Comments on: On Music: the use of brass in Scheherazade

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:56:50 +0000

You’re probaby right Molly, Western Art Music does sound a bit pretentious, even if it is more accurate, it’s a little too late for it to catch on, ‘classical’ already has a pretty firm grip on the entire genre.

My degree is in Music history, so I’m probably more of a stickler than most. In a perfect world, chronologically speaking Western Art Music would be broken down to Medeival, Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th C and Contemporary, and each genre certainly could be broken down in to sub-genres.

By: Molly

Molly — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 21:09:54 +0000

I say we use capital C Classical to refer to the specific Classical time period, and lower case c classical to refer to… well, the kind of music we’re discussing here. I know it’s not accurate, but it’s what most people are used to calling it. By choosing more appropriate (but obscure) terminology, I think you risk alienating the folks who don’t know what you’re talking about. No matter what you call it, everyone should be encouraged to appreciate this music. And I think if you get too elite with fancy terms, you might scare away the people who haven’t gotten into it yet. Just my two cents!

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:02:56 +0000

I too hate the name Classical to describe the music that people have labelled ‘Classical’, that term truly should only be used for music composed after 1750 to approx 1830. A better term would be ‘Western Art Music’, which can cover everything from Medeival to Contemporary.

By: David

David — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:21:16 +0000

Thanks Liz! Never been called “You people” before, but I’ll take the compliment nontheless…. heh. heh.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:07:18 +0000

I don’t see any problem with the term “classical”. I frequently play and listen to classical music and pretty much divide all music into the two large categories of “classical” and “popular” (pop).

Classical includes anything for orchestra, concert band (aka symphonic band, wind symphony, wind ensemble, etc.), chamber music, opera, most choral stuff, solo works for voice and instruments, and about any combination of these.

While there is some overlap, pop is pretty much everything else. People who like country get offended when I refer to it as pop, but the reality is that anything on a country station shares more with boy bands than it doesn’t. Not trying to pass judgment, just stating fact.

The biggest real difference between classical and pop is who is seen as the primary creative force behind the piece. Classical strives to play the piece as the composer had intended it to be played. Although there is always room for interpretation, there are also definite rights and wrongs.
In pop, the performer is seen as the primary artist and is invited drastically change a piece that they often did not write in an effort to “make it their own”.

By: Liz

Liz — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:06:49 +0000

To Sam: But, but, you have Ravel! And if no one’s playing Heckelphone that day – you have Holst to live by too!

And Milhaud every once in a while. . .Who needs anything more?

By: Liz

Liz — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:05:05 +0000

Oh my gosh. You people just highlighted two of my favorite pieces of orchestral music.

What about Dvor[zh]ak? New World symphony anyone? And why it’s labeled the “5th” instead of the “9th” on some recordings?

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:42:50 +0000

If you want to hear some more great brass moments, the Santa Clara Vanguard Drum and Bugle Corps performed this as their 2004 program entitled ‘Attraction: The Music of Scheherazade’. Simply powerful arrangement for both brass and percussion. A personal favorite of mine!

By: Dennis M

Dennis M — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:02:42 +0000

in re: triple tongue brass …

the intro to the chorale in Finlandia always got me focused.

By: Alyssa

Alyssa — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 04:15:11 +0000

I’m so glad to see topics on music! There is so much to explore, this should be a great topic.