Quote:
Originally Posted by maelstromtempest
Bach was a great composer, no doubt, and it isn't wrong to exclusively listen to him. But seriously, the majority of his pieces are short and focus on the rythmic aspect of music. In my opinion, this style doesn't... carry me in my emotions. Mozart and Haydn lack emotional harmonies as well. So, I think you should try listening to some Dvorak, Tchaikovsky, and Brahms. This will give you a good idea of the importance of chords. Then, work your way back to Beethoven. I feel that his music is the perfect balance between harmonious and rythmic complexity.
|
*rhythmic
Emotion emotion emotion emotion emotion blahblahblahblah
What is an "emotional harmony", can you please tell me that? What about a harmony is inherently emotional? Isn't the lack of emotion an emotion anyway? Listen, I'm pretty sure you say the word "emotion" at least 7 times in each of your posts and it really isn't helping your credibility, it's the real reason someone here might have a problem with your posts, they just haven't admitted it. I can understand if you find some of the gestures and ideas of Romantic composers attractive, some of it is quite good, but seriously drop the whole "OH IT'S SO EMOTIONAL
" schlock. To be frank, it's an immature way to approach music, any music. What, do you think Beethoven just sat at his piano sobbing for hours as he transcribed the sound of his tears hitting the ground and that became the Pastorale symphony? No, he was still very concerned about technique, form, sound, orchestration, motivic transformations and coherence, all the things every composer of EVERY era was and has been concerned about. Now the thing with the Romantic era is that you find a wider array of "emotions", styles, images, what have you in a given movement which you don't find in the Baroque and Classical, but this obviously doesn't make any of this music not worth giving any time. Most "emotion" in music is created by the performers anyway, not the composer. I've heard some dim performances on the Fifth, that's just life. Honestly though, I know you're young so you'll get over it soon (I was there once haha), but there is more to music than the bombast. "Oh man, big loud chords and drums and oh my god this is so amazing and EMOTIONAL OH MY GOD", and then you hear the Goldberg Variations and you think, "Oh this is boring". I get where you're coming from, you're going to get over it. Because seriously....give me Bach or John Adams any day over.....Dvorak/Tchaikovsky (shudders). Stravinsky even said that his music doesn't truly express emotion, not in the abstract sense anyway. But aren't we all emotionally moved in some way by Stravinsky's music? His music is certainly not a failure.
For the record, just because *you* don't like a piece of music does not mean that that particular music lacks effect for others that hear it. Therefore, a piece can't "lack emotion", you just don't like it. People really need to practice more objectivity on this board.
By the way, if you're ever a conductor, please don't be the conductor that programs nothing but Tchaik and has to have flagrant and uncontrolled gestures just because THE MUSIC MOVES YOU SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH. Those conductors never go anywhere in life. They're trying to be Lenny Bernstein, but the thing they forget is that Lenny Bernstein is....Lenny Bernstein. He still had a lot of control and maturity anyway, otherwise he wouldn't have been conducting the NY Phil. Same with Michael Tilson Thomas, lots of energy and personality in his conducting, but out of control for the sake of "emotion", never.