classical music, as a genre

[kola]

[quote][i]Originally posted by ghosty[/i]
Ever take a look at the $4.99 discount rack of Tower Records? "Berlin Hits", "Ramones Hits","Talk Talk Hits", "The Fixx Hits", "Spandau Ballet Hits", "The Motels Hits", "Kajagoogoo Hits", "New Wave Hits Of The 80's" etc. [/quote]

our local tower was the best shop in town, until it closed down and is now an overpriced boho clothing chain...

[quote][i]Originally posted by st arry[/i]
The old masters gave us the triumph of the western harmonic scale and all the possiblities that has and still has. All the melodic variations and harmonic possibilities. Music ends up being all one entitity - or at least intelligent music does.
[/quote]

i'd agree with the second part of that - to hell with genres, but give me a blues scale over dorian any day of the week.

[Ape Module]

My old man was a huge classical nut as well as a jazzhead, so I grew up with a lot of the best of both.

There are some individual classical (& baroque, romantic, etc.) pieces that I find very moving, but overall too much of it is too frilly or bombastic for me. I got no prob saying my tastes are markedly lower-brow than most classical music.

However, I am quite fond of 20th century composers like Lutoslawski, John Cage, minimalists like Steve Reich, Karlheinz Stockhausen, etc. and I am VERY into electronic composers like Pauline Oliveros, Morton Subotnick, Gordon Mumma, David Tudor, Ilhan Mimaroglu, Milton Babbitt, Alvin Lucier, etc.

[Ape Module]

...to the actual question from the first post, I DO think the contributions of Beethoven and Chopin, etc. are still relevant. Though a lot of younger people couldn't care less about music that was made more than two months ago, if you look at the continuum of music and its chronology, you can see how classical composers informed the work of bands like the Beatles, who in turn influenced so many.

I'd add that most of the attempts to blend classical music or instruments with "rock" were largely failures. At least I personally can't stand a lot of the prog rock that used string sections, etc. like Yes or Moody Blues.

[st arry]

The Moody Blues only used an orchestra on their first album as far as I know, they normally employed a mellotron. On the Beatles McCartney's Blackbird was apparently inspired by a Bach Bouree. It's more about this kind of influence than an attempt to specifically blend them. It's all cut from the same cloth. Of course classical music uses different instruments to express the music. It's the same western harmonic music but it's written to sound on particular instruments. You could say they aren't much of an influence on music now, but as you also say anything more than two months old isn't anyway. But the best music coming out now will draw on the best of the past, will keep the flag flying. Although the mainstream may have abandoned it for now it could still resurge with a prominent world famous exponent.

To me blues is a relatively simple musical approach which I find hard to enjoy, unless mixed with other musical elements. It's one of those genres that I think can ghetto-ize itself. If pop music or classical music as we know it in their classic forms re-emerges it will do so as 'popular' music and part of a creative mainstream. At present I think there is probably more good pop music in the far east than the west.

[kola]

[quote][i]Originally posted by st arry[/i]To me blues is a relatively simple musical approach which I find hard to enjoy, unless mixed with other musical elements. [/quote]

absolutley spot on... the blues scales are all i ever play in, but i don't play blues at all - i use them in my own synthpop music to give it that melancholy edge - you've got to mix in a little bit of this and that (like a spanish gypsy or indian scale) to make it more interesting...