An observation about "Modern" classical music.


As I sat in my car, waiting for my wife as usual, I listened to a local classical music station which happened to be playing some "modern" music. I don't like it, being an old fart who likes Mozart and his ilk. But, as I had nothing else to do, I tried to appreciate what I heard. No luck, but I did notice something I have experienced before but never thought about. At the end, there was a dead silence of 3 to 5 seconds before audience applause. This never happens with, for example, Mozart where the final notes never get a chance to decay before the applause and Bravos. Obviously (IMHO) the music was so hard to "follow" that the audience were not sure it was over until nothing happened for a while.

I know that some guys like this music, but haven't you noticed this dead time? How do you explain it?
eldartford
If you're going to post snyde comments about what you call 'that' music, you should at least be able to tell us what music you're refering to. That's not so much to ask.

To do otherwise is irresponsible. It could encourage in others the close-mindedness that you've embraced.

No one likes all of the music that's been written since Rite of Spring. I certainly don't. But many people will find something intriguing if they keep an open mind. Your consistent generalizations about how 'modern music' sounds and how it makes people feel (again, without being able to reference your attacks with a salient example) are a disservice to this community, which I believe should be a mechanism for encouraging people to try new things (equipment, music, whatever).

I hope people who have read this thread have come away with an impression that the world of 'modern music' is as diverse as any other, and that generalizations about the genre as a whole are meaningless.

Check out some of the pieces that folks have recommended. Most of it's probably downloadable, so you can try it for free. It would be fantastic to get a discussion going about some of them.
Lousyreeds1..."That" music was an acknowledgement that the term "modern" is not quite correct. Sorry if you didn't get that.

My original posting simply reported a fact, delayed audience response, which anyone at a live performance can verify, and which suggests to me that the audience was disconnected from the music.

It seems to me that one can validly comment on a genre of music, not just specific pieces. You yourself referred to "Gregorian chant, very mainstream", without citing "Genuit puerpera regem". Many people feel that Rap is not music, and they don't feel obligated to cite specific examples. (Whoops...now I will have the rappers mad at me).

So everyone go listen to what they like. Just, don't take the attitude that because they disagree with you they must be ignorant or stupid.
I agree with eldartford. No offense to those that like that style, but like "modern art" it is lost on me and will stay lost. It's not music to me. I'm not into sound effects. - I've listed one of the works above - you know what music I mean. The other styles of modern classical music are enjoyable however. Minimalism, serialism (I think).

As far as how it makes me feel. It's disturbing sounding. If I wanted that effect I'd put on modern heavy metal.
Eldartford, the ingenious subtlety of your prose was lost on me. My apologies. I hope I was the only one.

Your "delayed audience response" theory was explained away by a number of posters.

Those who would claim that rap is not music without citing an example and providing a thorough explanation should not be trusted.

Robm: it's fine to dislike the use of atonality, but you should understand what that means. Neither Bach nor Beethoven ever wrote atonally. There's a difference between atonality and plain old dissonance, and I think you're confusing them. Serialism, which you say you enjoy, is by definition atonal. Which piece did you listen to that was mentioned above?

I hope I haven't given the impression that I think any of this is "stupid". That was not my intention, and I apologize if that's how it came across. However, there has been a lot of false information passed around (atonality, etc). That's ignorant. Not stupid, not indicative of a lack of knowledge.
Lousyreeds1...Serious question...Do you feel that there are any criteria which separate "sound" from "music"? For example: how about a collage of random sound snippets, which is how some of your (___?) music sounds to me. If this is "music" could not the same be said of an assembly of sounds created by technical difficulties of a recording playback system? How do you distinguish music from sound?

To be fair I ought to offer my own answer to the question.
I have summarized my view by "I like music if I can hum it". Going further, it is "music" if it makes me *want* to hum it. Indeed, sometimes a catchy tune gets going around in your head, and you can't stop humming it! "Music" triggers a special reaction in the mind whereas "sound" is merely heard. Your mind is different from mine, so what is "music" to you may be "sound" to me. Note that my definition does not consider whether the sound has been deliberately composed by someone.