An observation about "Modern" classical music.

Robm, Robm, Robm!

I can't give you details on John Adams creative process, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't involve thin air. Interestingly, I got involved earlier today on another thread when a poster decided to dis Bach's "Opera." As you know, different music is centered in different things. Some music emphasizes lyric elements, some rhythmic, and some philosophical or theological. I suppose all music has a target audience, but the audience for a particular piece may not include me. That does not mean the music is of limited value in objective sense. It may just mean I'm not ready for that particular "hook." I didn't especially like Bruckner or Mahler at first. It took work to acquire the taste, but I grew to love them both.

Archivmusic.com has a pretty good deal on some Arte Nova CDS now. They are $6- $10, and there are some interesting 20th century works. Some of these offerings contain works mentioned in this thread, like the Gorecki 3rd and Copland Piano concerto.

At that price, I could't resist picking up some stuff that will be new to me, such as the Carter Piano concerto and the Furtwangler 2nd. I also got the Copland, which is coupled with concertos by Ravel, Honegger, and Antheil. Just thought I'd mention the sale in case anyone is interested.

I am really happy that some people do like "modern" music. To each his own. My intent was to explore why such music draws so few fans, and why, at a time when orchestras face fiscal hard times, they persist in playing it, often to empty halls

Here is an experiment that would be interesting. Make a recording of an orchestra tuning up. See if you can promote it as a new composition. I bet you could!

Ever listened to the "Hoe Down" from Copland's "Rodeo", Eldartford? The first ten bars or so are inspired by the tuning of an orchestra.

Lousyreeds1...Yes I have heard Copland"s "Rodeo", one of his more popular works, but I didn't know about his inspiration from tuning up. Of course, inspiration is not quite the same as the actual sound, which I still think could be passed off as a composition.

Eldarford

Your initial post didn't state the intent of asking why people like modern classical music. Rather your question had to do with the pause after the performance was done. It also seems that your question also pertains to "atonal" music and not other modern works.

I like "atonal" classical music because it is intellectually stimulating. Initially, there was something that pulled me into listening, and now I enjoy the surprises, emotionality, and patterns. Having said that, I only listen to this type of music on an occasional basis because I have to be in the mood for it. I agree that some "atonal" music is difficult, but that's part of allure for me.

IMHO, "atonal" music has been a sort of inspiration for newer works that are much more universally appealing. Please correct me if I'm wrong (I"m not a musicologist), some composers have reacted strongly to "atonal" music, and created gorgeous music that is not strictly "atonal." Arvo Part had a crisis, stopped composing for a while, and then took a much different track to his music, much of which is exceeding beautiful (see my post above). Gorecki also departed from strict atonal composition. His music, especially his Third Symphony, which is mentioned several times in this thread, had been a top seller in England (if my information is correct). Penderecki's Threnody for the Victims of Hirshima is very beautiful and usually brings goosebumps. BTW, this piece won an UNESCO prize.

I challenge you to pick up some of the music mentioned above, listen to it a few times, and then respond.

John