Well I think that is because they became a trend. Trendy music seems to die out, i.e. disco, boy bands. Popular underground music seems to stay around for a while. Even when we think of the classical greats, I don't think they were all that popular in their day. I think today they are more known than they were in their time. That is why so much of certain artists' works were lost forever. Once people realized the genius behind the work, then their popularity grew. But there is no way to tell the future.
Music Through the Ages
- Thread starter Kenneth R.
- Start date
Well I think that is because they became a trend. Trendy music seems to die out, i.e. disco, boy bands. Popular underground music seems to stay around for a while. Even when we think of the classical greats, I don't think they were all that popular in their day. I think today they are more known than they were in their time. That is why so much of certain artists' works were lost forever. Once people realized the genius behind the work, then their popularity grew. But there is no way to tell the future.
Like I said the sheer number of recordings today as well as wide array of styles will deminish the value of any individual piece or artist. Where as there was a small handful of classical composers and just the one approach or style that was around for centuries. I guess when they were that awsomely perfect their was no need to do anything else..........
On further research I discovered the root of classical composition was derived from a Neanderthal woman that was draged by her hair into a cave and violated. Soon men began to make instruments from their clubs to mimic the sounds they heard. Shortly after that they discovered fire .......... and the rest is history. It is also rumered that this echoing from the cave eventually inspired the development of reverb, echo and delay effects.
On further research I discovered the root of classical composition was derived from a Neanderthal woman that was draged by her hair into a cave and violated. Soon men began to make instruments from their clubs to mimic the sounds they heard. Shortly after that they discovered fire .......... and the rest is history. It is also rumered that this echoing from the cave eventually inspired the development of reverb, echo and delay effects.
I looked and kept going. There isn't anything to see here....
*it confused me too*
Taliwakker
.....
Lol, no its the sound of Andrew Lloyd Webber rip-offs.
*Cue Phatom of the Opera cover*
Who ripped off Webber ?
I hope your not going to say Paul O'Neil and the bestest, mostist awsomeist musical genious's EVER Savatage ......... cause if you do Im gonna have to find you and chop off yer wittle pinky........
Seriously, I found it entertaining to learn that Paul O'Neil toured as guitarist with the JCS show at one time. Alot began to make since about their musical style. I actually saw that show back in 72, it wasnt a show it was just the concert, they performing the music. Ian Gillan didnt tour though he just did the origional recording, too bad. Anyhow I was really inspired by the then heavy guitar intro, cool in its day. I was a kid and remember nothing but being there and it broaden my tastes. Dont know any other of Webber's works.
I hope your not going to say Paul O'Neil and the bestest, mostist awsomeist musical genious's EVER Savatage ......... cause if you do Im gonna have to find you and chop off yer wittle pinky........
Seriously, I found it entertaining to learn that Paul O'Neil toured as guitarist with the JCS show at one time. Alot began to make since about their musical style. I actually saw that show back in 72, it wasnt a show it was just the concert, they performing the music. Ian Gillan didnt tour though he just did the origional recording, too bad. Anyhow I was really inspired by the then heavy guitar intro, cool in its day. I was a kid and remember nothing but being there and it broaden my tastes. Dont know any other of Webber's works.
TalesOfTerror
MetalHotSauce
I feel that way about most of the Western composers.
The Russians on the other hand (Shostakovich mmmmmm).
MnoruS
Member
- Oct 27, 2006
- 112
- 0
- 16
The present genre most likely to survive as classical works have done is in metal.
It's an exaggeration when people point out how classical works were for 60 instruments, or even a thousand. Those instruments were playing in unison, and there were only at the most five distinct melodies at any given time.
Now bands have about four or five instruments. Sometimes their interaction with eac other is pretty straightforward as we see in pop music and other times there is an application of counterpoint just like in classical works.
We also have to consider technologies, because a synth can sound like an orchestra on its own.
Mozart and co. remain pioneers because they did it best in their time, and no one's ever composed as they did. But with the variety of music that's out there now, it's most likely that stuff comes out more impacting even though not as 'intelligent' as these old works.
Honestly though, how many people nowadays are fans of Mozart the same way there are fans of Symphony X? Because even if someone likes Mozart, oftentimes this is just a casual thing, and they point out some piece that came out from the movie 'Amadeus.' So even nowadays, the true Mozart clique is very limited. I know I'm part of it, I don't know about others.
Another point. There has also been a significant shift from composing, to songwriting. Things are simpler nowadays because there's no need to complicate things. And there are songwriting masters who will eventually be mentioned in the same league as the compositional masters. I think that list will include people like Lennon, Michael Romeo (whose lead performance is secondary), Mustaine and Billy Joel.
I know I'm saying a lot, but the main point is that stuff that comes out today has the potential to be more impacting than these works of old, and it is my belief that natural selection will weed out the shit of today, leaving behind several works, most of which are in the metal and perhaps jazz (which I don't care for much) genres.
It's an exaggeration when people point out how classical works were for 60 instruments, or even a thousand. Those instruments were playing in unison, and there were only at the most five distinct melodies at any given time.
Now bands have about four or five instruments. Sometimes their interaction with eac other is pretty straightforward as we see in pop music and other times there is an application of counterpoint just like in classical works.
We also have to consider technologies, because a synth can sound like an orchestra on its own.
Mozart and co. remain pioneers because they did it best in their time, and no one's ever composed as they did. But with the variety of music that's out there now, it's most likely that stuff comes out more impacting even though not as 'intelligent' as these old works.
Honestly though, how many people nowadays are fans of Mozart the same way there are fans of Symphony X? Because even if someone likes Mozart, oftentimes this is just a casual thing, and they point out some piece that came out from the movie 'Amadeus.' So even nowadays, the true Mozart clique is very limited. I know I'm part of it, I don't know about others.
Another point. There has also been a significant shift from composing, to songwriting. Things are simpler nowadays because there's no need to complicate things. And there are songwriting masters who will eventually be mentioned in the same league as the compositional masters. I think that list will include people like Lennon, Michael Romeo (whose lead performance is secondary), Mustaine and Billy Joel.
I know I'm saying a lot, but the main point is that stuff that comes out today has the potential to be more impacting than these works of old, and it is my belief that natural selection will weed out the shit of today, leaving behind several works, most of which are in the metal and perhaps jazz (which I don't care for much) genres.
Not exactly, there is a lot more to it than that. I do agree, however, that a lot of people exaggerate things a bit when praising the work that goes into certain aspects of orchestral arrangement.
Not really. It can sort of get by doing simplified string parts but a single synth in a live situation isn't going to sound close to an orchestra. VST instruments are sounding better and better though and someone who knows how to program can make very impressive recordings using them.
Absolutely no way in hell Romeo will ever be regarded in the same light as someone like Lennon. I love the guys work to death, but that's one of the most overboard statements I've ever heard. Great guitar player and he's written some great stuff, but his stuff doesn't reach as many people nor does it touch as many people as the stuff guys like Lennon have written. He'll be highly regarded by Symphony X fans, but he'd be lucky to even get universal recognition even just in the metal community.
Of course there's potential, but to date there hasn't been a single artist/band/composer who's impacted the music world as much as Bach, for example. The Beatles come to mind as being debatable for that title. There are VERY few metal acts who I think would even make the list of artists who have impacted the music world enough to mention....Metallica for example. There are a few jazz guys (as far as those still living) who I could easily see being talked about for their contributions years from now. Pat Metheny and Chick Corea for example.
In all honesty, your assessment is from the biased viewpoint of a metalhead. I'm not saying that's a bad thing at all, because metal will still mean a lot to some people years down the road from now. As far as being regarded in the same way as the classical guys though? No way
MnoruS
Member
- Oct 27, 2006
- 112
- 0
- 16
But I'm not even a metalhead. I'm actually very much a pop guy, who sees the works of metal as closest in resemblance to that to classical music, and that have the best chance of survival.
I'm not saying all metal's great, there're only a few acts I like, including Symphony X.
Although Romeo and co. are not widely recognized, I'm pointing out that in the long run, their music will still be listened to by a small but strong group, perhaps for decades and decades yet. It's the type of music that inspires loyalty.
Times change, and situations change, there will never be another Mozart, because of the way we are bombarded with different acts and have a billion groups to choose from as opposed to how it was two hundred years ago.
It's like in the NBA, I highly doubt that another Michael Jordan will come anytime soon, because the standard of the game as a whole has risen, that it's harder for someone to really stand out.
I'm not saying all metal's great, there're only a few acts I like, including Symphony X.
Although Romeo and co. are not widely recognized, I'm pointing out that in the long run, their music will still be listened to by a small but strong group, perhaps for decades and decades yet. It's the type of music that inspires loyalty.
Times change, and situations change, there will never be another Mozart, because of the way we are bombarded with different acts and have a billion groups to choose from as opposed to how it was two hundred years ago.
It's like in the NBA, I highly doubt that another Michael Jordan will come anytime soon, because the standard of the game as a whole has risen, that it's harder for someone to really stand out.
Similar threads
