The next step in classical music

What do you think will be the next big step/evolution in contemporary classical music? Will be any new significant kinds of harmonic/tonal languages developed, or will new instruments/timbres become more common? Is there even still room for significant innovation in music? Do you think that the role contemporary classical music has in our society will change any time soon?

Has there really been any significant innovation in classical music in the last 50 - 60 years that has resulted in every classical seat being sold out? I'd really like to see the genre become more popular again. And I will applaud the composer that brings audiences back into the concert hall. To me, that would be the next big step/evolution of the genre.

I don't think an innovation in classical music can make it more popular. This is because (in my thinking, at least), an innovation is an addition to the sum of the preceeding styles of a tradition; so to understand a piece, you need to be well versed in all classical music since it is likely to reference previous aspects of classical music, overtly of covertly. In other words, as you accumulate more aspects in a genre, you increase the amount of learning required for its appreciation, and thereby decrease the number of its appreciators.

That's a real simplification but I think most modern classical composers, regardless of what school they belong to, are inspired by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven etc. to some degree. That means, to understand the work, you need a knowledge of contemporary classical AND 18th century music.

So, I think any advancement of art in music may stem from popular music. I've made my views clear before but I think that mixing and production are the new equivalents of orchestration, drawing excitement out of dull melodies. I think that's a good jumping point for an advancement in real art.

As a separate point, I *hope* that the "advancement" is a change in emphasis so that originality, progression and development are not the sole purpose of new music. I love/hate Beethoven for his influence on music. It seems to me that since his time, composers have become more and more interested in being new and different. Beethoven's emphasis on self-expression seems to have seeped away from the classical tradition somewhat over the years; I hope the same happens to his emphasis on innovation.

For me, music is best when it's slightly detached from the world around, and keeping up with technical aspects of genre is very much an Earthly activity for me and can only distract from my enjoyment. Just think of the modern compositions that truely affect the non-musician. They are few in number but they exist. I consider that to be good art; and the rest to be a kind of science.

So to answer your question: no idea.

I agree that classical music should learn from popular music. I find it pretty strange and anachronistic that most contemporary classical music in the 21th century is still written for 100+ year old acoustic instruments. I would love to see more acceptance for electronics. Also there should be singing styles other than the classical/opera style, I personally find the singing in popular styles often to be more expressive and natural. Sadly, most people from academia I know, know little to nothing about styles other than classical and don't seem to be interested in changing it,so I don't know if this will ever happen.

I don't know that much about the 20th centuries classical music, but it seems to me that a freedom to do anything you wanted to, was at some point in the early 1900's introduced, and ever since then people have moved in different directions, but the audience has kept it's love for order, and as such they don't like the new music that breaks with the traditions.

Well, since the Rite of Spring, many people have composed more modern pieces. However, many people ALSO still try to write music that sounds like music from 200-300 years ago. I think that the next step is really not something we can guess. I don't really know what is going to happen. I just hope that it won't be going back to 200 years ago style! (Because I really don't like that style of classical music, except for Haydn's music... I like how he changes and surprises you, unlike, say Mozart.

But all and all, you really don't know what will happen until it happens!

Well, since the Rite of Spring, many people have composed more modern pieces. However, many people ALSO still try to write music that sounds like music from 200-300 years ago. I think that the next step is really not something we can guess. I don't really know what is going to happen. I just hope that it won't be going back to 200 years ago style! (Because I really don't like that style of classical music, except for Haydn's music... I like how he changes and surprises you, unlike, say Mozart.

But all and all, you really don't know what will happen until it happens!

If I absolutely had to make a guess at who could possibly be the next revolutionary music figure from what I know now, (a guess I wouldn't like to make) I'd base it on who thus far has shown extremely exceptional early development a la Mozart because in my mind that early talent which typically eclipses much older but more experienced composers suggests something substantial.

The only person I can think of is the one who was the youngest to win serious 'recognition' with ASCAP and other awards, his name is Graham Cohen.

The thing I fear with young exceptionally talented composers like this is that they receive inadequate or dangerous ideological training which closes their mind, thus cutting off opportunities for full individual growth. Lessons should guide, not inform or make decisions for young composers.

What do you think will be the next big step/evolution in contemporary classical music?

Wrong question, I think. What we actually have learned in the last 100 years about music is that no one style is any more significant, advanced, or practical than any other. What Native American cultures did/do in music is no less significant to us than Beethoven, Mozart, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Hindemith, etc. So, the real question to ask is, how do we progress individually, educationally, or as a culture with this information? What will we do with all these different traditions of music?

Will be any new significant kinds of harmonic/tonal languages developed, or will new instruments/timbres become more common?

We're past that already. Actually, I'm convinced that the term "tonality" has taken on an entirely new meaning for us. It no longer refers to just Baroque, Classical, or Romantic periods of music. The idea of tonality, the notion that pitches and pitch combinations create perceptual relationships via intervals, is really the basis for what we call "The Tonal Language" anyway. So, any breakthrough regarding harmony is the understanding that no work of music is entirely devoid of tonal implications. Relationships are going to occur, some of which will be heard and processed differently by listeners.

Is there even still room for significant innovation in music?

"Innovation?" Not really...

Creativity? Certainly!

Do you think that the role contemporary classical music has in our society will change any time soon?

It better, or it won't last. The problem, as I see it, is intellectual minds of music universities seem to think it's important to distinguish contemporary music from other music. This is counterproductive in a great many respects, because these "other" forms are already incorporating music from everywhere else. You'll hear many "contemporary" techniques in film scores. You'll hear far more folk and world influences in pop music. The emergence of such diversity will only continue to overshadow the approach many academic minds take toward music composition.

Times are changing. Universities are no longer competitive in offering music education to the masses because music is so clearly abundant, as is education in music. Go to your local library and actually look at some of the books on writing and studying music that are available for the cost of checking out a book. You could even read some of those books in the library without having to even check them out. Where before, music was taught in a master/apprentice relationship, today it's -learned- by those who are interested in it.

Narrow mindsets and indoctrinating students who study contemporary music into accepting this divide of "intellectualism" in music is only harmful. Closing minds off to forms of music outside of the academic realm only bolsters these "other" forms of music, allowing them to overtake university offerings. So, I think the biggest change that will take place in society will be the reallocation of music education in the university system or its gradual removal from academic study to more "technical" approaches, however you think of the "university" system in America.

Well, since the Rite of Spring, many people have composed more modern pieces. However, many people ALSO still try to write music that sounds like music from 200-300 years ago. I think that the next step is really not something we can guess. I don't really know what is going to happen. I just hope that it won't be going back to 200 years ago style! (Because I really don't like that style of classical music, except for Haydn's music... I like how he changes and surprises you, unlike, say Mozart.

I didn't like mozart when I was your age either; give it another 10 years :D

If I absolutely had to make a guess at who could possibly be the next revolutionary music figure from what I know now, (a guess I wouldn't like to make) I'd base it on who thus far has shown extremely exceptional early development a la Mozart because in my mind that early talent which typically eclipses much older but more experienced composers suggests something substantial.

You may well be right but you're answer is a bit of a tautology. If you find a "kid that's really good", that implies you already know what "good" is, meaning you already know the new direction of music. In other words, a revolutionary prodigy can only really be recognised after he/she has had their effect on music. And for the record, I don't think recognition with ASCAP really qualifies.. as you can tell from my comments on classical training and tradition.

Wrong question, I think. What we actually have learned in the last 100 years about music is that no one style is any more significant, advanced, or practical than any other. What Native American cultures did/do in music is no less significant to us than Beethoven, Mozart, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Hindemith, etc. So, the real question to ask is, how do we progress individually, educationally, or as a culture with this information? What will we do with all these different traditions of music?

I think this is untrue. Beethoven *is* more significant to me. And to the Europeans of Beethoven's time, Beethoven was more significant. And the word 'advancement' is used to mean 'progression' or 'change' rather than a value-judgement. And it is clear that music has been changing/advancing - or I think it should be phrased: the musical taste of Western culture (or in later times, the classical musician subculture) has been changing.

Narrow mindsets and indoctrinating students who study contemporary music into accepting this divide of "intellectualism" in music is only harmful.

I agree - well, I think *overall* it's harmful; it's not *only* harmful.

well, obviously, me.

next!

I think this is untrue. Beethoven *is* more significant to me. And to the Europeans of Beethoven's time, Beethoven was more significant. And the word 'advancement' is used to mean 'progression' or 'change' rather than a value-judgement. And it is clear that music has been changing/advancing - or I think it should be phrased: the musical taste of Western culture (or in later times, the classical musician subculture) has been changing.

I think it's time to come to terms with the idea that Western Classicism is not the only bad donkey on the block and hasn't been for quite some time.

There's a LOT of interesting music out there you'll never learn about in university. That's my point.

Tbh, I don't care what becomes popular, I'm just going to compose what I want.

I think that the next step in most of the arts that were once public and for many people (concert halls, theater, etc etc.) is to start to make the experience customized and individual.

Nowadays you really don't HAVE to go to an opera to see one, you don't really need to go to a concert hall to listen to music, etc etc. So, technology allows this culture to be delivered to your home, and thus we should be expecting a shift to focus more on that. Does it mean concert halls are doomed? No. But it means that they'll lose even that last bit of the importance they once had and for good reason.

There is also just too much music, composers, artists, etc. There is simply not enough physical resources and space to have everyone have their music played period and this goes hand in hand with people not having the time to go to these events and that culture is delivered to your home. In that sense, the next step is not a musical thing but more of a shift in how culture gets around.

Due to that shift however, maybe innovative musical practices may arise. Who knows? Such as an opera for just 1 person in the audience. I wouldn't be surprised one of the next big things is the integration between music and things like games and interactive electronic media. Sure this already exists, but there's a lot of bullshit preventing it from really going anywhere.

And really now, if it were up to the "modern" crowd we would already be exploring musical Jupiter, however it's because of the conventions set by the old models that were once useful that scraggy progresses so slow. After all you have to listen to Beethoven orchestras or Penderecki threnodies in an orchestral hall, but that takes up room and resources that could be devoted to other things. Personally I don't mind ye old music but when it starts choking what could possibly be necessary innovations and improvements they have to go, at least the requirement and need for spending so many resources on performing old warhorses. If anything those could be the first to make the leap (hell most people now watch opera DVDs since it's sort of hard to find a local performance of a specific opera, so that's already starting.)

Besides, the space reserved for the Beethovens and Puccinis is effectively entirely off-limits to new composers anyway (we can't all have our personal orchestras, nor can we beat the warhorses in popularity and $$,) the only reason they're still around is as a public service to people who want to try to relive the time where listening to the music that was the ONLY way. Yeah, as much as it may be great to listen to Grieg live, I would gladly give all that away if it meant that we can start seeing some progress and updates in regards to how the world is at present.

And really, I think it's inevitable with the latest years being a culture-producing boom that keeps on expanding as more and more people grow up with the notion that they don't have to just consume but they can also actively produce it. Something has to give.

Maybe music will take a 2001: A Space Odyssey kind of step. Like...music, but without the sound part. :P

</bad joke>

If I absolutely had to make a guess at who could possibly be the next revolutionary music figure from what I know now, (a guess I wouldn't like to make) I'd base it on who thus far has shown extremely exceptional early development a la Mozart because in my mind that early talent which typically eclipses much older but more experienced composers suggests something substantial.

The only person I can think of is the one who was the youngest to win serious 'recognition' with ASCAP and other awards, his name is Graham Cohen.

The thing I fear with young exceptionally talented composers like this is that they receive inadequate or dangerous ideological training which closes their mind, thus cutting off opportunities for full individual growth. Lessons should guide, not inform or make decisions for young composers.

Okay...... You will not believe this.... I am Graham Cohen!! :lol: :lol:

The last part of what you said is true... people often don't get what they need in composing. My parents, lucky for me, don't do that. They let me write what I want, and make sure I hear different kinds of music

I feel like he knew that...

Well maybe.. who knows?

A rather tired topic ... only comments I agree with is SSC. In fact I have said some of things SSC said in some thread from months ago.

Music is organized sound. The only thing you could ever ask a composer why did you organize it that way? Aside from the many who don't really know the answer to this, the thoughtful, conscientious minority realize what unimaginative monkeys they have been a good deal of the time upon close study of their works reveals how slavishly they followed the models and affections of the past.

PS Exan - don't ever get too starstruck by awards. Heckel writes very well for his age but there is no guarantee how well he'll do when he is 24, he may choose to pursue another career and maintain composing (if at all) as a pleasant hobby.

What you say is so general that it's true (the first 2 paras), but it's not helpful. I don't think that the OP's question is a bad one, just because it's asked a lot.

Actually it is helpful.

If you continue to compose after reading my prior post than you have it in you to overcome the main stumbling block of all composition: TRYING TO BE INNOVATIVE FOR INNOVATION"S SAKE (heck it is even a bane to stay current just for the sake of avoiding sounding like an anachronism).

That is why the thread is not such a great question - look what such an obsession led to in music with the advent of the Industrial Revolution - basically leading Western music back to a similar situation as in the 14th century except with different, much fancier technology.

But to be more helpful, the next advance in music is as man makes advances in robotics the technological changes from this will have profound impact on music creation and making. Think about it - enhancements to our hearing to hear sound spectra presently undetectable, possible enhancement to the brain to take in sound in completely new ways. WHo knows how long this takes (well as long as we don't blow ourselves up or humungous asteroid doesn't obliterate life) - 50, 100, 500, 1,000 years. But this is about only innovation I could see arise in composition.

Haha, now that is a good answer. Cyborgs!

:sith:

PS Exan - don't ever get too starstruck by awards. Heckel writes very well for his age but there is no guarantee how well he'll do when he is 24, he may choose to pursue another career and maintain composing (if at all) as a pleasant hobby.

Hmm... Well I like to cook and like weather but I doubt I'd be going on Iron Chef America with 7 famous over the top dinner places and an MD in meteorology. :happy:

Heckel - you never know. Really you never know what direction your life takes as you cultivate new interests or attend to ones you hadn't focused on. You'd be surprised how many aspiring musicians choose to keep it as an avocation after their first year or two in college or upon graduating conservatory. At the Oberlin Conservatory I saw a significant amount of grads change direction to go to law school, business school or entered the workforce to explore other career interests. On the other hand I have met Oberlin alumni who were teaching at Peabody and elsewhere and took a year off to work a regular 9 - 5 job before returning to school to get their graduate degree there.

In fact, since work is a little quiet, I will find out what some of the winners of the your award do know.

Or maybe the classical music of the future will be based on pure sinusoides, pink, brown, and white noise. Organ-ised, of course! LOL!

Do you honestly think Wagner and Mahler KNEW what they were getting into when they propelled the romantic? Do you honestly think Stravinsky and Schoenberg KNEW what they were creating when they propelled the modern? Do you honestly think Cage, Carter, Adams, and Reich honestly KNEW what they were doing when they propelled the post-modern? It was the historians that called Beethoven "The first romantic" and historians that called Duke the "most influential" of the jazz artists of the 20th century. They didn't know it in the act of composing what influence they would have.

Music always lags behind or is way ahead of its time, it is never in line with history exactly. Thus, to predict where we're going is impractical. We can hardly agree were we've been and where we are let alone where we're going.

Just write. Let the musicologists figure out the macromusical picture.