0586: "Mission To Culture"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
starabo
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 9:34 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby starabo » Thu May 21, 2009 12:34 pm UTC

T-D wrote:
Jourdy289 wrote:Viola has a much larger range.


Nonsense. The violin's compact body gives it much better aerodynamics. Try more of an overhead whipping motion, you should be able to get about twenty extra yards.


Brilliant. But I reckon on a yard-for-yard comparison the Oboe has got to be the winner for distance. That is, assuming, you use the 'javelin' technique as opposed to the 'welly-toss'.

I just wouldn't want to be the tubist.

--
Starabo

User avatar
6453893
Posts: 557
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:40 am UTC
Location: Australia

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby 6453893 » Thu May 21, 2009 1:43 pm UTC

jsumners wrote:
6453893 wrote:
jsumners wrote:2) I don't need a website to tell me about the music I have been listening to for 20 years. "Electronic music" and "Electronica" are very new terms. If you walked into a Turtle's Music (bought out by Blockbuster Music) in the early 90s you would have had a hard time finding an "electronic music" section -- it didn't exist. Orbital, The Prodigy, The Orb, L.A. Style, you name it was in the "techno" section. Now they would all be in the "dance" section, but that is a different conversation.


Oh yeah? Was Kraftwerk in the Techno section too? Because according to you they were around twenty years before "Electronic Music" as a term was invented.


I really haven't listened to much Kraftwerk so I'm not going to guess at their music. But I don't recall ever seeing any Kraftwerk in the techno section. It's always slim pickings for that type of music at major chain stores (thankfully, Amazon.com fixes that problem).


If you don't know Kraftwerk, you clearly do need "a website" to school you in the genre on which you are supposedly an expert.

User avatar
brume
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 11:37 pm UTC
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby brume » Thu May 21, 2009 3:20 pm UTC

The interesting thing about a live orchestra is watching the individual musicians actually make music. It's a physical act, all done on rigid timing in 'concert' with each other. If you get a chance to see an orchestra with a large percussion section, it's guaranteed to be a lot of fun to watch and listen.

User avatar
Jourdy289
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 4:31 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Jourdy289 » Thu May 21, 2009 3:29 pm UTC

Rabidchaos wrote:A modern musician would have a very hard time retaining the qualities of the original. Our ears have changed. Chords and progressions that sound good to us would be horrendous in their day. Yes, they would have had fun with the tools we have, but any modern composer wouldn't be able to reproduce their style. Take a Music Theory class and see how much flack you catch for things that actually sound good to you and me.

athelas wrote:If we're going to have the "does high/low culture exist" debate, let's at least have full disclosure over where everyone's tribal loyalties lie.

Orchestra! I play cello. The bigger instruments may not make more money, but they're more fun to play! But I take no position on the culture issue...

Tofer wrote:
jsumners wrote:
Tofer wrote:Some people have kind of a warped idea of what techno is... Techno is just one genre of electronic music. Nothing posted in this thread would be considered techno.

I waste far too much time explaining to people that I'm listening to trance (NOT TECHNO). It's a huge pet peeve of mine when people group all that music into one genre. It's like suggesting that The Beatles and Pantera play the same music. It makes no sense.


And your insistence that trance is not techno is my pet peeve. Trance is a sub-genre of techno, just like metal is a sub-genre of rock (to go with your example). There is an overarching classification of rock into which The Beetles would be classified. Pantera would be classified as both metal _and_ rock. "Techno" is comprised of music mainly created with completely electronic instruments (e.g. a synthesizer and/or drum machine). Trance fits this definition. Basic techno has a straight 4/4 beat and generally is not very complex, which, in my opinion, is perfectly exemplified in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-qBMgNohnE. Yes, Tiësto sounds vastly different, but his music is still "techno".

Please refer to http://techno.org/electronic-music-guide/ Many people see this as a definitive guide through the history of electronic music. Do some reading (and listening).

Hint: You are getting the term techno mixed up with electronic music. The main sub-genres of electronic music are House,Techno, Trance, Downtempo, Breakbeat, Jungle, and Hardcore. There are many sub-genres within those and cross-overs between the genres, but at the core, trance is not a sub-genre of techno.


And for those of you with the pet peeves about the classification of music, how many of you know the difference between Full Orchestra and String Orchestra stuff? They're both classical, yet they are even more different than the example given earlier of The Beatles and Pantera. Yet they are both called Classical. They use different instruments, yet you split hairs over how a combination of guitar, bass, drums, and singing is used. THEY ARE ALL THE SAME THING! (All flames to the bit bucket, please.) Techno, trance, they both are solely electronic, right? Just let it go because you are probably going to end up stepping on someone else's toes the same way.

YES! You get it!
Cut your clothes to fit your body, and not the other way around!
http://thestuffiread.blogspot.com -Book Blog http://www.travian.co.uk/?uc=uk5_48953 -Want to play Travian? Sign up here!

User avatar
thinglie
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:16 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby thinglie » Thu May 21, 2009 3:34 pm UTC

This is now on the wall of my music classroom. Don't know how long it'll stay there.

User avatar
Jourdy289
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 4:31 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Jourdy289 » Thu May 21, 2009 3:39 pm UTC

MsMinerva wrote:As an aspiring opera singer and classical music enthusiast, I feel I must come out of lurking to promote an "opera electronica" I saw in LA a couple of summers ago:

Eric Whitacre seems to have taken down the website for Paradise Lost, and a demo recording is in the works, but here's a video of the trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRJ7WBS9ZRI

It combined anime, japanese drumming, techno, and orchestral sounds with classical voices. It was fairly low-budget but they made it work.

Oh.... and it's kind of true, at least in opera, that the biggest instrument DOES get paid more.

And yes, I like techno. Classical and contemporary can be friends!

Ditto.
thinglie wrote:This is now on the wall of my music classroom. Don't know how long it'll stay there.


The comic or the classroom? What's sad is that if the arts keep declining at the rate they are now, playing music will be something that not many people can do!
Cut your clothes to fit your body, and not the other way around!
http://thestuffiread.blogspot.com -Book Blog http://www.travian.co.uk/?uc=uk5_48953 -Want to play Travian? Sign up here!

User avatar
Kitsusyn
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 3:26 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Kitsusyn » Thu May 21, 2009 4:34 pm UTC

Oh me yarm I HAD AN XKCD MOMENT!

I <3 techno with all my soul, especially D'N'B, whenever I hear something that is not techno I instantly think: REMIX! I cannot wait to get an MPC, software isn't quite cutting it...

On another note, this comic reminds me of one of the supplementary stories that came with the Sierra game Outpost 2. It was about this girl who was tricked into going to a poetry recital by the elder, and before they got even into the third line, the auditorium came under fire and they had to evacuate.
Get off my Internet.

jsumners
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 5:05 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby jsumners » Thu May 21, 2009 4:57 pm UTC

6453893 wrote:If you don't know Kraftwerk, you clearly do need "a website" to school you in the genre on which you are supposedly an expert.


I know who Kraftwerk is, and I know that they are big influence to at least Orbital. I've just never gone out of my way to listen to any of their work. I have heard one or two pieces, but that isn't enough to make a firm statement about them. Would you rather I just make something up?

User avatar
Kitsusyn
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 3:26 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Kitsusyn » Thu May 21, 2009 5:13 pm UTC

Kraftwerk rules.

I used to have the 8-Bit Operators tribute CD, until it got shattered by my nerd rage because my favorite track irreparably skipped (Man Machine by Gwem and Counter Reset - POKEY FTW!!!).
Get off my Internet.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby achan1058 » Thu May 21, 2009 6:25 pm UTC

Jourdy289 wrote:The comic or the classroom? What's sad is that if the arts keep declining at the rate they are now, playing music will be something that not many people can do!
I think it will be fine. Learning piano is all the rage right now in Asian countries. Even if Western music dies out in the Western world, it will be preserved in Asia.

User avatar
Namaps
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 2:14 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Namaps » Thu May 21, 2009 7:25 pm UTC

The interesting thing about a live orchestra is watching the individual musicians actually make music. It's a physical act, all done on rigid timing in 'concert' with each other. If you get a chance to see an orchestra with a large percussion section, it's guaranteed to be a lot of fun to watch and listen.


That's one thing a lot of people I know don't seem to get. Rap, electronic music, and a lot of modern rock music is meant to be listened to on a recording. Very often live performances from these types of groups is quite disappointing (live performance being something that usually isn't even possible with electronic music). Things like classical music and jazz, on the other hand, can only really be fully appreciated live. Recordings really don't capture the essence of it at all.


My main issue isn't whether or not the result sounds cool (it certainly can sound very good) but that I think there's no honour in mucking with the work of a master and then taking credit for it. Maybe Ludwig would do that, and he would have every right to, but any monkey can port music to different instruments or drag & drop samples around. Even if a genius monkey remixed The Choral Symphony and actually added something valuable and original to the music there would still be the fact that he couldn't come up with it on his own, he had to steal it from an old deaf guy... I will concede that it might sound really cool though.


I don't think that's necessarily the case. Arranging can be an art in and of itself. Many classical composers put together really great works that were based on folk tunes, and it's quite common for jazz groups to arrange their own versions of jazz standards.
Marbles wrote:The bass trombone is way awesomer than the ordinary trombone.


Turiya wrote:Get out of my head, Randall (except in bed)--that's what SHE said!

CrazyPirateNinja
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:44 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby CrazyPirateNinja » Thu May 21, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

tahrey wrote:I'm pretty sure claiming something such as "remixing makes it worse" - even for something like Beethoven - makes you as bad as any other monocultured narrow mind. Genius as Ludwig was in getting such awesome sounds from the technology of the day, we have access to instruments and techniques that would make him wet his pants if brought forward in a time machine. Whose to say his first step after getting a cochlear implant and a bit of training in Cubase or Protools wouldn't be to remix the glorious 9th and take it to the next level? Or we don't have similar wunderkind alive today who would be able to do similar?


I disagree. I haven't studied Beethoven, but I've taken a musicology class on the 18th century (eg. Bach, Haydn, Mozart, etc.) so I have some ideas to draw on. I wouldn't say that the genius in Beethoven is in getting such awesome sounds from the technology of the day. What makes his music brilliant is the way it uses contrast and motifs and themes and other things to build a symphony that represents so much. Mahler said "a symphony should represent the world". Beethoven's Symphonies were all in the area of 40 minutes or longer, and contain almost no music which is repeated verbatim. His genius wasn't in "using the technology of the day", it was in the content of the symphonies, the actual composition. You have to consider, this man was the standard to which all composers were measured for nearly the next 100 years. In that time "new technology" was developed, but still, no one was held higher than Beethoven.

As far as instruments, very little has been added to the Symphony orchestra since Beethoven's. Sure there is more percussion, and occasionally someone like Rachmaninoff or Ravel would use a saxophone or something, and the English Horn, Bass Clarinet, and Contrabassoon started making more appearances, but the core of the orchestra still hasn't really changed. If these new sounds were truly the secret to being a better composer, one would think that everyone would begin using them (although I guess you could argue that Wagner was a very influential composer and was obsessed with getting new sounds, but none of his new instruments really stuck).

I would disagree that you could remix the 9th to take it to the next level. The 9th does exactly what it was supposed to do. Maybe if he had had access to a saxophone or something he would have used that, but I think that when Beethoven composed the piece, there weren't points at which he thought there were shortcomings. Sure he couldn't really anticipate what would be developed, but I think very few musicologists would look at Beethoven's Symphonies and say, this could be better if it included modern harmonies, what with dissonances to build tension and such. The fact of the matter is, Beethoven knew what he wanted the piece to do, and he did it. If he didn't know what he wanted he would have a very hard time composing it, since he couldn't hear.

I'm not trying to be closed-minded, or say that a remix couldn't be cool, but you have to understand, the man spent months perfecting 70 minutes of music for the 9th, I don't think it could be taken to the next level. I just think that it could be done differently, and might be just as good in that alternate way, but I don't think you'd convince people it was better than how it was supposed to be.

For example: Consider the piece Pictures at an Exhibition. Written initially for piano by Mussorgsky, it's been orchestrated tons of times, and while some orchestrations are more popular, mostly due to tradition, it's hard to say that one master composers orchestration is better than another's. Yet no one is going to redo the piano score of it, because that is how it's supposed to be. The Piano version does what Mussorgsky wanted it to. You may prefer the piano version or the orchestral version depending on your personal tastes, I'm more of and orchestral guy myself, but I wouldn't say that moving it to the orchestra is "taking it to the next level".

That's just my two cents. Hope I don't sound like a jerk, I'm just explaining my view on it.

Edit: @Namaps, I have to completely agree with your first point. I have thought to myself and mentioned to friends many time how interesting it is that classical and jazz are the only types of music that sound better in person than on a recording. Also, with regard to your signature, Bass Trombone kicks ass. I play it in my University Symphony Orchestra. Woot Woot.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby achan1058 » Thu May 21, 2009 8:21 pm UTC

Namaps wrote:That's one thing a lot of people I know don't seem to get. Rap, electronic music, and a lot of modern rock music is meant to be listened to on a recording. Very often live performances from these types of groups is quite disappointing (live performance being something that usually isn't even possible with electronic music). Things like classical music and jazz, on the other hand, can only really be fully appreciated live. Recordings really don't capture the essence of it at all.
I have heard a few live recordings of pop/rock works that are outstanding, so presumably not every live performance is bad.
Namaps wrote:
My main issue isn't whether or not the result sounds cool (it certainly can sound very good) but that I think there's no honour in mucking with the work of a master and then taking credit for it. Maybe Ludwig would do that, and he would have every right to, but any monkey can port music to different instruments or drag & drop samples around. Even if a genius monkey remixed The Choral Symphony and actually added something valuable and original to the music there would still be the fact that he couldn't come up with it on his own, he had to steal it from an old deaf guy... I will concede that it might sound really cool though.


I don't think that's necessarily the case. Arranging can be an art in and of itself. Many classical composers put together really great works that were based on folk tunes, and it's quite common for jazz groups to arrange their own versions of jazz standards.
Mahler stole quite a bit, to say, doesn't make him any less of a genius. Besides, what about all those Dies Irae that's been floating around classical music, or the Variation on a Theme by XYZ?
Last edited by achan1058 on Thu May 21, 2009 8:43 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Air Hadoken
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:25 pm UTC
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Air Hadoken » Thu May 21, 2009 8:32 pm UTC

Namaps wrote:That's one thing a lot of people I know don't seem to get. Rap, electronic music, and a lot of modern rock music is meant to be listened to on a recording. Very often live performances from these types of groups is quite disappointing (live performance being something that usually isn't even possible with electronic music). Things like classical music and jazz, on the other hand, can only really be fully appreciated live. Recordings really don't capture the essence of it at all.


I tend to agree with you on the latter point, though I think that each of classical and jazz has a different reasoning for why a recording does not capture the full impact (classical due to the sonic depth and diversity, which any sort of recording material roughens; jazz due to its foundations in improvisation). However, your former point seems less substantiated to me. In your favor, all of your cited musical forms were created after the use of recording equipment became widespread. It is easy to see how the existence of recording and playback fundamentally shaped rap and electronic. Even for rock, it led to one of my most memorable "Pop-up Video" footnotes -- that Queen never performed "Bohemian Rhapsody" live due to it being "too complex." But rap has its roots in being a performance medium; rappers *and* their predecessors have a long tradition of expressing lyrical flow live and in person, and starting in the late '80s to the early '90s, were improvising their lyrics on the spot (reminiscent of a particular scene in Cyrano de Bergerac). The atmosphere of tension from needing to be on point and in the moment, rather than get one good take in a recording session, seems to heighten the value of live performance for a rapper. As for electronic, I've seen bad and good live performances, but I've also seen live performances from electronic bands that provide counterexamples to your blanket statement. It's not genre-specific, but it *is* specific to how the performer approaches music and composition. You only get so many control mechanisms when you have to go live, and just preprogramming your pristine loop progression is boring, but people can perform amazing live performance feats when challenged to do so. Video game remixers can stay home and record, sure. But D'n'B should be seen live. Ultra-fusion hip-hop/rock/synth bands (Campaign for Real Time!) should be seen live. Any outfit fronted by an MC, wherever it falls in the genre map, is just begging to perform for you for the full experience. Give it the right chance and you might find yourself pleasantly surprised.

Jirin
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:18 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Jirin » Thu May 21, 2009 10:46 pm UTC

You know, classical music is fine for the people who are into it. But the whole 'All classical is superior to all other forms of music' thing is crap. Listening to conservatory students is more painful than listening to hipsters talk about Neutral Milk Hotel. Especially since everyone into classical has already decided no music written after 1800 shall ever be considered great.

Unless it's generated from the intersection of two mathematical functions, of course. Then it can be considered great on an academic level despite being completely aesthetically joyless.

The current institution of classical music is really paradoxical. They're appreciating some of the most emotionally evocative music of all time by focusing completely on technically perfect recitation, thereby stripping it of all emotion.

Lerkistan
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 7:25 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Lerkistan » Thu May 21, 2009 10:52 pm UTC

Namaps wrote:Rap, electronic music, and a lot of modern rock music is meant to be listened to on a recording.


I was about to write a lengthy post, but Air Hadoken has already given a good answer to that.

Air Hadoken wrote:But rap has its roots in being a performance medium; rappers *and* their predecessors have a long tradition of expressing lyrical flow live and in person, and starting in the late '80s to the early '90s, were improvising their lyrics on the spot (reminiscent of a particular scene in Cyrano de Bergerac). The atmosphere of tension from needing to be on point and in the moment, rather than get one good take in a recording session, seems to heighten the value of live performance for a rapper.


I'd like to add a good example for this - the prime discipline, in my opinion, are freestyle battles where each opponent consecutively has to do 4 lines. for whatever reason, I only seem to find good examples in German, so I'll just hope you can understand that...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-Uc6XYl4ts

English stuff, but not from the discipline above (I have no clue how freestyle this really is)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-2kk6s1axk

poohat
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:21 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby poohat » Thu May 21, 2009 11:33 pm UTC

CrazyPirateNinja wrote:I disagree. I haven't studied Beethoven, but I've taken a musicology class on the 18th century (eg. Bach, Haydn, Mozart, etc.) so I have some ideas to draw on. I wouldn't say that the genius in Beethoven is in getting such awesome sounds from the technology of the day. What makes his music brilliant is the way it uses contrast and motifs and themes and other things to build a symphony that represents so much. Mahler said "a symphony should represent the world". Beethoven's Symphonies were all in the area of 40 minutes or longer, and contain almost no music which is repeated verbatim. His genius wasn't in "using the technology of the day", it was in the content of the symphonies, the actual composition. You have to consider, this man was the standard to which all composers were measured for nearly the next 100 years. In that time "new technology" was developed, but still, no one was held higher than Beethoven.

Yeah, basically this.

The difference between classical music and pop music (and I'm including hiphop/techno/etc as pop) is that classical music is based just as much on structure as it is on tunes/melodies. The 'point' of a symphony lies in it's large scale structure, within which the individual elements (themes, tunes, whatever) interact. With pop music, there is very little structural complexity - mainly its just verse/chorus/verse, or endless repetition of tunes/motifs which dont really develop or go anywhere. Yeah, lots of pop pieces contain interesting tunes, but they are rarely ever unified into a structural composition.

The defining element of classical music isnt that it 'uses violins' or whatever, its that the point of piece lies just as much in their overal structure as it does in the immediate parts of the music which you hear at any given instance. As such, classical music needs to be listened to in a different way than pop music - there is more of an intellectual element since you have to continually relate what youre hearing now to what has come before and what will come later, rather than just getting 'lost in the moment' and only hearing immediate sounds like you do in pop.

In 90% of cases, when people talk about 'mixing classical music and pop/hiphop/electronic', they misunderstand classical music. Just because a piece of music uses violins or samples Beethoven, it doesnt mean it has anything to do with classical music. In most of these 'crossover' pieces, all thats happening is that isolated tunes are being borrowed from classical pieces - but these tunes are then treated in a 'pop' manner, by just being repeated over and over again, rather than being developed or embedded in an actual composition. When you rip out a classical tune (or a segment of a work) from the piece it belongs to, youre destroying its meaning and basically making turning it into pop music. A Beethoven/Mozart symphony isnt just a collection of nice tunes, even if thats how someone who doesnt understand classical music may hear it. What people seem to think are 'unions between pop music and classical music' (Vanessa Mae being an obvious example) are really just examples of people appropriating tunes from art, and turning them into pop music for the purpose of making money. Dont confuse capitalist appropriation with some kind of artistic progress.
Last edited by poohat on Fri May 22, 2009 12:08 am UTC, edited 7 times in total.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby achan1058 » Thu May 21, 2009 11:40 pm UTC

Jirin wrote:You know, classical music is fine for the people who are into it. But the whole 'All classical is superior to all other forms of music' thing is crap. Listening to conservatory students is more painful than listening to hipsters talk about Neutral Milk Hotel. Especially since everyone into classical has already decided no music written after 1800 shall ever be considered great.
Untrue. Mahler's symphonies are written in 1884-1909, and are the most overplayed after Beethoven's. As for whether it is superior, the only reason why it is "superior" is that the weak stuff have been weeded out by the passage of time. The same will happen to pop/rock/etc music as well. In fact, certain pop/rock pieces have already made themselves into the music history textbooks, so...... (The Enjoyment of Music had Santana's Black Magic Woman in it, and this is the book we use to study for music history exam.) In this sense, classical is definitely not superior. It is however, superior to the stuff that did not withstood the passage of time, however.

As for the conservatory students, are you referring to them talking to each other or them talking to you? If it is the former, I can understand, since math/CS lingo aren't any better. It is however your fault for attempting to listen to the conversation. If it is the latter, I have nothing to say about it, though I occasionally let a math jargon slip while I am talking to non-math people as well.

Jirin wrote:The current institution of classical music is really paradoxical. They're appreciating some of the most emotionally evocative music of all time by focusing completely on technically perfect recitation, thereby stripping it of all emotion.
That's the difference between academia and industry for you. (industry here refers to video game/film music)
poohat wrote:Yeah, basically this. The difference between classical music and pop music (and I'm including hiphop/techno/etc as pop) is that classical music is based just as much around structure as it is on tunes/melodies. The 'point' of a symphony lies in its large scale structure, within which the individual elements (themes, tunes, whatever) interact. With pop music, there is very little structural complexity - mainly its just verse/chorus/verse, or endless repetition of tunes/motifs which dont really develop or go anywhere. -Yeah, lots of pop pieces contain interesting tunes, but they are rarely ever unified into a structural composition. The defining element of classical music isnt that it 'uses violins' or whatever, its that the point of the piece lies just as much in the overal structure as it does in the immediates part of the music which you hear at any given instance. As such, classical music needs to be listened to in a completely different way than pop music - there is more of an intellectual element since you have to continually relate what youre hearing now to what has come before and what will come later, rather than just getting 'lost in the moment' and only hearing immediate sounds like you do in pop. And it is this structural/intellectual element which makes classical music art, while pop music is mainly just entertainment.
How about the Lied? They certainly do not have large structure or anything of that sort. We still classify them as classical. There are also many other smaller pieces, like preludes, images, etc.

poohat
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:21 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby poohat » Thu May 21, 2009 11:53 pm UTC

achan1058 wrote:How about the Lied? They certainly do not have large structure or anything of that sort. We still classify them as classical. There are also many other smaller pieces, like preludes, images, etc.

Well we classify these as 'classical music' today, but thats only really because the term 'classical' now gets used to refer to either a particular historical period, or do all composed music in general. If you dont mind the anachronism, I think it would probably be more accurate to label things like Brahms Hungarian Dances as being 'pop music', since they probably have more in common with (more sophisticated) modern pop than they do with Mahler's symphonies or whatever.

I think the key question is how these 'smaller' pieces were actually perceived by the composers who wrote them. Generally, the symphony was always considered the highest form of music because it was viewed as having the most refined structure. And for a few centuries, the evolution of classical music basically centered around pushing the boundaries of the symphony as far as it could go. I dont think that most of the composers who wrote 'lighter' pieces like the ones you mentioned would have viewed them as being on the same artistic level as their symphonies/concertos, nor would their audiences. Thats obviously not to say that they dont have value (theres nothing inherantly wrong with pop/simple music, the problem today is more that consumerism has pretty much killed all other more complex types of music), but I dont think you can really say theyre as artistically developed as symphonies/concertos.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby achan1058 » Fri May 22, 2009 12:06 am UTC

poohat wrote:I think the key question is how these 'smaller' pieces were actually perceived by the composers who wrote them. Generally, the symphony was always considered the highest form of music because it was viewed as having the most refined structure. And for a few centuries, the evolution of classical music basically centered around pushing the boundaries of the symphony as far as it could go. I dont think that most of the composers who wrote 'lighter' pieces like the ones you mentioned would have viewed them as being on the same artistic level as their symphonies/concertos, nor would their audiences. Thats obviously not to say that they dont have value (theres nothing inherantly wrong with pop/simple music, the problem today is more that consumerism has pretty much killed all other more complex types of music), but I dont think you can really say theyre as artistically developed as symphonies/concertos.
The way I see it is that there are people who write good stuff, then and now. It's just that the stuff being written now have not gone through the test of time. Wait for 50 or 100 years and see what pop music is still standing, and we can lump them as "classical" as well. The rest of them? Pretend they never happened.

poohat
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 6:21 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby poohat » Fri May 22, 2009 12:20 am UTC

achan1058 wrote:The way I see it is that there are people who write good stuff, then and now. It's just that the stuff being written now have not gone through the test of time. Wait for 50 or 100 years and see what pop music is still standing, and we can lump them as "classical" as well. The rest of them? Pretend they never happened.

The problem with that is that its not clear how you can argue that one piece of pop music is 'better' than another (I dont just mean in the boring relativist sense that 'all taste is subjective', I mean that I dont know what criteria make sense to use). With pop music, its very difficult to separate the most respected music from the best marketed music, because of how ridiculously commercialised the genre is. Lots of pop music fans will tell you that the Beatles are one of the best examples of the genre, but really the popularity of the Beatles is more to do with how they were marketed to the youth of the 60s ('Beatlemania') than anything to do with their music. And the same applies to many other of the big name pop groups.

Most interesting pop music has never really been 'popular', because its creators were more concerned with music than with marketing. And so its quite likely that the pop music that stands the test of time will be the best marketed stuff like the Beatles, rather than the stuff which actually pushed boundaries and was interesting - look at which bands from the 60s/70s most people remember today for example. More people today are listening to the Beatles and Jefferson Airplane than they are to Can or Captain Beefheart or Kraftwerk, and this doesnt really bode well for the best music 'standing the test of time'.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby achan1058 » Fri May 22, 2009 12:32 am UTC

But in many sense, the subjective judgement is all there is to it. You certainly would not say a piece of good music must follow formula XYZ, right? Music is not a mathematical proof. (Though some people did try this, but IMO it wasn't very successful.) In fact, the reason why I listen to much of the classical I am listening to now is simply because I like what they wrote, and not whether the artist was genuinely trying to express something. In fact, some of their expressions are distorted, in more ways than one. (think Shostakovich and USSR) I listen to Mahler not because it has fancy orchestration/form/whatever, but because it rings with me. The attempt to study deeper into it was after listening to it, not before. In this sense, I never understood why people hype over much of Mozart's works. (his early symphonies......, I listened to it for a few times and I was like....., not happy) In this sense, Mozart aren't that different from the Beatles, over marketed. Furthermore, there are rarely played (if at all) great works that I think are much superior to Mozart, but because of marketing it was lost as well. In this sense, classical isn't any better. However, the test of time is still a reasonable test for most classical works. I do not see why it shouldn't be for current works.

Now, why do you believe that Can or Captain Beefheart or Kraftwerk is necessary better than the Beatles? (Seeing I am not interested in the Beatles, I can fairly ask that question.) Besides, the Beatles did push the boundary, at least according to a mastering blog. They introduced much of the distortion and mastering techniques. Besides, how people marketed their music is not new. Liszt have flocks after him as well.

CrazyPirateNinja
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:44 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby CrazyPirateNinja » Fri May 22, 2009 4:35 am UTC

achan1058 wrote: In this sense, I never understood why people hype over much of Mozart's works. (his early symphonies......, I listened to it for a few times and I was like....., not happy) In this sense, Mozart aren't that different from the Beatles, over marketed. Furthermore, there are rarely played (if at all) great works that I think are much superior to Mozart, but because of marketing it was lost as well. In this sense, classical isn't any better. However, the test of time is still a reasonable test for most classical works. I do not see why it shouldn't be for current works.


With regards to that, I can agree, some of his early symphonies are quite boring. What happens often in the classical world is that a composer gets famous for some genre or another, and once their name is out there, people will record every piece of music by that person that they can find. As far as Mozart goes, his piano concertos (at least the later ones) as well as his Operas are good. His early work you have to consider was written when he was still a child, I haven't listened to a later symphony in a while, but I imagine it's better. Also, besides Haydn, Mozart was the first big name to have success with instrumental music (prior to those two, people basically thought instrumental music was worthless, and only music with words was worth listening to). In fact, I'd say that's a large part of why some people are remembered, for being the first to do something, like you said with the Beatles and mastering and distortion techniques.

But yeah, you are correct, some of it is overmarketing, but maybe in a different way. Think one hit wonder artists, who get one song that tops the billboards charts and then uses that fame to spring onto the big scene, such as "Lovesong" by Sarah Barielles (thought of that off the top of my head, she came to my school. No one I talked to knew any other songs by her).

dabigkid
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 3:09 am UTC
Location: NJ
Contact:

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby dabigkid » Fri May 22, 2009 5:25 am UTC

Jirin wrote:You know, classical music is fine for the people who are into it. But the whole 'All classical is superior to all other forms of music' thing is crap. Listening to conservatory students is more painful than listening to hipsters talk about Neutral Milk Hotel. Especially since everyone into classical has already decided no music written after 1800 shall ever be considered great.

Maybe if you weren't just over-exaggerating everything you'd have known that the best classical music was written after 1800. Most of Beethoven, Chopin, Mahler, Shostakovich, man the list goes on. I'd argue that most music before 1800 is not great at all, except some of Bach and a little Vivaldi.

CrazyPirateNinja wrote:I disagree. I haven't studied Beethoven, but I've taken a musicology class on the 18th century (eg. Bach, Haydn, Mozart, etc.) so I have some ideas to draw on. I wouldn't say that the genius in Beethoven is in getting such awesome sounds from the technology of the day. What makes his music brilliant is the way it uses contrast and motifs and themes and other things to build a symphony that represents so much. Mahler said "a symphony should represent the world". Beethoven's Symphonies were all in the area of 40 minutes or longer, and contain almost no music which is repeated verbatim. His genius wasn't in "using the technology of the day", it was in the content of the symphonies, the actual composition. You have to consider, this man was the standard to which all composers were measured for nearly the next 100 years. In that time "new technology" was developed, but still, no one was held higher than Beethoven.

I agree more or less.

Compare the Beethoven symphonies to Schubert. Schubert's prime after Beethoven yet he had only a weak grasp of Beethoven's style (that or he just didn't care much to emulate it). It's not that he didn't use the technology; it's just that Schubert didn't rely on motifs nearly as much as Beethoven did.
wut

User avatar
muteKi
Angry is too weak a term. Try "Fluffy".
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 4:02 am UTC
Location: William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby muteKi » Fri May 22, 2009 5:32 am UTC

tetsujin wrote:Yakk...

DECULTURE!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWHaOyohiqE [You just got <<1-up'd>>]



Also, time for me to link you all to something amazing, an excerpt of Holst's Planets Suite as electronically arranged and performed by Isao Tomita. That stuff was awesome -- I also used to listen to his version of Pictures at an Exhibition as a kid, and it was fantastic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ym6KHc6670
I remain a staunch fan of outmoded synthesizers.

Incidentally while I'm a fan of music that uses said outmoded synthesizers to produce certain types of sounds and styles, I generally am more concerned on melody and structure than random effects, especially in my own work.
Image

User avatar
KingAl
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:50 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby KingAl » Sat May 23, 2009 5:37 pm UTC

I find it bizarre how worked up people get over classification of music. When you get down to it, it's ancillary to the appreciation of music, and while genres aren't unhelpful (and I get as worked up as anyone about Franz Schubert and the Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band [that sounds like a single band in the Haley and the Comets mould, doesn't it :P] being marked 'Alternative & Punk' in GracenoteDB), when discussions of it become as heated as a religious debate it suggests something has gone very wrong.

Jirin wrote:...


If the people you're railing against exist, then sure, I can agree with you. But all summaries are lies, and you've made huge, inaccurate generalisations -- everyone into classical music decided what? The current institution is focussing on technical perfection above expressiveness? This is all news to me.

poohat wrote:...

What criteria do you use for any kind of music?
Sheer popularity may tide over some artists which are 'undeserving' of recognition, whatever that means. But critical perception is also important in forming memory of the past -- look at film, another medium which is popular music's close contemporary. And your own opinion is a wonderful example of the way in which critical opinion can deviate from public perception :wink:
I don't believe that popularity is entirely divorced from quality, either; that something is able to become popular at all is a measure of it, though not the only one that counts. The Beatles were a great band; this is not just a public perception, this is also a critical perception. They played an important part in the trend towards self-penned songs and display a consistency in melodic quality, originality and emotional resonance that isn't matched by many of their contemporaries, and I think public awareness of their catalogue is skewed towards the albums which most demonstrate these qualities, while their more derivative and less inspired (but by no means bad) early skiffle isn't really remembered well.
Public perception often revises itself. The Kinks fell into obscurity despite their great popularity in the '60s, but have been experiencing a resurgence just recently, while Phil Collins' Genesis, hugely popular in the '80s, have fallen into relative obscurity themselves. That I think this reflects their relative qualities ( :P ) isn't really important. What is important is that popularity and marketing only go so far, and that history is reassessed and opinions are changed.
Captain Beefheart may be great, but he's not unpopular solely because he's underexposed, he's unpopular because he's hard to take, and just like Schoenberg and his ilk he'll still be remembered for his innovation even if he doesn't suit the public's aesthetic preferences. It is pretty unfortunate that Can are underappreciated, but the very fact that you know their name reflects how they've been singled out by their quality from the rest of the krautrock scene.
Now, I don't mean to say that recollection of music in the future will be perfectly fair and unbiased; people are fickle, and it's pretty clear that some baseline level of exposure is necessary for any memory to be formed at all, particularly with the sheer volume (hurr) of music that is produced nowadays. I just think that your 'consumerism conquers all' attitude is misplaced.

User avatar
Glenn Magus Harvey
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:39 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Glenn Magus Harvey » Sat May 23, 2009 7:08 pm UTC

My reply to the comic (in other words, TL;DR):

Ironically, I'm a fan of both classical and techno. However, for some reason, I have yet to become as excited by rock/metal.

Then again, I sorta get my share of older jazz/rock styles in older videogame music.

Nyktos
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:02 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Nyktos » Sat May 23, 2009 8:29 pm UTC

Whoa, GMH, I didn't know you existed here.

User avatar
Blokey
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:17 am UTC
Location: Lahndahn, Merrie Olde Englande

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Blokey » Sat May 23, 2009 8:49 pm UTC

What a coincidence! I also enjoy the presence of varying acoustic waveforms in my auditory processing centre.
Image
Only the tone of your own inner monologue separates a reading of superciliousness or philanthropy - Felstaff

User avatar
Glenn Magus Harvey
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:39 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Glenn Magus Harvey » Sun May 24, 2009 8:51 pm UTC

Nyktos wrote:Whoa, GMH, I didn't know you existed here.


Hey.

Yeah, so far, I've only posted very rarely in order to comment on specific comics.

Which actually puts you in really good luck, since I rarely come back to check the board after commenting. Haha.

_kodisha
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 11:22 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby _kodisha » Fri May 29, 2009 11:37 pm UTC

i used to *love* xkcd
i love it now too, but after this http://xkcd.com/411/ i must say i'm really disappointed :(
And now it continues :/ no lesson learned..

the thing that hurts me the most is the fact that in comic 411 he is not saying "hey you why do you LISTEN to techno..." byt when you are BUYING something that according to the author has no value, you are plain stupid!

If you pack air into cans and breath it, your friends might laugh at you, and consider you weird, but if you are buying canned air from your neighbor there is a big chance that your friends might consider you stupid.. Because you are essentially buying something already available to you.. just breathe it.. just take sample and repeat it for 10 minutes...

Someone with such great influence on public, especially young people should be more careful.


------------------------- // letter end

it was really hard to restrain my self and not to burst into flames.. because someone is wrong on the internet :)
but this comes from BIG disappointment in xkcd after this two episodes.

_kodisha
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 11:22 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby _kodisha » Fri May 29, 2009 11:40 pm UTC

and while i'm here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STpOak4iAJY

beat that ;)

User avatar
diotimajsh
Posts: 658
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:10 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby diotimajsh » Sat May 30, 2009 1:08 am UTC

_kodisha wrote:the thing that hurts me the most is the fact that in comic 411 he is not saying "hey you why do you LISTEN to techno..." byt when you are BUYING something that according to the author has no value, you are plain stupid!
Wait, what??

To my thinking, Randall didn't imply at all that techno has no value in comic #411. The reason his character says there's no point to buying it is because he's poking fun at how repetitive techno (electronic music) is, not because it's a worthless form of music.

Now, we might conclude that "very repetitive music is bad" on our own, but Randall doesn't actually make any judgments about that himself anywhere in the comic. Speaking as one who enjoys and creates electronic music myself, I honestly think it's something of a fact that techno is extremely repetitive; in which case if we still have a problem, the problem is with the genre itself rather than any of Randall's assertions about it.
Osha wrote:Foolish Patriarchy! Your feeble attempts at social pressure have no effect on my invincible awesomeness! Bwahahahaa


Blog type thing

User avatar
diotimajsh
Posts: 658
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:10 am UTC
Contact:

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby diotimajsh » Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:02 pm UTC

Late addition to the thread, might I suggest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjZ56f5GIX0

I think this does a much better job of blending the symphony with electronic music (though admittedly with a much more hip hop / turntablist feel) than other attempts I've seen.
Osha wrote:Foolish Patriarchy! Your feeble attempts at social pressure have no effect on my invincible awesomeness! Bwahahahaa


Blog type thing

User avatar
Blokey
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:17 am UTC
Location: Lahndahn, Merrie Olde Englande

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Blokey » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:58 am UTC

CrazyPirateNinja wrote:For example: Consider the piece Pictures at an Exhibition. Written initially for piano by Mussorgsky, it's been orchestrated tons of times, and while some orchestrations are more popular, mostly due to tradition, it's hard to say that one master composers orchestration is better than another's. Yet no one is going to redo the piano score of it, because that is how it's supposed to be. The Piano version does what Mussorgsky wanted it to. You may prefer the piano version or the orchestral version depending on your personal tastes, I'm more of and orchestral guy myself, but I wouldn't say that moving it to the orchestra is "taking it to the next level".

You may see this, you may not, but regardless: That's one of my favourites, and when I moved into student accommodation, turned out the guy in the room opposite me was also a fan of it (he'd heard ELP's version first). Anyway, we used to head down to London and find classic rock LP's and such, and in one shop, by pure chance, we stumbled across Allyn Ferguson's jazz arrangement of it (it's called Framed In Jazz). I highly reccommend it.
Image
Only the tone of your own inner monologue separates a reading of superciliousness or philanthropy - Felstaff

benighted..
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:25 pm UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby benighted.. » Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:46 pm UTC

T-D wrote:
Jourdy289 wrote:Viola has a much larger range.


Nonsense. The violin's compact body gives it much better aerodynamics. Try more of an overhead whipping motion, you should be able to get about twenty extra yards.



well, yes.. the viola's body size is improportionate to its register, so it will unfortunately always stay an imperfect instrument (but we still love it..), unlike the violin that has relatively perfect (wow) proportions and so has a much larger range - even if only dogs can hear it in the upmost regiser.. :P

but talking about the comic: I actually DO sit on the left side of the audience all the time, just because all the bass instruments face that way, and who wants to hear the violins anyway.. bass sounds stimulate the human brain in a much more pleasurable way, even if you're a classical musician, and that's strictly biological.. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Josephine
Posts: 2142
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 5:53 am UTC

Re: "Mission To Culture" Discussion

Postby Josephine » Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:13 pm UTC

I'm going to resurrect this thread to mention an artist I found who does remix classical. Rose, with songs like 'speed over Beethoven' and 'Mozart is back'.
Belial wrote:Listen, what I'm saying is that he committed a felony with a zoo animal.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests