Best Ever Soundtracks

[mmichaelson]

YRH: I don't know if you have spelled his name wrong, but most people assume it is "shapely" and call him that, instead of "shapley".
(He says that his wife is the shapely one)

[Shapley]

Yes, Nicoel,

You've spelled Shapely in most of your posts.

V/R
Shapley

[rwcrooks]

Nicole,

I'm still a little confused by the definition of classical music. It seems as if there is an arbitrary cut-off at '20th century influence.'

I guess that I don't see much sense in calling Beethoven a classical composer and Stravinsky (he was surely 20th century influenced) not a classical composer because of the influences of their times.

Just as the Classical era composers broke away from the forms of the Baroque composers, and then the Romantic era composers, in their turn, from the Classical era, the modern composers are still composing classical music, but of a slightly different form than what had come before.

I guess that not having an extensive music education hampers my ability to discern between 'classical' music and an 'imitation' of classical music.

For the most part, I enjoy most of it (OK, not opera that much), but my listening habits tend towards the more modern when possible.

[Nicole Marie]

RichC, as I said before there is no ONE definition. Generaly we consider it from the time between the Medieval and Romanitc eras. With composer like Stravinsky, they began to break away from the traditional rules of composition and began to develop new styles. Yes, their base is the western/classical styles of composition but they really developed something different. And that difference has been now labeled as 20th c music. Yes it's still classical based, so Beethoven Radio will play it but it has a style all it's own. Remember it's not about how it sounds but the structure, the compostions, chord progressions etc. It's what is on the sheet music that determines where it falls.

Yes there were differences between the Baroque, Romantic etc eras. But today we are really seeing massive variations in music. Many of today's modern composers are developing something 100% different. (Take a look at a score, it looks nothing like what you would expect.) And composers like Stravinksy set the foundation for 20th c music. He IS the turning point for the neo-classical movement which developed the 20th c movement. Stravinsky payed attention to compositions from guys like Handel (for example) but he set out to develop something different. He called it "borrowing".

Of course there are exceptions. Some of today's composers stick to the traditions but there is a massive movement away from it and many of the soundtracks fit in that group. I really encourage you to take a music theory/composition class. Because it is what is on paper and the structre that defines it. I could make myself sound like someone else but it does not make me that person.

[Nicole Marie]

OK I just got home and came up with the perfect analogy....

On the way home I heard a tune from Aeorsmiths new album called "Honking on Bobo". It's a blues album that Aerosmith just put together. Now Aerosmith is a rock band, no argument about that. But b/c they do a blues album does that make them a blues band? No. It just means they were influenced and tried something different. Just like composers who are based in one tradition, try a style etc. For example, Glass a traditonal classical composer? No. He's 20th c with the classical influence. Stravisnsky... classical? No. Neo-classical b/c he was schooled in the tradition but developed a 100% new sound.

Does that help?

[Marye]

Oooh, the Toxic Twins do blues.


Scary

[rwcrooks]

Nicole,

Your prior two posts have started clarifying the whole definition.

Instead of looking at the 20th century composers as a subset of classical composers, the view is that they should be viewed as their own little universe. I guess that I can live with that.

But you know, this sort of reminds me of all of the 'millenium' discussions in which a small group of people insisted that the new millenium was to begin on 1/1/2001 because there was no year 0. Meanwhile, the other 99.5% of the population celebrated 1/1/2000 as the beginning. There was no way that anyone could convince them that they were wrong. I think that is happening with the definition of classical music.

My formal music education amounted to several semesters of classical guitar in college and private lessons in a couple other instruments. That probably exceeds the majority of the population. Since I didn't take any composition classes and don't understand the structures that you talk about, I find it hard to differentiate between 20th c and classical. I would venture to say that most members of the general public are in my shoes.

I liked your Aerosmith analogy, but if they put out a blues album, then they have written some blues songs (providing the songs meet the structure of the blues). A rock band playing blues songs is not a blues band, just as a rock band playing blues songs does not make the blues songs become rock songs.

Thanks for your help with the definition.

[Serenity]

What do you call 20th and 21st century music in the "classical" format nowadays?

[rwcrooks]

Serenity,

I guess that you don't call it classical. At least that's what I'm taking away from my conversation with Nicole.

Are you, too, one of the multitudes who have been led down the road believing it was classical music, only to find out that it's not?

[Serenity]

I don't know what else to call it; I call it what everybody else calls it.

[Nicole Marie]

(My head hurts)

Composer who are breaking away from the traditions fall in the 20th c category. Composers of today that still write in the tradition we generally lump in the neo-classical category. We are living in a really BIG turning point in music. Rock was invented, pop, the blues etc. For hundreds of years the main source of music was classical. Now all of the sudden we have all these different forms. We are still picking up the pieces. But most experts have figured out that there is a very distinctive groups of composers who are 20th c and the majority of today's music is in that category. Composers of today want to write something different. They want to develop their own style.

Attend a concert of modern composers. Many orchestras in the US will add a concert or two in the season that features composers still living or fresh in the ground. (joke) Buy a ticket and listen to it. Many of the concerts will also feature lectures that explain the music and how it was developed. And many times (if you are lucky) you can catch a lecture by the composer. Find out how they broke away from the traditions.

[rwcrooks]

Serenity,

Basically, there are two camps in this discussion. The first is those who are schooled in music theory and who can discern the differences. The second is the rest of us.

Sort of like stamp collectors who know the differences between commemorative, definitive, special issue and semi-postal stamps (which are all used for first-class postage) and the rest of the population who are only interested in the picture on the stamp.

Both groups of people enjoy the music (or the stamps) but at different levels.

[Nicole Marie]

Thank you RichC.

So I take it you collect stamps? I collect stamps from Europe and only save the ones I think are "pretty". I should really look into the value of them.

[redlover1]

Hey RichC,

Great analogy! I think you hit it right on the head! There are those of us that takes music with classical instruments that just sounds good (all in your manner of "taste") as classical and those that are the intellectuals ("purists") that can differentiate the various forms of said classical music. So it just boils down to your preferences...... and since we all listen to B-Com, we must "enjoy" listening to it all, right?

Devin

[barfle]

I have to agree with RichC here. Although I have nothing against knowing everything I can about music, how it is structured, how to make it come out of a twisty brass pipe or even a mouth, I come to music for its recreational uses. I enjoy listening to music, and I simply seek out what is pleasing to my ears. That undoubtedly differs from what is pleasing to others' ears (I cite Glass and the Revenge aria).

To that end, I'm almost exclusively self-taught. I know enough about sheet music to follow along, but certainly not enough to use it to make anything anyone would call music come out of anything more complicated to play than a phonograph.

So is it "classical," "romantic," "neo-classical," "modern orchestral," "orchestral rock," "American classical," "baroque," the name really doesn't matter that much to me. Does it sing, does it dance? That's what I care about.

I may not be an authority, but...

[BigJon]

Egg-Xactly! For the vast unwashed masses, it gets down to what resonates our Monkey Bone. Ralph Vaughn Williams' "Fantasia On A Theme Of Thomas Tallis" resonates deeply within my soul and it sure sounds classical to me. But I was surprised to learn that he died in 1958. So I guess he is a neo.

<Hijack Alert>
What else has Ralph Vaughn Williams done that is as moving as his "Fantasia On A Theme Of Thomas Tallis"? I'm looking to add a few CDs to the collection and I was thinking of getting a collection of his works.

BigJon

[Shapley]

Well, If I go the Tower Records store, and it's in the "classical music" section, then I reckon it's classical. I'm no expert, but they claim to be.

V/R
Shapley

[Serenity]

Originally posted by BigJon:
Egg-Xactly! For the vast unwashed masses, it gets down to what resonates our Monkey Bone. Ralph Vaughn Williams' "Fantasia On A Theme Of Thomas Tallis" resonates deeply within my soul and it sure sounds classical to me. But I was surprised to learn that he died in 1958. So I guess he is a neo.

<Hijack Alert>
What else has Ralph Vaughn Williams done that is as moving as his "Fantasia On A Theme Of Thomas Tallis"? I'm looking to add a few CDs to the collection and I was thinking of getting a collection of his works.

BigJon

Try Lark Ascending (tone poem) and the Wasps overture is good; they get played on B.com pretty regularly.

His Serenade to Music is a hidden choral gem.
His London Symphony is somewhat like Beethoven's #6.

His Symphony #5 is the most spiritual and the third movement (Romanza) is among his most beautiful.

I also like his Antarctica (Symphony #7) describing the harsh environment and the explorers struggle to get to the South Pole.

His Dona Nobis Pacem is a large scale choral work in the spirit of his 3rd symphony and Verdi's Requiem. it was written during WWI. Some of the sections are haunting, loud and martial, or deeply moving.

What do you know.....My first music post!

[Nicole Marie]

Shapely, don't use Tower Records as you base for musical education.

[barfle]

It's not "Shapely", it's "Shapley."