Tír Na HiFi

I agree with all of this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/ap ... ical-music

I don't..... :-)

That is a very interesting article, alas I am not familiar with Contemporary Classical Music so I'll have to leave it to others to agree or disagree with Tome Service's assertions.

I don't either :) Sorry I misread the question...I do agree totally with the article. There's a whole unexplored world out there, not just Contemporary Classical, that people are just not aware of or give a hoot about....However there are some difficult works just like in any other genre that are hard to like; The late Àkos Rózmann's recent release 12 Stationer is a case in point. Manipulated piano and voices/soprano give the work a cold disjointed feel which is probably intentional; after all it's a musical interpretation about the twelve causes of earthly suffering as represented by the Tibetan Wheel Of Life....

my main gripe with his assertion is context...

Mozart was pop... ( in his time )

does he honestly believe that all of those guys, of whom I recognise only part and glass..., equate to what Mozart or any other composer was doing in their own time...

like it or not the majority of the music he talks about is unknown to the world...

Hmmm, I'm not sure that's 100% accurate, nor do I think popularity is a good measure of this stuff, but one way or the other I don't see that as as a myth, or related to a myth, about contemporary classical. You can, of course find examples to back up any of the myths, but I think the point here is that they're never uniformly true. The more I listen to contemporary art music the more I realise how diverse, and indeed how accessible, such music often is. The composers themselves often have more in common with indie artists in terms of outlook than stuffy, concert-hall only, tails-wearing classical artists. The lines are FAR more blurred than the stereotypes would have up believe. Ultimately, it's not enough to listen to a tiny subset and make a judgment about 100 years of music.

don't get me wrong, I'm not dismissing his take on how good modern classical music is or isn't.

I only question how much it is informing "popular" music....

That was my question of his comparison to historical greats!

Also, posting on an iPhone seriously impairs my ability to attach any sort of clarity to a post!!

p.s. I am largely ignorant of musical history (cogged way too much from Diapason...!!!) so bear that in mind!!

Of course, some of it is still bollocks!

jaybee wrote:I only question how much it is informing "popular" music....

That was my question of his comparison to historical greats!

Yep, that seems to be seriously overstated. A few popular artists who nod to modern composers does not mean those composers have any great influence.