For decades, the emperors have had no clothes.

[Tuba Guy]

[k001k47]

Tubenet:

Where a discussion about composers can turn into a discussion about drugs.

[ken k]

A lot of this is operating under what could be a false pretense. From what I can see, it is implying that pot is bad, which just isn't the case. It's not nearly as dangerous as smoking cigs or drinking. In fact,I have a "friend" who is a tuba player and smokes pot regularly. It has increased his lungpower, made his sound a lot fuller, and increased his low range freedom and ability. It is actually kinda beneficial to tuba.

Ah, the joys of blind justification. Pot is beneficial to tuba playing? Makes your sound fuller? Increases your low range?

Thanks so much for the belly laugh. Enjoy your next bong hit, duuuuude. I especially liked the justification of bad (illegal) behavior (pot smoking) by describing worse (legal) behavior (smoking cigarettes and drinking). That's rich.

yeah, I wonder if smoking pot helps Michael Phelps's breathing......

k

[rocksanddirt]

Rather than specific causes, I think the problem is (as pointed out earlier) 90% of anything sucks/is indifferent.

[ken k]

So what is art?

A simplistic answer could be creations that define a culture or the culture of an era?

What is "good" art? got me; I only know what I like.

I think we can't really tell what is "good" art in our own time. What art from today will still be around and appreciated 50 - 100 years from now?

Now what about music of our time (or at least the last 50 years or so as bloke eluded to in his thread title) Well orchestral music is not really of our time, at least not as an entertainment medium as it was in the 18th & 19th centuries. It is to a certain extent "Museum Music" (as was menitoned in Mojo's thread) just like a painting. Does that mean it is no longer good or enjoyable or relevant? How many symphonies and operas were written that we no longer hear anymore because they were not the "good" ones and haven't stood th test of time. Although look how JS Bach's music went unheard for over a hundrsd years before Mendelssohn and his compatriots "discovered" it in the the mid 1800's. Art has to be viewed (or listened to and/or appreciated) relative to the time it was created.

With the electronic age of the last 40 -50 years, large orchestral music has really left the "popular" art world. The only modern orchestral music that gets performed and purchased is basiclally film score music, which I really feel has sort of become the operatic music of the last 50 years. (film music and the broadway show music of Andrew Lloyd Webber and the like, although a show like Les Mis I feel will be a true classic an be around for a long time, I know ALW did not write that one.) All the academics poo-poo Williams and Korngold, etc because the music has been done before. It is not using a new theory or sound to "stretch the musical envelope or pallette" and heaven forbid it might have a major chord in it or some sort of tonality or be of a programatic nature. But quite honestly that music will be around alot longer and performed alot more than the latest symphony written by some composition professor at some university. But does that make it "good"?

On that note I did hear a very interesting and enjoyable piece this year by the Reading Symphony (PA). It was Michael Daugherty's Hell’s Angels. It was a concerto for four bassoons. Yes you read it correctly! and it was themed around the sound of motorcycles with very loud sound effects from the trombones and percussoin to imitate a roaring Harley. Very well crafted and interesting work, aside from the programatic aspect.

I think recordings of Miles Davis' "So What" will be around for along time, or Charlie Parker or many of the jazz artsists of the early to mid 20th century because they took music in a new direction and many people tried to emulate them. Now jazz is sort of at the same point that orchestral music is in that it is lacking something "new". Does that mean we can't enjoy it anymore?

Oh well , what the hell do i know....

Continue to talk amoungst yourselves....

ken "nice thread bloke" k

PS Wow that has to be my longest post yet. I can't believe I actually wrote that. all that typiong and I didn't say a thing....

[Tuba Guy]

[Todd S. Malicoate]

I know this piece. I appreciate it ONLY for the fact that this concerto sounds incredibly tough. I would not care to hear it again, though. Was he a grad student? That takes some SERIOUS chops to pull off!

You are correct that it is incredibly difficult for the soloist. The chap who performed it here at OSU was a senior undergraduate student.

It wasn't the difficulty of the music that made it "empty" to me...it was the fact that it seemed to be difficult only for the sake of being difficult. It's one of those pieces where, if you are arguing for it, almost always prompts the comment, "Well, you just have to listen to it several times to get it." I don't think that's necessarily true, nor do I think that music needs to be that "intellectual" to be excellent.

I lived with this piece's accompaniment for several months and never did "get it." The slow outer movements are boring and the fast middle section is just pure randomness - no melodies, no themes, no development whatsoever. I did find it amusing that the composer himself specifies on the front cover that the piece is not to be performed with just piano - that the piano part is for rehearsal purposes only. The full orchestral accompaniment is beyond the capabilities of almost any amateur orchestra (as noted by the university orchestra conductor, who let the guy play something else instead after he won the concerto competition - hmmm...those judges must have been impressed by something!). We went against the wishes of the composer and performed it with piano, anyway...I'll be damned if a student is going to work that hard on a piece and not at least get the opportunity to perform it on a recital.

Apparently, the 1993 Pulitzer committee disagreed with my opinion of the Trombone Concerto. They must have heard something I just "don't get."

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Or there was just no other entries that year...

Which is a very good point and brings up a sub-topic:

How do these "vacant" pieces receive awards and accolades? There aren't many awards in the classical music genre, and it seems that the very strange "intellectual" ones do very well. Who are the people nominating this stuff for awards?

Have any of you shared my experience of attending a live symphony concert which included the premier of a new composition, heard the piece, thought "wow, that was crap," and then read in a review that weekend how magnificent the piece was?

[Mojo workin']

LJV, that earns you the honor of one of the best Tubenet posts of all time.

[circusboy]

I don't really care for Lil Wayne or most other rap music, either. But don't blame it on his weed. I understand that his drug of choice is actually dextromethorophan or DXM, which is found in most over-the-counter cough syrups.

Fats Waller
Louis Armstrong
The Beatles
The Rolling Stones
Neil Diamond
Willie Nelson
Bob Marley

You may not love 'em all, but you can't say that they wasted their lives and didn't make contributions--in some cases profound contributions--to our culture.

I know and/or know of successful business executives, scholars, comedians, actors, philosophers, and scientists who raise families and pay taxes and choose to smoke marijuana. It's not for everybody, just as John Williams is not for everybody. But those who choose to make it part of their lives should be allowed to do so without fear of the law or of disapproving reprisals from those who don't know any better.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. If you don't want to marry someone of your same gender, don't. If you don't believe in pot-smoking, don't smoke pot. Just don't think you have the right to make those decisions for everyone else.

And I'm pretty sure that this is the topic of the original post more than that silly crap about pieces of music that you don't like. Saying "live and let live" is a lot braver than saying you don't like the output of Andrew Lloyd Webber.

[MaryAnn]

Coupla things.

1: To the poster who said he had never smoked pot but his dad came back from Nam with a bad habit...dude, you have inhaled a LOT of pot (more than Bill Clinton, even maybe.)

2: There's music and there's noise. Seems to be a matter of opinion. That blabba-blabba I hear coming out the lowrider cars with the slouched dude at the wheel, sure sounds like noise to me. Prolly the London Horn Sound coming out my stereo sounds like noise to him.

The trick, it seems, is to please both the "I be an intellectual" crowd and the "I just likes this" crowd at the same time.

MA, who is in the "I just likes this" crowd

[Mojo workin']

Fats Waller
Louis Armstrong
The Beatles
The Rolling Stones
Neil Diamond
Willie Nelson
Bob Marley

You may not love 'em all, but you can't say that they wasted their lives and didn't make contributions--in some cases profound contributions--to our culture.

Who said that they wasted their lives? Yes, they are musicians that have contributed greatly to the culture, despite their stupid, self indulgent, irresponsible use of marijuana.

I know and/or know of successful business executives, scholars, comedians, actors, philosophers, and scientists who raise families and pay taxes and choose to smoke marijuana. It's not for everybody, just as John Williams is not for everybody. But those who choose to make it part of their lives should be allowed to do so without fear of the law or of disapproving reprisals from those who don't know any better.

You don't like it here, move to The Netherlands.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. If you don't want to marry someone of your same gender, don't. If you don't believe in pot-smoking, don't smoke pot. Just don't think you have the right to make those decisions for everyone else.

I bet that you have never read the US Constitution.

And I'm pretty sure that this is the topic of the original post more than that silly crap about pieces of music that you don't like. Saying "live and let live" is a lot braver than saying you don't like the output of Andrew Lloyd Webber.

What have you been smoking? Don't answer that, we already know.

READ the OP's words-

Do you have the courage - in this thread - to list composers and/or compositions in the "classical" genre that - to you - are obviously completely vacant?

How's the weather over there on the LEFT coast, Circusboy?

[tubafatness]

Anyone who doesn't ingest cannabis or hasn't heavily ingested cannabis who can't see the extremely wide-ranging effects and affects of this stupifier in decisions and actions executed throughout all aspects of our society, probably had a preexisting mental disorder.

Well, according to this premise, I am someone with a pre-existing mental disorder. Anything else you would like to insult me with?

To be perfectly honest, this type of know-it-all crap is part of the reason why I think people don't find this place as useful as it should be. We all play the tuba, and we all like music. Let's talk about that for awhile. And let's not bring our overt political and other beliefs into this place, as much as we can.

How's the weather over there on the LEFT coast, Circusboy?

I thought this place was supposed to be politics-free. And especially not in such a derogatory way, (and please don't insinuate that my personal politics have anything to do with my view on this matter, I won't buy it.)

Huh.....
Aaron H.

[Uncle Buck]

You all do know there's a foe button, right?

But unfortunately, no reverse foe button.

[The Jackson]

I don't really care for Lil Wayne or most other rap music, either. But don't blame it on his weed. I understand that his drug of choice is actually dextromethorophan or DXM, which is found in most over-the-counter cough syrups.

It's funny that you should mention

Lil Wayne

because that goes gastrointenstinally with

over-the-counter cough syrups.

Jackson "who inhales about 50% of the times he breathes" Noskcaj

[circusboy]

All I need do is look at my cousin who shall forevermore be referred to as "Captain Coke" and I'm more than aware of the lack of attributes cannabis has.

"CC" is still working hard at being a professional bum.

Not sure I understand, Schlepp. I take it from the monniker you've ascribed to your unfortunate cousin that he has a cocaine problem. That's very sad. I'm sorry for him and for the apparent pain that he has inflicted upon his family as a result of this addiction. Cocaine is a dangerous and debilitating drug.

I thought this was about cannabis, which is not related in any way (chemically, botanically, medicinally) to cocaine. If you think one leads to the other, that's an old myth that science and statistics disproved in the 1970s.

[Tubaryan12]

Alright...I've been holding back all day....I didn't want to do this, but you've left me no choice:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29099116/" target="_blank

If that's not a reason to quit, nothing is.

[Tuba Guy]

[Tubaryan12]

Yeah, but wasn't there another post a while back that masterbation causes cancer too?

Carpe diem.
if that means smoking pot, do it. If that means living straight-edge, do it. To each his own

I guess you're right. If you have to die, you might as well die happy.

besides,.....I only look at that stuff for it's artistic value.

[Tubaguyry]

cannabis-induced mental disorders

Are you talking about compulsive overeating?