I would just like to say...

giancula:

And yet you go back to declaring your opinion of composers. I am, honestly, eager to post count (since you have not a lot yet) and see in how many posts you bash, or declare you opinion of other composers, or otherwise belittle someone who has a name...

But really, I will tend to agree and if I take into account my CD collection (which is more than 600 now), I will notice that I only have a few Bach CDs, and nothing else from Baroque. Which goes to simply say that I don't really enjoy Baroque music. And, until robin came to my life, I had NO Jazz CDs But I was fortunate to meet Robin and started listening and now I'm enjoying it very much! Heck! I wrote a "jazz" piece!

There are a lot of artists I vocally despise, but it's less about genre and more about their work.

Originally Posted by gianluca

Having a clear, strong and consistent set of preferences lies at the heart of developing a distinctive musical personality.The greatest composers were also very outspoken about the music they loved and about the music they hated.

Many were indeed quite outspoken about it, but most of them weren't very "clear, strong and consistent" about it, at least not when it came to their actual music. Beethoven depreciated Haydn, but who can't hear the Haydn influence in his music (well, fair enough, he was his teacher)? Schubert spoke ill of Beethoven, but at the same time admired him and drew a lot out of his work for himself. Debussy constantly railed against Wagner, but there's definitely an influence of some Wagnerian ideas in Pelléas et Mélisande. Schönberg and his students rejected tonality as antiquated but their music is full of romantic expression. Boulez rejected music before him, but the timbral relation to Debussy and Messiaen is obvious. Not even to mention the composers who switched their musical orientation completely several times during their lifes, like Stravinsky.

Just watch out! If you rant too much about pop music, you'll find it creeping into your own music before you even know it!

Anyways, I find nothing wrong with liking some kinds of music more than others. There's certainly music I don't like listening to. I also agree that as a composer you must take a stance, musically. You should know what music you want to make (even if that changes again after some time). But I don't know whether firing verbal shotguns at anything that you think doesn't conform with it is all that helpful. The fact that famous composers did it too from time to time doesn't prove it's a good thing to do, just as much as the fact that many composers were rather troublesome people to live with doesn't mean one should deliberately develop a bad personality in order to become a great composer

Take your stance musically. Or, if in words, at least choose them with care and be precise, concentrating on your musical vision rather than belittling others.

Originally Posted by gianluca

I am reminded of the words of the late Stockhausen: “Zappa was a lost composer: he wanted to please all sides - which never works”.

Hmm, Stockhausen or Frank Zappa. I wonder who will stand the tests of time...something tells me it's gonna Frank. I dunno, call it a hunch.

This is also why I think Corigliano is not one of the greatest composers. You mention him as an example of an “independent, someone who embraces both sides” but exactly because of this attitude, his music lacks a distinctive and original personal voice (unlike, for instance, Carter’s music which has an extremely distinctive personal voice). I think he (Corigliano) is a typical example of a type of composer you see a lot nowadays, a composer who isn't critical enough, who is afraid to choose, afraid to take a stance. Of course it's not good to be closed-minded, but neither is it good to embrace everything without being critical enough.

So you're saying it's completely impossible to be progressive artistically and combine that with success. Man...

I can understand your point that we shouldn't be so narrow-minded and it's okay to like other types of music, or individual pieces or songs from other genres. But why do you feel sorry for those who only like classical? There is a lot of great music from that time and if that is what makes them happy, why should you feel sorry for them?

Originally Posted by red82991

I can understand your point that we shouldn't be so narrow-minded and it's okay to like other types of music, or individual pieces or songs from other genres. But why do you feel sorry for those who only like classical? There is a lot of great music from that time and if that is what makes them happy, why should you feel sorry for them?

You know, I really don't have an answer for that. Why do I feel sorry for them? I don't know. I guess a person could be happy eating Big Macs all the time. "Man, this Big Mac, these are the greatest food of all time!" And if they're happy, fine, but is liking one exclusive thing really conducive to healthy living?

Originally Posted by red82991

I can understand your point that we shouldn't be so narrow-minded and it's okay to like other types of music, or individual pieces or songs from other genres. But why do you feel sorry for those who only like classical? There is a lot of great music from that time and if that is what makes them happy, why should you feel sorry for them?

Well, the topic's question wasn't classical in general, but classical from a specific time period. In answer, I feel sorry for anyone who only likes one specific type of music and can't enjoy others. It's extremely limiting to be confined to one genre or style when there are so many others out there - you're missing so much! Not to mention, listening to only one type of music can only have a disadvantageous effect on your music.

Originally Posted by IHoldThePenHaHa

just like you hate ALL pop music?

There’s a big difference between hating all music from a particular musical category (such as the category of pop music), of which all cases share common musical aesthetic features (on the basis of which one may justifiably reject that category) and hating all music from, say, before 1789, which is not a musical category in the sense that it is defined by specific musical aesthetic features all music from before 1780 has in common.

Originally Posted by IHoldThePenHaHa

And you know what- I forgive you for the "I hate pop music" thread.

Thanks, Alan, for being so forgiving...

Originally Posted by nikolas

giancula:

And yet you go back to declaring your opinion of composers. I am, honestly, eager to post count (since you have not a lot yet) and see in how many posts you bash, or declare you opinion of other composers, or otherwise belittle someone who has a name...

So what’s wrong with stating one’s opinion of other composers on a forum like this? Is it a crime to be critical of composers who have a "name"?

Originally Posted by gms5287

Hmm, Stockhausen or Frank Zappa. I wonder who will stand the tests of time...something tells me it's gonna Frank. I dunno, call it a hunch.

Well, something tells me that it’s gonna be Karlheinz, who IMHO was by far the greater of the two, but feel free to disagree.

Originally Posted by gms5287

So you're saying it's completely impossible to be progressive artistically and combine that with success. Man...

That's not exactly what I’m saying. What I’m trying to say is that this eclectic approach of embracing so many different styles and aesthetics (as reflected in the music of Corigliano and many other - mostly younger - composers) doesn’t enhance artistic progression or the development of a distinctive musical personality, although paradoxically this is exactly the type of music that happens to be very successful with the public. Nowadays young composers tend to recycle all these different styles and mix them up into one big stretch of music, containing a little bit of Mahler, a little bit of Stravinsky, a little bit of Gershwin, a little bit of minimalism, a little bit of 12 tone music (not too much of course), a lot of John Williams, etc. And this is a type of music I usually can’t stand. But apparently this is what the public likes to hear nowadays. However, that doesn’t mean that it is completely impossible to be progressive artistically and combine that with success – Ligeti and Berio are two examples of composers who wrote highly original and progressive music, which at the same time seemed to be relatively successful with the public.

Originally Posted by gianluca

So what’s wrong with stating one’s opinion of other composers on a forum like this? Is it a crime to be critical of composers who have a "name"?

Actually, no, but it's arrogant beyond belief to think that a nobody like yourself has the balls to presume to know an "absolute truth" about music and art, and to feel so confident of your own musical experience and academic credentials that you can summarily dismiss the work of so many artists.

Honestly? I pity you. You've been blinded by a bad musical education and fooled into thinking that those opinions you so blithely spew are anything OTHER than "opinions". The musicians you've badmouthed, some of whom I have met in person or had the pleasure of studying with, are far greater musicians than those who have so sadly twisted your little mind.

Good luck in life. I hope you're well-built and strong, because with a mouth like yours, you're going to be eating a lot of knuckle sandwiches in life.

Last response from me, Gianluca is now officially on the ignore list.