Why don't more music geniuses do pop music?

College Majors Music Major
21

<p>Wow. Great responses. I can’t stop thinking about this now! I was debating this with my friends and we came up with a few observations of our own:</p>

<p>It seems that music today has more of a passive function. For example, one of the only popular outlets for orchestral music is film scores, and popular music much of the time the instrumentals feel like an accompaniment to the lyrics rather than the other way around (see Hip Hop). Even Electronica, which besides Jazz is probably the most abstract and purely musical of the popular genres, has only found widespread popularity in the context of dancing. People get made fun of for listening to it otherwise. I don’t know why music has taken a secondary role, but I see it everyday in my friends and family, all of whom get bored listening to music in its pure, unaccompanied form. </p>

<p>Also, maybe music has always been that way. Opera music is meant to accompany a stage performance, same with Ballet, and even church music. It seems as if the musical climate of pre 19th Century Europe, where concert goers would simply sit back and listen to music, was an a brief exception to the norm, a blip in time where the public shared the same mentality as highly musical people. The only people i know who can lie in bed with their eyes closed, listening to orchestral music are music majors. </p>

<p>Anyway, If I go on any more this could turn into my thesis haha. Great discussion fodder though.</p>

22

<p>Take a look at Alex Ross’s book, The Rest is Noise – he is someone with broadly eclectic musical tastes who writes about Classical music in the 20th-21st centuries.</p>

23

<p>Hunt, I’ve exhausted much of the “standard” classical repertoire over the years. Just when I think I’ve heard it all, something new always surprises me. My latest area of interest is minimalism. Have you sampled Philip Glass, Steve Reich, or Brian Eno? If not, Google them or hit YouTube (am I allowed to say “YouTube”?) for some amazingly engaging music.</p>

<p>Is it classical? Well, time will tell.</p>

24

<p>Re: above post #23-
try sitting through “Satyagraha” (even if it was at the Met!), the Phillip Glass opera about Ghandi!</p>

25

<p>Because it feels like selling out.</p>

26

<p>Just attended a phenomenal concert with Jonathan Carney (concertmaster of the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra) conducting and playing Vivaldi 4 Seasons and Piazzolla 4 Seasons of Buenos Aires- movements interspersed. The concert was really well attended by at least half non-classical music lovers (much of the audience clapped between sections of the Vivaldi). The audience LOVED the concert (whistles, standing ovations, etc.). I don’t think classical music is dead by any means. We just have to find ways to engage our new audience.</p>

27

<p>Operahorn –</p>

<p>I agree. I have found that the music that is played today on the radio has a sameness about it that tends toward boring. I listen to classical music all the time, but I almost can’t listen to the radio any more. I think the orchestras have kind of dumbed themselves down for fear of displeasing their shrinking audiences. I lived in Europe for several years and the live classical music there had a lot more oomph. It is my humble opinion that the excessive emphasis on perfection has made our players over cautious - conductors and musicians alike. A rare exception is the Baltimore Symphony. Not coincidental that they have had a firey Russian conductor for many years and there are many Russian players in the orchestra. Where is this leading? I’m not really sure except that to me, the classical stations begin to sound a little too close to Musak. They aren’t playing dynamic recordings, they aren’t playing opera very much, they aren’t playing enough live music from obscure venues. They too are being over cautious. </p>

<p>I don’t think classical music will die - there are just too many young people still loving it and going into it. But it has to change and it is changing. I think Youtube is a positive development. I also see a lot of smaller venues, smaller ensembles popping up which are younger and more energetic. We are bringing a new generation out of the music schools and they will be different, I hope. But one fact is true: classical music was never a field one went into expecting to get rich. Popular music is completely different that way - everyone in it is looking for the “big break” and many will sell their souls to get it.</p>

<p>What do you all think?</p>

28

<p>I read another forum for classical singers and they seem to all be convinced that no one can sing anymore - at least very few who are really popular. That’s obviously an exaggeration, but there is concern with regard to opera that too much attention is now on looks and sex appeal. Nathan Gunn performs as often as possible with his shirt off. Anna Netrebko has made MTV style videos. Agents are telling singers to lose weight and come back to them. There is a sense that the talent is taking a back seat to asthetics. I don’t see why we can’t have both. I read a review of the performance of a young Met competition winner that said she would have trouble getting certain roles because of her “body type.” I have read similar reviews for men who no longer have the leading man look. More and more, vocalists have to present the entire package.</p>

29

<p>Some excellent points, all valid. Too expand on a few:</p>

<p>shennie mentioned the need for improv skills, which I agree is not part of the standard classical training. Those that seem to “have it” come from a tradition and background from ethnic/folk and fiddlin, or find those genres after classical training. It’s rare that they are encouaged simultaneously, especially by the “old school”.</p>

<p>Which opens up point two: the older generation and many current instructors of reknown see anything beyond the standards as being diversionary, unimportant, vulgar, or at best a distraction. The newer, emerging group of artist/teachers seem far more willing to embrace contemporary music, in all its forms.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>and how much of that is coupled with the “snob appeal” aspect associated with classical music. How much is actual artistic integrity, and how much is fear of criticism by peers, instructor/mentors. Many chaired pros look down their bows or over their valves at the lowly sub, who is very content to have a contracted job in a national tour, or a steady pit job in a long running show.</p>

<p>The crossover artist takes it from both sides. Take a group like Bond, classically trained, excellent musicians. They happen to look good too. They had a short run of success, but were accused of demeaning the music, using looks to attract audiences. Hey, it was different, and it brought some old rep to new audiences, and might have resulted in a few standard venue ticket sales because it got people interested. </p>

<p>Andre Rieu is another case. If he happens to be on, and son is in the room, he’ll leave. Why? “He sold out.” So what. The man is a showman. He’s not Heifitz, or Oistrach, but he’s good and backed by an excellent orchestra. His concerts sell out. Look at the audience view pan shots… they’re having a great time. Isn’t that what it should be all about.?</p>

<p>And some of it is marketing. Hilary Hahn clothed only in a violin on a CD cover draws immense criticism, but it DID sell a few. Hell, if you look like Leila Josefowicz, Janine Jansen. or Nicola Benedetti, and it adds a few bucks to your royalty statement, why not use it? But rest assured, you will be
accused of having your looks sell your music. We use sex to sell everything else in this country. Maybe it’s time to start using sex appeal to fill the concert halls.</p>

<p>cartera, as an aside, you cite both Charlotte Church and Sarah Brightman. Now, I have no training or skill to assess vocal talent, but I enjoy alot of what I heard of the early Church, and I find Brightman enjoyable across her choice of genres; as a layman, I’m astonished by her range. On the same token, I find opera untenable. Enlighten me. Or is this a case of crossover and the ensuing flak?
I truly am a musical idiot in understanding the finer points.</p>

30

<p>Oops…I somehow left out two pretty important Berklee grads: Aimee Mann and Natalie Maines.</p>

31

<p>violadad - I think the consensus is that Charlotte Church ruined her voice by overreaching at such a young age. She never developed proper technique to give her a long career. There is very little appreciation of Brightman as a classical singer. Her technique is criticized and she is described as breathy and having a vibrato that is more like a flutter. I think she is a much better pop singer. She is not respected in the classical community as an opera singer.</p>

32

<p>If we’re listing favorite Berklee grads, mine are Rushad Eggleston and Hanneke Cassell.</p>

33

<p>Today I listened to online recordings of the NEC commencement concert showcasing 08 grads, some of whom composed some very fresh contemporary pieces that were quite an interesting meld of musical influences. I cannot believe that being open to new and creative approaches to “serious” music could ever be a bad thing, and if it brings a wider audience to music outside of the commercial, even better. The combination of vocals and instruments on the NEC recordings was listenable and challenging.</p>

34

<p>“Have you sampled Philip Glass, Steve Reich, or Brian Eno? If not, Google them or hit YouTube (am I allowed to say “YouTube”?) for some amazingly engaging music.”</p>

<p>I like all of those, but I have to say that their music does not hold up well to repeated listening, and Glass’s, in particular, all sounds the same to my ear. I also like Terry Riley’s “In C,” but again, I can’t listen to it very often. As for Eno, I like his pop songs much better than his minimalist music.</p>

35

<p>Plenty of vibrant and exciting music is being produced in Los Angeles lately. The Disney Center has sold out regularly, especially when the Maestro Salonen is conducting works by contemporary composer John Adams. Ditto with LA Opera. Placido Domingo like to shake things up . He has brought in Woody Allen this year to direct Gianni Schicchi and we are going to be “treated” to an new opera based on the horror classic “The Fly”. (eeek) But back to John Adams, I think he is writing some of the most spectacular and lovely operas to be written in the last 50 years. I also love whats being composed in art song by the likes of John Musto and Jake Heggie.</p>

36

<p>Hmm…musical geniuses doing pop. Well the first one that comes to mind is Paul McCartney. I personally think he’s a musical genius…vocals, composing, marketing…he’s got it all. Linda Ronstadt had classical vocal training before she entered the pop world. Look at the music variety and writings of folks like Paul Simon or Elton John. Personally I think they all are musical geniuses. Their path to success was not through conservatory study…I guess that is what the OP was really asking.</p>

37

<p>Re: Eno, I’m kind of still stuck in the '70s with his jems like “Dead Finks Don’t Talk” and “Baby’s On Fire”. I thought the guy was nuts then, but it didn’t keep me from buying and playing his stuff. He, along with the rest of us has grown up quite a bit, but I always gave him major points for creativity.</p>

38

<p>My favorite Eno song is “Put A Straw Under Baby.”</p>

39

<p>And plenty of musical genius working in film scores. Current favorite for me would be Jonny Greenwoods music for “There Will Be Blood”.</p>

40

<p>John Williams is classically trained. Mick Jagger (believe it or not) studied classical piano! There are many examples of crossovers. But I also agree that the classical world does not have a monopoly on “geniuses”. Just look at some of the black singers who have emerged from gospel choirs - take Aretha Franklin as the prime example. She would have been as great an opera singer as there is had she chosen that route.</p>