Jump to content

KStoertebeker

Members
  • Posts

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

KStoertebeker last won the day on April 9 2022

KStoertebeker had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About KStoertebeker

Profile Information

  • Gender
    NA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

KStoertebeker's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/15)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Popular Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges

17

Reputation

  1. As far as my experience with this forum(as a user as well as someone who read silently before) goes, this has been a one-in-a-time occurrence. Things got heated quickly, there were some misunderstandings and slapfights about semantics, but besides some minor taunts(which I took to be in the tone of the discussion and understood as such by the addressee), not much happened. Nobody involved poo pooed up other threads or seems to hold a grudge. Then again, it might as well have been closed before the first page break to prevent such slapfights.
  2. Just jump to 1:16, 6:48 and 12:32. I distinctly remember these sections because back then, when I could not stand this piece at all and would only listen to Bach and Telemann, I was still mesmerized by their beauty. Vivaldi's piece on the other hand would have bored me to death even back then, at least compare it to the Brandenburg Concerti or Telemann's quartets. Nevertheless, I was not talking about the whole work. Comparing a thirty-minute story to a short baroque concerto is not very fair. Yeah, I will not. It has been a quite a while since I tried to and all I could produce and finalize was a boring concerto in the Baroque style(I was 15 back then and inexperienced) and some awful fugues and minor exercises. Actually, I registered to get me back in the mood, but that has not happened yet. Ask me in a month maybe. You are taking this thread way too serious. We are three pages in and you are still trying to get a cheap gotcha out of somebody because Marx or modernism or whatever. Nobody is going to give you that, calm down.
  3. Have you ever listened to Schönberg's "Verklärte Nacht"? Its thematic and harmonic ingenuity easily knock Vivaldi's entire work out of the water(no offense to the Red Monk) and it still has many memorable, yet accessible moments. Maybe they will flinch at some point, but at least they are not bored to death by endless Ritornelli sections for two Violins. Why compare the two? Arch Enemy produces bottom-of-the-barrel melodeath(emphasis on the first two syllables) which is basically glorified rock music. Take a simple song structure, slap some blast beats on top and congrats, you have got yourself an AE song. Cannibal Corpse at least put some effort into their batshit insane lyrics and hilariously frantic riffs. They would prefer the former(if at all) because it is easy rock.
  4. No. 1: Nice short theme, I can almost smell the ridiculously oversized wig on the performer's head. The stretta in MM. 64 ff. is also nicely prepared. I really like how you insert free-flowing toccata sections. No. 2: What a strange introduction, reminds me of Mozart's "Dissonanzenquartett". The slower tempo has an air of Bach's pastorale for organ. No. 3: Starts rather conventional as well, but quickly takes a turn to something different. Great cadence into the Ebmaj7 in M. 18 and the picardy third on the tonic minor in M. 20 gets the sweet plagal minor cadence sound from the fa-mi and lo-so. MM. 25 ff. on the other hand have an infectious rhythm. The Cm sixte-ajoutèe and the fdim7 leading into a surprising Amaj7 are a nice touch(Haydn did something similiar once in a quartet). No. 4: Right of the bat, this sounds like the funky lovechild of Buxtehude and Stevie Wonder(in a good way). Those sweet jazzy chords and progressions: dimmaj7(M. 30), Maj7(M. 4)...MM. 9-12 are just pure voice leading, held together by the C# over a 9b2(as the third), 7#4(as the augmented fourth), m7b5(as the fourth) and a lush lydian augmented chord. M. 29 really tricked me into thinking you would give us a minor plagal cadence. By comparison, the fugue is rather tame. Nice how you let the introductory sections reappear in MM. 106 ff. and MM. 153 ff. respectively. Seldom can I brace myself for such a large-scale work, but I actually listened to your entire opus and read along. This is such a smooth marriage of fugue and toccata, truly a marvellous work, combined with anachronistically different pre-/interludes. Have you met with the organist yet?
  5. @SSC To me, it is more the presentation than anything. I have read master theses in under sixty-two minutes. He could easily have done it in less than half of the time and it reeks of self-importance. Granted, he is important to many a thousand people all around the world but still. At least give the viewer an idea of what is to come, you are not livestreaming the discovery of the world formula. @AngelCityOutlaw > implying that listening to Mozart makes you smarter
  6. @AngelCityOutlaw Tantacrul, just like Neely, is a lazy blowhard who sprinkles his rambling liberally with (leftist) buzzwords. This instantly reminded me of mouthbreathers like Contrapoints getting high on obscure trivia with their five-dollar words. One hour of video, five minutes worth of ideas, that was my main gripe. As pointed out by @SSC, music still is very much common practice period. Your studies at a university will be many semesters of counterpoint and classical form. You will not study melody because there is not much (academic) study to melody. Go, look it up, I just did it for our universities. Mostly, it is grifters/journalists from outside who push for change and seldom succeed. And who does even know Mahler? Mahler did advance the classical tradition to its pinnacle, yet people know Mozart, Chopin and Beethoven, not him. People like accessible, popular things and much classical music requires stiff attention to get pleasure out of it or you will miss the most of it. Tchaikovsky, Bach and Mozart have billions of views on YouTube, Stockhausen does not. You absolutely have to be a total sperg to think people have even heard of Schoenberg.
  7. Yeah, I have to stop you right there. Most people get into classical music through music education and I have never met a single person there, even among professionals, who is into serialism, even throughout the Boulez craze. Most people do not care about Williams or Holst either. It is neither leftists banning Mozart(this has never happened) nor stiff pretenders at Rieu's who are responsible for the public's lack of interest in classical music. You have to be on the spectrum to not get that classical music is an acquired taste. It is a niche.
  8. Exactly. After all, art really only is about meaning. Composing a mirror fugue for the most part is more of a technical exercise than deep introspection and many operas have no meaningful plot. Yet they often make up for that through intricate compositional devices. If a work has no personality or emotion, one should at least exercise his technical skills. This holds true for other genres as well. Best example: technical death metal. Batshit insane lyrics you cannot understand anyway paired with a wall of sound, but they still have nice grooves and scales going for them. I still do not understand what Tantacrul's problem is. Actively enjoying classical music beyond Rieu's hitlist will always have a high barrier of entry. That is true for all of art. I for myself do not care about painting at all, but not because hipsters ruined Monet. I just do not get it and it will probably stay this way.
  9. That is exactly what I mean. Of course one can just "hear music", but a duck could do the same, as Stravinsky (supposedly) quipped. Active listening is an integral part of the classical experience. With simple music, you get away with diverting your attention to something else. Just because aristocrats in Mozart's time were fools with too large a fortune on their hands and how Rieu plays simplified versions for the superficial masses, this does not take away the potential depth of classical music. I wonder why you think that "watching random garbage on youtube" is below reading but do not apply this scheme to music genres. Moreso since there are many genres in literature(Young Adult might be the most prominent) which might as well be below random YouTube garbage themselves. Kudos. I myself always recommend listening to reharmonizations of jazz standards to keep your vocabulary flexible and identifying or harmonizing sounds in daily life. Putting a tritone on that one annoying water boiler truely is the peak of modern art.
  10. One gets the most out of classical music by attentively listening to it exactly because of its qualities. It is a pleasure, but also a mental exercise, given the right circumstances. Taking one's time, listening closely, familiarizing oneself with the music are timeconsuming entry barriers. As most people do not care that much about music, they could never really enjoy it. Same goes for theater and literature. But by this standard, "The Big Bang Theory" and mac 'n' cheese would be most valuable because the majority does not care about better crafted alternatives. The entry barrier for Shakespeare is even lower since all of his texts are in the public domain, yet you need time and dedication to actually read one of his works.
  11. Interesting pedal point from M. 62 on. The rhythm in M. 2 seems to work when it is supplemented by a steady stream of sixteenth notes because otherwise it strongly suggests the preparation of a cadence, at least to my ears . In M. 14 and M. 46, I (aurally) stumble over it, but in M. 73 it serves as a perfect way to end the fugue, I think. This nitpicking aside, I could not spot any glaring errors. Really solid counterpoint and nice theme, as far as my (definitely rusty) fugue skills allow me to judge. A pleasant and skillful work for sure.
  12. It is almost as if classical music, despite all the progress in accessibility, still inherently is higher art which you need to invest time and dedication into where most people just want to have something to blare over them sitting on the shitter and this discussion has been about the former, not the entire music market. But surely, if it were not for Rieu cosplaying as an 18th century aristocrat, people in the back of the bus would be terrorizing passengers with Beethoven's "Große Fuge", maybe even some spicy "Gesang der Jünglinge".
  13. Yeah, but the question was why (untrained) people flock to classical music and why it is seen as artistically (not economically) valuable in comparison to other music. Well, because hundreds of years of music tradition have produced a loose canon of rules which allows us to write comprehensible, pleasant music. Mozart's music follows an intrinsic logic, just as Strauss' pompous waltzes, Desprez' motets and many more do. Of course, Ligeti, Stockhausen and even early modernists like Hindemith cannot fairly be judged by these standards, but they deliberately break with this tradition and, as you yourself noticed, are far less popular.
  14. @SSC Nobody cares about the LTV. Why would you determine the value of art empirically? How hard is it to accept that judging a composition based on rules emerging from hundreds of years of music practice is as objective as it gets? This discussion has been a rollercoaster of amusement and absurdity, you might as well tell us that a woman is anybody who identifies as one.
  15. @SSC Oh, you misunderstood me there. I meant that in terms of craftmanship, art music is more valuable than a simple pop song. Everybody can produce music, but the Western tradition is a distinguished discipline, built upon a long lecay. I personally do not care about symphonies(especially Beethoven's) at all, since I am more partial towards small-scale works. Still, I can admire the work involved in constructing such a work objectively. A simple song however, as it is easy to construct, can only be evaluated subjectively. I also do not care about popularity at all. I am always searching for apocryphic composers(a few I can recommend: Joseph Ermand-Bonnal, Jean Cras and Joseph Jongen) and seldom listen to the popular works. Not out of elitism, but because I am intrigued by compositions in the vein of Debussy's and Ravel's String Quartets for example. But, to return to the video, I still have to disagree. Andre Rieu is not elitist: he is the epitome of pop-classical pretentiousness, presenting shallow shows to everyone. At least, everyone can enjoy some Rieu. Elitism, however, I see in the works of Tantacrul himself and academia producing unintelligible music based on foreign (often purely mathematical) ideas. To enjoy these works, you have to be part of the musical elite. These works are vastly unpopular. Again: How can one call Rieu, who at least sells out overplayed classics to the common man, elitist, when he himself composes music most musicians would not even appreciate? This is some marvellous cognitive dissonance at work. If anything, works like "Herostratic" are at fault for classical music being percieved as elitist.
×
×
  • Create New...