Piano Society
Free Classical Keyboard Recordings
It is currently Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:31 am

All times are UTC - 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:35 am
Posts: 1418
Location: Gulfport, MS, USA
1. Mozart was probably the least under-appreciated of all the 'great' composers during their respective lifetimes. If anything, he was over-hyped, having made a fairly huge name for himself as a child prodigy. He performed in Schönbrunn for the Hapsburgs at age five. If you were talking about in the 20th century....again, bad example. Even today, that child prodigy reputation remains, and most laymen, if asked, would tell you that Mozart is the greatest of the classical composers, or perhaps Beethoven. All the world seems unaware of the reverence that both of them had for J.S. Bach....

2. Beethoven was only an 'apprentice' of Mozart through indirect means (he was a fan of Mozart, and he studied with Haydn, Mozart's friend and admirer). He never studied with Mozart, and the tales of their meeting when Beethoven was a child have the earmarks of urban legend. No one has ever come up with convincing evidence that they actually met.

3. Debussy was very anti-German when it came to composition, and the German influences he would admit to were few, Wagner being a notable exception. In piano music, he was most influenced by Chopin, by a fair margin.

I am starting to get the idea that you have no idea what you are talking about, and that you're just bouncing around Wikipedia pages and pretending to have a clue. Really, I had that impression earlier, but decided to hold out for further evidence. Now, there's no shame if you're not classically trained. But it would be nice if you would admit it, rather than pretending to know what you are talking about.

No offense intended, but all of these misinformed details are distracting from the conversation.

_________________
"Z Czernym poznałem się na panie brat—na dwa fortepiana często z nim u niego grywałem. Dobry człowiek, ale nic więcej..." - Fryderyk Chopin


Last edited by Terez on Thu Feb 11, 2010 11:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:01 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9638
Location: Netherlands
Terez - 3
The Pringle - 0

Terez wrote:
I am starting to get the idea that you have no idea what you are talking about, and that you're just bouncing around Wikipedia pages and pretending to have a clue.

I hadn't really followed this discussion, as I quickly get bored with long and winded, er, winding, arguments, but upon reading the latest illuminating post, I tend to agree with the above.

Mozart was an alcoholic... :lol: Where did you Google that up ? I think he was as sharp as a razor, and then some, right to the end.
Or no, wait... achoholic it says. What's that, addicted to having pains ?

Jack, what are you really doing here ? From your YouTube video, and the oblique PM's you sent us about it, I do not get the impression you are a fan of PS. It rather seems like you feel you have some bone to pick with us. I could be wrong of course, it's sometimes hard to gauge peoples' intentions. Maybe we should not even try... but we're such a nosy bunch here !

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:35 am
Posts: 1418
Location: Gulfport, MS, USA
Well, in the beginning, I thought perhaps we could have an interesting philosophical discussion despite the original poster, but then it started to get really difficult! :lol: I wonder if maybe it is the same guy that tried to submit his new-agey piano pieces here recently? That would explain the bone....

Looking back at that post, I see I missed several wrong bits, such as the 'Mozart was poor' myth, along with the alcoholic bit (he might have seen Amadeus). And indeed the Wiki page on Debussy says almost exactly what he says about Debussy. :lol:

_________________
"Z Czernym poznałem się na panie brat—na dwa fortepiana często z nim u niego grywałem. Dobry człowiek, ale nic więcej..." - Fryderyk Chopin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:29 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9638
Location: Netherlands
Terez wrote:
And indeed the Wiki page on Debussy says almost exactly what he says about Debussy. :lol:

Though not that he was influenced by piano music. That must have been an original thought :lol:
Surely, one can learn a lot in a forum :wink:

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:02 pm
Posts: 1167
Location: Piemonte, Italy
Terez wrote:
BIWIDNB.



HAHA, if I get it right, that is finally something we can agree upon.


Terez wrote:
I suppose it's okay for the original poster, but I don't like that one either! I know it was just one of those 95% of all statistics that were made up on the spot, but lots of people like older music; it's the crazy contemporary stuff they tend to not get. Well, most people can handle this sort of music better when it's incidental music in a film or some other kind of drama, because it isn't trying to be music for the sake of music; that goes for all 'classical' music, but more so for the wildly dissonant music. But if you take a random poll, I'd guess at least 20-30% of people would like a broad range of classical music, and even more would like a smaller range of it.



My definition was tongue-in-cheek of course. How could you possibly run a survey on every supposedly classical piece of music? Aside from that, the five per cent boundary is more or less the proportion of classical on all music sales (again, they are rough figures, since they do vary with the different countries and, again, depend on which shelf you find Bocelli's crossover or Allevi's fashionable emptiness -but they're usually accounted as classical, this is what we have come to... :?) You could call that the Marketeer's criterion. 8) As good as another.

Seriously, as Scott has already pointed out, the definition of 'Classical' music can only be outlined by looking at the music landscape from a certain (temporal) distance (after all, being "classical", it cannot belong to the contemporary turmoil by definition), but it's quite sure that since the end of WWII, art music has radically changed in many aspects. Art in general has.


Terez wrote:
His defense tactics still amaze me. He liked to question students about things that they 'liked', asking this and that about the piece or the composer or whatever, and always coming to the conclusion that we didn't know the piece well enough to like it.



This is crap. One essential quality of art music is that offers multiple tiers of understanding and fruition -you don't need to reach one to have the 'right' to like a given piece. It's obvious to me that the more you understand about music (inner process, compositional devices, milieu and so on) the better, the goal being always to increase the awareness of what you hear as a listener or do as a pianist, but what we may experience through music goes well beyond that.


Jackpringle123 wrote:
I am not totally sure about this answer. Consider a sold out concert featuring Freddy Kempf. If people are paying money to see him perform Beethoven's Pathetique, then how could it be that 5 out of 100 people are the only ones who like it? (why would the other 95 waste their money on something they value at zero)


Nope, that would be a self selected sample, how could it work?

techneut wrote:
we have to make this choice here on PS regularly as we claim to be a classical music site. But there is no criterium for this,



There should be, how fun a bike race, much better than my poll!


Terez wrote:
2. Beethoven was only an 'apprentice' of Mozart through indirect means (he was a fan of Mozart, and he studied with Haydn, Mozart's teacher). He never studied with Mozart, and the tales of their meeting when Beethoven was a child have the earmarks of urban legend. No one has ever come up with convincing evidence that they actually met.



I didn't know that Haydn was Mozart's teacher. ;)


Terez wrote:
I am starting to get the idea that you have no idea what you are talking about, and that you're just bouncing around Wikipedia pages and pretending to have a clue.



I'm afraid that it was my fault. No more Wikipedia to anyone, I promise. :)

_________________
"A conclusion is simply the place where you got tired of thinking" - Anonymous

Alfonso Bertazzi, amateur pianist.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: replies
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:32 pm 
Quote:
No offense intended, but all of these misinformed details are distracting from the conversation.


None taken--I am simply asking questions relating to the question I originally posted, and based upon what others have written.

You may (or may not) delite in knowing I do not enjoy Wikipedia. I find it useful for constants (i.e. formulas, the height of the highest skyscraper). Biographies, measuring what one has accomplished is a harder task, and should imho not be reserved for any jack who thinks he’s up to the challenge.

I find it interesting the challenge of one proving that Classical Music can be determined today, not by future music historians at some indeterminate time in the future. If all pieces could be gauged off other pieces, one might say Debussy sounds like Chopin, only more baroque, like J.S. Bach. Tchaikovsky sounds like Wagner only more systematic…

Quote:
Now, there's no shame if you're not classically trained. But it would be nice if you would admit it, rather than pretending to know what you are talking about.


Terez, I admit I have not studied the background of the classical forefathers in fine detail, but that is not the central question is it? It is defining what is a classical piano piece and what is not. And though I already have answers, I enjoy continuing the conversation.

Quote:
Terez - 3
The Pringle – 0


So that's what this is then--a competition? With all due respect Techneut, I never signed up to compete, and I do not wish to. I only posted this first topic for a discussion, not to keep score.

Quote:
I wonder if maybe it is the same guy that tried to submit his new-agey piano pieces here recently?


I will dissapoint you, I don't think I am capable of "new agey piano pieces" :oops:

Quote:
Mozart was an alcoholic... Where did you Google that up ?


If you read The Mozart Myth’s A critical reassessment it talks about it. I recommend it.

Quote:
Jack, what are you really doing here ?


As I state above, I posted a topic that explores what is a classical piano piece and what is not.

Quote:
I do not get the impression you are a fan of PS


I don’t know what I can do to convince you? Give you money? I have tried by writing you and telling your that I was... :?

Quote:
It rather seems like you feel you have some bone to pick with us.


No bone to pick sir.

Quote:
Maybe we should not even try... but we're such a nosy bunch here !


Being nosy is a good thing,

Just ask all of the piano composers who have created beautiful works inspired by others! :)

Quote:
How could you possibly run a survey on every supposedly classical piece of music?


I don’t think you could. One thing is if you tried it would probably take a real long time.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:14 pm
Posts: 536
Location: Illinois
Beethoven was never an apprentice of Mozart. Beethoven arrived in Vienna in 1792. Mozart died in 1791. It is said that he met Mozart when Beethoven was younger and that his intent was to study with Mozart, but obviously that could not have happened unless he was somehow able to channel Mozart's spirit.

Scott


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:02 pm
Posts: 1167
Location: Piemonte, Italy
RSPIll wrote:
Beethoven was never an apprentice of Mozart. Beethoven arrived in Vienna in 1792. Mozart died in 1791. It is said that he met Mozart when Beethoven was younger and that his intent was to study with Mozart, but obviously that could not have happened unless he was somehow able to channel Mozart's spirit.


Count Waldstein was (through Haydn's hands). :lol:

_________________
"A conclusion is simply the place where you got tired of thinking" - Anonymous

Alfonso Bertazzi, amateur pianist.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:35 am
Posts: 1418
Location: Gulfport, MS, USA
alf wrote:
Terez wrote:
BIWIDNB.

HAHA, if I get it right, that is finally something we can agree upon.

pssh, you say that every time we agree about something! And it should not be all that hard to figure out in the context. :lol:


Alfie wrote:
I didn't know that Haydn was Mozart's teacher. ;)

LOL, my apathy for the First Viennese School is bleeding through, isn't it? I suppose I had gotten that impression from the fact that Haydn knew Mozart when he was very young.

_________________
"Z Czernym poznałem się na panie brat—na dwa fortepiana często z nim u niego grywałem. Dobry człowiek, ale nic więcej..." - Fryderyk Chopin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: replies
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:01 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9638
Location: Netherlands
Jackpringle123 wrote:
[I don’t know what I can do to convince you? Give you money? I have tried by writing you and telling your that I was... :?

You have a thing about money, it seems. I was nonplussed earlier when money suddenly cropped up in your argument. Anyway, nope, I don't want your money. What a strange thing to say.

Now let me be honest with you. Your weird video, and the self-conscious way you presented it, has really put us on the wrong foot with you. It looks for all the world like you're trying to put us in a bad light - all three admins (including the site founder) thought so. Not that we worry about it in any way as it's not at all convincingly done, and we have many friends around the globe who will easily see through this. Still, I can't fathom why you did it and what you think to achieve, except for being eyed with suspicion in these quarters. Does that make sense at all ? Or have we got it all wrong ? If you did it with the idea of helping us, as I think you have suggested, then be aware that few things are more annoying than unsolicited help.

I have to side with Terez in that it looks like you are throwing all manner of irrelevant and sometimes dubious things in the pot. But of course anybody is free to do that, and I will not gripe about it. You'll have to allow me to take the p*ss every now and then though. Not being a scholar, that is all I can do :lol:

Well ok, spoke my mind here. If you have something to explain, then now would be a good time. But maybe you don't, and that is fine too (in that case, the suspicion will remain).

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 11:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:35 am
Posts: 1418
Location: Gulfport, MS, USA
Alfie wrote:
This is crap. One essential quality of art music is that offers multiple tiers of understanding and fruition -you don't need to reach one to have the 'right' to like a given piece. It's obvious to me that the more you understand about music (inner process, compositional devices, milieu and so on) the better, the goal being always to increase the awareness of what you hear as a listener or do as a pianist, but what we may experience through music goes well beyond that.

I know it's crap, and I also know why he spouted this crap. He has obviously had a good number of people over the years say that they don't like his music. He probably feels that they are ignorant and don't like his music because they don't understand it. So, if he wants to maintain this view, he has to also maintain the reverse, that you must know a piece of music very well to like it. He says that he also doesn't like it when people tell him that they like his music, mostly because he sees himself and a few others as the musical elite, and everyone else as the unwashed masses (and of course he doesn't say that). He doesn't care about your opinion unless you also toss out some detail that shows you are trained, such as a comment about the form or some such.

Which reminds me....Chopin did the same thing. In one of his letters, he tells his friend Tytus about a small private-ish performance, and how he got all sorts of compliments from various people, but one man said 'I have never heard anything written in that form before.' And Chopin tells Tytus, 'I think that man understood me better than anyone else.' :lol: I think Chopin was a little more entitled to be a snob....but he was definitely a snob.

_________________
"Z Czernym poznałem się na panie brat—na dwa fortepiana często z nim u niego grywałem. Dobry człowiek, ale nic więcej..." - Fryderyk Chopin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:03 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9638
Location: Netherlands
I'd like to repeat in public what I just replied to Jack's PM to me.

Quote:
So have you now helped would-be composers, by telling them they have to be as good as Buxtehude, or Bach, or Stahlbrand (*LOL*) ? And would-be pianists, by telling them they must be exceptional ? I still don't understand what you were thinking. That video was an immensely strange way to introduce yourself, followed by such a lofty and ponderous discussion on the core value of classical music. Can you understand why we frown at all this ? If not, it may be best to leave now. If yes, you are welcome to the forum and maybe later as a pianist (provided you can stand our criticisms).


Jack, please respond in public too. This forum is not just about the admins. One thing we value here is honesty and openness. You still have some explaining to do, if not outright apologizing.

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:35 am
Posts: 1418
Location: Gulfport, MS, USA
I don't suppose we could watch this video? It doesn't seem to be linked on his profile or in his sig.

_________________
"Z Czernym poznałem się na panie brat—na dwa fortepiana często z nim u niego grywałem. Dobry człowiek, ale nic więcej..." - Fryderyk Chopin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:49 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9638
Location: Netherlands
Terez wrote:
I don't suppose we could watch this video? It doesn't seem to be linked on his profile or in his sig.

Nope, it's been deleted from YouTube already, after a PM exchange between the film director and Monica. I believe some others here have seen it.

We took it as rather derogatory, and the use of photographs (of Monica, Robert, and me), literal quotes, as well as the dedication to John Robson, are quite out of order.

Thinking about it, I see no future for Jack Pringle on this site unless he explains, apologizes, and bends over backwards.

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:35 am
Posts: 1418
Location: Gulfport, MS, USA
That is indeed strange! There do seem to be a number of people who come around every once in a while with a bone to pick, and you have to wonder if some of them are the same people, especially in a case like this where the person's actions don't make sense otherwise.

_________________
"Z Czernym poznałem się na panie brat—na dwa fortepiana często z nim u niego grywałem. Dobry człowiek, ale nic więcej..." - Fryderyk Chopin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:02 pm
Posts: 1167
Location: Piemonte, Italy
techneut wrote:
We took it as rather derogatory, and the use of photographs (of Monica, Robert, and me), literal quotes, as well as the dedication to John Robson, are quite out of order.


The dedication to John was really slimy, but to me too the entire video was clearly meant to discredit PS's admins, in spite of the ambivalent setting.

techneut wrote:
Thinking about it, I see no future for Jack Pringle on this site unless he explains, apologizes, and bends over backwards.


I suspect that Jack Pringle 123 couldn't care less about his/her future here, I mean, I can't see how you can prevent the very same guy (or whoever else) from coming to us under a different persona.

_________________
"A conclusion is simply the place where you got tired of thinking" - Anonymous

Alfonso Bertazzi, amateur pianist.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:10 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9638
Location: Netherlands
alf wrote:
The dedication to John was really slimy, but to me too the entire video was clearly meant to discredit PS's admins, in spite of the ambivalent setting.

Well put. I locked that thread as I wanted to ignore the thing and prevent long discussions. I did not really expect him to be back.

alf wrote:
I suspect that Jack Pringle 123 couldn't care less about his/her future here, I mean, I can't see how you can prevent the very same guy (or whoever else) from coming to us under a different persona.

We can't. But we'd probably recognize him by his style...

Anyway I am still interested what he has to say, if anything.

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: reply
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:43 pm 
Quote:
Jack, please respond in public too. This forum is not just about the admins. One thing we value here is honesty and openness. You still have some explaining to do, if not outright apologizing.


This issue has been beaten like a dead horse! And I don't think it relates to this subject but I will say it anyways: I originally made the video to tell new, prospective members that the standards are high at pianosociety. I realize now that such a video was not wanted and I was very stupid not to ask before posting it. I apologize for not asking and if I ruined or partially tarnished the reputations of the admins or any other member I mentioned. I also apologize for the dedication to John Robson.

Quote:
We took it as rather derogatory, and the use of photographs (of Monica, Robert, and me), literal quotes, as well as the dedication to John Robson, are quite out of order.


I used all three of the admins pictures as a visual aid to give people an idea about which site it was. As for the dedication to John Robson, my only intention is to honor his memory.

Quote:
The dedication to John was really slimy


In which way alf? I did not have the pleasure of knowing Mr. Robson, but I wish I did. I wish I could have asked for his approval to dedicate the video to him, but I would like to say when I die I would rather my name be remembered rather than forgotten, if such a statement can be forgiven for being very profound. I am insulted that you would call my dedication slimy, as it was made in the best of intentions.

Quote:
I don't suppose we could watch this video?


At this point, I don't want to talk about this video again, not to mention see it, or let others see it. If this issue could be forgotten.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: reply
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 8:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:45 am
Posts: 9638
Location: Netherlands
Jackpringle123 wrote:
This issue has been beaten like a dead horse!

It is indeed ! And so it had to be. A horse is not dead until we say it is.
You need to realize that you can't step on our toes like this without getting the full works.

Jackpringle123 wrote:
And I don't think it relates to this subject but I will say it anyways:

No it does not relate to the subject but we think nothing of going wildly OT when needed.

Jackpringle123 wrote:
I originally made the video to tell new, prospective members that the standards are high at pianosociety.

What makes you think that
a) such a thing is needed
b) people would watch your video
c) and if they did, would take it seriously ?

You're talking bollocks anyway. One doesn't have to be an exceptionally gifted pianist to be admitted here. What we expect is musicality, dedication, sufficient preparation, reasonable accuracy, and a pleasant sound. There are plenty of amateurs here who can achieve that without being world-class pianists. I don't think you have lurked around here long enough to see that.

Jackpringle123 wrote:
I realize now that such a video was not wanted and I was very stupid not to ask before posting it. I apologize for not asking and if I ruined or partially tarnished the reputations of the admins or any other member I mentioned. I also apologize for the dedication to John Robson.

Don't flatter youself ... it would take a bit more to ruin or tarnish our reputation.
But I appreciate your apologies.

Jackpringle123 wrote:
I used all three of the admins pictures as a visual aid to give people an idea about which site it was. As for the dedication to John Robson, my only intention is to honor his memory.

That may be so, but that was not the impression it made. I know of al least one other regular PS member here who was quite distressed by the way you went about it, to the point of wishing you gone as soon as possible.

Jackpringle123 wrote:
In which way alf? I did not have the pleasure of knowing Mr. Robson, but I wish I did. I wish I could have asked for his approval to dedicate the video to him, but I would like to say when I die I would rather my name be remembered rather than forgotten, if such a statement can be forgiven for being very profound. I am insulted that you would call my dedication slimy, as it was made in the best of intentions.

Pardon me, but is not for you to feel insulted here. Actually, after the insinuating tone of your video, this dedication added insult to injury, making rather a mockery of John's memory. I accept you probably did not intend it this way, but again, that was the impression it made. For God's sake, will you think before you write something for all the world to see....

Jackpringle123 wrote:
At this point, I don't want to talk about this video again, not to mention see it, or let others see it. If this issue could be forgotten.

Fair enough. I think everything has been said by now. Go forth and sin no more.....

_________________
Nothing is always absolutely so -- Sturgeon's law
Chris Breemer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Distinction between Classical and Non-Classical Piano Music
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 2:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:25 am
Posts: 15
I didn't really feel like reading through all the previous posts, but here's my opinion... "Classical" can't really be defined objectively because it's far too ambiguous and has obviously evolved through time. Now if we get more specific to say... Romanticism or Minimalism, we can say things like "the composition must contain a wide tonic range and explore unorthodox harmonic progressions" or "it must rely on repetitive and conservative structure."

I think the REAL reason the starter of this thread posted this topic was to compare modern "youtube composers" with the ones on this forum or even the legendary ones (I'm not talking skill-wise, but taste-wise). I think we can all point out the difference between the repetitive "1-4-5" type of music that novice composers tend to limit themselves to, compared to... say.. Bach's fugues. I know we've all seen the pianist/composer who just repeats arpeggios in one hand and and bangs out octaves in the other.

This isn't to say that classical music is limited to the elitists, but due to the popularity of predictable and overplayed harmonic progressions from the pop genre often dubbed as "classical," we must draw the line somewhere, else there'd be no reason to discriminate different forms of music under different names, we'd just call it "music."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group