This may seem a daft question, but what is the definition of “Classical Music” ?
I know the standard Beethoven, Bach, Mozart etc are obviously classical, but then we have modern music that is also – e.g Nils Frahm. If that is classical, why is not all instrumental music also classical – e.g Tubular Bells, Tangerine Dream etc etc ? And anyway, some of the “proper” classical has vocals (choral), so its not necessarily instrumental….
It can’t be that it needs to be orchestrated, as there is plenty of classical that is solo piano etc etc.
So, is there something about the structure of the composition that makes it classical ?
As I say, maybe a dumb question and probably irrelevant to me anyways as I hate categorisation of music (I either like it or I don’t) but I was pondering this as I was cleaning up my library the other day.
I’m not entirely sure, but I think classical music is made by and for people who have their own libraries.
It’s a good question, and I have wondered about this. I always thought that, strictly speaking, ‘classical’ music is of a specific period, but a quick online search muddies the waters and it seems now to be broadly defined by what it isn’t – i.e. anything that isn’t folk, pop or jazz (and try defining them too!).
Setting my pedants hat at a jaunty angle*. The classical period in music is roughly from the 1750s to the 1820s.
*Chapeau*
But wouldn’t that exclude Vivaldi, Handel and Bach, who are generally considered “classical” ?
Baroque rather than classical, but in day to day terms it doesn’t matter too much. Radio 3 calls itself ‘the home of classical music’ but plays a for broader range than the strict definition would allow.
As in “baroque and roll”, eg, Gryphon?
Well I have Apple Music and they have a specific Classical app. So it must be anything I can get on that?
We were taught that there are just historical periods of western music like baroque, classical and romantic. It all gets lumped in as classical out of laziness and for convenience as happens often when it’s too complicated to explain.
This ⬆️
Exactly
IMPROMPTU QUIZ: CAN YOU NAME THIS FILM?
Music Teacher: All right. Listen up, everyone. Can anyone tell me the difference between these two pieces?
High School Student: One’s pop and the other is classical?
Teacher: At least we know you’re not deaf. How about you, Mr. Spaulding? Could you give us a deeper distinction?
Student: Well… the first one’s bad… and the second one’s good.
Teacher: Well, that’s, uh, a matter of opinion, not a fact. I’m sure several people in this room would disagree. How about you, Mr. Manfield? Would you venture a guess?
Student: Well… You can’t dance to Beethoven.
Teacher: That’s very good, Manfield. Do you listen to much Beethoven?
Student: No, not really.
Teacher: How did you identify this piece?
Student: I guess I’ve heard some.
Teacher: Well, I’m sure the rest of the class can identify the other composer. You’re correct. You can’t dance to Mr. Beethoven. Can you tell me why, Mr. Manfield?
Student: Because the Beethoven piece doesn’t use a constant rhythm or tempo.
Teacher: And Madonna’s 4/4 time all the way through. The melody changes, but the rhythm is constant, so you can dance to it. The quartet changes both melodically and rhythmically.
Beethoven?
Nil points.
My first guess was Apocalypse Now, but then I remembered that was Wagner, not Beethoven……
So, I’l, go with Mr Holland’s Opus – only film I can think of with a music teacher
Mr Holland’s Opus is a good guess. But wrong.
CLUES
You might not have seen this 1988 film, but you certainly have seen some films by its highly acclaimed, now dead, American director. His 1957 debut film is an AW favourite.
The student who correctly identifies Beethoven’s music is also very famous and dead.
Seen it! I’ve not even heard of it. (I looked it up)
Cheating shows curiosity and initiative. Both highly commendable virtues.
River Phoenix would make sense. But not espcially up with his films so not going to pick one (but not Stand By Me I would have thought).
Correctamundo Signor Leedsboy! Your powers of logical deduction have not let you down and for reasons of time constraints I award you the top prize despite your lack of an actual answer.
River Phoenix’s 1988 film, it should be noted, is not a James Taylor biopic.
Coincidentally, I watched Sidney Lumet’s last film, Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead recently. I thought it was very excellent. With Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke.
What about my powers of logical cheating? Though I prefer to think of it as logical research.
The annoying thing about internets is that almost everybody’s got one but not everybody can be a winner. I do admire your audacity though.
What did Phil and Ethan think of it?
I am doffing my own cap to myself.
The History Boys.
I’m afraid the vast majority of the judging panel has popped down to the beach for a swim and can’t be bothered with responding to any more attempts, especially ones that aren’t “Running On Empty by Sidney Lumet, starring River Phoenix”.
I do think that The History Boys precedes the advent of Madonna (that one not the other) in other news in the film you catch a glimpse of a friend’s house.
Sometimes you should Google before engaging typing mode. This was one of those occasions.
Using my bumper Boys Book of Facts That No One Else Is Interested In as a starting point, ‘classical’ is a generic term that encompasses the following periods:
Early Music – up to 1600
Baroque – 1600 to 1750
Classical – 1750 to 1820
Romantic – 1810 to 1900
Modern – 1900 onwards
Interestingly, ‘romantic’ auto-corrected to ‘really manic’, which may have an element of truth to it.
The Baroque era is my particular favourite.
The if it encompasses all those era’s, including Modern (1900 onwards) then back to my original question- why is someone like Nils Frahm categorised as classical, but Tubular Bells isn’t ?
Maybe because Nils Frahm’s music is seen as more ‘intellectual’ than Tubular Bells which is tainted by being unashamedly ‘pop’. I’m guessing because I don’t really know, but classical music has always had an element of artificial elitism. Mr McCartney’s Liverpool Oratorio was scoffed at in some circles – although that might just be because it’s not very good.
Marketing?
Personally I’d stick Nils Frahm and a few others who are plowing a similar furrow into the loose definition of ‘neo-classical’. Like most genres it’s flexible enough to incorporate some pretty disparate musical stylees.
I listen to lots of music that fits roughly under the all encompassing umbrella term ‘classical’ I also listen to pop, rock, jazz, folk, techno, dub, reggae…I’m not snobbish about any of it. I either like it or I don’t. It’s all music.
Modern – 1900 onwards. That is the most Afterword thing ever.
Surely the “Early Music” period should be broken up in the customary way, namely:
Medieval – before 1400
Renaissance – 1400 to 1600
My absolute favourite is Renaissance polyphony:
Josquin, Tallis, Palestrina, Lassus, Ockeghem, Victoria, Gesulaldo, Dowland, DuFay, Obrecht, Monteverdi. Fantastic – all of them.
As I knew you dig Dowland, as do I, I thought you would be leaning into polyphony. It is when one’s mood is just right incredibly beautiful.
For the C20 debate about this can I recommend unreservedly Alex Ross’ book The Rest of Noise which is a fantastic and accessible investigation of what happened to ‘classical’ music after 1900 and why… I listened along to many of the pieces as they came up and learnt a lot about other areas of ‘modern’ than my own comfort zone of Reich/Glass/Riley. Messien is one great discovery made via this book.
Love Messian. Birdsong and Jesus.
The Rest is Noise is a damn good read. I’m just about to embark on Listen to This the companion volume to The Rest is Noise. For those seeking an entertaing and enjoyable way into ‘classical’ I usually recommend Clemancy Burton-Hill’s two books Year of Wonder and the imaginatively titled follow up Another Year of Wonder.
Listen To This has a lot of good stuff. I particularly enjoyed the chapter on Björk. However, overall, it lacks the frisson of The Rest Is Noise.
I kinda guessed it would. A collection of his essays written for The New Yorker is going to lack a little of the impetus of The Rest is Noise. I thought I should mop it up though for neatness sake if for nought else.
As others have said technically ‘classical’ always used to refer to a specific period of music, so Tchaikovsky who I am listening to right now is not ‘classical’ by that definition. But these days for the vast majority of people he clearly is. Essentially ‘classical’ is as useful and as baggy a term as ‘pop’ or ‘jazz’ or (shudders) ‘world’.
Nils Frahm, Max Richter, Einaudi et al tend to be put by the marketing people in that relatively recently created term ‘contemporary classical’. They might stick Steve Reich, Philip Glass and Arvo Part in there, as being deemed to be acceptable to the cool kids, but wouldn’t put in, say Mark Antony Turnage or James MacMillan, who last time I checked were very definitely contemporary and generally considered classical, so go figure.
As for Tubular Bells, musically its language is broadly pop based; its length isn’t enough to make it ‘classical’. That said the classical conductor and composer the late David Bedford arranged the orchestral version – maybe that would be deemed classical…
I think the short answer is that most contemporary composers who tend to be defined as classical are definitely working broadly within the musical tradition and influences of ‘classical’ music over the centuries rather than rock and roll, blues, pop or rock – and generally still have had a classical conservatoire training. But as the Duke said ‘there are simply two kinds of music: good music and the other kind’. He of course was a jazz musician who produced ‘’classical’ works as well….
Violin music, preferably lots of them.
You can’t beat a bit of ultra-violins
With a bit of mindless sax?
I think the advent of recorded music changed the definition. Prior to the 20th century, there would be the music played in concert halls, composed to a structure, by those that knew & studied “the rules”. Then there was the folk music that was improvised, played by self taught musicians, sung in pubs etc. There would be little overlap between the high & low art.
Records (& particularly) radio, exposed both parties to a wider range, and elements appeared in both.
I was just perusing the big river tax dodgers site and for those who may be interested they have the complete Erato recordings of the French pianist Samson François for the ridiculously cheap price of £27.25. Probably one of their occasional cock-ups. I have of course taken a punt. Fingers crossed it’s either kosher or they will honour the deal.
Edit:- The price has just risen to £85. My bill is still showing £27.25.
@pencilsqueezer – sorry to say, but I predict its failure to arrive, followed by a message indicating that they have encountered some supply issues and have therefore refunded your £27 quid. The buggers have done that to me on several similar occasions.
Yep. What you describe is exactly what I’m expecting. It was an impulse buy anyway triggered by the low price. Dastardly dastards.
Classical with a big C formally refers to the bit between the Baroque and Romantic period. classical with a small c is the generic term for all periods of orchestral/ operatic/ art music post medieval.
I really hate those classical music snobs (not you obviously) who use the terms ‘art music’ or ‘serious music’ as if anyone who makes folk or jazz or pop or rock or any other kind of music is not serious and is not making art. It’s particularly prevalent in the US; thankfully it’s never really caught on here.
Good point @blue-boy,
Within the world of orchestral music that Martin.S mapped out, there are many compositions which are anything but po-faced. The operettas of Gilbert and Sullivan are a classic example.
And there’s nothing odd about this. Sometimes when i go to the cinema I want to see Oppenheimer, Apocalypse Now or All of us strangers. And on other days I may want to see Barbie, Bridesmaids or Vengeance Most Fowl.
Serious classical music is not automatically better than other musical genres which intend to delight the listener in other ways.
Wagner or Willie Wonka? Or why not enjoy both?
Doesn’t any mention of the 3LMFSHMs automatically prime the QI klaxon, in discussions of this sort?
No.
Bloody should do, operetta even makes opera seem quite good.
Bollocks. (OOAA, of course)
I was going to accuse you of being a musical snob: then I remembered…
Snob is so vulgar, dear boy.
Arf!
Anything featured in Classic Rock magazine, innit? So boring music for straight old people.
Down wiv ver kids as always, retro…
A classic rock.
Yes, but will it roll?
I direct me learned friend to the musings of one Mr Keef Richards.
What an interesting discussion.
It got me thinking about Linnaeus.
wiki describes him as —
a Swedish biologist and physician who formalised binomial nomenclature, the modern system of naming organisms. He is known as the father of modern taxonomy.
Taxonomy is the branch of science concerned with classification, especially of organisms.
So is there anyone who has attempted a taxonomy of musical genres?
This site had a stab at it but was most interested in modern music styles.
https://musicmap.info/
In the intro they make this interesting comment.
Almost all genres belong to greater, well-known “areas” in the musical network, what we will call super-genres. Super-genres are simply the parent genre of any given genre; a higher-level, overarching family.
If I’m talking to a non-nerdy pal about a new discovery, the descriptions jazz, dark metal, early music or ambient will suffice. They will not cut the mustard with someone like @duco01.
He will, quite rightly, want to know who else they sound like which, record label the artist is on, when they were active , who they have collaborated with etc.
SNIFFFING VARNISH is a superb name for a classical music blog. And blogger Philip Marten has some very useful things to say about music classification-
https://www.sniffingvarnish.com/blog/on-the-classification-of-classical-music
Here is his YOUTUBE channel which mostly contains clips of him playing the violin.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqy4so8UrpPwL9IGPT6j_9w
He is very talented.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqy4so8UrpPwL9IGPT6j_9w
You may enjoy Listening In.
Thanks a lot @pencilsqueezer. What a superb podcast.
Oddly enough, a few weeks ago, I saw an charming anime about a Japanese girl who experienced synaesthesia.
Thanks KFD that’s another film I now want to see. That chap’s You Tube channel seems to enjoy pretty good production values. His video ‘essays’ out of necessity only scratch the surface but are an enjoyable way to while away a few minutes from time to time.
It’s a film primarily for teens and young adults, @pencilsqueezer.
Which does not mean older viewers won’t enjoy it too.
I saw it at a screening during the Stockholm Film Festival in cinema full of teens. It’s slow-moving, gentle and not much happens.
But at the end, when the three kids had their first concert in the school hall, the audience were really enjoying and clapping along with all the songs. Who can resist J-Pop?
BIO REFLEXEN has 196 seats and when it’s full with kids and the film is a success, it’s a joy to be in the audience.
I would definitely enjoy it. I have lots of anime films on dvd. That this has synaesthesia at it’s heart makes it pure unadulterated ‘catnip’ to me.
Impressive restraint from the resident cloak-wearing and centre-parted/ be-mulletted (and now tonsured) progressive rock fans here, I think. No mention of “Close to the Edge” being as good as Beethoven, the Keith Emerson piano concerto side of “Works (volume 1), the top progressive rock keyboard players being “classically-trained”, etc. POSSIBLY this aspect of the discussion is done to death now?
Let’s hope so.
Although, having said that, I don’t recall that being prevalent in prog discussions on here – not by the prog fans anyway…a bit of a stereotype with which to beat us?
Exakerly. We are not snobs about musical superiority. I don’t quite know where this idea came from. Maybe folk trying to be prolier than thou during the punk wars, and projecting their own prejudices? For me, I was pogoing in my flares to whoever was playing the Top Rank, then getting stoned to “801 Live” afterwards, mand I was not alone. Worked for me.
Well, quite…
The likes of Nils Frahm etc. I’ve decided to call Contemporary Music. Steve Reich, Philip Glass, John Adams also Contemporary. Purely for my own convenience. Your opinion may differ.
But we’ll have to call them something different in 50 years’ time. (Life expectancy is pretty good in my family)
But we will have 50 years to come up with it.
I won’t be around, I’m pretty sure, so not my problem squire.
I am sure Willie Nelson and Keith Richard’s will hold a proxy for you, should you have shuffled, @mikethep
Wrong Mike! @mike_h
1. A whole load of my school went to a posh university (you know, the two institutions) to study music. They knew jack-shit about pop music, any pop music. The ones that went elsewhere, did, and probably more about Beethoven!
2. Stephen Fry said something like “I luv Wagner but some days only the Spice Girls/Boyzone will do”…. in other words completely circumnavigating the bit in the middle, the bit (crucially chaps) he missed – Rock ‘n’ Roll and the Beatles. Aim high, but presume low.
3. A guy I once knew walked straight into a job at an auction house in the role of ‘Popular Music’ boss and although he LOVED classical music, he couldn’t have told you the name of one Bob Dylan song, or three Beatles songs… this is a MAJOR auction house. Apparently he did a car-crash interview on breakfast TV and lasted three months! I once had to explain to him that the Monkees were a 60s group not a 1970s group.
I hate classical music, and the wonderful ‘Slade in Flame’ has the appalling manager, no doubt Eton-educated and played brilliantly by Tom Conti, reading a copy of ‘Gramophone’ magazine in 1968… really?… we’re meant to think “what a spanner”.
I thought “what a spanner”… so it worked!
Anyway Johnny Shannon got him.
What a strange tiny little space you occupy. I mean this in the most caring of ways…can you remember at what age your curiosity atrophied and died?
Dame Edna lives!!
😉
There certainly are people who know loads about classical music (however defined) and nothing about pop music (again, however defined) and the reverse is equally true. But there are many many people who are interested in both, including people I know who went to a ‘posh’ university.
Genuine question – why do you hate classical music? Is it ALL classical music, or just certain types?
(I quite like Gramophone, occasionally: if that makes me a “spanner” in the reckoning of Deramdaze – well, so be it – I guess I can live with that…)
Dodgers….dodgers…..dodgers….dod…. *sigh*…..
Well…quite…
The irony is,perhaps, that Slade might not have go anywhere without Jim Lea’s background in the Staffordshire Youth Orchestra.
I thought it was because Dave Hill had sold his soul to the devil at The Crossroads Motel.
Bravo, sir!!!
We can’t help ourselves, can we? We have a thread about classical music and end up talking about Slade.