Thread: Classical Music vs. Modern Music

Well, I know there are a lot of people out there saying that classical music is the only real musical "art" out there, and I know I alot of you are going to jump all over this saying "What's the difference, it's just a different style... etc." basically everything that has been said before. That being said, why has classical music been strong from it's conception to now? You don't hear many people listening to 40's music unless they were born in the 40's, and people generally stick to their era in terms of "modern" music.

Why do you think this is?

Classical music just seems...timeless. I could put one piece on repeat and listen to it all day, but with other stuff I can barely stand to hear it more than twice a day.

Classical music NEVER sounds good. Modern music sounds good for about a month, longer if it is a good song. This is probably because I was born in the 90s though...

Actually plenty of young people listen to music of the 40s around surrounding decades. I went to a Jazz festival a couple of years ago to see McCoy Tyner and Pharoah Sanders play, both of who played with John Coltrane in the 50s. There were stacks of young folk there. I know people my own age who love Sinatra and his contemporaries.

But anyway, i think the sheer profile of classical music has something to do with it. I mean think about it, apart from folk music, every other form of music has only existed for about 100 years. Classical music has been composed for hundreds. It's the music of the west's past. It's not something that's going to be let go of.

I'm going to assume that by "classical" music you mean anything done by orchestra, band, piano, organ, chamber groups, etc. that doesn't have a "modern" feel to it, instead of the classical period of music(mid 1700s to early 1800s).

Actually, I'm a fan of both types of music(if it can be reduced to 2 types). Although, I tend to listen to more "modern" music(although some of it being very classically influenced). Sometimes I just like to put on some Debussy or Brahms and chill out though.

I think Ardent has it right. It is the music of the west's past is a great way of putting it. That being said, I love when modern and classical are mixed, such as in symphonic metal. It is awsome to me.

Originally Posted by Ardent Lost

Actually plenty of young people listen to music of the 40s around surrounding decades. I went to a Jazz festival a couple of years ago to see McCoy Tyner and Pharoah Sanders play, both of who played with John Coltrane in the 50s. There were stacks of young folk there. I know people my own age who love Sinatra and his contemporaries.

But the whole point is you don't listen to Sinatra all the time. Just because you visit Africa and like the music doesn't mean you get into it.

I think it has something to do with the work that was put into it. I don't think it would have been so prolific if the artists did not put so much time into it, even to the point of becoming riddles. Johann Sebastian Bach actually composed fugues purely as musical puzzles: He took one melody and inverted it, scaled it, layered it, put it in canons and so forth, and then had his student decipher the composition by un-inverting, scaling, layering etc. until it was just one melody being played by many instruments and voices.

Also, the sheer amount of work produced means it is virtually inexhaustible as a musical resource. Also, playing one of these compositions is more of a team effort than anything in music.

But here I pose another question: Even if the average middle-high schooler doesn’t like classical music (A general assumption) he still puts up with a lot of it in the movies. Granted this isn’t “classical” music in the true sense, but I doubt it would be all that distinguishable to him. Anyway, at the end of almost every trilogy, there is a cantata composed for the movie, or at least a choral piece, and everyone eats it up, whether they like classical or no. Thoughts on this?

Classical music has that timeless quality about it because it's complex and has depth. Back then you had to be well-educated to produce fine music. Now any bimbo with an acting or modeling career can become a "musician".

Originally Posted by Vance

But the whole point is you don't listen to Sinatra all the time. Just because you visit Africa and like the music doesn't mean you get into it.

I'm not sure i understand what you're saying here. People do listen to Sinatra all the time. There are young people everywhere who listen to nothing but Duke Ellington and Charlie Parker, Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald. Anyway, it's not important, i'm just sticking up for Jazz