An observation about "Modern" classical music.

Aaaah, it's refreshing to see a thread about the substance of our hobby as opposed to the hardware of our hobby. I've been an avid classical music listener for years and continue to believe that people enjoy music that follows a few basic rules:

1. Is it predictable?
2. Does it contain melodies the listener can remember?
3. Does it contain "comfortable" harmonic content?
4. Does it evoke positive emotion?
5. Do the musicians visibly enjoy what they are playing? Or, if a recording, is
joy audibly apparent?
6. Does the conductor like the music he's conducting?

With much modern classical, one or more (often all) of these rules simply don't apply. Yes, much modern music is still great music; it's simply not enjoyable music, and that's the rub. Further, I believe that the more listeners know about the technical aspects of classical music, the more they are able to understand and appreciate (not necessarily enjoy) modern music. This opens another can of worms:
1. Where do we draw the line between appreciating modern music and
enjoying it?
2. Why even listen to music that we don't enjoy?
3. Why should orchestras continue to learn and play music that their
audiences clearly don't enjoy?

Great thread.

Eldartford: I see a lot of hypocrisy in stating your musical preference and allowing for disagreement, but then defining "skill", a value judgement, in terms of your own musical tastes.

You claim that this "skill" is manifested in "inventiveness within the structure of some rule set." What makes one rule set better than another? I don't accept that the rule set of "melody, harmony, and rythm" is fundamental to enjoyment of music. That's way to broad. Listen to Gregorian chant, very mainstream. No harmony much of the time. How about Taiko drumming? No melody... Jazz improvisation: No steady rythm here. Why should classical music have to play by some preordained set of rules?

I think us fans of the avant-garde in music respect your tastes; no one is shoving this stuff down your throat. What I have a problem with is your continuing insistance on engaging the fundamental value of this music (please read your previous posts before denying this). There is an argument to be made here, but if you want to make it you're going to have to start working within a more complex musical vocabulary. I think the conversation would be far more meaningful if you would explore the genre more deeply.

A reader doesnt like Dante "Divine Comedy" or doesnt understand Joyce "Ulisses". What's the problem? The book or the reader. There's no hard books, only lousy readers. And the same aplies to music.
Who said that music is made to be easy?
Music it's not made to be an enjoyable item. We are talking about culture. We must ear with the senses and feel with the intellect.
Do you understand Boulez "Sur incises", Carter Sympnony or Ligeti "Atmosphere"? No!

No news, you dont understand either Bach "Welltempered clavier" or Beethoven "Grosse fugue".
Who's fault? Bach, Beethoven, Boulez,Carter Ligeti, ......No way.
There must be an effort from the listener to fully appreciate the beauties of life.

Contemporay music as evolved from the melody, harmony, rhythm paradigm. If you want this there is the latest Robie Williams or Madona for you. (it's very easy on the ear :)

Should the composer (or any artist) be slave of the public? IMHO, NO.
Just some provocative thoughts.

Lousyreeds1...I don't think that I ever said that my preferences are the only acceptable ones. I have merely commented on some objective evidence that most (yes most) people prefer music that has melody, harmony and rhythm, and that, IMHO, these elements being lacking in a lot of modern music explains why people don't like it. This thread is supposed to be thoughtful analysis, not criticism. If you like to listen to Taiko drumming that's fine with me.

But Gregorian chants...mainstream? Give me a break!

"This thread is supposed to be about thoughtful analysis." Exactly. This is why I've suggested that you listen to and read about a broader spectrum of modern music before continuing to throw out simplistic generalizations that belie the complexity and nuance of the subject.