Abstract: The way music is divided into styles or genres depends critically on the point of view. Two orthogonal views are described, termed "pop" and "classical". From each of these viewpoints, the "other" kind of music seems an incomprehensible monolith that defies categorization. These viewpoints originate from using different criteria to classify music and ultimately from intrinsic differences between these two musical realms.
People's tastes in music vary a lot: some like techno, some like ambient, others like classical songs, and still others prefer fast disco. No, wait... Let's put it differently: some people like the classical style, some like early 20th century impressionism, others are into piano concertos of the Romantic era, while still others prefer pop songs.
What's wrong with these descriptions?
Let us enter a typical medium-size record store (in the USA). The CD collection is usually divided into sections labeled by names of the various musical "styles": for instance, "Rap", "Reggae", or "New Age". One of the sections is labeled "Classical" and includes all music of the 17th to 20th century, but it is not necessarily the largest section and sometimes it is not subdivided into any further subsections. The "Classical" CDs are simply sorted alphabetically by composer name, just like the "Reggae" CDs, for example, are sorted alphabetically by artist or group name. (In some record stores, the "Classical" section may be further divided into categories such as "Best Hits", "Opera", "Romance", "Christmas" or "Relaxation".)
Moreover, we notice that the CD catalogs usually refer to the individual pieces of music as "songs" (as in, "Artist: Beethoven; Song: 5th Symphony"), even though the majority of the music in the "Classical" section involves no singing.
For someone who is familiar with classical music, this manner of categorization must initially provoke some surprise. Strictly speaking, Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 is not a song; neither "Relaxation" is a musical form or genre. On another level, the glib juxtaposition of "Classical" and "Country" would suggest that "Classical" is just another pop song style. In that case, it would of course be natural to see a "Chopin song" next to a "Beatles song".
The customary and widespread use of the word "song" to mean "a piece of music", as well as of the word "music" to mean collectively songs, 1 suggests a perception that one could call the "pop" view of music. This perception can also be seen in the way Napster.com chose to classify music. Here is a short excerpt from its list of "channels": 2
According to this viewpoint, a large and diverse body of music (including all pre-1900 music and a significant part of the 20th-century music) is lumped into one "style" labeled "Classical", on equal footing with a multitude of other "styles".
Someone who is a connoisseur of songs, someone who knows much about particular groups and styles, is usually also familiar with a number of "basic" classical pieces. The set of widely known classical-style pieces in the U.S.A. includes Pachelbel's Canon, Albinoni's Adagio, and Bach's Goldberg Variations. (Let us note: these pieces are not necessarily popular or even remembered in other countries, and not necessarily characteristic of a given composer's creative output.) These and some other "best hit" pieces are considered representative of the "classical" style. A pop music lover would of course want to be somewhat familiar with a variety of styles, although perhaps not develop a further interest in them. This person may indeed perceive all "classical" pieces to belong to one narrow "style", one among many possible styles, and will not classify them further.
On the other hand, it is not infrequent that classical music lovers are unable to tell the difference between e.g. "Funk" and "Hip-Hop" because, as they would say, "it sounds all the same" to them. They are familiar with some songs, of course, but they cannot categorize them meaningfully.
It is this lack of structure, perceived on both "classical" and "pop" sides, that is intriguing. It is surprizing that someone may be able to distinguish, say, J. S. Bach's pieces of his "early" period from those of his "mature" period, and yet the same person feels that all songs belong to one shapeless heap. (Even "pop" music fans would sometimes claim that certain styles "sound all the same." 3 )
For comparison, here is a typical make-up of a record store in the USSR in 1970s. Music was divided into sections by instrument and genre (solo instrumental music, chamber instrumental music, music for orchestra, vocals, opera and ballet), then sorted by composers, and finally by performers. Needless to say, the majority of music sold here was "classical" music. There was one small section called "Modern music" with pop songs recordings in alphabetical order by artist name. This time, all songs were placed in one category, while the "classical" music was divided into many sections and subsections.
As we have seen, there seem to be two orthogonal points of view on music -- let us call them the "pop" and the "classical". Is it not remarkable that, according to each viewpoint, the "other" kind of music is a featureless monolith that cannot be meaningfully categorized, because the "other" classification scheme makes little sense?
It seems that the two points of view must have followed from using very different sets of criteria to conceptualize and categorize the existing variety of music. Here is an attempt to summarize these criteria and explain the origins of the two views.
1) General character and texture of sound.
The focus here is on the general impression from listening to a piece of music: whether it is loud or soft, fast or slow, whether the sound is "tense" (high overtone content, as in the sound of trumpet) or "relaxed" (as in the sound of flute), whether there are lots of notes playing at once or not (a "full" or a "thin" texture), and so on. The character of music could be judged as happy or depressed, according to the texture of sound and to prevailing mood. The piece is perceived to have a certain character as a whole.
From this point of view, most of the pop styles seem to have a certain more or less definite categorization. For example, we might say that "Disco" is fast, medium loud to loud, and happy of mood, with mostly relaxed quality of sound; "Heavy Metal" is medium fast, loud, aggressive, with tense sounds. It seems that this kind of general characterization is important for distinguishing the pop styles.
On the other hand, the classical music seems to be impossible to characterize in this fashion. Pieces that would fall into the same "classical" category, for example, Bach's Preludes and Fugues, do not have a common general character -- some are very fast, some are slow, some are loud, some are soft, may have fuller or thinner texture, and so on. Although each piece has its own character and mood, it is not shared between pieces, and we cannot describe a "classical" category of "Preludes and Fugues" by texture, character or prevailing mood. With longer pieces, such as sonatas, concertos or symphonies, there is even less of a general character of each piece, since it usually varies too much throughout the duration of the piece. So, there is little surprise that the taxonomy of classical music does not employ "general character", "volume", "sound quality" or "mood" of the piece as classifiers.
2) Rhythmic structure, meter and tempo.
The questions to be asked are: what is the tempo and how it varies; whether there is a fixed rhythm and meter to the piece; and what is this rhythm and meter.
Even a cursory inspection of pop music played nowadays on radio, TV and in people's cars shows that all such music includes a fixed beat, superimposed on a rhythmic pattern. This pattern is repeated almost without change and almost always in the same tempo for the duration of the piece. "Music ... <is anything that> has a rhythm and a beat," says a pop music fan. 3 Sometimes the beat is louder, sometimes softer, faster or slower, but it is always present. One might call this an obligato beat, so pervasive and invariable it is.
Then, one notices that there is a fixed meter which is 4/4 in the vast majority of pop songs. (Each of the quarter beats is in most cases subdivided into four 16th beats.) You may listen all day long, switch between radio stations covering different pop styles, but you will not hear a single song in 3/4, 9/8, or any other meter -- it is always 4/4 and the bar is subdivided into 16 demisemiquavers. The rhythmic sequence (the "loop") in a song repeats with very slight variations and occasional short cadences. Between different songs, the rhythm varies a lot in detail but the basis of the rhythm is always one of four kinds: (a) the first and the third beats accented, (b) only the third beat accented, (c) the second and the fourth beats accented, (d) all four beats accented. (Below we argue that all these rhythms are fundamentally the same constant-beat rhythm.)
Melody and harmony of a song are structured around the constant beat; in other words, the melody always falls onto accentuated beats or syncopates around them, while the harmony is static (no development, temporary key changes or deviations due to harmonic progression). The harmonies are repeated regularly with the beat. (There are exceptions but the majority of the pop styles seems to fall into this description.)
One notes also that the tempo of a song varies very little or not at all; in most styles, the drum section might as well be played by a clockwork machine. It is extremely rare to find a pop song that has any kind of expressive tempo variation or, say, a slow-down and stop in the middle, followed by a resumption of the tempo.
It is also clear that pop styles differ significantly in the kinds of rhythms they employ, and that rhythmic variation within one style is usually rather limited. Therefore, the rhythm and the fixed obligato beat seems to be an important classifier of pop music.
In contrast, rhythm does not play such a crucial role in the taxonomy of classical music, nor is it so obviously audible as in pop music. As a rule, there is no drum section that would constantly tap the beat; instead, drums are used sparingly for special effects. In most cases, the listeners are not expected to tap the beat either.
Melodies and harmonic content are still structured around the rhythmic base, but each melody usually has a rhythm of its own which is not strictly related to the rhythmic base. In the majority of classical music, although the change of harmonies is tied to the rhythmic base, it is much less regular than in pop music. Because of this, the rhythmic structure of some classical pieces may be sometimes difficult to discern right away, although it is almost always present. There are, of course, certain parts or passages in some classical pieces (e.g. Mozart's and Haydn's sonatas) where melodies and harmonic structures are strictly tied to a fixed rhythmic base; but there are also examples when the fixed beat is avoided to produce virtually beat-less music, for instance due to tempo variation.
Tempi in classical music are highly varied within one piece as well as among pieces belonging to the same "classical" category. The meters used most are perhaps 3/4 and 4/4, but other metric divisions, such as 6/8, 3/2, 3/8, 9/8 are quite frequent; 5/4 and other mixed meters are used occasionally. More exotic meters are sometimes used, e.g. 7/8 (Prokofiev's Piano sonata no. 7) or 11/4 (a choir from one of Rimsky-Korsakov's Russian operas).
We find that pieces in classical music are not categorized by tempo, by rhythm or by meter because it would not be a useful taxonomy. For example, of the three parts of Prokofiev's Piano Concerto No. 3, the first is in 4/4 and fast, the second is in 4/4 and slow with a fast interlude in the middle, while the last part is in 3/4 and is fast with a slow interlude. All three parts of the Concerto make a whole piece and clearly cannot be considered to belong to different "styles". In some classical music of the late 20th century, the meter is frequently varied throughout the piece or may be missing altogether (for example, some organ pieces by Olivier Messiaen, written around 1940, have no meter).
3) Instruments and musical form.
The set of instruments used to play the piece is one of the basic means of "classical" categorization, and musical form is another. This is clear from the way pieces are normally referred to: "Sonata for violin solo" or, "Concerto for two harpsichords and string orchestra". Sonata and concerto are designations of musical form, of which there exists a significant variety, e.g. prelude, study, fugue, suite, variations on a theme, and so on. The musical forms vary greatly in the allowed performing instruments, length of the piece, number of parts, techniques of musical development and so forth.
Musical forms come with certain historically established rules. For instance, a prelude is generally expected to be a one-part piece of more or less free form and expository development, while a suite (which was once dance music) is to consist of several short pieces of contrasting character. Composers usually provide a genre designation for their pieces. Clearly, the musical form is a relevant characterization of classical music. 4
The usage of instruments in classical music is rather free. Although recently the violin and the piano have been perhaps more popular than other solo instruments, extensive musical literature exists also for many other "classical" instruments, as well as for ensembles of instruments. Some musical forms dictate the use of instruments (a symphony requires an orchestra, while a cantata requires a choir), while, for example, a study may be written for any solo instrument. A piece is usually composed with regard to the qualities of the particular instruments it is intended for. As all instruments have their peculiarities, this affords a great variety of techniques and means of expression.
On the other hand, in the realm of pop music the choice of musical form and instruments seems to be irrelevant. Most songs are written for a standard ensemble consisting of voice(s), guitar(s), electronic keyboard(s), and a drum section. There are occasional introductions of other instruments or non-musical sounds, clearly meant as deviations from the canonical set-up.
The musical form is almost always chosen to be the same piece -- one could call it a dance rondo, because it originates in dance and resembles the classical rondo. In this form, pieces are short and a small number of melodies and harmonic sequences repeats over and over. This musical form comes partly from dance music which needs repetition to allow the dancers to keep going through the dance motions, and partly from stylized folk song, where the refrain is repeatedly sung to the same melody.
The voices usually sing lyrics: texts (mostly unrhymed nowadays) written normally by the composer. The texts, more often than not, share the repetitive character of the music. The singing of lyrics is almost obligatory for pop songs; exceptions (pop music without words) are represented by some fringe styles.
One finds, therefore, that the categorization by instruments and musical form would be of little use for pop music because it would classify almost all pop styles into one category: a certain kind of a dance rondo, played by certain instruments, with voices that sing lyrics.
4) Harmonic and structural development.
I think of "musical language" as the choice of harmonies (chord sequences) and of structural means (how to combine melodies vertically, i.e. several voices at the same time, and horizontally, i.e. in time). The evolution of Western musical language throughout the last three centuries has resulted in a variety of harmonic and structural means a modern composer may choose from. The harmony went from static assonance of the Middle Ages to the canonic resolutions of the 18th century, to chromaticism of the 19th century, to atonality, dissonant tonal "neo-classicism", polystylism, and a more radical atonality of the late 20th century, where music is on the verge of becoming pure noise. Similarly, the structure has evolved from unison melody (e.g. Gregorian chant), to various forms of imitative counterpoint (canons, fugues), to melody with more or less chordal accompaniment (e.g. most "variations on a theme" from the 19th century), and finally to a combination of non-imitative counterpoint and free accompaniment in 20th century.
Because of this evolution, the musical language typical of every major epoch is immediately recognizable and is a useful means of categorization of classical music. For instance, one might describe a piece as "late Romantic" if its chord progressions are reminiscent of those introduced at the end of 19th century. This would be clear to a musician after listening to even a short fragment of a piece.
In contrast, pop music does not offer a large variety of harmonic and structural development. In classical terms, almost all pop styles share the same musical language. The harmony of pop music is the one developed at the end of 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, while the musical form of an accompanied song-dance goes back to the 18th century. The music is always tonal, has a prominent melody ("tune") and chordal accompaniment. Chord progressions do not vary significantly between styles.
There is, in most cases, no structural development at all. Usually, a song begins with a short interlude whereby a fixed rhythm (a "loop") is established; then an accompanied theme is presented; and following that, the theme is simply repeated on the background of the same fixed rhythm. There is almost never a second theme, and variations of the theme are strictly limited to small deviations from the rhythm and sometimes to introduction of passing notes. The accompanying harmonies or the rhythms never change. There is usually no coda or conclusion at all: the music simply fades out while the theme is repeating itself.
We see that harmonic language and structural development is not a useful classifier of pop music.
5) Means of musical expression.
Here we look at how music expresses human emotional states. This is perhaps the heart of music. Note that here we do not consider the impact of words (lyrics) because words are not means of musical expression.
In Western music, there are four principal components that are used for expression: harmony, melody, rhythm and quality of sound.
Harmony is another word for "chords", or notes played at the same time (placed "vertically"). Different chords are used to mean different moods or emotional states; for example, the diminished 7th chord was at some time termed the "chord of despair" suggesting a strongly dramatic interpretation. On the other hand, the tonic triad is usually interpreted as a balanced, positive mood. Chord progressions can be interpreted as changes of emotion, or as "emotional reasoning".
Melody, or a melodic phrase, consists of some notes played one after another ("horizontally") by the same voice. Melodies can be interpreted as "musical speech" because of their intonational similarity with spoken phrases. Melodies can be "supported" (accompanied) by harmonic progressions; this is normally the case in tonal music.
Rhythm consists of the exact timing of each note. As such, it is similar to the heartbeat or to the breathing while speaking. A speedup of the tempo (accelerando) resembles the state of agitation. A constant rhythm has a certain hypnotic effect.
Finally, the "quality of sound" means the overtone content of the sound (a clarinet sound contains a lot more overtones than a bottle blow sound) and the dynamics, i.e. increase or decrease of the volume. The quality of sound affects us directly, as we hear the sound and subconsciously compare with other sounds we have heard in our life.
These four basic components are prescribed by the composer in the score. Performers of classical music interpret the composer's intentions and introduce further expressive elements not fixed by the composer. For example, new harmony can be created by retarding a note a little past its nominal duration and so letting it play together with some other notes for a split second. The expressive quality of a melody is enhanced by playing some notes a little shorter or longer, tying them to or disconnecting them from each other ("phrasing"); by playing the notes legato or staccato ("articulation" of notes); by playing them a little louder or softer; or by generally speeding up and slowing down for short periods. Some instruments allow other modifications, such as vibrato or varying dynamics within the duration of one note. These expressive micro-modifications of the musical score are similar to expressive speech where a person talks now faster as if in agitation, now slower as if in meditation, or emphasizes certain words in various ways.
While the last two components of expression (rhythm and sound quality) are present in all classical music, composers usually do not emphasize them. For instance, although nominally the first beat of the bar is the strongest, a melodic or harmonic progression may create an emphasis on a rhythmically weak beat (syncopated rhythm), and in these cases the melodic or harmonic emphasis prevails. In other words, rhythm and beat are not as important in classical music as melodic or harmonic content. Sounds are in most cases produced by traditional instruments such as a piano or a flute and do not vary (exceptions are found recently in the use of "prepared piano" and other artificially modified instruments, but these are clearly special effects).
So the main expressive quality of classical music consists of the melodic and harmonic development as written by the composer, with meaningful interpretative micro-modifications of articulation and dynamics by the performer. The listeners are expected to follow these musical features with their own imagined moods.
On the other hand, pop music foregoes these micro-modifications and concentrates its expressive effort on rhythm, repetition and unusual sound quality. Indeed, most pop songs are played in constant tempo with incessantly repeating rhythm loop; the notes are in most cases played flatly, without phrasing, articulation or changing the dynamics of individual notes. Singers almost never use vibrato and rarely vary the dynamics.
Instead, all expression in pop music is focused on the rhythm. When dynamics is used to underscore some notes in a melodic phrase, the emphasis falls not on the harmonic or melodic high points, but on the rhythmically important notes, that is, on notes which coincide with rhythmically stressed beats.
Rhythm needs repetition to be expressive on its own. Hence, pop music employs constant "looping" of the basic rhythmic sequence with small variations. The constant flow of heartbeat is manifested on yet another level. To a classical ear, pop rhythms would seem "syncopated" because, for instance, in a two-beat bar the second beat is usually more accented than the first, while in classical rhythm the first beat of the bar is always the strongest. Similarly, in a four-beat bar the 2nd and the 4th beats are frequently accented. There are even passages where all sound is removed except the 2nd and the 4th beats. However, the accent on the "weak" beats serves to draw the listener's attention to these beats and reinforce the beat in the listener's imagination. In effect, it creates an impression that all beats are intended to be equally strong. In other words, the listener is induced to interpret this "pseudo-syncopated" rhythm as a perfectly uniform sequence of beats -- the ultimate pattern of repetition. Another justification for this conjecture can be found in the dancing motions which people produce while listening to such rhythms: clearly, these motions have no emphases on any particular beats. But even if the pop rhythms are fundamentally constant-beat rhythms, each style and each group has their particular version of the 4/4 rhythm loop.
In addition to finding "their" rhythm, pop musicians search for unusual sound effects. Most groups use electronic devices to produce and amplify sounds. In almost every group there is the electronic keyboard: this is an instrument which does not have its own characteristic sound or expressive qualities, but imitates the sounds of other instruments. Clearly, the quality of sound is an important means of expression in pop music.
As we have seen, the means of expression in pop songs are entirely different from those used in classical pieces (including classical songs). People used to the one mode of expression are, therefore, tempted to ignore the other mode and perceive the "other" music as boring and expressionless.
6) Programmatic intent.
Music may be divided, although somewhat ambiguously, into "pure", "programmed" and "utility" music.
In "pure" music, the composer's intentions are not indicated in any extraneous way. The composer does not tell us anything about the "subject matter" of the music; the author's remarks are usually limited to indicating the tempo or other particularities of performance. Expressive components of the music are interpreted by just listening. For example, the mood of a piece may at a particular moment become tragic with ambiguously sardonic overtones; perceptive listeners would infer this directly from the melodies and harmonies of that particular passage. "Pure" music is represented by many classical forms of instrumental music such as symphony, concerto, sonata, prelude, quartet and so on.
"Programmed" music is supplied with an extraneous theme of some sort, for example, the composer may provide a "plan of music" (formulated in words), or refer to a poem, a painting, or an historic event which the music is supposed to illustrate. "Programmed" music includes opera and ballet as well as some instrumental pieces that, without the composer's commentary on the intended interpretation, would otherwise belong to pure music. (In many cases, the composer's commentary is disregarded and such pieces are performed as pure music.)
"Utility" music is composed specifically for the purpose of accompanying a particular event; for example, it could be a coronation march for a certain monarch, or accompaniment for a particular dance, or film music. Perhaps, the best known piece of Western "utility" music is Mendelssohn's Wedding March. Music written for commercials is also "utility" music.
In other words, we categorize music by the composer's intentions regarding the context for the music to be performed and listened to. This categorization of music is not unambiguous because, for example, some audiences may disregard the composer's programmatic intents and impose their own instead. Any soft-sounding piece may end up in the "Relaxation" section of a record store or may be played as "elevator music" -- that is, presented to us as a certain kind of "utility" music. An extreme case is a dejectedly meditative movement from a Chopin's piano sonata ("pure" music) that later became the Funeral March ("utility" music) to which all rulers of the Soviet Union descended into their graves in the Red Square. However, the categorization is still quite useful: the composer's original intent is an interesting and varied means of expression that enhances our interpretation of music. For this reason, programmatic notes explaining, among other things, the context in which a piece was composed, usually accompany classical recordings in CD inserts.
Using this categorization, most pop music seems to belong somewhere between "programmed" and "utility" music. One can find rare pieces of pop music which are "pure" music with no words; the absolute majority, however, have lyrics. Nominally, pop songs would belong to the genre of songs. A classical song is merely a piece of music for voice with accompaniment; it belongs to "programmed" music because the melody is supposed to illustrate the lyrics. On the other hand, a pop song may not contain any lyrics to speak of, or consist mainly of lyrics; it may be primarily used as accompaniment to dance, or it may not -- some pop music is not "danceable" at all. The "danceable" styles can be counted as "utility" music if they are used solely as accompaniment to some external events. But this does not seem to be a significant part of pop music.
We find that the majority of pop music falls into the category of "programmed" music, with small branches of "pure" and "utility" music. On the other hand, most of the classical music is "pure" music, with a certain fraction of "programmed" music and with only occasional "utility" music. Categorization by programmatic intent seems to be useful in both musical realms, although it puts most of the pop music into one lump of "programmed" music.
7) Composers and performers.
The relationship between composers and performers is sharply different in classical and pop music. We immediately notice this difference in the way recordings are produced. In classical music, there is one composer who writes a piece (published separately as a musical score) and many performers who record the piece. On the other hand, in pop music there is a group who is the author and the performer at the same time; a group almost never plays songs written by other groups. A musical score of a song is almost never published separately. Although a given song may be played by a group many times during concerts, there are rarely several recordings of the same song.
The reason for this difference seems to be in the interpretation of music. Classical musicians play the same piece in different ways, according to their individual interpretation of the same score. The interpretation varies significantly, especially with solo instrumental pieces. Technically, an interpretation consists of choices of the means of expression left unspecified by the composer's score: articulation and dynamics of individual notes, local changes of tempo, phrasing and so on. As the centuries go, the same piece of classical music may be revisited and interpreted by leading musicians according to the current state of the performing art. The audiences follow these interpretations and so judge the performers. (This is still largely true now, although the days are long past when people would come to concerts with musical scores.)
On the other hand, in pop music there is usually no score to be interpreted; the principal unit of interpretation is a recorded song. As we have seen, in pop music there are very few means of expression left for musicians. Tempi and rhythms are fixed, and individual notes are usually played or sung with flat dynamics and without articulation. In other words, there is little freedom of interpretation in pop music. For this reason, a pop song is "finished" once it is recorded by the group. This is why the lifetime of most pop music is so short: there is little to revisit or re-interpret.
In conclusion, we attempted to show that the dichotomy between the classical and the pop views of musical styles is rooted in the choices of criteria of categorization that are relevant to each musical realm. We have shown that the classical and the pop music are classified by two almost non-intersecting sets of relevant criteria. These sets of criteria reflect the historically emerged idioms prevalent in these two realms of music.
Serge Winitzki, August 2001
P.S.
1. My proposed definitions of "classical" and "pop" are not based on the way a particular piece of music is marketed. These are definitions that are based entirely on the content of the music. At the beginning of the essay I described two opposite examples of music marketing that correspond to the "classical" and "pop" viewpoints.
2. The consideration has so far ignored jazz music. Jazz would be difficult to label "classical" or "pop" because it is a transitional genre, historically and also by the present categorization. Some jazz pieces use typically "pop" means of expression while others use mainly "classical" ideas.
3. There are of course exceptions in all kinds of music. Particular composers or groups today may freely mix various means of expression and freely choose the genre. In my opinion, however, this does not mean that the difference between "classical" and "pop" music has vanished. It is still possible to distinguish between "classical" and "pop" characteristics, even if both are used in a particular piece.
Footnotes
1 To find examples of this usage, I performed an Internet search for the phrases "Mozart songs" and "Beethoven songs" and found that the search results can be divided into two groups. In the first group of pages, a song meant "music for accompanied voice that sings lyrics". These pages were invariably either online shopping catalogs for classical music, or written by persons interested primarily in classical music. One such page read: "...The idea of introducing voices into a symphony was one that had been in Beethoven's mind for some time. He had written his Choral Fantasia, a kind of piano concerto with voices, in 1808, and Beethoven had always shown a considerable interest in the composition of songs, an element in his work that is often underestimated..." (Ludwig van Beethoven: A Musical Titan, by Charles K. Moss, M.M.Ed., M.Mus., http://classicalmus.hispeed.com/articles/beethoven.html). The meaning of song is unambiguous here. In the second group of Web pages, the word "song" was clearly used to denote any piece of music whatsoever. Here are two examples of this usage taken verbatim from different online music discussion forums: (1) "Message posted by 'Bri' on May 25, 2000 at 22:36:09. Hi I would like to test Beethoveen's sheet music so I can see if I would like to buy any of his music. I know you you probably wouldn't give away free stuff but mabe you could send me a couple of songs on the internet to listem to. Thank you" (2) "Message posted by 'Shaun' on March 25, 2001 at 19:28:59. Which of Mozarts songs are said to increase your marks in schooling while you listen to them while studying?"
2 The Napster.com list of music styles, or "channels" as they are called in the software read as follows, as of end of 2000:
1. Rap
2. Game
3. Rock
4. International
5. HardCore
6. Grunge
7. House
8. Ska
9. Help
10. Anime
11. Country
12. Club
13. Guitar
14. ClassicRock
15. R&B
16. Metal
17. Punk
18. Live
19. NewArtists
20. Gospel
21. Classical
22. 80's
23. Alternative
24. Soundtracks
25. Gothic
26. Trance
27. Dance
28. Funk
29. Jungle
30. Oldies
31. Reggae
32. Remixes
33. HipHop
34. French
35. Dutch
36. Russian
37. Brasilian
38. Lobby
39. Admins
40. Jazz
41. Comedy
42. 70's
43. Disco
44. Techno
45. Ambient
46. Blues
47. Folk
48. Industrial
49. Pop
50. Themes
51. Covers
52. Italian
53. Spanish
54. German
55. DJ
56. Privileged
3 An excerpt from an online discussion about contemporary styles "Rap" and "Punk".
Topic: Do you even consider rap a form of music?
frank stallone
Junior Member
posted 03-29-2001 11:47 AM
<...>
how about all of you? Half the reason i like bands like the ataris, and green day is because of the lyrics and how talented they really are. Won't rap ever go away, it all sounds the same, when will people just get tired of it? It's gotta happen sometime
AlkalineZero
Member
posted 03-29-2001 11:54 AM
well, you saying all rap sounds the same, people are always saying that punk and the stuff I listen to sounds the same. everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I myself feel the same way about rap as you do.
frank stallone
Junior Member
posted 03-29-2001 11:55 AM
but even if alot of punk sounds the same, the lyrics don't sound the same, as opposed to rap lyrics
getupkid135
Member
posted 03-29-2001 12:46 PM
whats the big deal its just music
rap is urban punk, its music that relates to the lifestlye that fans are used to. They talk about the things that matter to them, its the same thing the only rap you know is mainstream rap, just as rap fans only know punk as blink.
you dont understand it so you bash it.
and yes i like rap i am open to different kinds of music besides punk.
about eminem he is talented, he uses complex speech patterns in his lyrics that not many people can duplicate, just because you dont like something dont bash it <...>
theatarisdan182
Member
posted 03-29-2001 01:54 PM
<...> one of my good friends listens to rap. ive probably heard 100 different rap artists and they all say the same stuff. i asked him if he thinks they do and he said that, yes they do repeat the same stuff over and over. but i guess since the "beats" are different it appeals to him. <...>
Booch
Junior Member
posted 03-29-2001 02:02 PM
<...> Technically, rap 'is' music, since it has a rhythem and a beat, but that shit doesn't appeal to me at all. <...>
SDpunker20
Member
posted 03-29-2001 03:17 PM
So rap isn't your taste of music, and i personally don't like it. But hey, what is everyone gonna dance to when they go to clubs, rap or dance music of course. I like to dance to it, great way to meet girls. It's kinda like someone saying that punks sucks when they don't really know anything about it, i don't think rap is shitty music, it's just not the kinda music i like.
Cleveland Steamer
Junior Member
posted 03-29-2001 03:39 PM
Absolutely rap is a form of music.
Punk and rap are so similar that it's almost scary. When punk got big (before most of y'all were born), the same arguments you use against rap were used - it took no talent to make punk music, the lyrics are all the same, it promotes violence, it's for poor white (British) trash. Real musicians argued that the Clash and the Pistols and the Slits, etc., had no talent because they could only play three chords and the songs were two minutes long. Plus, the lyrics were all angry and violent and about being pissed off. Why were they pissed? Because they were poor white kids in aristocratic Britain with no chance of moving up in life.
Now, you say the same about rap - it takes no talent to sample stuff and put together beats, the lyrics promote violence, they all sound the same, it's for poor inner city black kids.
Punk and rap are both rebellious forms of music. For punk, white kids in Britain were sick of crap like Rod Stewart and Thin Lizzy, etc., and wanted to get back to something more meaningful and passionate and that related to them. With respect to rap, it's the exact same thing except with black kids who were fed up with the Commodores and Earth, Wind, & Fire, etc. They wanted to hear stuff that pertained to growing up in the inner city.
Both forms of music gave the music industry a kick in the ass and both are alive and kicking today. And from this music some artists have made brilliant statements.
I personally think "The Marshall Mathers LP" is brilliant. If you don't get what he's really doing, you won't like it. But once you do see where he's going, it is phenomenal. He's talking about things we think about, but nobody wants to say. <...>
miloauckerman
Member
posted 03-29-2001 10:39 PM
<...> The majority of punk is three- and four-chord tunes with a fast beat. A student of the blues or classical music could get away with saying that's not "real music" - it didn't take much discipline to learn, there's no basis in theory, there's little talent, so on and on (not to say I agree, but it's a possible argument).
4 Here is the classification in the Index of Bach's Works by W. Schmieder, 1950 ("Bach-Werke-Verzeichnis", or "BWV"). Source: www.bachcentral.com
(In the Index, all works of J. S. Bach are assigned a BWV number.)
BWV 1 to BWV 524 are vocal works. Of them, numbers 1 to roughly 220 are Cantatas; 220 to 230 are Motets; 230 to 250 are Oratorios, Masses and other miscellaneous choral works; 250 to 438 are four-part Chorale arrangements; and 439 to 524 are Arias and Songs.
BWV 525 to BWV 770 are organ works. Of them, numbers 525 to 530 are Sonatas; 531 to 563 are Preludes and Fugues; 564 to 566 are Toccatas; 567 to 573 are single Preludes or Fantasies; 574 to 580 are single Fugues; 582 to 591 are miscellaneous works (Passacaglia, Pastorale, Trios and so on); 592 to 597 are Concertos; 598 is a Study ("Pedal-exercitium"); and 599 to 770 are Chorale Preludes.
BWV 770 to BWV 994 are keyboard works. Of them, numbers 770 to 801 are two- and three-part Inventions; 802 to 805 are Duets; 806 to 833 are Suites and Partitas; 834 to 845 are single parts of Suites; 846 to 909 are Preludes and Fantasies; 910 to 919 are Toccatas; 921 to 943 are single Preludes; 944 to 961 are single Fugues; 963 to 967 are Sonatas; 971 to 987 are Concertos for keyboard solo; and 988 to 994 are Variations and Capriccios.
BWV 995 to BWV 1000 are lute works.
BWV 1001 to BWV 1013 are Sonatas, Suites and Partitas for solo violin.
BWV 1014 to BWV 1035 are Sonatas for violin and keyboard and for flute and keyboard.
BWV 1041 to BWV 1058 are Concertos for one or more solo instruments (mostly, for the keyboard and the violin) and string orchestra. Of them, numbers 1052 to 1058 are Concertos for several solo keyboards and orchestra.
BWV 1066 to BWV 1071 are Ouvertures and Symphonies.
BWV 1072 to BWV 1087 are works without assigned instruments: Canons, the Musical Offering and the Art of Fugue.
