forever]

He could have 85 degrees and 6,000 letters after his name, or he could be illiterate, but it is still wrong and always will be.

Thal

But I still know what he's talking about.  If I know what he's talking about then there's no problem

[rachmaninoff_forever]

sort if like saying banjo =guitar =ukelele
which is not ajd sadly have heard some dufases use

Dude calling a banjo a guitar doesn't warrant for any music snobs to be like *snort snort* 'actually that's a guitar you uncultured swine' *snort snort*. Like Jesus it ain't that damn serious.  You guys are putting the emphasis on HOW someone says something instead of WHAT they're actually saying.  I could've made some incredible discovery about how to practice a piece and if I call it a song in my explanation does that discredit me?  No that's stupid.

As long as the message gets across there's no problem!  It's not like I'm writing a masters thesis or anything.  It's everyday conversation.  If I call a guitar a banjo, that might be a problem cause that'll be confusing.  But whether I decide to call a piece a song, there's no confusion, you'll still know what I'm talking about.

[thalbergmad]

But whether I decide to call a piece a song, there's no confusion, you'll still know what I'm talking about.

For people with a command of the English language, there would be confusion when you decided to perform your song and failed to sing.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

sort if like saying banjo =guitar =ukelele

It irritates the crap out of me that many people remember George Formby because of his ukelele playing. On 99.9999999999% of his recordings he played the banjolele.

Thal

[rachmaninoff_forever]

For people with a command of the English language, there would be confusion when you decided to perform your song and failed to sing.

Thal

Psssssh

If you go on stage and say something like

I'm gonna play a song

Nobody's gonna think you're gonna sing

Unless you say sing a song

[thalbergmad]

I have little doubt that in America your assertion is correct.

Thal

[eldergeek]

For me, it is not really a matter of "Do I get mad if people call a piece of music a song?", but much more a question of "If this person is so lazy that they cannot be bothered to learn to speak correctly, and use correct terminology, then do I really have any respect for anything they say?".

Personally, for me, the answer is usually "No". I don't make a fuss about it, I don't get mad; I just tend to ignore them.

I usually do the same with people who start a speech with the word "So ... ", people who say "amount of ..." when they should say "Number of ...", and people who ask a waiter "Can I get ..." (to whom the correct response is clearly: "No you can not get it! I can get it for you - that is the purpose of a waiter.").

The amount of time I save by ignoring such people allows me to devote much more time to serious occupations

[Bob]

It's an easy way to tell the person probably doesn't know much about music.

[ahinton]

Sorabji once urged a pianist about to perform his Opus Clavicembalisticum to think of it as a song; now bearing in mind that this devastating 12-movement 250+-minute monsterpiece was once described by Ronald Stevenson (who knew well of what he spoke) as a work of unremitting contrapuntal complexity relieved only by transcendental virtuosity, that makes it quite some song indeed!...

Best,

Alistair

[Bob]

One distinction I can see is a music player calling each track a "song."  Still off, but in that case it's a track/song, and if the software refers to tracks as songs, I can see the person using it following that too.

I'm trying to think of an analogy.  Part of it esp. is when it's your area.  I remember someone getting annoyed when I referred to a truck as a car.  If I was in the automotive industry or was a cop, than I could see it being an issue.

The easiest thing is just to call everything a piece.  No thought necessary.

I'd call it... ignorance, maybe common misuse of a word, but if you've studied music it's just being purposely inaccurate.  Piece is better than song, but even sometimes that's not quite as accurate as it could be.  Maybe it's just an excerpt. 

[thalbergmad]

Sorabji once urged a pianist about to perform his Opus Clavicembalisticum to think of it as a song; now bearing in mind that this devastating 12-movement 250+-minute monsterpiece was once described by Ronald Stevenson (who knew well of what he spoke) as a work of unremitting contrapuntal complexity relieved only by transcendental virtuosity, that makes it quite some song indeed!...

Best,

Alistair

Screech would be more accurate than song is this instance.

Thal

[chopinlover01]

The area I'm most forgiving is with Lieder arranged for piano solo, IE Liszt Erlkonig and the like.
Come to think of it, much of Schubert's music is somewhat "song like" in its quality; the piece coming to mind being his G flat impromptu.

[ahinton]

Screech would be more accurate than song is this instance.

Try doing that for over four hours...

Best,

Alistair

[theholygideons]

Try doing that for over four hours...

Best,

Alistair

No.




That is why John Ogdon ended up in a mental asylum.





The black space in between my sentences is actually what John Ogdon saw in his consciousness after he had finished playing Opus Clavicembalisticum. All he saw and could remember was not the notes, but just the colour black.





How do I know? I was the doctor who treated him.

[ahinton]

No.




That is why John Ogdon ended up in a mental asylum.





The black space in between my sentences is actually what John Ogdon saw in his consciousness after he had finished playing Opus Clavicembalisticum. All he saw and could remember was not the notes, but just the colour black.





How do I know? I was the doctor who treated him.

I have to hand it to you for the sheer consistency of your BS. That said, BS it most certainly is, as I'm sure many people here reading it will realise and those who don't ought to be told.

For starters, John Ogdon did not "end up in a mental asylum".

Another important fact that you fail to recognise is that the time that John Ogdon spent receiving medical treatment both postdates and predates his work with Opus Clavicembalisticum; he was given a score of it by Peter Maxwell Davies in aound 1955/56, at a time when PMD himself had just orchestrated the work's first two movements (and no, I don't yet know what ever happened to that) and Ogdon recorded the work from the mid-1980s onwards. How do I know the latter? Because I was the executive producer of the recording and heard every note that he played on it, in addition to a few runs of Busoni's Fantasia Contrappuntistica which he chose to play as a warm-up piece for sessions.

Either stick to writing about things that you know or write nothing; your choice.

Best,

Alistair

[abielikesu]

People who are not into classical music, will say "song". I would normally tell them "jokingly" that nobody is singing, so calling it "a piece" would be more appropriate.

Abie.