First of all, thanks for your response, and I will try to address you and then Terez.
-The piece can be played over and over again and sound beautiful every time!
This is highly subjective. Take something dodecaphonic and most classical listeners wouldn't find it beautiful even the first time.
When you said it is high subjective I agree, I was not being specific enough. However when you talk about dodecaphonic or twelve tone music, this makes me think of Phillip Glass. He will input a bar chord into a synthesizer, then we will hear the three notes play over and over
. To some people this is not a pleasurable musical experience. I confess I am one of them. I am thinking of Theile's Chromatic Fantasy in Fugue, writing this question, and if you know a piano piece in the classical repetoire that you enjoy listening to over and over again then it is interesting to pick apart what makes it so ... easy to listen to over and over again. and I encourage you to tell me what the result is.
Minimalism? Aren't Reich, Glass & Co classical composers?
Interesting. I have yet to hear Reich, but in my mind Phillip Glass is not composer that deserves a space in the classical music canon. I will say his music has elements of classical music, but let me qoute him in his own words: he claims he is "a composer of repetitive structures." So if he does not claim to be a classical composer, why should we arrive at that conclusion? of course one my argue that what a composers says in words is as important compared to what a composer writes in music, no doubt some of his newer music is beginning to step into the classical realm.
-There is some sort of narrative conveying in this piece.
Not at all. There's plenty of "abstract" classical music, without any narrative contents or the such.
Are you referring to a specific composer in general? I guess i was not being specific with saying a narrative makes a classical piano piece. Fritz Froschhammer may be a good example, specifically his work "nacht". It is structured, though very atonal, in some ways without a narrative, but I think it is an excellent contribution to the world of classical piano music. Again, what one agrees on as "narrative" is malleable and non-permanent. Someone could say a piece is a narrative, and the next could think it is a farcry from a narrative. Depends on your perspective.
This is to say that we hear a chord progression introduced in the beginning of the piece, and it is used to correct effect later on in the piece. This is too narrow a criterion to be useful. By the way, what does it make the use of a repetition correct?
Good question. I think this is a study of musical form. we have this format, AAAB, or AABB or AABA or ABBA and all of the different variations. It makes the audience pick up certain themes and hold them, remember them. So to answer your question, what makes it ok to use repetition later in a piece is that it is introduced earlier, either once or more than once. If you hear it that first time, the second time you hear it, the melody is stronger and the piece is not a scatterbrain of elements whose form is ACDBECBA, in other words not well defined.
Don't reinvent the wheel, a pretty good and generally agreeable definition of classical (music) is given on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_music
Interesting. Though you seem to be making the assumption that wikipedia is the resource that is worth its salt on what what makes a piano piece classical--a fair question by itself. Is classification what makes a piece classical (ie."European music is largely distinguished from many other non-European and popular musical forms by its system of staff notation, in use since about the 16th century. yada yada", or is it purely a type of experience that one feels when listening to a piano piece performed by the composer perfectly, that which is hard to define in so many words.
Ok. Alf, thanks for your comments. I turn now to answer Terez.
agreeable definition of classical (music) is given on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_music
That definition is vague and also falls short of defining what is considered to be 'legitimate' music in academia.
I must say that I agree with you Terez. While I do like the structure of classical music, that the periods started and ended at a certain time, for example, that the baroque period of classical music started in 1600 and ended in 1760, it does little to answer what is on the table, if a unknown piano piece, then is it a piece that is classical music? Another way to look at wikipedia is with skepticism: that with anyone able to edit entries, how can quality come from that process? The counterarg being that with so many people editing the right answer is forced to the front, but I digress.
There was one that was just a random drawing, and the performers are supposed to play whatever the picture inspires them to play
I am little confused. So I could ask my brother, who is five, to write on a piece of paper. I could then ask him to play on the piano, asking him to play what the picture inspires him to play, and he will make classical piano music? I am not sure what I would hear would be nice to my ears...
Are you saying that this is what you are learning, and it is sad? Or that this is sad that there should be a better method?
you might as well just record the orchestra warming up and sell it.
If somebody recorded the orchestra warming up, nobody would buy it! So are you saying that classical music must have a price tag to be classical music? Is something only valuable if it has a price tag?? I hope not--one of the reasons I am not an item listed on ebay
all kidding aside, I hope that classical music is something special and not something that you can throw together on finale. I do not think that anything wonderfully classical can come from something that is through together without some thought, without some serious thinking. some risks, well, you get the picture.
There is something else going on here: it's not about reinventing the wheel, but about defining it properly, which I don't believe has been done.
I confess it has not been done to justice. I wonder what Franz Liszt would say to this question or Frederique Chopin, or Enrique Granados, or Bach.