 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-10-10 22:16
Perhaps it's just a metaphor. Why would anyone use Mr.Springsteen as a comparitor when Bob Dylan would be more appropriate. I do agree,however, that the Arts needs more publicity directed at young people.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2005-10-10 23:36
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
If classical music is being played and nobody is listening, does it have any cultural impact?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Phillips
Date: 2005-10-11 00:48
Yes, a falling tree produces noise --whether or not that noise is heard.
Yes, classical music has a cultural impact --unless it is an ignored recording.
Bob Phillips
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: johnsonfromwisconsin
Date: 2005-10-11 03:10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If classical music is being played and nobody is listening, does it have any cultural impact?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, and that's the problem.
-JfW
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2005-10-11 03:48
It's the kiss of death because the type of people that often demand such things as Beethoven's superiority to Springsteen are quite often elitist snobs, and whether or not you actually are one, you are grouped in the elitist snob category by making such a statement.
When was the last time someone came out in public making a statement of "Springsteen is better than Beethoven," expecting an uproarious response from the public at large in favor of one or the other? It just doesn't happen.
For me, I ask "better at what?" Are we comparing ravens and writing desks here?
As for "cultural impact," when the local classical station stops calling itself "Southern California's home for arts and culture," I'll take its views on culture into account. The same goes for the New Grove's "premier authority on all aspects music" slogan. This declaration by academic-type classical people that they are all that's important and superior in music only serves to lessen their relevance.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-10-11 13:55
"Why is it the kiss of death to say that Beethoven really is better than Springsteen?"
Because Springsteen ain't where it's at today.......
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Poulsen
Date: 2005-10-11 14:53
My interpretation is that the quote, "But there's no question that any politician or individual will shy away from saying that Beethoven is in fact better than Bruce Springsteen," is not about purposely making a public pronouncement as it is about someone, especially someone in the public eye, avoiding the simple statement that they prefer classical music over pop because they will be labeled as elitist, even if they aren't.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2005-10-11 16:29
Can we PLEASE go back to discussing something really important, like what's the best ligature or in what year Buffet R-13 #330453 was made?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: joannew
Date: 2005-10-11 18:30
I've been to many rock & electronica shows, and many classical performances, in several different parts of the world. By a long margin, the greater variety age and appearance of the audience members in at the classical gigs: families with young kids, grey haired grannies, teenagers in jeans, business types. Most rock or electronic shows that I've attended have a very narrow audience, and I'm often the only one not wearing all black!
Who are the real elitist snobs?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-10-11 18:39
joannew wrote:
> I've been to many rock & electronica shows, and many classical
> performances, in several different parts of the world. By a
> long margin, the greater variety age and appearance of the
> audience members in at the classical gigs: families with young
> kids, grey haired grannies, teenagers in jeans, business types.
That's who I see at a Stones concert ... but wait, that's classical, too.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Don Poulsen
Date: 2005-10-11 19:38
joannew--
You say you've made your observations based on performances you've seen in many parts of the world. Recognizing that you posted from a French IP address, have you been to performances in the U.S. and, if so, how does the composition of the audience compare to other places?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: joannew
Date: 2005-10-12 06:29
I've seen only a couple of concerts in the US (one outdoor symphony concert where the fireflies were flashing all through the show - great effect!), but seen and played many in Canada, so presumably a close approximation. Doesn't seem much different from Sweden, UK or France as far as audience composition. Classical music definitely brings out a much broader segment of society from what I've seen, although I imagine fewer in numbers than contemporary music.
I must say French audiences are far more appreciative than anywhere else I've been - rather than the usual polite applause after the symphony, or occasional standing ovation, here applause is much more enthusiastic and goes on for ages, often phase locking into synchronized clapping for a time then back to the usual chaos.
The Brits can be surprisingly enthusiastic too at times: a wonderful concert by the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment in London last week, with Tony Pay & Jane Booth on boxwood clarinets, was really well received, complete with catcalls and hollering from the audience!
That would never happen in Canada or Sweden.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-10-12 07:52
This sort of cultural lament and misanthropy has been around as far as the arts/culture go ever since from the beginning. It´s part of the game. Distinguished MC´s of the so-called high culture step up and say "oh my, things are in bad shape and it´s getting worse", self-declared revolutionists answer "we don´t need your academic stillstand, you´re not reaching anyone but your puppets,evolution is elsewhere" and so on and so forth. Structuralist autisms. Most of us here shoot down the same alley when they label the poor few avantgarde posttonalists here "elitist nobody wants to listen to", by the way; aka, as if it were art whenever the audience says so. The snobs are always the ones differing from me. And the Julliard isn´t exactly a stronghold of the contemporary, they´re firmly wedged into their tonality-metaphysics. Here in Berlin, there´s the famous "ensemble recherche", and their academy offers youngsters a chance to accquire insights into the very unstable and challenging realms of posttonal music, from composition to instrumental skills - just an example that one doesn´t need to call up murky "tradition" and its pompy heroes to make our times move. This inherent distinction between high and low culture is metaphysics, another logocentric and structuralist relict,and neither Beethoven nor Springsteen are anywhere near the edge.
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2005-10-12 14:43
Markus -
I think the situation is different today, and worse than ever. Almost all funding for music has been cut out of public school budgets, and the supply of young players is being choked off. It's not gone yet, as shown by the number of people on this board, but it's nowhere near what it was when I was coming up.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinets1
Date: 2005-10-12 15:41
IS there anyone else here who cannot stand playing William Schuman's triptych?
I mean, come on, does the entire clarinet section really need to play altissimo G#'s?
in a roundabout way, i think this is relevant.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JessKateDD
Date: 2005-10-12 18:38
History has a way of sorting these things out. Since his death, Beethoven has been regarded by many, if not most, as the greatest composer ever. He has few peers and no superiors. He is to music what Shakespeare is to plays and Plato is to philosophy. He is the standard by which all others are judged.
"The Boss" is merely a popular rocker of the past 20 or 30 years. His fame is already in decline, and in 50 years, uttering his name will probably elicit the response of "Who?"
I'm not worried for Beethoven. Nor was he worried and knew his own worth. There is a story that Beethoven once attended a party given by the prince of Vienna and was offended that he was not seated next to the prince. He said "There have been thousands of princes and will be thousands more, but I am Beethoven!"
The same can be said when comparing Beethoven to people like "the Boss" or whacko Jacko, or whatever else flavor of the day is out there.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-10-12 18:48
I never heard of this Schuman "tryptych" (but I will check instantly, promise) - but indeed, yes, there are many many altissimo notes to be played, to come up to the vast majority of welltempered/pampered smoothy-notes clogging all (NO, NOT ALL YET!) winds from Salzburg to [insert here your city´s orchestra]. Yes, this is relevant, immensely so.
/Yes, Ken Shaw, I´m inclined to agree, and these grim circumstances make it all the more important and pressing to cross borders, bridge all and every gap (to quote L.Fiedler), from the chromatic scale of our instruments to style/scene distinctions, put more abstractly, to work against all entropy and homogenity.
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LeeB
Date: 2005-10-12 22:33
I really feel sorry for anyone who is firmly planted at either end of the spectrum. For them, there's less in the world to enjoy.
There's an enormously long tradition of cross pollination between popular music, and "academic" music. Indeed, a lot of classical music is pop music of yesteryear.
I think it's a bit premature to predict Springsteen's ultimate place in music history. Time will tell. I don't see any point in organizing various types of music into some sort of rigid hierarchy. If it speaks to you, then it's good.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grant
Date: 2005-10-12 23:49
I wonder if the Trombone forums have discussions like this one.
Peace on Earth and May You always have a reed that PLAYS.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2005-10-13 00:02
Grant wrote:
> I wonder if the Trombone forums have discussions like this one.
Dunno. I can bet they have significantly fewer equipment discussions though.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-10-13 07:00
LeeB, the point is that there is no "spectrum", because this concept treadmills on the opposition of "art vs. entertainment", "mind vs. body", "abstract vs. concrete", "intellect vs. emotion", "composition vs. improvisation" etc etc etc - the complete symbolic form of music is full up to the roof with those metaphysical impostors. Since the 60ies in the English-speaking world, since the late Husserl, Dilthey, early Heidegger et al in German-speaking countries there´s this rather fierce struggle to overcome structuralist antagonistic pair-ing. Those "any opposition is in reality a mutual dependance" are the most treacherous of false friends, because this bolts the opposition down for ever. "Spectrum" insinuates a range of harmony, a metacategory labelled "music", where every element contributes its own share of its own right - but this harmony is a blunt lie, it never exists, there´s always a style or a notion
m o r e e q u a l (sic) than the rest, one that makes sure how the elements of the whole metaset "msic" are aligned and accquired. Now the threat to this structuralist regime nowadays stems not from yet another position going like "now here´s the truth that alters all and everything" but grows inside this traditional hierarchy: Performers play on operastages as well as on the streets, composers write for electric instruments and renaissance ones, the whole electronic department invades everything form the most ordinary sound source to the inside of the performers body itself, through digitalisation anything that is different form anything else can be translated into digitals and turned into sound. Let the so-clalled "Boss" play his stuff as well as the billionth Beethoven concert staged, there´s no way back to those goode olden times (which they weren´t at all).
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LeeB
Date: 2005-10-13 22:52
Katrina wrote:
> Hmmm...Will anyone pay an expected $2 million for a self-done
> transcription of a Springsteen tune for 2-hand piano???
Perhaps not, but they might pay that for Britney Spears's bra or Elvis Presley's shorts.
By the same token, I doubt that the equivalent of $2 million will ever be paid for such a document produced by any currently living composer of "serious" music.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: john gibson
Date: 2005-10-15 01:40
Forget Springstein......Listen to Pete Townsend's TOMMY and you'll hear Rock music at it's finest. Orchestral perfection in a new genre. Townsend and The WHO are an amazing colaberation of harmonics, rhythm, instrumental integration and energy. Quadraphenia is another example though less orchestral. Perhaps the first attempt at Rock Opera was Townsends Quick One While He's Away. Movements, key changes, story line, and of course the drumming of the best stick man that ever was, Keith Moon. If anyone should be compared to the great classical composers it is Pete Townsend. The Who then should be the best comparison to a world class symphony. If you've not yet listened to TOMMY or the earlier QUICK ONE......you should. Then Springsteen will quickly fade to the back burner in comparison to any and all classical composers you can name.
JG
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Peacham
Date: 2005-10-16 21:13
Ken : "Not to mention the fact that their ears are RIGHT NEXT TO THE BELL, so they all SHOUT."
I must tell my trombone teacher he's taught me to hold it wrong. The bell's about 18 inches in front of my ear. Perhaps that's why it sounds so bad.
And in fact, there's quite a lot to argue about. Some trombone makers specify every part of the instrument separately.
-----------
If there are so many people on this board unwilling or unable to have a civil and balanced discussion about important issues, then I shan't bother to post here any more.
To the great relief of many of you, no doubt.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grant
Date: 2005-10-19 23:55
Markus,
Could you please clarify your last posting?
Peace on Earth and May You always have a reed that PLAYS.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-10-20 17:19
Hulloh-I already thought I got completely ignored...![[right]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie8.gif) ...Grant, my argument was basically aimed ad rem structuralism - it´s a poststructuralist argument that immediately pops p whenever two (or more) elements are set against each other, all those dualisms the Western world has become so depending on. One of those dualisms is,e.g., the one {art music; pop music}. Now those who appear to escape the basically unreasonable valuating of one above the other, what they really do is enforcing the interdependent rivality of those two. (To give a monstruos example: Consider the whole plateau about the pair {mind/consciousness/reason; body/unconsciousness/emotion}). My point was that to overcome this stalemate situation, one has to check the performance practice nowadays: Of course, if musical evolution and developement stops or at least is considered at its peak of realisation with the pair {Beethoven; Springsteen} (or whomever fits in for the respective party), there´s no consolation without false compromise for either party. But music moved on, it never stops or just slows down, nowadays you have all style barriers perforated by audience´s tastes, performers abilities´, composer´s ideas, from who play whom on which stage down to the disintegration of the chromatic scale, and don´t forget the whole incredible ongoing shockwave of electronics. This turning into a contiuum what metaphysics had so nicely chopped in discreet elements is overrunnning those stylish teaparty questions about who is better, tit or tat, reducing it to feuilleton basically. Music happens elsewheres, and completely differently.
I don´t know whether I have been able to clear up things a bit for you?
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-10-20 17:50
Markus Wenninger wrote:
> This turning into a contiuum what metaphysics had so nicely
> chopped in discreet elements is overrunnning those
> stylish teaparty questions about who is better,
> tit or tat, reducing it to feuilleton basically.
![[huh]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie11.gif) Sorry Markus, you've lost me ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-10-22 08:38
GBK,
My apologies-the wish to answer as swiftly as possible often lures me into packing too much into too short sentences, what usually should have taken more room to express.
What I meant was: Metaphysics/the tonal order of music is all based on establishing discreetely ordered sets, it´s about distinctive qualities, e.g. of the elements in the full chromatic scale, of what distinguishes Springsteen from Beethoven, of correct and wrong intonation, of theatre and symphonic concert etc. Now posttonal music insists in re-continuation of all those sets, of smearing over/blurring/destabilizing/making tremble all these distinctions, but n o t obliterating/destroying them (sic). The question which startet this thread is relying basically on one of those distinctions which are essentially outdated, it is only lazy habit that makes us still fall back pon those (viz Schönberg´s book on modern harmony, just for starters). Nowadays there´s literally not only a half- and a quartertone between to whole tones but a contiuum, which devours the whole-tone-concept itself. Pitches (ask the electronic department) are arbitrary selections from a contiuous soundstream, which is only outlined by the range of frequencies the human ear able to hear (and which is also made infinite by the transposing abilities of the electronic instruments-this is an age where the "harmony of celestial spheres" is actually a thing to be listened to, not just a metaphorical expression). There´s still the nagging problem of notation, because how can you notate a contiuum if not re-chopping it into symbolic representations of discreet elements, aka helping the badly bruised idea of extra-musical order back into the living room, although through the backdoor? ("etxra-musical", because the structure and order which is so lethally threatened by the continuum of musical performance and p l a y i n g abilities must not be itself part of what is ordered and structured by it). This is the prime fascination of performing and composing posttonal music today, this struggle to notate/make discreet a contiuum, and, to make a continuum what has been constructed in tonal sets (especially all non-electronic instruments).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2005-10-22 22:19
I get lost with big paragraphs, especially if they are highly philosophical. It's purely a visual thing, but breaking them up with lines in between greatly aids readability.
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2005-10-23 15:58
Alex,
Yes, my fault, I´ll keep that in mind from now on.
Roger,
I think this BBoard is the place for a bit more than those nagging equipment posts. We´re all performers, and the manyworlded plateaus we move around in are complicated and densely correllated - it helps to think about what we´re doing, and any answer that is simple is wrong, simply. There is this buddhist sentence that for a beginner there´s mountains and trees, for the committed there´s no longer mountains and trees, and for the enlightened there´s mountains and trees. I think, for us, as musicians, it´s essential that we, beholding mountains and trees, never ever fall prey to the folly that we think ourselves already on the wise side, though we may never be able to hammer down the criterium. I´m extremely grateful for any hard knock to the back of my head; I want to be taught things, and performance that is not thoroughly reflected upon and thought through is shallow rubbish for the trillionth time.
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: rogerb40uk
Date: 2005-10-24 14:16
Markus, to put it simply, I am sure you are correct.
Best regards
Roger
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
