How many Opeth fans enjoy "classical" music?
- Thread starter soundave
- Start date
Stilgar
Berzerker
I go through periods where I listen to a lot of classical music. When people see my CD collection, they often get confused, since it spans over so many gengres. Close minded people. 
I reccomend anyone interested in classical guitar or classical music check out David Russell, he's a phenominal guitar player.
go to http://www.davidrussellguitar.com and go to the media player.
it was so great to see him live too
go to http://www.davidrussellguitar.com and go to the media player.
it was so great to see him live too
MegaMoose said:
Its just like loads of people call anything with electric guitars 'Rock Music' .. doesnt bother me really.. it's their ignorance and up to them how they choose to label things.
rrjii2000
Member
Igor Stravinsky - he composed the contriversial "The Rite of Spring" which actually caused riots outside the venue when it was first preformed back in the 1940's. To my understanding it was underlying satanic content that started the riot. Never the less, it's a great piece.
I also enjoy other classical composers
I also enjoy other classical composers
Powers
Good Morning USA!
daz436 said:
Agreed. It's a very closed minded idea, however it seems that for the sake of this discussion it would help.
soundave said:
I'm really into classical music, and actually most of the stuff that I write is symphonic/orchestral. I'd say that, within the metal community, fans of the Symphonic metal and prog ala After Forever, Therion, Nightwish, Symphony X, etc would be the most likely to appreciate classical music, although Opethians tend to be pretty open minded to different styles of music as well. As far as metal goes, though, I would argue that Opeth lean more towards jazz than classical, especially since the Martins joined.
btw if anyone wants to hear my stuff, it's here:
http://www.myspace.com/tedpinson
rrjii2000 said:
Lately I've been listening to The Rite of Spring, and I'm finding it quite hard to get into, but it's really interesting. Not that anyone cares.
rrjii2000 said:
the premiere of the rite of spring was in 1913. there was indeed a scandal at the premiere which started during the performance (which continued outside as well). it wasn't just over the music, but also over the unconventional performance of the ballets russes dance company. there is strictly speaking no satanic content in the ballet, as its subtitle, "pictures from pagan russia" indicates. the ballet depicts a pagan ritual which culminates in a sacrifice. since the fights among the audience had supposedly started earlier on in the performance, we may assume that the fights did not start upon people being enraged by the fact that the work ends in a sacrifice. the first part of the ballet indeed has no such morbid themes, but is a celebration of the coming of spring. it also is good to bear in mind that the first concert performance of the work a year (again in paris) was a complete success. stravinsky has expressed his preference for the rite of spring as a concert piece over the performance on stage.
stravinsky later wrote a version of the score for four hands, which should also be heard along with the original orchestral version.
i especially recommend these two recordings of the work:
stravinsky conducting columbia symphony orchestra - 1960 - (available on columbia)
fazil say's unique recording of the four hand piano version by himself - achieved by overrecording (teldec)
but i should add that my favorite recording of the two last movements is the 1969 recording by the new york philarmonic conducted by pierre boulez (sony)
brownette
.:. next to his name .:.
As a violinist I really have an appreciation for strings...
I'm a big fan of all classical music, especially the more progressive variations, such as classical music that's mixed with a beat...
I just.. really love strings music
I'm a big fan of all classical music, especially the more progressive variations, such as classical music that's mixed with a beat...
I just.. really love strings music
entanglement
Member
Abhorsen
Long Distance Voyager
I listen to quite a bit of classical myself. Mostly Mahler, Beethoven, Sibelius, and Shostakovich with a smattering of Mozart and Bach thrown in for good measure.
I think it's kinda pointless... listening to classical music, I mean.
Why look back when you can look forward?
Classical music is ok in movies sometimes but other than that: NO THANKS.
Why look back when you can look forward?
Classical music is ok in movies sometimes but other than that: NO THANKS.
vampyré said:
It's so DAMN well made. Look at the effort put into composing and even PLAYING classial pieces. There was no disortion, no double kicks, hardly any drums, no catchy singing. But pure composition. Classical music is melodically perfect. It's leaps and bounds above music we listen to today, musically.
vampyré said:
The complexity and nuance of it goes WAY beyond any other type of music. Trust me, Opeth and the like are extremely simplistic compared to Beethoven. In pretty much every way possible.
What do you mean why look back? Does that mean no listening to music from the 70's, 80's, or 90's? Classical music is the foundation for most modern music, although it is much more complex. Why should you not experience a masterpiece just because it was created hundreds of years ago? Time doesn't make things worse, unless you're a trendy douchebag.
Similar threads
