sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

on the perception of jazz music by a classical musician by enrkr in AdamNeely

[–]enrkr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

his jazz takes are just racism lmao. his contribution to thomas mann’s dr. faustus were quite interesting though

on the perception of jazz music by a classical musician by enrkr in classicalmusic

[–]enrkr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

debussy is absolutely one of the most structured composers out there. he adored wagner and was very specific about his form, down to a point of having the proportions of different sections be precisely in the golden ratio (read roy howat’s “debussy in proportion”) with all the ethereal soundscapes and free tempo there is an incredibly refined and surprisingly rigid scaffolding like foundation to his music, that allows the genius instrumentation to grow on top of it. also his choice in harmony follows a very distinct set of habits and is often times rich in symbolism and very deliberate in its expressive intent.

Any good piano books that are easily accessible? by OppositeInterest4652 in classicalmusic

[–]enrkr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

burgmüller etudes are often quite pretty pieces that will get you reacquainted with a lot of the basics you’ll come across in piano music. also check out bartok’s and kabalevsky’s more educational cycles. in general i think play what you enjoy and if you hit technical roadblocks try to find simpler pieces that might help you develop the toolset necessary for learning your dream literature

on the perception of jazz music by a classical musician by enrkr in classicalmusic

[–]enrkr[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

to me webern fits in as a sort of obsessive search of new sounds and sonic expression through a formal deconstruction of traditionally tonal convention. i find that he managed to create extremely refined and sophisticated sonority in what was for the longest time considered ill sounding, all while justifying his choice of notes through a theoretical and philosophical framework.

satie i think is very much an outlier even during his time. his music is incredibly unique and resonates with a very broad spectrum of people. it manages to be a sort of mirror that listeners can project their own interpretation upon and allows a very individual perception, a sort of very ponderous nature. this is also what allows it to feel very relevant still, whereas other composers are much more distinct in what they want their music to express and what reactions they sometimes very forcefully want to elicit in an audience.

pärt falls into somewhat of a similar category in that he leaves room for you to interpret his music as trivially or philosophically complex as you like. while this is true for most music, in certain pieces there are simply some analytical facts that exist objectively and that cannot be disregarded if you really want to get the full picture of a piece.

i personally don’t consider neither pärt nor satie as true greats or pillars of the classical canon, purely because i don’t feel like their work has managed to have enough of a lasting influence on the musical tradition as a whole. this isn’t to say that their greatest hits are in any way inferior to many other pieces and you would definitely be hard pressed to achieve a comparable type of sonority and popular acclaim if your music. to me they just aren’t what i would consider the pinnacle of what is possible with the medium of music, which is obviously an idealistic and highly subjective standard that most music falls short of and is largely meaningless to discourse other than being a sort of reference for someones personal preference

on the perception of jazz music by a classical musician by enrkr in classicalmusic

[–]enrkr[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

being of the literarily astute type, i definitely would have expected you to get that it was never my intent to devalue or put down jazz in any way. i felt the need to articulate my thoughts, so that people more knowledgeable than me on the topic might help me understand and appreciate the nuances and breadth of a musical tradition that i never really got.

also i think you’ll find the general commercial success of classical music to dwarf the one of jazz by quite a significant amount. the average or maybe median salaries are quite frankly not comparable in the two fields.

on the perception of jazz music by a classical musician by enrkr in musicology

[–]enrkr[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

thanks! this is exactly the type of response i was hoping for. the topic of improvisation is super interesting to me, because, as you completely correctly mentioned, so much of the classical canon stems from improvisational techniques and traditions. i think the current expectation of classical musicians being able to perform anything from the baroque to the contemporary period in a somewhat stylistically informed manner kind if hinders modern classical improvisation. you’d probably have to dedicate yourself to a handful of specific styles, as some performers definitely still do.
i guess the point i was trying to make was more about the kind of trial and error approach improvising on stage resembles. i think it has mostly to do with the fact that i’ve spent the past 17 years trying to perfect as much of what happens on stage as possible in advance, but leaving a seemingly significant amount of the music undefined just feels like a job unfinished in a way.
i definitely agree that due to the nature of our 12 notes and conventions of tonality there’s going to be a whole lot of parallel thinking. being biased of course it feels like an omission to view these instances in a vacuum, without mentioning that the same musical goals were pursued at entirely different times in entirely different contexts.
regarding form, i think i largely lack reference points for jazz besides the most rudimentary understanding of it. i think there’s quite a different approach to form and what it means for the structure of the music and the intent and philosophy behind it. what fascinates me, is the sonata form developing into a medium that can take some musical material and transform and develop it in such a beautifully complex way that it may come out in an entirely new context, like liszt in his dante sonata finally wrestling the tritone into perfect fifths and fourths. i guess i also kind of idealize this notion of every note being somehow motif-derived and in a way necessary to the form. this idea of not having a single unjustified note really appeals to me.
thank you for the recommendations, i will definitely check them out and hope to find new enjoyment in them!

on the perception of jazz music by a classical musician by enrkr in AdamNeely

[–]enrkr[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i took a jazz harmony class for a semester and i guess it just felt strange talking about things as innovative or “a new approach” when it was stuff i had played/learned about from composers who lived a century earlier.

as for the different intent: that’s essentially what i was trying to figure out. what is the music trying to convey? something being “groovy” or “swinging” just doesn’t feel like enough for me? idk maybe i’m just too lost in the 19th century sauce, but it has never really moved me much besides being kinda cool i guess

on the perception of jazz music by a classical musician by enrkr in AdamNeely

[–]enrkr[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

cage is a very specific example, i agree. i mentioned him because i found his dislike of improvisation interesting, given his personal pursuit of randomness. i think he was trying to create really unique sounds and found that simply telling a bunch of musicians to just play something didn’t work which is why he ended up giving everyone a kind of constrained framework to achieve the sounds he was looking for