Why don't people like classical music?

You also seem to think that everything that sucks cannot be art. Why Opeth isn't artistic? There rip off some bands and they completely suck, true, but there is no other band that sounds exactly like them, they have their own identity. So why can't they be artistic?
 
infoterror said:
"Entertainment" is for people with no internal mental life.

Re: Opeth - they're a pathetic ripoff of progressive bands, and in my view, do not attempt anything impressive. I am reasonably impressed by King Crimson, Camel, Yes and Jade Warrior, although I think Opeth have a slicker aesthetic.

Dude first of all you need to stop taking life so seriously, you'll enjoy it a lot more. One doesn't constantly have to ponder the meaning of life to have an "internal mental life". Sometimes it is ok to watch a basketball game, or play catch with a dog, or visit with good friends just because its fun. Infact I would argue people who do so would have better "internal metal lives" because as we know, when one focuses exclusively on one thing thier perception of this thing almost always becomes blurred.

Second of all I really want know how Camel's album about Snow Geese has more integrity then Opeth's "My Arms Your Hearse".
 
crimsonfloyd said:
Sometimes it is ok to watch a basketball game, or play catch with a dog, or visit with good friends just because its fun. Infact I would argue people who do so would have better "internal metal lives" because as we know, when one focuses exclusively on one thing thier perception of this thing almost always becomes blurred.

Agreed.
 
crimsonfloyd said:
Dude first of all you need to stop taking life so seriously, you'll enjoy it a lot more. One doesn't constantly have to ponder the meaning of life to have an "internal mental life". Sometimes it is ok to watch a basketball game, or play catch with a dog, or visit with good friends just because its fun. Infact I would argue people who do so would have better "internal metal lives" because as we know, when one focuses exclusively on one thing thier perception of this thing almost always becomes blurred.

Second of all I really want know how Camel's album about Snow Geese has more integrity then Opeth's "My Arms Your Hearse".

We're not all the same. What delights you might bore me. Further, there's a place for everything, and sometimes screwing around is right, but things that I value I take seriously.

The Flight of the Snow Goose? Give a careful listen to how it's structured and how subtly the melodies interact. Compared to that, Opeth sounds like a monkey with a xylophone.
 
kmik said:
You simply over exaggerate the importance and artistic value of metal. It's just metal. It's played by people who can't speak English properly. It's ignored by academics for a reason (hint: it has nothing to do with Judeo-Christianity). Repeating a crappy riff for 5 minutes with some screaming in the background =/= Beethoven.

Disagreed.

Metal is one of the last holdouts of the narrative style of composition, which is superior to the cyclic-harmonic nature of modern music.

That others cannot see this doesn't bother me. Obviously, there's a lot they don't see.
 
kmik said:
which Yes album do you like, by the way? They are all to fucking HAPPY, imo.

They are. Prog has its failings. For less-happy, try King Crimson. I'm fondest of "Going for the One," but most of the Yes catalog before 1980 is good by me.

Camel is like Yes with less gratuitous instrumentalism, and more pure melodic songwriting. I recommend it to any of you.

Regarding Opeth, well, it's a small essay. Suffice to say I think they're pretenders to prog in the same way Grand Belial's Key (ultimate shit band) is a pretender to Darkthrone and GBH.
 
anonymousnick2001 said:
What is simultaneously destroying any attempt to achieve any sort of progress with metal as a genre is the tendency of the more intellectual fans to subscribe to ideology. And elitism. Because of this I am grateful for the always trusty hordes of beer-guzzling fun-lovers and their brand of entertaining, yet wholly-powerful and enduring brand of fun metal that retains the spirit of difficulty and exploration and everything metal has been...without the added cerebral baggage.

I'm aware of it that I'm generalizing a bit much and there are a few exceptions to the rule, however most of the people from the group that you mentioned are the ones that make albums that simply re-hash older stuff (i.e. most power metal). Re-hashing older material isn't retaining the spirit of difficulty and exploration because it's not attempting anything new, so there's no real "exploring" being done.
 
GoD said:
Eh, whatever else infoterror might be he's definitely a life-lover.

Well, I was just stereotyping anyway.

The Devil's Steed said:
I'm aware of it that I'm generalizing a bit much and there are a few exceptions to the rule, however most of the people from the group that you mentioned are the ones that make albums that simply re-hash older stuff (i.e. most power metal). Re-hashing older material isn't retaining the spirit of difficulty and exploration because it's not attempting anything new, so there's no real "exploring" being done.

Well, yes, you were generalizing, and that's okay, but I was referring to the multitudes who love Ozzy, Slayer, Metallica, Iron Maiden and Pantera. And I also said that it retains the 'spirit.' The spirit of the original bands the newer ones might be ripping off. It was an unclear post. I see that now. I also see your point.

infoterror said:
Metal is one of the last holdouts of the narrative style of composition, which is superior to the cyclic-harmonic nature of modern music.

Objectively superior? No, not really, no...
 
infoterror said:
We're not all the same. What delights you might bore me. Further, there's a place for everything, and sometimes screwing around is right, but things that I value I take seriously.

Well you'll get no disagreement from me there, I agree whole heartedly with all of that. Nevertheless stating "entertainment is for people with no internal life" is still completely naive...

infoterror said:
The Flight of the Snow Goose? Give a careful listen to how it's structured and how subtly the melodies interact. Compared to that, Opeth sounds like a monkey with a xylophone.

Does it matter how well the melodies interact if they sound like second rate NASH theme songs?
 
anonymousnick2001 said:
Well, I was just stereotyping anyway.



Well, yes, you were generalizing, and that's okay, but I was referring to the multitudes who love Ozzy, Slayer, Metallica, Iron Maiden and Pantera. And I also said that it retains the 'spirit.' The spirit of the original bands the newer ones might be ripping off. It was an unclear post. I see that now. I also see your point.



Objectively superior? No, not really, no...

Okay. I now understand what you mean.
 
Well....not sure what it has to do with philosophy, but the general music forum is for general metal discussion, so I guess a thread about classical ended up here. My guess is that the thread starter wanted intelligent discussion about it, and thought this would be the place to find it.
 
Of all the mainstream genres, death metal, black metal, and some ambient musics (kraftwerk) most resemble classical.

The scales are similar (diatonic + others, not pentatonic) but also, the structure is similar. Metal is narrative, as is classical, and uses a motif-based format. Rock uses... repetition and fixed form.