The new pop music

[reith]

Through the internet I've come to realise that there are three classifications of music listeners. The largest listens to chart music; the second largest listens to chart classical music and the third is the enquiring, adventurous few who listen to the less promoted, less available serious music; who actually search out such music possibly in the search for new musical experiences; possibly because some are more intricately mixed up in music as composers or commentators.

Composers like Mozart and Beethoven are so obviously accomplished in their respective eras, music to be much respected indeed. But it's simple music that needs little engagement on behalf of the listener. This isn't to demean it at all - indeed, we owe conventions such as the orchestra and its development to this music. And it's just possible that a tiny percent of newcomers to classic FM might just tire of chart stuff and move themselves forward.

However, I've decided to reclassify the (literal) classics in my mind as pop music. It was once, anyway, all be it to an elite audience mostly.

[Thorolf]

As long as it’s still popular, it’s pop music by definition, isn’t it? :tongue:

But seriously, two ounces of honest analysis confirm that both so called “classical” music and “pop” music comes in all varieties, from the simplistically banal to the most sophisticated intricacies. And you really can’t explain away the simplicitiy of heaps of “classical” music, nor play down the unconventional genius of highly unlikely pop music.

Just to mention some “pop” examples:

The immense popularity of Pink Floyd’s
“The Dark Side Of The Moon” and “The Wall” albums

These hits:
“Autobahn” by Kraftwerk
“Down In The Park” by Gary Numan
“Ghosts” by Japan
“Wuthering Heights” by Kate Bush
“Toxic” by Cathy Dennis (Performed by Britney Spears)



Regards

[Violoncello]

Originally Posted by reith

Composers like Mozart and Beethoven are so obviously accomplished in their respective eras, music to be much respected indeed. But it's simple music that needs little engagement on behalf of the listener.

Beethoven - simple music? Surely you're joking?! I think Mozart is simplistic which is why it's still popular. They were laying the harmonic foundations of most pop music of today.

Sorry that I can't agree with all you say but it's your view and something to think about - but Thorolf has sums it up. Some fringe popular music is way more complicated than Mozart.

[stevel]

Through the internet I've come to realise that there are three classifications of music listeners. The largest listens to chart music; the second largest listens to chart classical music and the third is the enquiring, adventurous few who listen to the less promoted, less available serious music; who actually search out such music possibly in the search for new musical experiences;

Chart listeners are by far the largest.

But there are probably many levels before "classical" music even steps in. Within evey genre, the same is true - there are the Jazz listeners who listen to Chart jazz, then those who seek out the more obscure stuff.

So, I might refine your statment by saying, the largest proportion of *Classical* Music listeners listen to "pop" favorites in the Classical Genre (or the "chart hits"). This would include Beethoven's 5th, Messiah, Nutcracker Suite, Four Seasons, that sort of thing.

Our local classical station ran a poll to vote for the "top 100" classical pieces of all time (sort of like how rock radio stations do). Most of it was Romantic Period Orchestral music. There was but one Baroque work, and maybe one Mozart. There was also little choral (I think Messiah may have been the one Baroque/Choral work IIRC) and no Chamber music, save for something like Fur Elise (but it was actually a Chopin piece I think). Nothing remotely contemporary - save for those that lived on like Rossini or something.

It was really, really disappointing.

I'd say level two are those people who go out and actually buy CDs and listen to them - I was just looking that the Beethoven Symphony poll and some people voted based on one movement! No offense to those voters, but, it's favorite symphony, not movement. Some people have at least bought all of Beethoven's symphonies because they do like movement 1 of #5, or movement 4 of #9. Good for them.

Then level 3 are the ones who go out and get other composers symphonies, or, piano, chamber, vocal, etc. music by Beethoven.

Then level 4 are those that really get into the obscure.

It's good that you're noticing this stuff Reith, but I think your classification might at this point be a little broad! Maybe as you continue this line of investigation, you'll see more things that are worthy of distinction. But my point is, even though there are "pop" classical works, thye are still listened to by only a small segment of the population comparatively (let's ignore things like all the times Stars and Stripes Forever is played on July 4th in the US!).

Best,
Steve

[SeriouslyRetro]

Our local classical station ran a poll to vote for the "top 100" classical pieces of all time (sort of like how rock radio stations do). Most of it was Romantic Period Orchestral music. There was but one Baroque work, and maybe one Mozart. There was also little choral (I think Messiah may have been the one Baroque/Choral work IIRC) and no Chamber music, save for something like Fur Elise (but it was actually a Chopin piece I think). Nothing remotely contemporary - save for those that lived on like Rossini or something.

It was really, really disappointing.

That's definitely disappointing, but it's what I've come to expect. Every classical station I've ever listened to plays mostly Romantic Period, Opera, and bland Mozart - usually all the clichéd "hits". They rarely play Baroque and when they do, 90% of the time it's bland versions of the "upbeat" major key popular hits. I think only once in my life I heard a well-played non-vocal Baroque piece in minor key on the radio. That's why I rarely bother with the radio any more.

I'd say level two are those people who go out and actually buy CDs and listen to them - I was just looking that the Beethoven Symphony poll and some people voted based on one movement! No offense to those voters, but, it's favorite symphony, not movement. Some people have at least bought all of Beethoven's symphonies because they do like movement 1 of #5, or movement 4 of #9. Good for them.

Are you talking about me? I voted for favourite symphonies, but then explained what movements in those symphonies I actually liked. What's wrong with that? If you have a favourite symphony, it doesn't necessarily mean you like every single movement in that symphony. (...at least not for picky people like me)

Then level 4 are those that really get into the obscure.

I think that's where people who actually like Classical eventually end up. It's a progression. When I first discovered Classical, I started at the clichéd pieces because I heard a few that I liked (first was actually Mozart's #25 at the beginning of Amadeus - I had no exposure to Classical in childhood). Then I narrowed down into Baroque, from the popular to the less known. Now I'm at "stage 4" where I'm researching and scouring the planet, checking the most obscure Baroque composers for anything that's good.

[reith]

Originally Posted by stevel

Chart listeners are by far the largest.

Our local classical station ran a poll to vote for the "top 100" classical pieces of all time (sort of like how rock radio stations do). Most of it was Romantic Period Orchestral music. There was but one Baroque work, and maybe one Mozart. There was also little choral (I think Messiah may have been the one Baroque/Choral work IIRC) and no Chamber music, save for something like Fur Elise (but it was actually a Chopin piece I think). Nothing remotely contemporary - save for those that lived on like Rossini or something.

It was really, really disappointing.

This is the unforunate way it works. They play the voted chart chunks hoping to attract a greater audience by way of popularity which in turn narrows the listener's exposure even more.

Then level 4 are those that really get into the obscure.

There are a few of us, then. I'm the guy who'll switch on Radio 3 if I spot unfamiliar names in a 20th Century concert. (I might switch it off again but usually not!)

It's good that you're noticing this stuff Reith, but I think your classification might at this point be a little broad! Maybe as you continue this line of investigation, you'll see more things that are worthy of distinction.

well, it was just an observation and a bit of a generalisation but it seems a trend. I see nothing wrong with pop classics, just the way their market is led.

But my point is, even though there are "pop" classical works, they are still listened to by only a small segment of the population comparatively.

True.

reith

[chckn8r]

I like your thinking on this Reith - I think Steve's refinement adds a nice sub-categorization that can be most likely applied to all general music styles.

Thank goodness for government-funded programming though - like the BBC in GB, CBC Radio 1 here in Canada, isn't coerced by an advertising department to play the "pops" in the "classical" genre so as to reach a broader audience. And thank goodness for that - you get to hear a lot of hidden gems you probably wouldn't have otherwise.

I think we're all a lot a like in this profession in that we have a voracious appetite for music. The "pops" are fine - listening to and appreciating Mozart and the like, but when you've gotten over being introduced to the textbook Sonata-Allegro form, then you're ready for more, something different...

I hardly listen to terrestrial radio anymore - it's only if I'm in the car and forgot my iPod - and it's typically CBC or the local college station. Occasionally, I'll put on the local alternative station in the car but even then, there's only so much of the latest NIN album that you can take.

D

[stevel]

Are you talking about me? I voted for favourite symphonies, but then explained what movements in those symphonies I actually liked. What's wrong with that? If you have a favourite symphony, it doesn't necessarily mean you like every single movement in that symphony. (...at least not for picky people like me)

Maybe......did you vote for only a movement - shame on you :-)

I point it out because many people (not necessarily you) go around saying "my favorite Symphony is Beethoven's 5th" - in many cases, it may in fact be the only symphony they've ever heard! In other cases, they may have only heard 5 and 9, and even then, it's unlikely that they really KNOW the other movements besides 1 of 5, and 4 of 9 - not even 4 of 9 - only the Ode to Joy.

So I'm always cautious about a poll like this - you never know how much experience the respondents have.

I would say though, if you don't like all the movements, it would be more appropriate to say "my favorite symphony movement is, the 2nd of Beethoven's 7th, but my favorite Beethoven Symphony is the 5th" or something. But yeah, that's nit-picky.

Steve

[stevel]

This is the unforunate way it works. They play the voted chart chunks hoping to attract a greater audience by way of popularity which in turn narrows the listener's exposure even more.

This was my point in an e-mail to the station manager. They don't get that it's actually counterproductive and narrowing their audience - which in turn, narrows the amount of support they get. Our classical station is a PBS station so it relies heavily on listener support (monetary pledges). They're always complaining they don't have enough moolah, but they are in effect, biting the hand that feeds them. They don't have to play George Crumb or anything that drastic, but some friggin chamber music instead of symphonies, or some songs instead of operas, or some baroque, renaissance, or even "listenable" post romantic (besides the Theme from Star Wars and what not) music - they'd widen their listening base quite a bit.

Oh, well.

Steve

[stevel]

Thank goodness for government-funded programming though - like the BBC in GB, CBC Radio 1 here in Canada, isn't coerced by an advertising department to play the "pops" in the "classical" genre so as to reach a broader audience. And thank goodness for that - you get to hear a lot of hidden gems you probably wouldn't have otherwise.

Here in puritanical america, government funding doesn't work. First, people complain that the government is spending money at all on the arts, which are of course "sissy" and a waste of time, and that we should be building Aircraft Carriers so someone else can make a profit off my tax dollars. Secondly, when there is funding, the interest groups chime in - "you can't fund that, it's offensive to me".

So of course, our classical station (the local one anyway), while it operates non-commercially and is not subject to the dictates of advertising, it is subject to the dictates of the funding agencies (hey, I'll give you 100,000 if you stop playing that old renaysance music) and the listener/supporters (hey, I'll give you 10,000 dollars if you put my name in your brochure as a supporter and stop playing any of that modern junk like Debussy).

Oh Well.

(you guys can tell I'm in a pissy mood today :-).

Steve