Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mouton.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mouton!mwg
From: mwg@mouton.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.music.classical
Subject: Re: Modern Classical Music
Message-ID: <50@mouton.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 31-May-84 09:28:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: mouton.50
Posted: Thu May 31 09:28:29 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Jun-84 09:29:02 EDT
References: <386@ihu1g.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 27

++
I wonder why there are so many people who can't find any recent music they
like; and why there aren't some modern composers who, feeling likewise, would
write something listenable.  Part of it, no doubt, is that all that modern
noise is so entrenched in musical academia that if you can't stand it, you
won't make it.

The twentieth century composers started in with the experimentation because
they were (are) bored with limited forms of music.  Some of the experiments
are only academically interesting [eg most of Cage, all of Stockhausen ~:-)],
some fail miserably, and some are quite sucessful.  Perhaps because musicians
(esp composers) take music more seriously than the casual listener, they
realize the limitation of the old styles and write in new ones; whereas
those who do not study music enough to see those limitations are confined by
them.  

Now we are getting composers who are tired of unlistenable music too.  But
they still experiment.  Much of the minimalist school's compositions are
wonderfully consonant.  Phil Glass might be too minimal for you but Steve
Reich is beautiful and complex (much like Bach), if you can stand the
repetition.  If you really listen, you will find that after some time
it no longer seems repetitious because you can hear the subtle changes.
Try "Music for 18 Musicians".

			-Mark Garrett
			...allegra!mouton!mwg