(western) classical music discussion

[I_am_not_mafia]

Given the thread a rest until I get back home again, it's too much of a distraction.

Always worth watching this again

[Alex K]

Baha, love Spinal Tap

Gotta go, too, first pick up the kid and then do some editing!

[Minimalist]

You're missing out Min. There are many masters and master works in the 20th century.

Just gotta stretch those ears!

Rachmaninoff, Prokofiev, Stravinsky, Bartok, Copland, Scriabin for starters.

I've never heard anything by Rachmaninoff that tempted me to listen to it again.  Prokofiev wrote some decent stuff.  Stravinsky, Bartok, Copland, Scriabin, no.  I'd rather have my nuts crushed in a car door.  There's a Russian by the name of Glazunov who was not too bad and Schostakovitch's Leningrad Symphony is fairly powerful.

[Alex K]

Just checked out Scriabin and Copland on youtube, they do nothing for me but Bartok looks interesting. He's a name that has popped up before because of his string quartets.

I wasn't familiar with Scriabin until the Berliner Phil recently selected their new boss, Petrenko, and one of his performances with them, a Scriabin piece, to me sounded pretty impressive under his command.

https://youtu.be/DqVz7Y2k4YU

[Alex K]

What makes the piece from the BSG soundtrack additionally interesting to our ears is that it takes some inspiration from western classical music in the overall structure, but makes heavy use of north african and middle eastern elements, not only in the choice of instruments and rhythms, but also scales. The rhythm of the middle section seems to be a dance, towards the end, it's reminiscent of something african. If you strip away the use of exotic style elements, the work is, in my opinion, relatively simple.

Another striking, if quite disturbing, use of arabic/north african elements in a soundtrack which really affected me was this one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAxXoHWT...D9CE1D0461

Btw., how do you like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l055c5lJMt4

[bennyboy]

Not sure what the best way to describe tonal complexity.

"harmonic density"

I meant in the way that a modern composer will create whole new sounds using a wider variety of instruments in different ways.

"timbre" or "orchestration"

Sorry but yes I do personally find most of Mozart's and Bach's output to be too simplistic for my taste.

That means you do not understand it, espcially in Bach's case. You should develop your ear for themes and the ways in which they are treated by Bach, and you will find enough complexity to make your head spin.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Not sure what the best way to describe tonal complexity.

"harmonic density"

I meant in the way that a modern composer will create whole new sounds using a wider variety of instruments in different ways.

"timbre" or "orchestration"

All adequate words. Thanks.

Sorry but yes I do personally find most of Mozart's and Bach's output to be too simplistic for my taste.

That means you do not understand it, espcially in Bach's case.  You should develop your ear for themes and the ways in which they are treated by Bach, and you will find enough complexity to make your head spin.

Possibly. Or it could also be that the techniques that they developed have been mined by so many composers since to the point whereby they are no longer novel or interesting. You see the same thing happen with books, plays and films for example and so it's quite possible that it's difficult for me to appreciate how it must have sounded to an audience at the time.

The thing is that 'themes', it's a very literal mindset. Again this could be what I was describing about how different brains work differently and respond to music in different ways. For example Berg's violin concerto does nothing for me. I think I bought a copy before Alex K posted it but it was just discordant noise to me. Yet Prokofiev's violin concertos speak to me on a fundamental level in a way that no music ever has. Prokofiev himself can be quite atonal and discordant at times. Even Prokofiev's second symphony makes sense to me even though it is difficult to listen to, and the composer himself ended up wondering whether he had made a mistake when it first aired. Or maybe I'm just not ready for Berg?

I've listened to a lot of Shostakovitch for example, and he has his own theme based on his initials and yes I do spot it. I spot the themes in cinematic music easily enough, so I don't think it's simple enough to say that I don't understand it. But for me it's stylistic. It's like comparing prose to poetry. The former is an act of communication, the latter is an evocation of emotion even though it can be meaningless.

[Alex K]

Ever since I ve begun to more closely study and play Bach (still at a very basic level), other things I before thought were interesting now seem just bland and simplistic. Things by Bach I before thought were unremarkable open up in unexpected ways, like flavours in a wine or herb that you never noticed were there.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Yeah I'll be the first to admit that I'm not in any way knowledgeable about music theory. It's something that I would love to learn given the time, which I don't have. I'd need another lifetime.

I do think though that music communicates at a more fundamental level and my theory about is that it relates to firing rates of neurons in the brain. It's like learning about linguistics or literary techniques not being the same as being able to write powerful fiction. Obviously you need the full tool set at your disposal in order to fully express yourself.

[FebruaryOfReason]

I love these youtube videos with animated graphic scores of Bach's fugues. I find it's a very powerful illustration of how such apparent complexity was created from such simple elements*, and what skill must have been necessary to achieve that effect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOWi8tOf...tion_78634

*Worth noting for the creationists amongst us too. Not that they will note it.