Is anyone kind enough to explain what makes classical music so great...

hrs talking about the /classical/ thread newfag

I can’t tell if the retard behind this image was being ironic or not. Because if he wasn’t, he’s a retard.

I'm joking a little, but you're still gay if you hate metal.

Attached: snarl.png (324x629, 173.43K)

There's not just one thing about it that makes it "great". Any classical composer that you know the name of is part of an exclusive few, who were so good at their craft that their names will be remembered forever. And each of those composers is known for something unique, and each style period is defined by different aesthetic ideals and compositional techniques, so I suppose it's just the richness of this whole cultural tradition of Western music. Take Beethoven for example. Beethoven came of age at the end of the Classical era, and the reason he is so revered is because he took all of the musical practices of the Classical period that were followed so closely, and bent them to his will. He mastered all the concepts of form and pushed everything further than that. Now Beethoven is like a lord above even the best composers in our history, but all of the composers you can name effected history like this.

Also, it isn't about instrumental technicality or difficulty. I'm sure everybody is familiar with the "An die Freude" sextion of Beethoven's 9th Symphony. That's a piece of music that probably literally anybody can hum. It's a piece of music that's left a huge impression on culture, and yet, they use it to teach kids how to plat their instruments. I remember it was the first thing they gave me when I started learning trumpet when I was like 8

>no interesting lyrics, only religious stuff, nothing relatable like Kanye, Playboi Carti
>no interesting, refreshing timbre
>pre wagner harmony is very dull, it's almost nothing but T D SD and dim chords
>counterpoint doesn't sound as satifying to the modern ear as syncopations, modern counterrythms and melodies
only autistic weirdos listen to classical nowadays

I’ll admit that it’s “fun” but it’s still a low IQ retarded genre that I’d have to wash the timpani of my ears with chloride after listening.

I'm sure there will be so many people listening to Playboi Carti in 300 years time, and they will all be able to relate so emotionally to the clicking noise he considers percussion and the occasional change of note in a bass noise which he considers a tune, and of course his evocative, penetrating, deeply "relatable" lyrics, such as

"Woke up to niggas talking like me, talk
Woke up to niggas sounding like me, talk
Woke up to niggas talking like me, talk
Woke up to niggas sounding like me, talk
I woke up to niggas sounding like me
Woke up to niggas talking like me
Woke up to niggas sounding like me
Woke up to niggas talking like me"

Lol, burn

Metal is a homosexual genre made by homosexuals in denia

>no interesting lyrics, only religious stuff
>pre wagner harmony is very dull, it's almost nothing but T D SD and dim chords
study music

>why it’s theoretically correct?
Uh, what?

>Carti isn't relatable to him
Virgin spotted hahahah

>why it’s theoretically correct
Niggawat?

based

>it appeals to the lowest common denominator.
Then why is most of it so unpopular?

Elitism, obsession with tradition, pomp and "muh music which takes 10 years of pain to make" aside, classical music:
1) Can be very expressive through it's sound, especially if you some have experience in listening to it. It can tell whole stories with no words.
2) Has some of the most complex and enthralling melodies (as in "sequences of noes") among the genres.
3) Because of being elitary, most people who work(ed) on it are really skilled at it. Because of being not very profitable, most people who work(ed) on it do it as enthusiasts. Because of it being so old, it got polished and perfected and accumulated an archive of REALLY good clasical musucians.
4) Because of how developed it is and how enthusiastic people making it are, it can br really technically complex.
5) Some people just love orchestras/organs/violins/opera-style singing/etc, and there aren't many of those in other genres.

Same as what makes anything other music great. People loved some of its greatest artists. Genres as a whole aren't good, its individual artists are. There's a gazillion musicians/composers from the past, the big names we think of are just the ones most remembered. It's not inherently superior or inferior to other music. Just enjoy what you enjoy.

The serious/art music connotations come more from its academic leanings than anything else.

Who (other than Italians) love opera singing? It sounds unnatural and impersonal.

Imagine beating someone to death with a dildo while you listen to this: youtube.com/watch?v=lD5TG8z3-SM

Why are classical fans always pseudo-intellectual douchebags with a superiority complex? Every time I want to get into classical I look at you guys and think to myself "do I really want to become that"?

Attached: b7igi7o9.png (1920x1080, 527.39K)

Because it was written before elements of blues and jazz became the foundation for all popular music and came to subsume everything else. Classical music that was heavily influenced by jazz doesn’t have the same effect as that which came before or that which ignored it.

Look at this guy and laugh! He has a small penis.
It is physically impossible to listen to this and not have a humongous donger:
youtube.com/watch?v=yNAFeCLDSgE

The fact that your first consideration regarding music isn't the music itself but your conception of its fans, shows that you're incapable of truly appreciating music.

>choral

Well Opera is about drama so why should it sound personal to the listener? it definitely is unnatural though as far as stuff like castratos and how sopranos have their voices wrecked by singing it

Case in point.

Nigger what the hell are you talking about? I'm genuinely confused.

Just on Yas Forums, they're not that bad outside of it.

it sounds good, that's about it. theory comes out of practice.

He's right though.

>small penis

no he isn't, the fans are a big part, it shows the kind of culture and mindset that is aroused by the music.

Get laid.

Attached: big dic energy.jpg (750x1000, 141.04K)

You get used to it, kinda think of the voice as an instrument like the violin youtu.be/FJZXBCHeBEU

You shouldn't care about what kind of fanbase a genre has. You should care about the quality of the music.
I guarantee you enjoy some music where the a portion of the fans are insufferable cunts.

But it isn't the music itself. Its associations are by definition not essential. If I like a piece of music and find out that someone I don't like also likes the piece, that has absolutely no baring on the quality of the music. The person could have completely misinterpreted it or may simply enjoy it for entirely different reasons to my own, or perhaps I am just similar to him in this single aspect. Either way, who cares. Until you listen to it and truly try to appreciate it on your own terms you won't really enjoy the music.

Louis Armstrong permanently stunted the artistic soul of the world through his masterful ability to make music fit for consumption and oversocialization.

BIG DICK
I
G

D
I
C
K

youtube.com/watch?v=QkQapdgAa7o

Attached: 477.jpg (610x412, 24.91K)

stop with the spam

Attached: the size of (you)r penis.png (1024x640, 145.55K)

>theoretically correct
theory derives from classical music - which was built upon math (ratios). Pythagorean tuning was based on the 3:2 ratio (the perfect fifth, obsessively abused as power chords in 's metal) and was expanded on with the help of Bach in the 16th century into equal temperament demonstrated here;
youtube.com/watch?v=ezZdbzreNcs
the point of this was to explore modulation (changing keys). Pythagorean tuning is ideal for one key.
>here's an attempt at a technical explanation: notes in a "scale" can be expressed in ratios; 1:1 (unison), 2:1 (octave), 5:3 (major sixth), 3:2 (perfect fifth), 4:3 (perfect fourth), 5:4 (major third), 6:5 (minor third). if A = 440 HZ then that number doubled is 880 and is the octave above that A (also an A). plug 3:2 to get the perfect fifth and you get 660 (E).
seems clean and elegant until you start changing keys - major thirds in particular get particularity dissonant going from key to key in this pure "just" system. so equal temperament is a like a compromise between all keys. this tuning was used to build most instruments you hear today (even synths) and was developed from a scientific and serious artistic mindset. again, listen to bachs well tempered clavier
youtube.com/watch?v=yfJtQXrOZB4
or Satie
youtube.com/watch?v=pzuIAXi51OA
>called serious or art music
music has historically often been religiously inspired - this may have had an evolutionary impact. bach was absolutely no exception as with many artists of that era that are still remembered today. pop music and the "record industry" have an agenda to make money and serious art music is harder to pander than sex and violence. in visual art there is a division made between fine and functional art - the mona lisa and a billboard respectively. pop music is closer to functional art (billboard magazine) and classical closer to fine art.

The Freude theme isn’t actually that good on its own. It’s a rather basic melody. What makes It great is that is it EARNED by the piece by Beethoven’s great variations and grandiosity.

>Bach
>16th century

>equal temperament
>well-tempered clavier
>well-tempered

Back was born in the late 17th century.

>blues that low
how the fuck?

what artists in popular music do you think will still be held in high regard hundreds of years from now? i was thinking bob dylan

simon and garfunkel

Depends on the quality of the output and how much taste changes in the future, but there are loads. I think Bowie will probably be one of the people considered on the same level of genius as Bach.

>bowie
only as a footnote of enos legacy

Bob Dylan killed folk music. He and Pete Seeger were the final nails in the coffin of the entire American folk tradition. An absolute disgrace.

That's my point. Through Beethoven's manipulation of form, even the most simple basic melody becomes something more than say for example an extremely virtuosic cadenza or something

Bowie made tacky kitchen. I doubt people will think much of him in fifty years, let alone 300.

Earning your cliches in music is a very important thing I think

*tacky kitsch

>why it’s theoretically correct?
Theory as in music theory? There's literally no such thing as "theoretically correct" music. Music theory is descriptive, not prescriptive.

Radiohead

i dont know about calling it more "correct" per se. classical is just as much about breaking the rules as it is following them.

i like classical music because it sounds good. really good. i dont know about the whole art music or serious music thing, there are lots of other types of music i like just as much...

>making a droning noise for an hour

i actually think theyre both really great and death metal is sort of one of the truest successors to classical music