(James) or John Rutter

[marquis66]

Originally Posted by Herzeleide

It's ersatz and insipid, evocative (or symptomatic?) of a cozy consumerist conservatism. Like trying to say what's already been said many times before with much superior results, through the filter of a pop-music-saturated age.

What he said.

[Despina41]

Originally Posted by marquis66

What he said.

you guys.... we love being snobs, eh?

[marquis66]

Originally Posted by Despina41

you guys.... we love being snobs, eh?

Every time we blame the musician for "selling out", I am reminded of the quote from the bass player for one of my favorite bands of all time. He was asked if the band "sold out", when it drastically changed its sound and image between two albums. His answer was "Yeap. We sure did. We sold out every f*cking stadium, every f*cking night we played for the last 10 years."

[Despina41]

Originally Posted by marquis66

Every time we blame the musician for "selling out", I am reminded of the quote from the bass player for one of my favorite bands of all time. He was asked if the band "sold out", when it drastically changed its sound and image between two albums. His answer was "Yeap. We sure did. We sold out every f*cking stadium, every f*cking night we played for the last 10 years."

Yup. So does Lang Lang.

[Herzeleide]

Originally Posted by Despina41

you guys.... we love being snobs, eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snob

http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&q=sno...w=1280&bih=827

How does disliking Rutter pertain to anything in those links?

[Mambo]

Now we know why the Boston Pops and not the Boston Sym. Orch.
was doing Rutter's Donkey Carol (DC)
Usually all the wrangling like recent posts on modernity, "new" music,
has to do with how modern classic is often too involved or
demanding to listen to.
We now have the other end of the spectrum - modern music that is too simplistic or not complex enough - where we can put in modern
popular and rock - c'mon guys, make up your minds -
do you want simple/easy or complex/difficult, or both, or in between.
Any elements of snobbery afoot like Big D suggested - and they get
flaunted in varying ways; but there was none above, was there
I'll say that when i play DC, i don't precede or follow it up with some
intricate sounding piece.
Back to the age old question - why does one enjoy this or that piece
more than another one.
Now that we've talked about Rutter, has anyone (other than a few)
heard the doggone thing - i'll put the youtube Donkey Carol here
and above.
by the way, zero dislikes of it there.

[Mambo]

[Mambo]

sorry guys -

[marquis66]

Originally Posted by Mambo

Usually all the wrangling like recent posts on modernity, "new" music, has to do with how modern classic is often too involved or demanding to listen to.

Not from me you haven't! Demanding music for me is an invitation to study it further (like my recent obsession, the Prokofiev second concerto)

[Neumerologist]

Originally Posted by Herzeleide

It's ersatz and insipid, evocative (or symptomatic?) of a cozy consumerist conservatism.

Ersatz and insipid. Really?

Just an observation, methinks comments like these aren't helping the valiant arguments and claims from Someguy, Balthazar and co. that the new music crowd doesn't go around snarking at successful composers who choose not to starve or make those they support starve from their dissonances.

So are you also implying that Rutter hasn't participated in any worthwhile recordings? His work as director with the King's Singers has no sustenance? Really?

Originally Posted by Herzeleide

Like trying to say what's already been said many times before with much superior results, through the filter of a pop-music-saturated age.

Is this an implication that music must be completely original for it to be modern, relevant or moving?

If the above is truly the case, how do you explain Bach's Mass in B Minor? 12 of the 27 movements are recycled. The music is verbatim adapted to the new text in many cases from previously composed sacred works.

Then the comment about a pop music saturated age. What does this mean exactly? Wasn't Mozart's music enjoyed by the masses? What about J.C. Bach or G.F. Handel in England? They didn't receive accolades from the general public for their work? Handel's keyboard suites were actually published without his knowledge because a publisher thought he could make a dime off of them. Regardless of whether this is right or wrong, it is quite indicative of the POPularity of Handel's music with the public.