An observation about "Modern" classical music.

Eldartford,

We're in the world of different events and subjects. We're in the world of a different languages.

Music is also a language or sonic form of such. Every tact is a word and every group of such may be a "phrase" or "sentence" not neccessarily sonic exploration or an exersise. There's not only the Blue Danube or Nutcracker, there's an industry, machines, trains etc...

I personally like when I can distinguish "phrases" or "sentences" there; reprising in musical compositions is a big +. For example Phillip Johnston's music to the movie "Unknown" falls onto that category. Despite its being played by 6-piece band I wouldn't categorize it to a jazz since there's too much order rather than an improvisation or blasting solos of every musician.

Start understanding Prokofiev and Shostakovitz first and than try Alf or Gorecki...

Marakanetz... I like "Peter and the Wolf". Maybe that's a start :-) But that piece has lots of melodies that I can hum.

Your comparison of music to language does not advance your point of view. Languages are very structured, with a few irregular verbs, and the like. Speech that lacks structure is not a language. It's called "gibberish".

Eldartford: Not all but 99% of modern classical music is structured. The notes are the same notes as Beethoven, that is C is still C (middle C is 256 hz). The stops are still the same. They use the same time signatures. It is just that they no longer use the diatonic scale strictly. Serialism of Berg and Webern though it sounds atonal is not per se. It uses all twelve notes equally, atonal works do not. Mahler and to some extent Wagner were chromatic, that is they went outside the diatonic system (major and minor scales) quite frequently. Liszt would sometimes use 11 different notes in the first 12 notes of one of his pieces, that surely is very chromatic and not very diatonic. One very interesting piece is Schnittke's Violin Sonata No.2, extremely atonal and extremely dissonant, but unbelievably emotional ( saw Gidon Kremer perform it in Philly two years ago), about 2/3rd's of the way through, the piano accompaniment loudly played the C chord from the C major scale.... it was so indescribly out of place...it seemed atonal!

The problem is that as the composers use the 12 tone scale with no tonal center, the listeners fade completely. In other words, it seems that the composers have moved past what most listeners can follow which wasn't the case during classical and romantic periods. There is structure, but when listening to classical music it helps to anticipate. It's hard to anticipate if you can't follow the music, and the average listener isn't going to become a musicologist just to enjoy the music. Is that what you see?

Shubertmaniac: no, serialism is by definition atonal. It has no tonic. Sometimes a perception of tonality can appear temporarily between related tone rows, but it is never permanent. And I'm afraid it's not correct that serialism uses "all twelve notes equally". Also, chromaticism has been around since Mozart's time, and became prevalent far before the time of Wagner or Mahler.

Robm321: The 12 tone scale was popular for about 30 years in the middle of the 20th century. It's used rarely nowadays. For Pete's sake people, "modern classical music" is not all the same. There are so many styles out there nowadays, you just have to try things out for yourself. Music is diverse enough to the point where generalizations like these become meaningless.

I worry that all of this persistent misinformation will convince someone inexperienced to avoid the world of new music. Maybe some of the experienced new music people could start a list of pieces they think are moving and relatively approachable?