The transformative power of music ( I left out the classical bit)

[mickj1]

Hi

I posted this yesterday, but it seems to have got lost in the server changeover.

It's worth perservering, even if you're not a classical music buff - the message and musical tricks of the trade are universal.

http://www.ted.com/t...nd_passion.html

Cheers

Mick

[k-k-k-kenny]

LIked that, Mick. Thanks.

As a lover of some classical music (mainly piano since that's what I learned, and not including Mozart) since I was very young, its lack of more general appeal has been a bit mystifying to me. But I think I can understand the "I don't get it" reaction that a lot of folk have. Fact is, I was exposed to it in various forms: solo instrumental, choral, orchestral - both listening and playing - from an early age, and so absorbed structures and so on gradually.

Maybe part of the problem is that for the uninitiated "classical" music is such a vast field - bit like jazz for me. Where to start? There's a world of difference between Wagner's Ring cycle (was it Mark Twain who said he had some glorious moments but some very dull quarter-hours?) and some of Chopin's preludes that run at less than a minute and yet are complete. For those of us brought up on pop/rock who are used to repeated verses, choruses and so on, its' easy to get lost in an orchestra sawing its way through 3 or more movements of a symphony. Even when it's a really good symphony, and not all are. Just as, I suppose, one who loves Dale Hawkins will not necessarily warm to Genesis.

But the way Zander explains the shape of the Chopin prelude in the link is really good, as is his suggestion that the audience think of someone loved and lost whilst they listen. The thing about it (classical music) for me is that it can touch/evoke emotions which no other music can.

So, for example, if comparing that prelude with, ah, Lou Reed's Sad Song (which I think is a great song) Reed gives us a window into something personal, particular and peculiar to him, whilst the Chopin is more transcendental and has a deep bitter-sweet quality that pop and rock music just does not do. It's a pity that more folk don't have the chance to hear it.

[MusicOne]

LIked that, Mick. Thanks.

As a lover of some classical music (mainly piano since that's what I learned, and not including Mozart) since I was very young, its lack of more general appeal has been a bit mystifying to me. But I think I can understand the "I don't get it" reaction that a lot of folk have. Fact is, I was exposed to it in various forms: solo instrumental, choral, orchestral - both listening and playing - from an early age, and so absorbed structures and so on gradually.

Maybe part of the problem is that for the uninitiated "classical" music is such a vast field - bit like jazz for me. Where to start? There's a world of difference between Wagner's Ring cycle (was it Mark Twain who said he had some glorious moments but some very dull quarter-hours?) and some of Chopin's preludes that run at less than a minute and yet are complete. For those of us brought up on pop/rock who are used to repeated verses, choruses and so on, its' easy to get lost in an orchestra sawing its way through 3 or more movements of a symphony. Even when it's a really good symphony, and not all are. Just as, I suppose, one who loves Dale Hawkins will not necessarily warm to Genesis.

But the way Zander explains the shape of the Chopin prelude in the link is really good, as is his suggestion that the audience think of someone loved and lost whilst they listen. The thing about it (classical music) for me is that it can touch/evoke emotions which no other music can.

So, for example, if comparing that prelude with, ah, Lou Reed's Sad Song (which I think is a great song) Reed gives us a window into something personal, particular and peculiar to him, whilst the Chopin is more transcendental and has a deep bitter-sweet quality that pop and rock music just does not do. It's a pity that more folk don't have the chance to hear it.

What!....a pianist who doesn't like Mozart? Oh well.

Classical music is in dire straits...audiences are aging rapidly. While there appears to be no shortage of performers, yet, I believe it is only a matter of time before young musicians will not be prepared to go through the many years of grueling training it takes to become a competent classical performer....the monetary rewards just won't be there.

That being the case, classical music will become a fossilized art form, with performances largely confined to recordings made in the past. A dismal prospect, indeed! This won't happen overnight, of course, but I believe the writing is on the wall unless things can be turned around.

Edited September 12, 2012 by MusicOne

[Guest guru]

What!....a pianist who doesn't like Mozart? Oh well.

Classical music is in dire straits...audiences are aging rapidly. While there appears to be no shortage of performers, yet, I believe it is only a matter of time before young musicians will not be prepared to go through the many years of grueling training it takes to become a competent classical performer....the monetary rewards just won't be there.

That being the case, classical music will become a fossilized art form, with performances largely confined to recordings made in the past. A dismal prospect, indeed! This won't happen overnight, of course, but I believe the writing is on the wall unless things can be turned around.

As a regular classical concert goer, I have observered as a conservative estimate, at least 80 percent of attendees under the age of 65 and the percentage of the overall audience under 30 years of age being at least 30 percent. I don't know where you are drawing your observations from as to classical music becoming a "fossilized art form", it certainly doesn't reflect my observations as to it's broad appeal across the various ages of patrons.

[MusicOne]

As a regular classical concert goer, I have observered as a conservative estimate, at least 80 percent of attendees under the age of 65 and the percentage of the overall audience under 30 years of age being at least 30 percent. I don't know where you are drawing your observations from as to classical music becoming a "fossilized art form", it certainly doesn't reflect my observations as to it's broad appeal across the various ages of patrons.

I don't know where you get your observations from, Guru...they fly in the face of the general consensus of opinion on this matter. There are any number of articles and opinions from respected critics and observers of the musical scene...too numerous to mention...and in mixing with young people, as I do in my business, they all say with one voice that classical music just does not do it for them (a number of the guys who worked for me are or were music students!).

Sorry Guru, but it is my view that rock music has corrupted the musical souls of the young and there is no way to remedy the situation, at least none that I can see.

Edited September 12, 2012 by MusicOne

[k-k-k-kenny]

What!....a pianist who doesn't like Mozart? Oh well.

Classical music is in dire straits...audiences are aging rapidly. While there appears to be no shortage of performers, yet, I believe it is only a matter of time before young musicians will not be prepared to go through the many years of grueling training it takes to become a competent classical performer....the monetary rewards just won't be there.

That being the case, classical music will become a fossilized art form, with performances largely confined to recordings made in the past. A dismal prospect, indeed! This won't happen overnight, of course, but I believe the writing is on the wall unless things can be turned around.

Yeah - I'm more of a minor key/dissonance guy: Chopin, Liszt, Bach, Rachmaninoff would be the perennial go-to composers, off the top of my head.

I do find limited appeal in most major venue concert offerings here: programming tends not to be very adventurous, which is a pity, but understandable. But a city like New York can only manage a programme of Debussy/Ravel/Messiaen/Takemitsu/Piazzolla because it has such a vast population, and that night there weren't more than about 80 people in the club.

I wonder whether the monetary rewards have ever been there, except for a favoured few. Most end up teaching, one way or another, and I suspect that's always been the case, though of course many leading performers feel a desire or obligation to pass on their wisdom. But in other fields of the arts, too, many are called but few are chosen. Takes a combination of talent, dedication and blind luck to make a career in any artistic endeavour financially secure.

There may have been a brief mid-century flowering of interest in "light classical" 60-odd years ago which saw unusually high classical record sales - at least that's what I've read. As far as concert-going and the composition of modern day audiences is concerned, my limited experience endorses Guru. OK - it's not a mass market, but the audience does seem to be regenerating itself. Any rate, tonight it's Galliano at the recital centre, and that should be good.

Edited September 13, 2012 by k-k-k-kenny

[bruce108]

In China and Japan, Western classical music is alive, well and growing. That market should hold it for a while.

[mickj1]

Sorry Guru, but it is my view that rock music has corrupted the musical souls of the young and there is no way to remedy the situation, at least none that I can see.

Well, that's one opinion. As someone whose soul has been thoroughly 'corrupted' by rocknroll, blues, RnB, rock, prog, soul and jazz, I think Zander does a pretty good job of positing an alternative view.

Cheers

Mick

[MusicOne]

Well, that's one opinion. As someone whose soul has been thoroughly 'corrupted' by rocknroll, blues, RnB, rock, prog, soul and jazz, I think Zander does a pretty good job of positing an alternative view.

Cheers

Mick

Well, he tries to posit an alternative view....I just disagree with his view that all people can grow to like classical music. You're either born with a liking for it or not, though it is true that some people can acquire a taste for it...they being the exception that proves the rule.

[k-k-k-kenny]

Do you really think so? My take on it would be that differing genres/styles of music have different things to offer, or, like language, grow up differently in different places and express different things. So 40 words for snow amongst the inuit ...

To appreciate the differences of expression from one genre to another involves exposure. At least, that's been my experience. Say with my absurd fascination with accordion: started as something of a joke, then a couple of tracks by great French musette players caught my ear, and it went from there. Or discovering Scriabin, coming from a background of familiarity some with baroque, classical, early and late romantic - he sounded all over the place for a while, but then his etude Op 8 no 12 and bits of his 3rd sonata made sense, and gave me a way in. Or, more recently, John Cage or Webern or Xenakis: hard as it is, I've found that by leaving my preconceptions of what music is and how it should go at the door, I get something from them. (On the other hand, I still find I lot of C20 "classical" all sounds the same and discordant, though I dare say that initiates have rich and varied experiences from them) Or my current determination to understand and appreciate a little more of jazz - the thick if subtle sounds of Bill Evans don't yet do it for me, but yesterday I played Ellington's Dancers In Love (from Piano Reflections) over and over, because it's so much fun.

I'd guess that many prog rock listeners are potential converts to classical: folk who like big long songs with quasi-symphonic stylings might well warm to the real thing, if they could get used to the lack of searing guitar solos and general notion that increased volume = intensity of emotion. For me own part, I'd start with something easier, as Zander did.

[k-k-k-kenny]

BTW, Galliano was superb

[mickj1]

Well, he tries to posit an alternative view....I just disagree with his view that all people can grow to like classical music. You're either born with a liking for it or not, though it is true that some people can acquire a taste for it...they being the exception that proves the rule.

well I didn't like olives when I was 15 either.

Cheers

Mick

[Guest guru]

well I didn't like olives when I was 15 either.

Cheers

Mick

i had strong disagreement with onions growing up but now require them raw de rigur on kebabs.go figure.

[MusicOne]

Do you really think so? My take on it would be that differing genres/styles of music have different things to offer, or, like language, grow up differently in different places and express different things. So 40 words for snow amongst the inuit ...

To appreciate the differences of expression from one genre to another involves exposure. At least, that's been my experience. Say with my absurd fascination with accordion: started as something of a joke, then a couple of tracks by great French musette players caught my ear, and it went from there. Or discovering Scriabin, coming from a background of familiarity some with baroque, classical, early and late romantic - he sounded all over the place for a while, but then his etude Op 8 no 12 and bits of his 3rd sonata made sense, and gave me a way in. Or, more recently, John Cage or Webern or Xenakis: hard as it is, I've found that by leaving my preconceptions of what music is and how it should go at the door, I get something from them. (On the other hand, I still find I lot of C20 "classical" all sounds the same and discordant, though I dare say that initiates have rich and varied experiences from them) Or my current determination to understand and appreciate a little more of jazz - the thick if subtle sounds of Bill Evans don't yet do it for me, but yesterday I played Ellington's Dancers In Love (from Piano Reflections) over and over, because it's so much fun.

I'd guess that many prog rock listeners are potential converts to classical: folk who like big long songs with quasi-symphonic stylings might well warm to the real thing, if they could get used to the lack of searing guitar solos and general notion that increased volume = intensity of emotion. For me own part, I'd start with something easier, as Zander did.

BTW, Galliano was superb

I used to play the Prelude by Chopin that Zander uses to illustrate his points...he plays it quite a bit slower than I did. He is a great communicator, though, and I'm sure he does good work in the field of music education.

I'm quite taken with the Bandoneon, Ken. Could you recommend a couple of Galliano's CDs? I particularly like the combination of bandoneon and guitar....they seem to go well together.

Cheers, John.

Edited September 16, 2012 by MusicOne

[Super Mustud]

Well, he tries to posit an alternative view....I just disagree with his view that all people can grow to like classical music. You're either born with a liking for it or not, though it is true that some people can acquire a taste for it...they being the exception that proves the rule.

I really can't agree with you there, MO. Its like anchovies and whisky. We all end up there in the fullness of time.

[k-k-k-kenny]

I used to play the Prelude by Chopin that Zander uses to illustrate his points...he plays it quite a bit slower than I did. He is a great communicator, though, and I'm sure he does good work in the field of music education.

I'm quite taken with the Bandoneon, Ken. Could you recommend a couple of Galliano's CDs? I particularly like the combination of bandoneon and guitar....they seem to go well together.

Cheers, John.

John

I don't have Galliano playing bandoneon, though he is a superb player, and did play some the other night.

For bandoneon & guitar, my collection is limited, but I can highly recommend, subject to potentially important caveats -

Ciriaco Ortiz - Conversando Con El Fueye (El Bandoneon – EBCD 57): bandoneon & two guitars

Los Provincianos 1931/1934 • Trio Ciriaco Ortiz 1931/1955 (Euro Records S.A. – EU 17024, RCA Victor – 8287 670094-2): Ortiz again, some tracks trio, others sextet

Various - Café de los Maestros (Surco Records J.V. – 9881787, Universal Music Latino – 9881787, Seminal – 9881787): does for 1950s-60s tango what Ry Cooder did for Ruben Gonzalez and the other Cuban maestros: get them well recorded before they all drop off the twig.

The caveats:

The first two recommendations are historic recordings, so if "being there" fidelity is a requirement, they will disappoint.

The third showcases the florid style of tango* against which Piazzolla reacted, for good reason in my view. But it's lovingly done, and features many fine second generation Argentinian players (the guys who came after folk like Ortiz and Troilo). And it has a couple of fine bandoneon solos (and lots of bandoneon in ensemble) but no bandoneon with just guitar.

*I prefer the more straight-ahead gutsiness of the 1920s-1945 outfits.

Ken

[Grumpy]

Thought I'd just have a quick listen - I watched the whole thing. Loved that music and will have to find some - it was relaxing, sad and uplifting all at the same time.

Does anyone else think he looks like forum member emesbee?

[Catostylus]

Its like anchovies and whisky.

I read this and was extremely sceptical but something made me want to try it. So I popped 2 anchovies in an Old Pulteney 17yo ("The Maritime Malt").

You're sick.

[mickj1]

I used to play the Prelude by Chopin that Zander uses to illustrate his points...he plays it quite a bit slower than I did.

Cheers, John.

Hi

Maybe that's why he became a conductor?

Cheers

mick

[MusicOne]

John

I don't have Galliano playing bandoneon, though he is a superb player, and did play some the other night.

For bandoneon & guitar, my collection is limited, but I can highly recommend, subject to potentially important caveats -

Ciriaco Ortiz - Conversando Con El Fueye (El Bandoneon – EBCD 57): bandoneon & two guitars

Los Provincianos 1931/1934 • Trio Ciriaco Ortiz 1931/1955 (Euro Records S.A. – EU 17024, RCA Victor – 8287 670094-2): Ortiz again, some tracks trio, others sextet

Various - Café de los Maestros (Surco Records J.V. – 9881787, Universal Music Latino – 9881787, Seminal – 9881787): does for 1950s-60s tango what Ry Cooder did for Ruben Gonzalez and the other Cuban maestros: get them well recorded before they all drop off the twig.

The caveats:

The first two recommendations are historic recordings, so if "being there" fidelity is a requirement, they will disappoint.

The third showcases the florid style of tango* against which Piazzolla reacted, for good reason in my view. But it's lovingly done, and features many fine second generation Argentinian players (the guys who came after folk like Ortiz and Troilo). And it has a couple of fine bandoneon solos (and lots of bandoneon in ensemble) but no bandoneon with just guitar.

*I prefer the more straight-ahead gutsiness of the 1920s-1945 outfits.

Ken

Many thanks for the info, Ken....much appreciated.

Must say, all of your posts are beautifully written...do you write professionally?

John.

[MusicOne]

Hi

Maybe that's why he became a conductor?

Cheers

mick

Hi Mick

Thanks for posting the Ben Zander link, mate....great stuff....a real communicator. I might have overstated my position a bit. Most classical music enthusiasts I have questioned over the years, do say that they have always had a liking , or preference, for classical music and they believe they were born with it, or can't remember a time when classical music was not their preferred genre.

Sorry, Mick, but I'm not a fan of rock music....I've listened to many different styles of rock and I'm afraid it just leaves me cold. I guess it's a matter of taste, really....some have it, some don't....Ha Ha!

Cheers, John.

[Super Mustud]

I read this and was extremely sceptical but something made me want to try it. So I popped 2 anchovies in an Old Pulteney 17yo ("The Maritime Malt").

You're sick.

Did you shake, not stir?

[mickj1]

Hi Mick

Thanks for posting the Ben Zander link, mate....great stuff....a real communicator. I might have overstated my position a bit. Most classical music enthusiasts I have questioned over the years, do say that they have always had a liking , or preference, for classical music and they believe they were born with it, or can't remember a time when classical music was not their preferred genre.

Sorry, Mick, but I'm not a fan of rock music....I've listened to many different styles of rock and I'm afraid it just leaves me cold. I guess it's a matter of taste, really....some have it, some don't....Ha Ha!

Cheers, John.

Hi John

No need to apologise for your tastes, diversity of opinion is part of what makes SNA such a good forum.

I believe Zander himself makes much the same point as you do when he considers that only a small proportion of his audience can't imagine their lives without classical music.

On the other hand I have met quite a few classical musicians who happily play and listen to rock and especially jazz as well as to their professional musical choice.Some are excellent jazz musicians. Eclecticism is also a feature of many classical composers.

I think that Zander is trying in his own way to break down some of the elitism and thereby encourage wider participation, which is why I posted the link.

Cheers

Mick

Edited September 18, 2012 by mickj1

[Super Mustud]

Many thanks for the info, Ken....much appreciated.

Must say, all of your posts are beautifully written...do you write professionally?

John.

Agreed.

[Catostylus]

Did you shake, not stir?

I keep forgetting that stirring is your job.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Catostylus