TubeNet

http://www.arbiterrecords.com/notes/102notes.html


Pianist Anton Batagov has some very interesting and thought provoking comments on what he calls the "System" of music making today. Very insightful and rather chilling because there is an amazing amount of truth to what he has to say. Enjoy.

Chuck

I find the article very insightful.. Certainly something I would/will print out and share with any students who have aspirations of joining the "system". But at the same time, I think the picture painted about modern music is a little drab. I feel that there are a lot of great musicians out there, some of whom get a lot more support than others, but that is how our world works. I could be completely wrong, but the comments from the article seem a little "K. Marx" like. Not denying there is plenty of truth in it however. Just not sure I would paint the same picture when describing the world of music. Afterall, I thoroughly enjoy going to symphony concerts...some pieces I have seen by as many as 5 or 6 different orchestras. Not because I felt I had to, but because I enjoy hearing the interpretations of the music I enjoy. All in all I think there is plenty of provacative material in this. Thanks for sharing it, it will certainly have me thinking now.

I look at the music business like the dog food business. If the dogs won't eat it, there's nothing you can do (putting it in fancy packaging, adding coloring, etc.) to sell the stuff. It seems like today if you can't use an orchestral work for a popular film score or TV commercial, it won't sell.

One distinction I make in music is "music for the musicians" and "music for the audience'. Sometimes, they're the same thing, but often they're not. List night, my quintet hauled out the Scheidt Centone V and read it down. Great stuff and fun to play--but I could never imagine playing it for an audience not made up of musicians. They'd be twitchin' and scratchin' and lookin' at their watches...

Besides, isn't Brian Eno the one responsible for this group?

Quote: "How many guys out there record a killer CD? I would be willing to bet that Gene Pokorny hasn't sold more than 500 copies of "Big Boy" and it is a great testament to his skill as an artist. There are probably 2,000 members that view this board and only 10-15% have purchased this work and supported this artist."

I think 500 is too conservative an estimation; it should be taken into account there are companies outside the US that distribute recordings by Summit. Many of my tuba-playing friends have this CD, including myself. Not to mention how many copies of the Orchestra excerpts and Tuba Track have sold! I think a lot!

Of course, that is NOTHING compare to Britney Spears' new CD.

wbthacker wrote:So, what's the big deal? The only "problem" here is that Bagatov apparently pursued the wrong career. He wanted to be a modern musician, but pursued training as a classical pianist. Probably not his fault - he grew up in the USSR whose system was doubtless even more rigid than our own, and got channeled into that path. But why blame it on "the system", and smear that system in the process?

Bill

I think there is some truth to what you say. Bagatov seems more of a scholar than a performer, and doesn't realize that many people are in music because they can perform. They don't mind if audience members come drool on them after every show...they even like it!

MA, who is also more of a scholar

harold wrote:
How many guys out there record a killer CD? I would be willing to bet that Gene Pokorny hasn't sold more than 500 copies of "Big Boy" and it is a great testament to his skill as an artist. There are probably 2,000 members that view this board and only 10-15% have purchased this work and supported this artist.

I'm trying to limit myself to one tuba CD per pay period, but this one will soon be mine all mine. Muahahahaha

harold wrote:
How many guys out there record a killer CD? I would be willing to bet that Gene Pokorny hasn't sold more than 500 copies of "Big Boy" and it is a great testament to his skill as an artist. There are probably 2,000 members that view this board and only 10-15% have purchased this work and supported this artist.

I'm trying to limit myself to one tuba CD per pay period, but this one will soon be mine all mine. Muahahahaha

wbthacker wrote:1) Bagatov isn't a "classical concert pianist" and doesn't want to be. This begs the definition: what does he mean by that? I sense emotional baggage.

Don't forget the subtext that he could be better than any of those "system" pianists if he wanted to. (Hence, all the description about winning awards, getting complimented by Messaien, etc.)

That's an important element in the usual modern-music whine, it seems to me: I could have been the best but I'm cut out for More Important Music. But nobody will pay for More Important Music, so everyone is wrong.

I wonder if Philip Glass would agree with him. I don't see him whining--I see him out there making a market for his stuff.

Rick "who thinks musicians run a major risk when the word 'important' slips into their vocabulary" Denney

Rick Denney wrote: Rick "who thinks musicians run a major risk when the word 'important' slips into their vocabulary" Denney

True! Very true!

Music is, and always will be a matter of taste. Each of us as an individual has our own taste. We tend to think we are right about our taste. Duh! If we thought we were wrong, we would change what we think we like. The thing is we either like something or we don't. We have our own taste. Of course, if we think our taste is good, then it is easy make the leap when it comes to certain music. We can easily attach the word "important." I don't think I have the right to decide what music is important for anyone except myself. Even then, I might be going a step too far.

I do, however, believe it is reasonable to determine that some music is just too simplistic, or that some is very complex. With music of the music that is selling in great quantities, the sum total of ideas can be a measure or two. This sometimes single idea is then repeated more times than I am able to count. Personally, I like a little more challenge than that. Even the much-maligned polka music is more complex than that. Polka music is pretty simple in its ideas. It is designed to be fun, not so much to challenge the thoughts of the listener. I understand this and enjoy polkas very much. However, there are usually several musical ideas in a polka. This is enough material for a 60 min. CD for some popular groups. I am quite tired of having to be exposed to this stuff. It does MORE than bore me. It tends to make me want to go somewhere else.

Well, to those with differing ideas, FLAME AWAY!!!

Chuck(G) wrote: It seems like today if you can't use an orchestral work for a popular film score or TV commercial, it won't sell.

Of course, there was also plenty of orchestral stuff that was "merely" music for opera or ballet. Many of those audiences cared about the dancers, not the musicians buried in the pit. Blame motion pictures for changing the medium from live performers to a flickering screen.

If people don't like to listen to it, then I probably don't want to play it. It's music, after all, and it's meant to be enjoyed.

Leland wrote: If people don't like to listen to it, then I probably don't want to play it. It's music, after all, and it's meant to be enjoyed.

Good point! I don't believe I had ever thought about it specifically, before. I agree.

I agree with TubaRay and Leland in that it seems like if the we need to "educate" the public as to why they need to like our music, it's not really the direction music should be going. If "serious" music is going to get ever more and more arcane and academic, it IS going to die out, as many classical musicians I've talked to are lamenting.

However, I think much of the reason that the public in general doesn't like classical music is because they're much less interested in music than we are. I find that the more music I listen to, the more complexity I can stand, and that the really simple music begins to bore me. Most people either listen to music that they can dance to or that they can ignore, and a lot of people just like the music that they partied to when they were young. I don't think you can "accidently" start listening to John Cage, you have to train your ear to listen to and understand music of that nature, which takes effort, something that most of the public is not willing to put into music.

Anton's article is freakin' AWESOME.

He hits it on the head -- he is NOT talking about specific repertoire or certain styles of music, he is speaking of human essence and the organic energy of music -- and whether one chooses to be an artist or a replicator. He is saying that common practice/academic approach is churning out the latter…

Bravo – that’s a great article. Very very poignant.