How were the people from olden timey days such good composers?

Plebeian detected.

There are minority of people and such minority of people who can write a music exists today.

>>>/yeoldemu/

Medieval dance music is pretty dank, better than Strauss's waltzes
youtube.com/watch?v=2PJ9vyOs2ZY

>tfw you will never fall in love to this music

That's technology

Democracy and capitalism are responsible for the moral and cultural decline of the Western world

Ikr. Must be cozy as fuck doing what you love as work with coworkers that share your interest.

>That's technology

The explosion of innovation is a direct result of liberty & the educated & literate populace that came with it.

You can't divorce 'technology' from liberalism

Education came from more affluence, not more liberty to embrace depravity.

>technology didn't exist before liberalism

Does everything have to be orthodox shit with you

can't you just listen to some grimes and chill god

20th century classical music is better than any other century though

as if there's really a separation between politics and economics

This is demonstrably false lmao, mostly because "classical" music endedin 1850.

Music has become on the other hand more ubiquitous which has made it lose its magic to a degree and has to compete with other types of entertainment that didn't exist before (movies, video games etc.). That's why not many people are nowadays willing to listen to music attentively for a long time (more than five minutes), which is needed for "serious" music, hence there is less demand for it.

I listen to secular music sometimes but it's generally "classical".

Marx was correct there: there isn't.

Metal in the intellectual successor to classical music

Except for Russian composers, 20th Century orchestral music is awful.

>muh Schoenberg
>muh Gershwin
You seriously saying these fruitloops can match the Renaissance or baroque or rococo or classical?

Metal is the intellectual successor to plague sufferers screaming.

down with memes

I thought Veeky Forums is 18+?

And it's all meaningless.

Morricone, faggot.

I can't even tell metal apart from classical. They sound more or less the same to me.

Greatest masterwork of our lifetime.

youtube.com/watch?v=Wabrnt1MVVQ

Prove me wrong.

>Education came from more affluence, not more liberty

Affluence among the general population came from the liberty to pursue commercial opportunities.

>technology didn't exist before liberalism

Not what I was implying at all. You attribute the elevation of living standards to simply 'technology' without understanding that it was liberalism that made it possible for those leaps in innovation to take place. Innovation since the 18th century has not come from the top down but from the bottom up. Freeing the general body of society from fossilized hierarchies is what allowed the enterprising & ingenious members of society to contribute the 'technology' that provided for the boon in wealth and living standards.

In this way you cannot divorce "technology" you attribute to prosperity from liberalism.

*Maricon

>Affluence among the general population came from the liberty to pursue commercial opportunities.
That came from the black plague killing off large portions of the working class and driving wages up, not from any new economic system.

> Innovation since the 18th century has not come from the top down but from the bottom up
Yeah, and the more we go that way, the worse it's gotten. Great tech like the freeway and the internet came from the military. "Bottom up" tech is apps and flavor #54

That's pretty funny from a guy who wanted to marry a tranny.

Huh? I never wanted to marry a transsexual.

no more constantine slander

>bullying my argument buddy
Only I can do that, you slut.

In all seriousness though are you a tranny or not?

Yeah you did, and then she fucking left, and you took up their trip, like a fucking parasite.

This faggot slander's Constantine every time he posts.

No.

It's not canon

Yes.

> moral and cultural decline
We create more beautiful music today than it was in XIX century. The problem here is that nobody is competent enough to rate it all and spoon feed all good composers for you and just small percent of people are dedicated enough to deep themselves, trying to be an active listener instead of consumer who listen passively to what is in a trend or retard who whines nonstop about muh decline of culture. Basically, the same reason why it seems that the past have a more geniuses than the present time. You need to be very smart to properly evaluate all modern scientific problems. This is why it is easy to point on Aristotle as example of human genius. This is why it is very hard to understand work that some guy put on proving the Poincare conjecture. We doesn't really live at times of moral or cultural decline. We live in time when our cultural or moral advancements are very complicated for a common people to jump at the bandwagon. There exists so many good music and yet you hardly could name even one modern author because in truth it's more easy to repeat opinions of critics from a past. It is more easy to whining about decline than try to do your part as a reader or even a listener. You tried to discover new music? Rate hundreds of pieces? Probably not. Maybe one or two times in your life. The only culture that is dead today is a culture of educated participation. The search for aesthetics is dead now. It is only about consumptions of big names and popular trends. Everyone desire read, but they would only read a book that are popular, appreciated by everyone else enough already. All people are too scared to be honest to their taste. Scared of their search for an experience. All they care is to be seen as the pinnacle of cultural and aesthetic wisdom by others. There is no way that are safer for that petty and cruel task than to shit on contemporary authors by denying fact of their existence. That is a pathetic truth of your decline.

We have a lot of toys, but because of that, we've neglected the great music which can be made simply. This was written in the 20th Century and it's a cappella

youtube.com/watch?v=AE1FzSC8DBs

This was made in 2010 its by my waifu grimes

youtube.com/watch?v=vjxqYdGWjgM

>"Bottom up" tech is apps and flavor #54

"Bottom up tech" is essentially EVERYTHING you use on a daily basis. The electric light in your room. The AC or heating in your house. Your refrigerator, the machines that make your clothes, the machines that power your house, airplanes, cars, bicycles, the tools that grow the food that you eat, the machines that process them, the lorries that transport them etc.. etc...

All of that was spurred that liberalism. The "capitalism" and "democracy" you scoff at. You seem to have lost the ability to distinguish difference between intelligent critique and dogmatic rejection.

Why do you think these technologies would be unattainable without liberalism? You think there would be no demand and patronage for their research?

Metal is the closest, mechanically, to classical. There's so much more you can DO with metal, than say, R&B or hip hop. At least instrumentally and thematically.

Can you imagine a pop song about vikings or dragons? One with an extended instrumental section?

That's lovely. Do you have any more pieces you like that are similar?

heh

There's literally a pop band called Imagine Dragons that personifies personal struggles as huge battles between demons and angels.

It's kitschy as fuck but shit like it's there. Same with Glitch Mob's Warrior Concerto.

>Imagine Dragons

Kill me senpai

The memes really has gone too far this time

> This was written in the 20th Century
And this is still perfectly reachable for you to listen whenever you want from public transport to in your sleep. We literally live in time where everyone can incorporate any kind of music to play major part in their day-to-day existence! How people got a nerve to blame their laziness on cultural decline is really beyond me. We got more opportunities for arrange our existence according to all of the ours aesthetic preferences than you could count. Yes, practically nobody bothers to use all of their creative freedom.

>Why do you think these technologies would be unattainable without liberalism?

Let's deal with historical fact as they happened than speculating on what "could have" happened. Liberalism played an enormous role in the innovation that brought prosperity to the west. While serfs in Russia were languishing under a fixed hierarchy, enterprising rural Americans, most famously Eli Whitney, had the freedom to innovate & invent new tools that improved people's lives.

Definitely. We're in a time period where we have unparalleled opportunities to educate ourselves and create works of culture and quality.

Op is just another fag that's hopelessly deluded into thinking they were born in muh wrong generation.

Constantine is a fag who, because of his religion, has to praise the virtues of being a shit eating russian peasant as the most pure and virtuous lifestyle. Expect anything associated with modernity to get a tirade about how shit sucks these days from him.

Yep, no one learns these sorts of songs any more to sing themselves. I love this hymn at my parish, and I love signing it. Groups of regular people hardly sing together anymore, except Mexicans who can barely speak English, or drunks

>Liberalism played an enormous role in the innovation
I don't believe that. It just changed the mechanism. It made certain innovations more likely (such as pet rocks), but cars and electric lighting would be valued technology regardless of liberalism, and patronized in research.

how do we know this is what they played? did they write music?

Russian serfs, by the way, didn't have it any less freedom than the workers of Matewan.

It's recorded, yes. Most of the popular music we have from Middle Ages was recorded by clerici vagantes

underrated bait

>I don't believe that.

It's not a question of faith. It's something we can look back on and see it as it happened. The countries that embraced liberalism had higher literacy, higher standards of living, and generally were more innovative than their conservative counterparts. You can speculate that "oh the assembly line would have been invented by SOMEONE at SOMETIME" but as it ACTUALLY happened, it was an enterprising businessmen who came up with that innovation because he was motivated by profit & efficiency. The automobile was made affordable because of capitalism. The story is the same with just about EVERYTHING you use on a daily basis. Commercial concerns spurred efficiency and improved people's lives.

You can still critique capitalism and give credit where credit is due.

It's also no coincidence today that countries with more economic freedom correlate with higher standards of living.

>The countries that embraced liberalism had higher literacy, higher standards of living, and generally were more innovative than their conservative counterparts.
They embraced liberalism after having a sizable bourgeoisie, they didn't get a sizable bourgeoisie because of liberalism.

Mahler

>muh numbers
shit stays the same

Veeky Forums

>Russian serfs, by the way, didn't have it any less freedom than the workers of Matewan.

Yes, the serfs were famous for their freedom of speech & right to own firearms.

Even if it is so, it doesn't refute anything about liberalism's beneficial affect on innovation.

Yeah well some places are closer to the 19th century than others. Between you and me I'm glad I live in one that's not so close.

>metal
>screaming
There are a lot of subgenres m8.
Also metal have a lot more thought put into it than the mainstream trash that are made from the computers nowdays

>mainstream trash that are made from the computers nowdays

Get out of here Dave Grohl you fucking geezer

The hell does that have to do with technological innovation?

Mahler, Bartok, Reich, Glass, Cage

The people of a tiny west virginian mining town weren't exactly the innovators I was previously referring to. I just found it somewhat ironic that his example of people who were "oppressed & bound by capitalist shackles" were still literate gun-owners. Something your typical serf would never dream of being.

I could have said the right "to own books & teach their families to read" I guess.

Is this autism? You can't tell an electrical guitar, a double bass and growling vocals apart from a viola, harpsichord and harp? The fuck?

>The instruments used define music
This is the appropriate time to call someone a pleb.

Serfs were allowed to have books

CPE Bach was wasted on Frederick since the king was only interested in the flute works by Quantz and himself.

The Patriots were right.

Yeah but these people don't realize (good and well thought out) screamo and, let's say the queen of the nights aria, are the same thing but just on the other end of the spectrum.

True. But only the less popular metal genres (much like classical music itself). The more popular genres/bands are not that much like classical, but more than your average pop band.

We're talking sub 30% literacy rates among male serfs in the late 19th century. Around 10% for women. Literacy among serfs actively discouraged by the Russian authorities.

These are numbers comparable to slaves in the American south. Was it technically illegal for slaves to own books? No. But in both cases learning to read either depended on the whims & good graces of a master or they were risking severe punishment.

Tupac wasn't around, so there wasn't a real G to compete with.

So,are you saying we've already hit rock bottom since the start of our existence and we've never noticed it until now?

nothing compared to hans zimmer

>Great Catholic composers
Palestrina, Lassus, Tallis, Byrd, Corelli, Scarlatti, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Chopin, Schumann, Liszt, and almost every other great composer in history

>Great Protestant composers
Schutz, Bach, Purcell, Handel, Mendelssohn

>Great orthodox composers
Nobody of worth before the middle of the 19th century, then you have some fag who wrote for cannons and killed himself, and slav emigrants who wrote firetrucks and memes.

Orthocucks are you even trying anymore?

incorrect. Modern classical is the closest to classical.

Unless its written by trained composers and primarily stored in a written score and intended for live performance in the concert hall, its not classical / art music.

>20th Century orchestral music is awful
you dont know shit about 20th century music if you think that. There's a huge variety of different types of orchestral music in the 20th century. Its 2016, surely some 1912 atonal music like schoenberg isn't going to offend you? its ancient history at this point. Have you listened to his 5 orchestral pieces? how about a survivor from warsaw?

If Gershwin and Schoenberg are your summation of 20th century music I'd suggest you go read a book

I need no further proof that the spirit of God, the source of all inspiration, has fled the ortho schismatic emperor/state cult.

And it should noted that Stravinsky, an orthodox himself, chose to commit to music a Latin mass rather than an orthodox liturgy, so sterile and monotonous a form he thought the orthodox service was.

>Great Orthocuck composers
Titov, Pekalitsky, Kalashnikov, Bavykin, Trediakovsky, Degtiarev, Vedel, Bortnyansky, Berezovsky, Davydov, Turchaninov. Bortnyansky, Lvov, Lomakin, Vorotnikov, Bakhmetev, Golitsyn, Strokin, Kastalsky, Chesnokov, Nikolsky, Arkhangelsky, Allemanov, Vinogradov

To name a few

None of which even have a shred of influence on the direction of art music. They are so back bench, they've actually bloody fallen off. It's almost laughable that a western composer as astonishingly mediocre as Gluck or Hasse are more well known, and has more skill than all of them combined.

Learn to read user, he asked for Great Orthodox composers, you just listed Orthodox composers.

>firetrucks and memes
Back to your >>>/classical/ containment thread you pseudo-intellectual memer.

>Kalashnikov
I've heard that this one has many hit songs...
But in all seriousness, nobody of notice on that list. I'm sure they must have written thousands of generic, interchangeable orthodox hymns and harmonizations of Russian folk songs for four-part choir, but still, no one composer of notice.

Classical music is dead because it has no demographic today. 1000 years ago the audience was the church. 250 years ago the audience was largely people who wanted to be entertained at parties, operas, etc. Who exactly is the audience for something like Schoenberg or Feldman? Other musicians and wannabe artists. Composers from the old times were better because they had a substantial audience.

You don't mean that seriously, right? First of all Mendelssohn-Bartholdy was jewish and just saying there were no good orthodox composers is laughable. Of course the russians didn't have any great composers before 19th century due to a lack of nationalism and national culture. Well Napolean and Romanticism changed that; it needed a Glinka in music to create a russian style of classical music, but it also needed a Pushkin for literature and nobody would ever say, there weren't any great russian authors or poets. Also: Tchaikovsky was certainly not the only great russian compser of his time:

>who is Glinka?
>who are the great five?
....