6 ms·

Classical music works of the 21st century

88 points by tintinnabula 7y ago

dwd 7y ago
What is their criteria for selection? Are they working from the idea of a published piece of music that could be performed by any symphony, quartet, choral group, etc? Or is about what instruments it is for? I'm just not clear on what their definition of "classical" music is.
- eeronen 7y ago
  Classical music as a genre is quite hard to define. Especially if you try to find some clear boundaries of where classical ends and jazz begins. That is the case for basically every genre. Personally I would try to approach it like this: If it needs the particular band/artist to play it live, it's not classical, if it can be played by anyone with the notes and still be considered the same as hearing the original, it's classical. I think the free dictionary puts it well: > In technical musical usage this means music composed during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, characterized by the development of the sonata by such composers as Mozart. In popular use, however, the term is used to mean any serious art music as distinct from jazz, pop, or folk. Looking at the article, I think their definition is based on the instruments used and the form of the piece (there's a whole lot of operas there).
  - analog31 7y ago
    I think this raises a good point about separating the composer and performer. It's almost like a symbiosis. If you're a composer, and you want there to be any chance of someone performing your work in a live setting, then you have to stay within certain parameters. If you're a musician, you're looking for interesting material that you can play on your instrument without getting killed. There are other practical concerns such as being able to hire from a pool of musicians who can all do similar work. So it leads to a large repertoire that is hard to define in a formal sense, but develops similarities out of practical necessity. There are other examples as well. The string quartet and the "big band" of jazz, where a particular instrumentation and performance setting guarantees a limitless supply of repertoire for the musicians, and a hope of getting performed for the composer or arranger. I play in a "big band."
- sammorrowdrums 7y ago
  Your confusion is completely right. The genre classical has an almost insanely wide meaning. It originally only meant music from the Classical Period of 1720 to 1820, then Romantic music after that, and thus everything you describe above ought to be termed contemporary music (and is usually called something like that as a sub-genre). There is a marketing explanation which is often the easiest definition to use, which is that labels have to box music into genres to sell and so they do, and get to decide if music should be pitched as classical. Beyond using vaguely reminiscent ensembles, forms and orchestration then I guess the focus on the composer is probably the next main thing. It is not a consistent definition though, where film composer John Williams gets called classical because of the aesthetic and influences and orchestration but then show music is not counted because for some reason its use of song forms and aesthetic is just not right, despite using mostly classical music orchestration... Although there are classical pieces that are quite like show music. Like "The Trout" by Schubert (which comes under Programme Music which is also frowned upon as low tier by many music snobs). So I can only really conclude that it's essentially the domain of marketers, critics and snobs to determine which artfully composed music deserves to be acknowledged as "classical" in the modern day and I think essentially the definition is "something that somebody collating new classical music for the Guardian / anyone bold enough to claim they define it thinks deserves the title". Classical music is in the eye of the beholder.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >Your confusion is completely right. The genre classical has an almost insanely wide meaning. To pundits, not to the common man, for which it means "mostly artsy stuff done with acoustic instruments by conservatory trained composers and performed and their like". Heck, for the common man even the distinction "classical", "romantic" etc doesn't mean anything, Bach and Mahler is all classical, and even for my brother and their folks (classically trained professional orchestra musicians), the term "classical" is thrown around for all this repertoire. It's just anything with "serious" trained composers, and (mostly) real instruments by conservatory players. Jazz and experimental works, like Xenakis or Stockhausen are excluded from called "classical" though, where e.g. a Phillip Glass piece would be included (but in that case, there's the "minimalist" branding which prevails). In any, case since the article talks about modern works (21st century or so), it has probably this meaning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music
- coldtea 7y ago
  >I'm just not clear on what their definition of "classical" music is. It's the casual definition of classical music. Music played by musicians trained in classical repertoire, with mostly conventional instruments (violins, cellos, pianos), choruses, etc. The criteria is that they suggest some pieces (there are no objective criteria, like "it has to be German" or "it has to have the viola"), and that they're modern works. The established term for the kind of music they include (for works from early-mid 20th century and upwards) is usually "contemporary classical music". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music No jazz, pop, electronica, funk, swing, salsa, afrobeat, hop jop, and so on.
- guiriduro 7y ago
  Good question - I doubt there is a complete formal definition of what 'classical' music is. I remember an analogous explanation of the "institutional" theory of art - as being whatever someone of the artworld offers for consideration as art[1]. Same for the subject of (generally regarded) aficionados of the modern "classical music"-world I would guess; or indeed, any genre. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_art
- em-bee 7y ago
  i once listened to a talk where the speaker argued that classical music per se does not exist. and i believe he is right. what we think of as classical music is very much defined by how it is played. the choice of instruments etc. many film scores sound like classical music, but they surely aren't. heck even heavy metal sounds like classic if played by a string quartet. and i bet you wouldn't immideately recognize a classical piece if played by a rock band.
antognini 7y ago
This is a great list! For anyone who's interested in a few more recommendations: * For my money, John Adams's best composition this century is El Niño (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2IUdBLVkOQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2IUdBLVkOQ), though Doctor Atomic is also amazing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlUHKHLk_VU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlUHKHLk_VU). The former is a nativity oratorio and the latter is an opera about Oppenheimer and the Manhatten Project. On the Transmigration of Souls (a 9/11 memorial piece) is also especially moving. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwoasXzLdVY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwoasXzLdVY) * Revelation, by Michael Harrison. This piece uses just intonation rather than the more common equal temperament. In just intonation, the notes are tuned so that the fifth is "pure" --- i.e., the frequencies are in an exact 2:1 ratio. This causes the other intervals to sound slightly out of tune and gives the music a really otherworldly feel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4oKzSRs3sA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4oKzSRs3sA (Michael Harrison, incidentally was a student of La Monte Young who revived just intonation and composed a 5-hour piano piece called The Well Tuned Piano. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfWV4rNB6KE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfWV4rNB6KE) * Sleep, by Eric Whitacre. Now a classic choral composition. (Cloudburst is also great, but was composed in 1995 at the age of 21!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw5gupbe9E0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw5gupbe9E0 * Orient & Occident by Arvo Pärt. Pärt has a lot of great works like Für Alina (which marked his departure from serialism), but most of them were composed in the 20th century, although he's still active! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGMaIfNdqH8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGMaIfNdqH8 * "...similarities between diverse things", by Joby Talbot (2002). For piano trio and vibraphone. The title comes from a mathematician friend of Talbot's who died at the age of 20 and used that phrase to describe why he found mathematics beautiful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tawlg0RN4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tawlg0RN4I * The Veil of the Temple, by John Taverner. A magisterial work lasting 7 hours. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62pRsgwSYjs&list=PLga2eRXhIyUgJmsqGzAaE19EPGz_C1kSn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62pRsgwSYjs&list=PLga2eRXhIy... * Chanson Eloignee, by Morten Lauridsen. A lot of Lauridsen's more famous works were composed in the late 20th century, but he is still active. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ajmn9m-C9Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ajmn9m-C9Y And there's a lot more that I'm missing. A couple of other favorites of mine that missed the 21st century by a few years: * Concerto for Harpsichord and Strings by Michael Nyman (1994) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Svf9yuouXww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Svf9yuouXww * Danzón No. 2 by Arturo Marquez (1994). This piece is great fun and helped to bring Gustav Dudamel to fame after he conducted it with the Venezuelan Youth Orchestra on their world tour in 2007. (Dudamel is now the conductor of the LA Philharmonic.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXeWiixwEz4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXeWiixwEz4 * 24 Preludes for Piano by Lera Auerbach https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9u5wc2CkL8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9u5wc2CkL8 Lots of great music out there!
claudiawerner 7y ago
I'm pleased to see Heiner Goebbels listed, I know him from his excellent collaboration with Alfred Harth on Frankfurt-Peking (1984), which is a jazzy sound collage album. I didn't know he also made classical music.
chewz 7y ago
https://open.spotify.com/playlist/23NEgb3NCEA7OtY7nZUHwR https://open.spotify.com/playlist/23NEgb3NCEA7OtY7nZUHwR
daviddaviddavid 7y ago
Very surprised not to see Nico Muhly on this list. There are many of his short pieces on youtube. I highly recommend "It Goes Without Saying", "Motion" and "Drones In Large Cycles". Another interesting musician is the Ukranian pianist Lubomyr Melnyk. The live video of him in Hamburg is wonderfully shot.
- tannhaeuser 7y ago
  Also from near Hamburg (now Berlin) is pianist/organist Nils Frahm, who featured in Hamburg several times, and also at the proms.
thanatropism 7y ago
Without having read the article, as so often is the custom in comment sections, I am UNABLE to prevent myself from recommending the series of documentaries "Leaving home". Specially the first one. They're all on youtube. "Home" here stands for the familiarity of classical/romantic music ("19th century" but including post-1900 stuff like Rachmaninoff and so on) but also more literally the tonic root of the harmonic system. Episode 1 is very closely about the road to serialism throughout Wagner, Debussy, etc. up until Schönberg's pre-serial and serial works. Then there are episodes about rhythm and folk influences and so on that widen the scope from just serialism. If you have a piano or keyboard at home I also recommend trying some of these tone rows, verifying when they're "true" tone rows, etc. I sometimes try to improvise with common chord progressions with my left hand and tone rows that start (or end) related to the tonal progression to feel how they forcefully disconnect from attempts to think tonally. Of course serialism isn't the definition of modern art music, but it's a mind expander.
suchoudh 7y ago
seems like noise to me. How can it be classical if it's not even pleasing to ears?
- Jeff_Brown 7y ago
  I thought it was pretty but gratuitously sad. Got fed up and didn't finish the list. Artists and philosophers both, I think, sometimes mistake sadness for import.

88 points by tintinnabula 7y ago

dwd 7y ago

What is their criteria for selection? Are they working from the idea of a published piece of music that could be performed by any symphony, quartet, choral group, etc? Or is about what instruments it is for? I'm just not clear on what their definition of "classical" music is.

eeronen 7y ago
Classical music as a genre is quite hard to define. Especially if you try to find some clear boundaries of where classical ends and jazz begins. That is the case for basically every genre. Personally I would try to approach it like this: If it needs the particular band/artist to play it live, it's not classical, if it can be played by anyone with the notes and still be considered the same as hearing the original, it's classical. I think the free dictionary puts it well: > In technical musical usage this means music composed during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, characterized by the development of the sonata by such composers as Mozart. In popular use, however, the term is used to mean any serious art music as distinct from jazz, pop, or folk. Looking at the article, I think their definition is based on the instruments used and the form of the piece (there's a whole lot of operas there).
- analog31 7y ago
  I think this raises a good point about separating the composer and performer. It's almost like a symbiosis. If you're a composer, and you want there to be any chance of someone performing your work in a live setting, then you have to stay within certain parameters. If you're a musician, you're looking for interesting material that you can play on your instrument without getting killed. There are other practical concerns such as being able to hire from a pool of musicians who can all do similar work. So it leads to a large repertoire that is hard to define in a formal sense, but develops similarities out of practical necessity. There are other examples as well. The string quartet and the "big band" of jazz, where a particular instrumentation and performance setting guarantees a limitless supply of repertoire for the musicians, and a hope of getting performed for the composer or arranger. I play in a "big band."
sammorrowdrums 7y ago
Your confusion is completely right. The genre classical has an almost insanely wide meaning. It originally only meant music from the Classical Period of 1720 to 1820, then Romantic music after that, and thus everything you describe above ought to be termed contemporary music (and is usually called something like that as a sub-genre). There is a marketing explanation which is often the easiest definition to use, which is that labels have to box music into genres to sell and so they do, and get to decide if music should be pitched as classical. Beyond using vaguely reminiscent ensembles, forms and orchestration then I guess the focus on the composer is probably the next main thing. It is not a consistent definition though, where film composer John Williams gets called classical because of the aesthetic and influences and orchestration but then show music is not counted because for some reason its use of song forms and aesthetic is just not right, despite using mostly classical music orchestration... Although there are classical pieces that are quite like show music. Like "The Trout" by Schubert (which comes under Programme Music which is also frowned upon as low tier by many music snobs). So I can only really conclude that it's essentially the domain of marketers, critics and snobs to determine which artfully composed music deserves to be acknowledged as "classical" in the modern day and I think essentially the definition is "something that somebody collating new classical music for the Guardian / anyone bold enough to claim they define it thinks deserves the title". Classical music is in the eye of the beholder.
- coldtea 7y ago
  >Your confusion is completely right. The genre classical has an almost insanely wide meaning. To pundits, not to the common man, for which it means "mostly artsy stuff done with acoustic instruments by conservatory trained composers and performed and their like". Heck, for the common man even the distinction "classical", "romantic" etc doesn't mean anything, Bach and Mahler is all classical, and even for my brother and their folks (classically trained professional orchestra musicians), the term "classical" is thrown around for all this repertoire. It's just anything with "serious" trained composers, and (mostly) real instruments by conservatory players. Jazz and experimental works, like Xenakis or Stockhausen are excluded from called "classical" though, where e.g. a Phillip Glass piece would be included (but in that case, there's the "minimalist" branding which prevails). In any, case since the article talks about modern works (21st century or so), it has probably this meaning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music
coldtea 7y ago
>I'm just not clear on what their definition of "classical" music is. It's the casual definition of classical music. Music played by musicians trained in classical repertoire, with mostly conventional instruments (violins, cellos, pianos), choruses, etc. The criteria is that they suggest some pieces (there are no objective criteria, like "it has to be German" or "it has to have the viola"), and that they're modern works. The established term for the kind of music they include (for works from early-mid 20th century and upwards) is usually "contemporary classical music". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_classical_music No jazz, pop, electronica, funk, swing, salsa, afrobeat, hop jop, and so on.
guiriduro 7y ago
Good question - I doubt there is a complete formal definition of what 'classical' music is. I remember an analogous explanation of the "institutional" theory of art - as being whatever someone of the artworld offers for consideration as art[1]. Same for the subject of (generally regarded) aficionados of the modern "classical music"-world I would guess; or indeed, any genre. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_art
em-bee 7y ago
i once listened to a talk where the speaker argued that classical music per se does not exist. and i believe he is right. what we think of as classical music is very much defined by how it is played. the choice of instruments etc. many film scores sound like classical music, but they surely aren't. heck even heavy metal sounds like classic if played by a string quartet. and i bet you wouldn't immideately recognize a classical piece if played by a rock band.

antognini 7y ago

This is a great list! For anyone who's interested in a few more recommendations: * For my money, John Adams's best composition this century is El Niño (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2IUdBLVkOQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2IUdBLVkOQ), though Doctor Atomic is also amazing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlUHKHLk_VU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlUHKHLk_VU). The former is a nativity oratorio and the latter is an opera about Oppenheimer and the Manhatten Project. On the Transmigration of Souls (a 9/11 memorial piece) is also especially moving. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwoasXzLdVY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwoasXzLdVY) * Revelation, by Michael Harrison. This piece uses just intonation rather than the more common equal temperament. In just intonation, the notes are tuned so that the fifth is "pure" --- i.e., the frequencies are in an exact 2:1 ratio. This causes the other intervals to sound slightly out of tune and gives the music a really otherworldly feel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4oKzSRs3sA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4oKzSRs3sA (Michael Harrison, incidentally was a student of La Monte Young who revived just intonation and composed a 5-hour piano piece called The Well Tuned Piano. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfWV4rNB6KE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfWV4rNB6KE) * Sleep, by Eric Whitacre. Now a classic choral composition. (Cloudburst is also great, but was composed in 1995 at the age of 21!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw5gupbe9E0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw5gupbe9E0 * Orient & Occident by Arvo Pärt. Pärt has a lot of great works like Für Alina (which marked his departure from serialism), but most of them were composed in the 20th century, although he's still active! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGMaIfNdqH8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGMaIfNdqH8 * "...similarities between diverse things", by Joby Talbot (2002). For piano trio and vibraphone. The title comes from a mathematician friend of Talbot's who died at the age of 20 and used that phrase to describe why he found mathematics beautiful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tawlg0RN4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tawlg0RN4I * The Veil of the Temple, by John Taverner. A magisterial work lasting 7 hours. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62pRsgwSYjs&list=PLga2eRXhIyUgJmsqGzAaE19EPGz_C1kSn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62pRsgwSYjs&list=PLga2eRXhIy... * Chanson Eloignee, by Morten Lauridsen. A lot of Lauridsen's more famous works were composed in the late 20th century, but he is still active. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ajmn9m-C9Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ajmn9m-C9Y And there's a lot more that I'm missing. A couple of other favorites of mine that missed the 21st century by a few years: * Concerto for Harpsichord and Strings by Michael Nyman (1994) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Svf9yuouXww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Svf9yuouXww * Danzón No. 2 by Arturo Marquez (1994). This piece is great fun and helped to bring Gustav Dudamel to fame after he conducted it with the Venezuelan Youth Orchestra on their world tour in 2007. (Dudamel is now the conductor of the LA Philharmonic.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXeWiixwEz4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXeWiixwEz4 * 24 Preludes for Piano by Lera Auerbach https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9u5wc2CkL8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9u5wc2CkL8 Lots of great music out there!

claudiawerner 7y ago

I'm pleased to see Heiner Goebbels listed, I know him from his excellent collaboration with Alfred Harth on Frankfurt-Peking (1984), which is a jazzy sound collage album. I didn't know he also made classical music.

chewz 7y ago

https://open.spotify.com/playlist/23NEgb3NCEA7OtY7nZUHwR https://open.spotify.com/playlist/23NEgb3NCEA7OtY7nZUHwR

daviddaviddavid 7y ago

Very surprised not to see Nico Muhly on this list. There are many of his short pieces on youtube. I highly recommend "It Goes Without Saying", "Motion" and "Drones In Large Cycles". Another interesting musician is the Ukranian pianist Lubomyr Melnyk. The live video of him in Hamburg is wonderfully shot.

tannhaeuser 7y ago
Also from near Hamburg (now Berlin) is pianist/organist Nils Frahm, who featured in Hamburg several times, and also at the proms.

thanatropism 7y ago

Without having read the article, as so often is the custom in comment sections, I am UNABLE to prevent myself from recommending the series of documentaries "Leaving home". Specially the first one. They're all on youtube. "Home" here stands for the familiarity of classical/romantic music ("19th century" but including post-1900 stuff like Rachmaninoff and so on) but also more literally the tonic root of the harmonic system. Episode 1 is very closely about the road to serialism throughout Wagner, Debussy, etc. up until Schönberg's pre-serial and serial works. Then there are episodes about rhythm and folk influences and so on that widen the scope from just serialism. If you have a piano or keyboard at home I also recommend trying some of these tone rows, verifying when they're "true" tone rows, etc. I sometimes try to improvise with common chord progressions with my left hand and tone rows that start (or end) related to the tonal progression to feel how they forcefully disconnect from attempts to think tonally. Of course serialism isn't the definition of modern art music, but it's a mind expander.

suchoudh 7y ago

seems like noise to me. How can it be classical if it's not even pleasing to ears?

Jeff_Brown 7y ago
I thought it was pretty but gratuitously sad. Got fed up and didn't finish the list. Artists and philosophers both, I think, sometimes mistake sadness for import.