Classical music is dying.The fundamental problem is a lack of contemporary emotionally compelling compositions,because listeners get no emotional reward from most contemporary classical music ,orchestras are forced to repeat a small number of compositions from the distant past,and as each year passes the standard repertoire becomes less and less relevant to a contemporary listener.so the audience for classical music continues to shrink. traditional music education for composers is part of the problem engendering, snobbery ,elitism and a cold unemotional approach to music composition.l believe that the situation is so bad that only a movement from outside the traditional music institutions (l call this the deinstitutionalization of classical music)can save classical music from oblivion. ps .for more information on this topic go to my website http://www.onedarylsprakecomposer.com
You need to be a member of Composers' Forum to add comments!
Thank you all for your replies,this is a very important topic,and this robust debate is very positive,if enough people inside the classical music institutions as well as contemporary composers push for change perhaps classical music will not die after all.l personal believe classical music still has a lot to say,and can play an important part in modern culture life,and l will keep fighting to keep modern classical music alive and well.
I wholeheartedly disagree with this suggestion. Artificially raising barriers to music does not solve the problem, it merely masks it. The problem is not that there is too much music in the world, but that there is as yet no good way of connecting the artists and composers with the audience who might appreciate their works. If you reach the right audience who appreciates your work, I have no doubt they will be more than willing to pay you what is due -- assuming, of course, that your music is really worth what you think it's worth.
With the advent of the internet, composers and artists can reach their audience directly, bypassing any sort of regulatory body or process, so any regulatory attempt will ultimately fall flat. That's a good thing, actually. It means that your fans can pay you directly and all the money goes to you, as opposed to 20% being eaten up by the distributors, 30% being eaten up by the record company, and 20% eaten up by who knows what other middlemen there are. However, current technology has not yet reached the point where it's easy for composers to connect with their fans. While technology come a long way, it still has a long way to go. Right now, we have an explosion of music online, but there is no easy way for a music lover to find the music he wants, and there is no easy way for the composer or artist to reach the audience who would appreciate his music. Everything is just thrown into this great amorphous blob called the internet, and all but the loudest and most vocal would find an audience of significant size. The rest just get lost in obscure corners that few discover.
If there were a way to link up audiences of a particular taste with composers who produce music that matches that taste, the problem of too much music wouldn't even be an issue -- listeners would get exactly the kind of music they like, and composers would be able to reach listeners who like exactly their kind of music. It's just a matter of technology developing to the point this is just a matter of clicking a few buttons.
In the meantime, composers just have to resort to more traditional means of outreach. Y'know, good ole hard work marketing your product, making connections, and so forth.
Good idea! I suggest next year we should continue by banning C# as well, and in the following year, the use of the number 3 in time signatures.
And maybe the year after that, we can dispense with F by writing it as E#, at the same time also prohibiting the use of the flat sign, and then perhaps in the subsequent year ban the use of '4' in time signatures too. That would greatly simplify our currently-too-cumbersome notation system, and consequently simplify notation software significantly along with the number of bugs and the associated development costs, and reduce the number of poor trees being killed just so some 0.5 cent composer wannabe can print his multi-paged scores of dubious worth. It would solve, or at least mitigate, the problem of global warming and ecological damage. Sounds like a win-win situation to me!
If you want the world to be free of "epic" music simply ban the use of any modes in C or D, and that would free up a lot of space on the internet.
Art is indeed, after all, playing its role in the bettering of our world. Amen.
As for there being too much music in the world, i can only agree. There are also too many cars, too many butter brands and to many bad TV shows! Our world is going in high speed and should anything be banished it's music going over 80 bpm!
As for the difficulty to find the music you like, I would like to point to my post about sharing the links to where your music is streamed so we all can put it in our playlists. If your music is not available for streaming nowadays, it's too hard to reach and out side modern music consumption lines. So I try to get my music on a many channels as possible.
Spiros Makris said:
I'm not sure about your definition of art, Bob. To me, it's something far more subjective, and abstract. While art may be a reflection of our world, or what we wish our world to be, it can also be something beyond that. It can be "art for its own sake", for lack of a better word.
Ban songs in the key of C all you want, i'll just keep writing in Am
Chris Carman said: