Ok, about Paganini...
By the calendar, he's considered a Romantic composer. But unlike other music of the Romantic era, Paganini was exceptionally limited in what he did - he stuck almost exclusively to a single form (theme and variation), did not explore the possibilities of the underlying chords (his bag was simply melody), and didn't explore sectional modulation the way the other Romantic composers did.
Lay out any of the Caprices next to one of Bach's violin partitas, and you'll probably see why I consider him a baroque composer.
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
Yes, Noteboat, I said I didn't study Paganini, in fact I only have a half dozen of his works. The Romantic era is not my favorite. I'm sure the Paganini's caprices are similar to the Bach's partitas from a musicological (is it correct?) point of view but when I listen to Paganini I shouldn't say he is baroque. :D
In my other post I wanted to include a comment on the chamber orchestra/music because when we say orchestral, usually we tend to think on a large orchestra. I think the Fretsource's comment express it much better than I never could write! :lol:
OK .. I confess . . I was being lazy in using the term "classical," and I do know better.
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
Well if you want to be really literal about it then alright. And for a neoclassical progressive metal band check out winds.
Although, in its strictest sense, 'classical music' refers to the period outlined by NoteBoat, the separate, wider meaning of the word is also completely legitimate and recognised by musical authorities, not only laymen.
SNIP
The term isn't restricted to orchestral music but also includes solo instrument 'art music' such as that composed for lute, classical guitar (not 'metal'), harpsichord, etc. as well as the art music of non Western traditions such as Middle Eastern, Indian, etc. (Ravi Shankar is a classical musician)
+1 to that. :)
I agree. 'Classical' can mean a lot of things in various contexts. It's good to know the stricter applications, but most people understand the wider usage as well.
One of my less outrageously successful commercial ventures was a shop selling "Classical Music" on CD. I stocked all sorts of stuff from old religious style music from the 12th Century Abbess, Hildegarde of Bingen through all the usual suspects up to contemporary 20th century 'classical' works that were neither orchestral nor melodic. But the customers had no trouble identifying with the kinds of music that they could expect to find at a shop specialising in "Classical Music". They weren't all that surprised to find things ranging from Opera, Gregorian Chant, Unaccompanied Male Voice choirs, and even some real 'outsiders' like "Classic" Blues and Jazz on the shelves.
I didn't make any money at the venture, but I did break even, and had a most enjoyable time listening to things and broadening my musical education. And when I wound it up I did keep one hell of a good CD collection. 8)
Cheers,
Chris
wow, great thread.
as always, thanks for the quick lesson guys
#4491....
