Because hearing it doesn't make it relevant. Appreciating it does. And there's no evidence that classical music is less appreciated than any other genre.

I disagree. Hearing it does make it relevant to the point that even if the listener doesn't consume that genre of music they still hear it on a pretty regular basis regardless of where they are.

That makes the music relevant.

We're disagreeing on a word: relevant. By your definition, you are correct.

To answer the OP question, I guess I don't know the answer. Obviously less people today are naturally exposed to classical music than they are to other genres. But most people who have responded to this thread enjoy classical music. I think it is alive and well. That's all I've got.

Do you think I don't enjoy classical music because I was arguing against its relevance?

We are posters at a music forum of course we appreciate music much more than the average listener.

Not at all. I think you mentioned that you do like Classical music earlier. And the fact that you did is one reason that I feel it is relevant even among people who are not elderly. I'm not just ranting about my own opinion of the stuff.

I actually came across an interesting article that shows it's not only elderly people that love classical music but to go the extra mile and call it relevant amongst people under 45 on a larger nationwide scale is misleading I feel. Especially compared to other contemporary genres.

I would say you are referring more to what is 'Popular' not what is 'relevant'

I measure the relevance of Classical music by the impact it has had in our culture and on music itself not how popular it currently is..

everybody has heard Classical music at one point and even if they don't like it they are aware it exists

Even if its not the most popular genre it is still drawing ppl in,
it is still influencing musicians to play it,
it still has a place in this crazy bieber one direction times we are living in lol

I don't know what more to say besides... I agree that it's not super popular among people in the US under 45 (although most of the people I know like it at least a little). But I do think enough people of all ages like it enough to call it relevant. I'd love to prove my point but I've really got no more talking points on the matter :wave:

I think people underestimate how much classical music they've been exposed to in their lives. You hear it in movies, on TV, in ads, in cartoons, at weddings, in churches, at Christmas time, etc., etc. There are so many classical songs you recognize when you hear them, even if you don't know them by name.

This is similar to saying that you feel that Latin is still relevant today because of the impact that it has had on the English language itself and not the fact that it's a dead language that isn't used in it's own form.

Except classical isn't dead. People still "speak" it.

yes but not to the same degree that they used to so it's not as relevant anymore.

I'm not sure that's true actually. As someone else pointed out in this thread, historically it was music of the elite. It's probably more accessible to the average Joe today than it's ever been.

Definitely. With recordings available, Youtube, iTunes... it's way more accessible and has been ever since Edison's phonograph. Performance tickets are cheaper now then they were in the 18th and 19th centuries (and on average, are WAY cheaper than tickets to a rock concert).

Also, there are plenty of websites to get public domain sheet music from all subgenres of classical and marching band music. My favourite sites are IMSLP and Flute Tunes. The music is more accessible for the average musician who can read sheet music, unlike way back in the 18th century where the only people who could play an instrument were the very wealthy because they could actually afford the instrument! And the lower classes could not afford the lessons, again unlike today.

even with all of that it's still not on the same level as other genres. Also the average person couldn't list off any current composers. The amount of current composers releasing material through labels has decreased as well.

I think it could definitely still be relevant. You'd be surprised how many people actually enjoy listening to classical music. I adore many of the tracks in movies and tend to download them. I also like the classics like Beethoven and Mozart.

I think people are maybe not reading the OP. She said compared to today's music. I wouldn't put classical right up next to contemporary music. Sure it might still be relevant overall but not up against the rest of the other genres that were mentioned.

She didn't even ask if it's relevance is as quantifiably large as contemporary genres. She asked if it "still has a place amongst today's audience, or has it been relegated to more specific listeners (i.e. music students, people learning instruments, elderly people)?"

I think it's clear that it's appeal goes beyond music students and the elderly.

Well yes to answer the second part of her question it does go beyond elderly and music students but to put it up against the level of those other genres as being actively listened to.

I don't think so.

Also she did ask about their relevance compared to contemporary, it says it in the first part of her question. Compared to..

Latin still has a practical use in religion, technology and science. And is the base for 753 million speakers of Romance language speakers. And makes up a very large percentage of the English language which is spoken by 375 million speakers worldwide. Latin doesn't have native speakers who were taught from birth and use it as their primary language, true, some call it a "dead language." But how dead or irrelevant can it be if a solid billion plus people use words from it in one form or another throughout the world today? Saying it is not relevant is relative considering the Latin language influence on languages used today.

The same analogy can be made with the different periods of Art music. Baroque, Classical and Romantic each has their place in time and history, but did each really die at the end of their respect periods? How irrelevant can something be if people kept it around for so long?

Even if it's kept around it's irrelevant compared to other contemporary genres

Deej, relevance cannot be relative. If it is one billionth of one percent relevant (classical is a magnitude of order higher than that) then it has relevance.

In the end, as long as people use it in media like movies and there's still enough money being earned to build venues dedicated almost primarily to the performance of classical music, it's relevant. Period. Will a fan of One Direction turn that off only to start blasting Chopin? Maybe not... But will a fan of Chopin really hanker for some One Direction? Also probably not. It goes both ways. Then there are probably artists both of those listeners can agree on. It all depends on taste. Just because you may not like classical or minimize your exposure to it doesn't make it irrelevant.

Put it this way, classical music may not be as popular as pop right now, but in 100 years all of the current Top 40 songs will be forgotten and the favorite classical pieces will remain in society's consciousness.

This doesn't mean that classical music awareness is adequate, though. In my opinion, music academies should stop discouraging composers of "traditional-sounding" classical music -- which is the kind that the wider public likes -- from learning the craft and getting into the business. If there were more successful and LIVING composers of classical music that people actually like, this would help spread awareness more than anything else. Dead composers are great, but for many people, there is an unmeasurable but positive psychological effect that comes from the feeling of being part of a "living tradition." For a living tradition, you need living composers.

I was only arguing relevance based off of how BD phrased the question in the first half of the OP. It's kind of crazy that most of you believe that classical is popular enough to be listed right next to hip hop pop rock and electronica.

The question is almost like asking if abstract games (e.g. Chess & Checkers) are as popular as video games. Where it's understandable you can compare the number of people are doing each activity, but the games themselves are a bit of an apples to oranges comparison.

Pitting one type of music against a collection of different music forms that are media/industry driven seems a bit tipping the scales, too. And even if all of them fall under the umbrella term of Popular music for a musicologist, it isn't like it's one monolithic mega-genre where every one loves everything about it... they don't.

Out of the types of music you mentioned, they are well liked by everyone. And I've seen a lots of harsh criticism about each one of them (both on MB and irl). Many people avoid at least one of those mention at all cost too. I see people really disliked or look down at the other types of music mentioned tbh. On the other hand when it comes to Classical music it goes unnoticed, can't be bother with it.

I voted 'yes,' classical music is still relevant in today's culture. Isn't that why it has the name "classical" and is deemed as "classic?!"

For me, classical music is still the backbone of music theory and practice in a variety of genres. Many noteworthy musicians are classically trained (some are not, and I don't have a problem with this) but the fact that most are means that there origins will have some kind of influence in the music they create.

Not to mention, much of the music created today includes practice that was prominent in classical music - the cycle of fifths, scales, arpeggios, time signatures, etc. It's not entirely obvious but all of these defining features, I believe, still seep into music that is constructed today.

Not to mention the fact that people still listen to classical music. All the time, every day. In fact, classical music is still one of the most popular musical genres. Doesn't that just go to show that it is far from becoming irrelevant?

Thanks for your opinions people! I know I haven't replied but I have read all of them :)

Here is another question. When current artists sample classical music in their songs, or remix them in some way or another, do you think it brings awareness to the original piece of music or does the sampling/remixing just cheapen it or over commercialize it?

It all depends on the listener. I bet most of us at MB would break it down and seek out the original piece to hear it but casual listeners won't care to.

I know you'd all probably look up the music used, but in terms of sampling, do any of you think that ruins the music? Or as I put before, does it cheapen the original music?

I think in most cases, neither.

No, I don't feel like it ruins or cheapens the original music. I don't mind sampling like others do where they feel like certain pieces of work shouldn't be touched and/or sampled.

What are your thoughts on it?

I don't think it really cheapens it either. Most of the stuff is public domain now anyways so people can do whatever with it. I'm more on the side that it might pique someone's interest and they will look it up.

I think there is stuff that should not be used for sampling or should just ty to be avoided. For example, sacred hymns, Bach's chorales, Gregorian chants (take that Enigma lol), and other liturgical music. I'm not religious at all but I still think that stuff should be respected for what it is, since much of it is still used and sung in church and in daily prayer to this day.

Thats like saying "Beethoven, you can't use that sequence of notes, they use them in Church!"

All music is plagerised in some form or another. As far as Classical being relevant, it is. It may not be noticeable to the average Joe, but most music you hear today is a decendant of the classics in some form or another. Kind of like how Led Zeppelin is a decendant of the earlier forms of blues. Pulling in bits and pieces from various resources to create what the artist sees.

Plagiarism on a quantitative level.

I should probably stay out of this thread and stop repeating myself but the question in the thread title is different from what Burning Down ends up asking in the OP.

In the OP she mentions classical music's relevance compared to other genres that's it.

She doesn't ask about how relevant it is by it's influence within other genres or anything of the sort.

I didn't read the OP, just the thread title. And here I thought I had some great insight.

3 lashes with a wet noodle for me.

Yeah, pretty much mostly purists will keep making it relevant as far as that goes. Masterpieces will always stand the test of time though.

That's not exactly what I was implying there. I've been picking apart symphonies and concertos and the like for 10 years now, for analysis assignments, and composers were always borrowing ideas from their predecessors. There was no such thing as copyright law until when... the mid-late 1800's? Copying and imitation was often seen as a huge compliment towards the originator of that melody. Plagiarism didn't become a problem until governments and lawyers got involved.

I was speaking about how artists come up with tunes, not copyrights. I guess the use of the word plagiarism threw it off a bit. Quite the difference in a purist sense, but I don't want to detract from the thread topic any more than I already have, so I'll just say it's an interesting one.

I attend classical concerts of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and Chicago Lyric Opera. The performances are always packed. Most of the audience is middle-aged to elderly, but there are a good number of people in their teens and twenties who attend. I'd say 10-20 percent are in that age bracket. I think there'd be more young people if the tickets were cheaper. Some of the music bores me (as does some of the music in any genre), but quite a bit of it is exciting and emotionally moving. I think you have to listen to it a little differently and not expect to be rocked out by it, although some of it definitely rocks. Classical music seems to be fairly popular in Asia and Europe. A lot of the best young classical musicians now are Asian, so I think you have to look at its worldwide appeal as well. It is not just Western music anymore. It's got a long history, and lots of different styles, so it is not just one thing. Also, all other Western popular music, including pop, rock, metal and jazz, is structurally based on it (e.g. same harmonic scales), so it is still technically relevant.