# Is Classical Music Really "Dying"?



## WIPerspective (Mar 26, 2012)

Well, I wasn't expecting this much of a response... It is interesting to see everyone's opinions, though.  

Classical music is a beautiful genre, one that I think can be appreciated by anyone who is open enough to listen to it. For example, since I sing (I'm a mezzo-soprano), I do so often enough to the point where I don't even notice that I'm singing for other people around me to notice and say, "That sounds really good!" People usually stereotype classical music (especially when it comes to opera) up to the point where they believe in that stereotype. And then, when they meet someone who actually sings classical music or plays classical music live, they'll realize how wrong the stereotype they believed in was. 

Besides that, I've met many rock/metal/rap/hip-hop fans who actually love classical music (it was a big shocker when I found out). A music buddy of mine plays the guitar and bass in a metal band, but he loves to listen and attend operas, especially Wagner. When I was in high school, there were actually a lot of "gangster-looking" people in my class and in other classes who would literally skip class just to listen to my high school orchestra rehearse in the auditorium. I didn't believe it at first, but then once these people started coming up and talking to us (the orchestra players), I thought to myself, "How is this possible, that classical music is actually making these people ditch their classes so they can listen to us rehearse?!"

One way or another, I definitely have absolute confidence that no matter what happens, classical music will live. Those critics who are saying that classical music is "dying" didn't think about what they were saying thoroughly. Sure, the classical music recording industry is struggling, but I blame that on our current economy, which is pretty much crap right now all over the world. People from different professions are still attending concerts, from physicists to literary professors to elementary school teachers. I see classical music thriving more than dying at this moment. We have many more of the younger generation learning instruments (from the Asians to the Caucasians to the African Americans to the Hispanics) all enjoying and learning the music, but maybe I see that because I live in New York City where it is one of the most culturally diverse cities around the world. I don't have any fear of it dying ever. 

Classical music is part of our culture, and the death of culture is a death of people.


----------



## Charles Schwaniger (Feb 14, 2012)

The term classical is relative. I remember an episode of Doctor Who where people in the future view contemporay music the way we view classical music.


----------



## WIPerspective (Mar 26, 2012)

It is. The reason why we call what we call "classical music" classical music today is because scholars, historians and musicologists needed to group music into separate time periods. And then within the "classical music" period, you have romantic music, classical music (Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn), and impressionistic, post-romantic, baroque, etc. Of course, in the future, I will expect our modern day music (pop, rock, etc) to be considered classical music as well (I'm thinking the year 3000-5000 if the human species will survive then?).

Then again, it kind of brings up the question why we need to label music. People say it would be for convenience, but others believe music and music. It doesn't matter what it is as long as it's the sound of music.


----------



## sharky (Jul 1, 2012)

Raain said:


> Classical music will probably never 'die' it's needed far too much in movies, tv shows, video games and Euro 2012 for dramatic effect.


That reminds me of another problem: though this music will probably have a place in media for a long time, the people that produce it generally favor electronic sounds instead of live musicians. Electronics are becoming cheaper and more high quality in sound. Nothing will ever replace a live performance, but in the media with other visual distractions it can be easy not to notice the slightly electronic quality. Especially because the programs used to create electronic compositions are so sophisticated with control of dynamics and effects and are improving every year. 

It doesn't mean live music will die, but it means that it's harder to make money in the performer field. I don't know if that will mean less performers, or just less really good performers because they have to spend a lot of time in a day job rather than practicing.


----------



## WIPerspective (Mar 26, 2012)

sharky said:


> That reminds me of another problem: though this music will probably have a place in media for a long time, the people that produce it generally favor electronic sounds instead of live musicians. Electronics are becoming cheaper and more high quality in sound. Nothing will ever replace a live performance, but in the media with other visual distractions it can be easy not to notice the slightly electronic quality. Especially because the programs used to create electronic compositions are so sophisticated with control of dynamics and effects and are improving every year.
> 
> It doesn't mean live music will die, but it means that it's harder to make money in the performer field. I don't know if that will mean less performers, or just less really good performers because they have to spend a lot of time in a day job rather than practicing.


There was a funny story about that. In NYC, there was a production of Gershwin's _Porgy and Bess_ earlier this year. The director wanted four synthesizers instead of a full orchestra so that there would be more seats for people to pay to see (for more money). But I think Gershwin's great-nephew or someone (I don't remember who) said that he wouldn't allow the director to do that (something about copyright). He wanted a real orchestra to play the music instead of getting four pianists to use the synthesizers. In the end, the production went on with the real orchestra. And it was a pretty good production too.


----------



## VioletTru (Jun 24, 2012)

But I don't want it to die. D: It shan't!


----------



## MNiS (Jan 30, 2010)

It's funny you mention electronic music eventually replacing Classical as I think genres like electronica and techno would die out long before Classical would. 

Not every new genre will replace an old one. Often times the range of new music categories simply expands, and not necessarily at the expense of the old. That's how I see it anyway. Plus I still listen to Classical so it's not dying or dead to me. :wink:


----------



## Raain (Jan 3, 2012)

sharky said:


> That reminds me of another problem: though this music will probably have a place in media for a long time, the people that produce it generally favor electronic sounds instead of live musicians. Electronics are becoming cheaper and more high quality in sound. Nothing will ever replace a live performance, but in the media with other visual distractions it can be easy not to notice the slightly electronic quality. Especially because the programs used to create electronic compositions are so sophisticated with control of dynamics and effects and are improving every year.
> 
> It doesn't mean live music will die, but it means that it's harder to make money in the performer field. I don't know if that will mean less performers, or just less really good performers because they have to spend a lot of time in a day job rather than practicing.



Have you heard of Globus before, I'd jump at the chance to see this and you can't really argue that this isn't classical seen as it's being performed by a live orchestra. Tbh all types of music evolve even classical, lots of groups or artists use electronic sounds in there music but there is still a lot of classical elements left and tbh I would have never taken any interest in classical music either if it wasn't for these groups.


----------



## sharky (Jul 1, 2012)

Raain said:


> Have you heard of Globus before, I'd jump at the chance to see this and you can't really argue that this isn't classical seen as it's being performed by a live orchestra. Tbh all types of music evolve even classical, lots of groups or artists use electronic sounds in there music but there is still a lot of classical elements left and tbh I would have never taken any interest in classical music either if it wasn't for these groups.


I have no problem with electronic music, in fact I compose with electronics myself. I just think it's sad that in the free market companies will likely choose to use a synthesizer instead of a real piano player to make the recording of say, a piano section in a film score. That is a really cool video, thank you!


----------



## sofort99 (Mar 27, 2010)

pinkrasputin said:


> I didn't mean "academic" in the sense it applied to college. More, that it is either a structured, learned, form or a reaction to it. As most others have said the word "classical" was bothering me when I know more than classical music was meant.




That's what makes it's future troubling though, isn't it?

Listening to classical takes some degree of intelligence and effort.

Also, instead of modern pop music increasingly refined to appeal to an absolute lowest common denominator, with a few exceptions, a classical "song" isn't self contained.

If I was forced for instance to listen to Justin Beaver, may God have mercy on my soul, at least his song is in context to itself.

Listening to classical, on the other hand, isn't. If you listen to a piece it's like watching a single act from a play, or a random block of 15 minutes between commercial breaks in the middle of "Alien" on TV.

If you have been expose to the story and know what's going on, it's not just OK, but can be enjoyable. If you haven't, it would be an exercise in futility and frustration.


----------



## WIPerspective (Mar 26, 2012)

I'd also like to add another note that conductor Alan Gilbert (the conductor of the New York Phil) mentioned in an interview. One interviewer asked him a question about relating "modern day" music to classical music. It didn't specifically mention that "classical music was dying" but it is relevant. The music created today (pop-related, if I had to use that terminology) and classical music are related. After all, pop music looks back at the music written in the past (to rock, which comes from jazz, which comes from classical and a few other combinations including African American music and whatnot). Anyone can hear the difference between the two, but one thing they both have in common is that they both look to the past for inspiration. For example, composers of the Baroque Era looked back at the Renaissance to guide their music, and then the Classical era looked at the Baroque, and the Romantic looked at Classical, Impressionist looked at Romantic, and then you have Post-Romantic, and then came WWI and WWII (which changed everything in the world, including the way composers wrote music) which helped lead to contemporary, jazz, rock, hip hop/R&B, etc.

Perhaps in 100 years from now, people will look at our "pop" music that some of us hate/take for granted and use that to guide their music.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

SteeplePoint said:


> It is. The reason why we call what we call "classical music" classical music today is because scholars, historians and musicologists needed to group music into separate time periods. And then within the "classical music" period, you have romantic music, classical music (Beethoven, Mozart, Haydn), and impressionistic, post-romantic, baroque, etc.


It is called "classical" music because it remains part of a historical tradition. There are related "classical" traditions in other parts of the world, eg China and India.

It could be argued that the 'trend' towards atonalism killed the classical tradition, but there are those who continue holding the flag, while 'skipping' this era.

Classical music was never 'pop' music and as such declines in its popularity are relative. 
If you listen to pop music today, you could say "Is Rock Music Really "Dying"? The biggest change in recent history is that music in general has become more accessible we are not longer forced to listen to that music which is performed or played on the radio. People today have the luxury of having more heterogeneous and diverse tastes.

If I had to make a statement, I would say that it is "pop" music that is clearly suffering from a prolonged tortured death.

This can also lead to a debate about whether a composer should compose something that they themselves find aesthetically pleasing, regardless of how 'innovative' or 'popular' it may be. (eg introspective vs extrospective modes of composition).


----------



## sharky (Jul 1, 2012)

Snow Leopard said:


> This can also lead to a debate about whether a composer should compose something that they themselves find aesthetically pleasing, regardless of how 'innovative' or 'popular' it may be. (eg introspective vs extrospective modes of composition).


Depends how much money you want to make from it. If other people happen to like the same kinds of things you like, you're lucky. If you're Charles Ives, you sell insurance. (For the record I do like Ives' pieces...) ^^


----------



## feelgood682 (Jul 7, 2012)

No i don't Think so.... Here Lots of People who they love 2 listen Classical Music..


----------

