Stratification of Art... And Therefore of Music

OT

do you live in Ariccia???!!! But shipping a bit of porchetta to all the users? I don't know why but I was convinced that you were Apulian...

Marzapane wrote:

That it is an unbalanced person is a given, the problem is that if you tell him so, you are precisely seen as a snob ... and in the end he proves himself right, because you went to the conservatory

In reality, any other self-taught person will suffice ... who has studied.

Yes, studied is the keyword, because the Flemish produced pieces superior to those of a tavern, but a layman would find themselves more at home in the latter.

Self-taught can also mean that they studied the wrong texts, or, they understood what they wanted or could from the right texts, etc.

thallo wrote:

OT

do you live in Ariccia???!!! But shipping a bit of porchetta to all the users? I don't know why but I was convinced you were from Puglia...

it is indeed Ariccia (RM).

Dear friend, give me your contact details and I will see about sending a little bit to your house... What's the problem?

Anyway, sooner or later we will have to organize a dinner by looking for a place reachable by most of us...

I agree with Thallo but I support TheSimon's common sense.

I find the discussion very complex and it is always difficult to compare aesthetics that are very far apart from each other, so while understanding a composer's commitment to writing a symphony, Lady Gaga (just for a change) probably puts in just as much effort for a clip

I don't quite agree, Frank.

the commitment of composers is one thing, and that is not up for debate.

there are pop songs conceived in 5 minutes that have become eternal, evergreen (not just due to the imposition of mass media but also because of musical content of a certain interest), just as there are broader works composed over decades that have substantially less to say than the aforementioned song.

I do agree, however, on the evident difficulty of comparing aesthetics that are far apart from each other.

Aside from the fact that I was quoting Lady Gaga not without reason... I doubt she loses 5 minutes and anyway... the speed of creation (writing, if we want to remain anchored to the traditional world of composition) is not a relevant parameter; Mozart wrote a quartet in the time it takes to go to the bathroom to make a "phone call," but that doesn't make me think there is inherently anything invalid about it.

I am certainly not one to diminish works like Debussy's "Pelléas et Mélisande"

In my opinion, the folkloric aspect must also be taken into account in this discussion.

I think Lady Gaga is the same story as the Beatles ... in a more modern context

If we keep saying "there are pieces that..." "there are singers who..." we will never get out of it. THESE are the judgments that make a classical musician snobbish. Because they are baseless judgments, not based on real knowledge, partial judgments that compare the worst of one genre with the best of another. In our discourse, too, we continue to compare two very different production systems. We compare the role of the composer in classical music with the role of the composer in light music. But they are different roles! A composer can write a piece in a month, and it would be a meditated piece. Lady Gaga's latest CD probably underwent processing stages for months, in the recording studio, in mixing, in mastering etc etc. Undervaluing the technical work of PRODUCTION in light music is nothing but snobbery

I really don't understand why it is necessary to prove something by comparing genres when, in my opinion, the argument should only be proven through a demonstration of ability; it would be like proving a theorem that proves itself with addition and subtraction using differential equations. I have seen many people produce pop music, and produce very beautiful and catchy tracks, without having even the slightest knowledge of music theory, without having instrumental experience, nothing, just by ear. Well, I strongly doubt they would be able to produce a symphony regardless.

> by ear

For me, the ear is the greatest teacher, especially if it caters to "Taste"

Well then, what is the point of studying? Let's sit at the piano and start playing a note, then all the others at random until we find a sound pleasing to the ear and write it down, continuing, and there you go, the composition by ear is done... Everyone who has studied for 10 years would be a fool if it were that easy.

Anyway, enough, I'll stop here, because it seems absurd to continue justifying the obvious. It feels like a festival of banality... Perhaps this is the best description I have been able to give.

In my opinion, it is useless to compare apples with pears.

thallo wrote:

Undervaluing the technical work of light music PRODUCTION is nothing more than snobbery

I agree, those who produce might have studied for more than 10 years in a conservatory... a good sound technician works their tail off and is just one of those who makes up the workgroups following certain projects.

I think those who don't understand this have no idea at all how it works... 3 clips can mean 6 months of work, the result of the cooperation of various specialized professionals.

This obviously has nothing to do with the example brought up by Scalaquaranta, which is self-evident. I am saying that one must always approach these discussions with the right mindset and therefore without prejudice

You are broadening the discussion like a spreading oil stain when the question was very simple and direct. Beethoven's 5th Symphony vs. The society of gluttons/slackers. There isn't even a need to discuss it. We ended up crashing into the Beatles, production, engineers, and sound technicians, and so on... Just to take stock of the situation.

True TheSimon, but we didn't hear the 2 hours of chat between Scala and his "friend"... so in the end it is a matter of arguing in defense of both hypotheses (in a broad sense and not regarding the specific example).

Clearly for me there is no comparison, but I have the feeling that by reasoning as if everything were all the same, one gets nowhere, or one ends up with the notion of being stuck-up, which isn't necessarily true