☺
Musica
> Dissecting your comment. I agree the influence (on the mass audience) of John Williams' music exceeds the audience of typical classical listeners. I would say it is Classical in style rather than nature, because by nature, typical Classical music works better than Film music on the Classical audience (there is a poll I created in the Movies subforum, and according to the poll, most voters don't return to much film music). Who is the 'we' in we can be proud of him, when many here don't agree he caters to our expectations? The statement 'He shows how now classical music can be at the top even in today's times' requires clarification. Is it at the top compared to other genres? Is it classical music in the first place? Do Classical music fans really care whether or not Williams is at the top in popularity in any genre if he is?
First of all, @Aries and you are both wrong.
The soundtracks in general (including, I guess, the ones of John Williams) don't exceed the audience of classical listeners.
In the image here below you can see the results of a poll in the subreddit "soundtracks" (for people who love soundtracks), which asked "Do you like classical music outside of soundtracks?".
As you can see, the 87% of the voters (141 out of 162) like classical music in general. So, if you think that classical soundtracks are appreciated by people who hate classical music, it's simply a fantasy.
This simple fact also tell us that if John Williams is the most popular living composer it's because he is popular among people who like classical music, not because he is popular among hip-hop fans.
Of course there are casual listeners without any particular interest for classical music who hear a melody in a soundtrack and say "what a beautiful melody!", but this is true for classical music in general. A casual listener can also have a positive reaction to a Mozart's melody.
So, the data we see above tell us that people who like soundtracks like classical music, but it doesn't say nothing about how many people of the classical world enjoy soundtracks... but does it matter when it comes to determine if something is classical music or not?
Let's pretend that only the 1% of the classical listeners listen to the music of Otto Olsson. Does the impopularity of Otto Olsson tell us that his music is not classical, or does it simply tell us that he is not a popular artist?
Well, this is not the case of John Williams: he is less popular than Mozart, but he is also the most popular living composer, as the data shared by @Forster suggest.
I am trying to understand the meaning of your nickname: "Phil Classical Purist". What is "pure classical music?".
If it is only about subjective perception, I can simply tell you that the music of John Williams and other composers of soundtracks is the most classical product in the modern world, to my ears.
If it's about objective elements, are you able to provide them, so that we can determine with a machine if something is pure classical music or not?
I have the feeling that the machine would find more elements of classical music in John Williams' music than it would find in the music of other contemporary artists, whose music many here would label as 'pure classical music'.
I've also read the post of @Fluteman and it really deserves a double facepalm for the complete nonsense expressed in the text.
> Bachtrack can define music genres any way they wish, but it would be just as legitimate to call Paul McCartney, Elton John, Wynton Marsalis, David Byrne, Laurie Anderson, Thom Yorke, Madonna, and, yes, Taylor Swift classical composers as it is to call John Williams one.
No, because the music of John Williams has clear elements of classical music (so much that someone might even say that it's the most classical product in the modern society), while the music of the artists you listed doesn't.
Paul McCartney has composed some classical pieces and in that specific cases his music can be labeled as "classical".
Nothing is difficult here.
If John Williams composes rock music, it's rock.
If he composes classical music, it's classical music.
If Paul McCartney composed classical music, it's classical music.
If the composes rock music, it's rock.
What the fuck is wrong with you? It's strange that someone who says that musical categories are arbitrary and created for marketing reasons stresses so much the idea that the music of John Williams is not classical. To be marketing are your posts! Marketing for sellers of fried air!
To @SanAntone: no one thinks that to label the music of John Williams as "classical music" makes it automatically good music. If we wanted to push the idea the John Williams is the best composer, we would simply say that he is the best composer.
The question we all should ask ourselves is why many people, including yourself, want to exclude works with clear elements of classical music from classical music. If the answer to this question is 'for simple snobbish reasons,' I think we get very close to the truth.
"I am a cultured person because I listen to classical music!"
"Uhm... classical music? You mean that stuff from Hollywood movies? You don't seem that cultured!"
"Darn, I have to go around saying that Hollywood music isn't classical, otherwise people think I'm uncultured."
**Modificato dall'autore il 02.02.2024 19:13**
First of all, @Aries and you are both wrong.
The soundtracks in general (including, I guess, the ones of John Williams) don't exceed the audience of classical listeners.
In the image here below you can see the results of a poll in the subreddit "soundtracks" (for people who love soundtracks), which asked "Do you like classical music outside of soundtracks?".
As you can see, the 87% of the voters (141 out of 162) like classical music in general. So, if you think that classical soundtracks are appreciated by people who hate classical music, it's simply a fantasy.
This simple fact also tell us that if John Williams is the most popular living composer it's because he is popular among people who like classical music, not because he is popular among hip-hop fans.
Of course there are casual listeners without any particular interest for classical music who hear a melody in a soundtrack and say "what a beautiful melody!", but this is true for classical music in general. A casual listener can also have a positive reaction to a Mozart's melody.
So, the data we see above tell us that people who like soundtracks like classical music, but it doesn't say nothing about how many people of the classical world enjoy soundtracks... but does it matter when it comes to determine if something is classical music or not?
Let's pretend that only the 1% of the classical listeners listen to the music of Otto Olsson. Does the impopularity of Otto Olsson tell us that his music is not classical, or does it simply tell us that he is not a popular artist?
Well, this is not the case of John Williams: he is less popular than Mozart, but he is also the most popular living composer, as the data shared by @Forster suggest.
I am trying to understand the meaning of your nickname: "Phil Classical Purist". What is "pure classical music?".
If it is only about subjective perception, I can simply tell you that the music of John Williams and other composers of soundtracks is the most classical product in the modern world, to my ears.
If it's about objective elements, are you able to provide them, so that we can determine with a machine if something is pure classical music or not?
I have the feeling that the machine would find more elements of classical music in John Williams' music than it would find in the music of other contemporary artists, whose music many here would label as 'pure classical music'.
I've also read the post of @Fluteman and it really deserves a double facepalm for the complete nonsense expressed in the text.
> Bachtrack can define music genres any way they wish, but it would be just as legitimate to call Paul McCartney, Elton John, Wynton Marsalis, David Byrne, Laurie Anderson, Thom Yorke, Madonna, and, yes, Taylor Swift classical composers as it is to call John Williams one.
No, because the music of John Williams has clear elements of classical music (so much that someone might even say that it's the most classical product in the modern society), while the music of the artists you listed doesn't.
Paul McCartney has composed some classical pieces and in that specific cases his music can be labeled as "classical".
Nothing is difficult here.
If John Williams composes rock music, it's rock.
If he composes classical music, it's classical music.
If Paul McCartney composed classical music, it's classical music.
If the composes rock music, it's rock.
What the fuck is wrong with you? It's strange that someone who says that musical categories are arbitrary and created for marketing reasons stresses so much the idea that the music of John Williams is not classical. To be marketing are your posts! Marketing for sellers of fried air!
To @SanAntone: no one thinks that to label the music of John Williams as "classical music" makes it automatically good music. If we wanted to push the idea the John Williams is the best composer, we would simply say that he is the best composer.
The question we all should ask ourselves is why many people, including yourself, want to exclude works with clear elements of classical music from classical music. If the answer to this question is 'for simple snobbish reasons,' I think we get very close to the truth.
"I am a cultured person because I listen to classical music!"
"Uhm... classical music? You mean that stuff from Hollywood movies? You don't seem that cultured!"
"Darn, I have to go around saying that Hollywood music isn't classical, otherwise people think I'm uncultured."
**Modificato dall'autore il 02.02.2024 19:13**
-
John Williams @ 2024-02-02 18:34:32.0 di Mattia
-
■ @ 2024-02-03 00:13:02.0 di Non Autenticato
-
■ @ 2024-02-03 02:15:19.0 di Mattia
-
■ @ 2024-02-03 11:19:11.0 di Mattia
-
-
-