"Classical" is a finicky term. To many, it means, "that old music, like Mozart and Bach and stuff. It has Violins." To Classical Music junkies, it often means music from the Western classical tradition, but specifically from the Classical period, ie, post Baroque, pre-Romantic, with Beethoven included or excluded ambiguously... To any musicologist, "Classical" music is just the music of the 'educated' musicians, anything that is passed on by strict, theorized, often notated pedagogy, rather than pop or folk....
BUT, we can probably agree that we just mean, "Western-Styled Music from the Classical Tradition."
In which case, it depends. If you mean the Boston Pops, then no. It is not classical any more than The Beatles were classical when they hired an orchestra. On the flip side, it's perfectly possible to compose classical music for drum set, two guitars, bass, and a pop singer.
If the music itself is "pop" in nature, then it remains "pop" even if "classical" musicians perform it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibiki Itano
Hell no! I don't even think new "classical" compositions nowadays should be named Classical since it's not classical.
|
And, not to be a pedantic snark, but there IS a big difference between "classical" and "Classical," as regards music. Lowercase, it is very broad, and signifies any music that comes from a musically literate tradition, be it European, North African, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, etc. Lowercase, it differentiates only from "Folk" and "Pop."
Capitalized, it refers specifically to the period, you know, after-Bach, before-Chopin. Many also extend the term to apply to earlier and later composers who don't stray too far, thereby including Guillame de Machaut and Palestrina as well as Wagner and Debussy, etc.
It's a tricky term, but I think we know what the OP was really asking about!
TLDR; Classical is a tricky term, but Orchestral Pops and the currently trending "Epic" filmscore are not really classical in ANY sense of the term.