BachRules

How much did they pay for the tickets?

What are you basing this information on? Same to you. It doesn't really seem like that; nor is my personal preference relevant, as my point was only about the preference of people in general. Same to you. I doubt that. Which statements? It's really just that your interpretation of my statements is incompetent.

What are you basing this information on? That says more about you than it does about me. Right. I'm basing it on my experience. Are you denying it? If so, what are you basing your denial on? Your university? Your next-door-neighbour? Something you read on the internet? In the papers? Are you just assuming? or making stuff up? What? Everyone who has musical preference -- but I didn't say it should be appealing to them, I just said that it doesn't appeal to them. Why should it appeal to them? But I never said it should.

In any case, I'm not blaming atonalism "for turning away" my "potential audience", and I'm with the many people who see it as mostly irrelevant (except when the government taxes us to fund grants for atonal music, and except when reddit music-theory mods censor me for not liking atonal music). I understand there are atonal composers who are able to compose tonally, but I still believe that is an exception, not the norm. I don't know how you mean "classical music" above. Orchestral music is important to movie-goers, whether they realize it or not. Without their orchestral soundtracks, I doubt Star Wars, Titanic, and countless other movies would have had the same appeal. Producers, I think on behalf of the people watching movies, are paying real big money for tonal soundtracks, and rarely atonal. Tonal dance anthems.

It depends on your definition of "drivel". I didn't say or mean that.

I've read the book and two others by him, and I didn't take them as signs of any ability. But how highly are their tonal attempts valued outside of academic circles? And realize there are exceptions, so was speaking only to a general tendency. I've been paid for my compositions by people outside of academic circles, and your assertion here "sounds like a very broad assumption with no bases behind it." How much are people willing to pay for atonal music? What is its market value? But Picasso appeals to many outside academic circles, so it doesn't really seem akin. It depends which jury you ask, and if you ask the jury of people outside academic circles, atonal music is virtually worthless. I don't know what you mean by this. There's an inbred, bureaucratic, academic world which often engages in folly, pouring resources into programs with no value outside academia; and then there's a world outside academia, where music is valued according to people's individual preferences, and you never hear anyone demanding atonal music in this real world. If you want to record the sound of someone vomiting and call it "music", I won't argue that your music is "invalid" -- and some bureaucrat in government or academia will probably award you with a grant for it. I'll just point out that your "music" appeals to no one outside academic circles.

By "fanning the flames", you mean admitting our opinions? By "denigrating" you mean criticizing? If I built a car that's dangerous to drive and tried to sell it to people, and you tried to warn people how dangerous the car was, would you be "denigrating" me? I don't know exactly what the original poster meant, but when I say "disabled", I mean atonal composers tend (with exceptions) to be objectively (not a matter of opinion) unable to compose music which appeals to anyone outside academic circles.

Yes, people who compose atonal music tend to be compositionally disabled, and even if their lives depended on it could not compose anything that appealed to anyone outside academia, I would be willing to bet money. Reddit's MusicTheory mods will ban you for admitting it sounds bad. What kind of music requires censorship like that -- only bad music.