On Jan 31, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
a definition of contemporary which is close to the one you use
describe, that is the sense of contemporary classical composer. I
consider Hovhaness to be in that category, but you do not.
Not quite. He is clearly identifiable as a
At 2/1/2006 11:09 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jan 31, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
a definition of contemporary which is close to the one you use
describe, that is the sense of contemporary classical composer. I
consider Hovhaness to be in that category, but you do not.
Not
On Feb 1, 2006, at 12:08 PM, Phil Daley wrote:
In it's strictest sense:
con·tem·po·rar·y
adj. Belonging to the same period of time: a fact documented by two
contemporary sources. Of about the same age. Current; modern:
contemporary trends in design.
Your ideas of what contemporary means
The Hovhaness reference confused me for a minute, because I was
referring to living classical composers, of which he is not one, and
of recently dead composers in a similar style--of which he is also
not one. (Nothing against H., BTW; I think he's gotten a bad rap over
the years).
I'm not
Andrew Stiller wrote:
I'm not sure I understand why you don't think Hovhaness was a
recently dead composer in classical style, since he died in 2000,
and when find references to performances of his music it is by
classical music groups, and the recordings are in the classical
music section
Owain Sutton wrote:
dhbailey wrote:
Or to go to a football game (if you add in the cost of parking and the
vastly overpriced souvenirs and refreshments).
Another very good comparison. And in terms of sheer numbers and
regularity of attendance, one that shows price is not necessarily
Great story, David.
Here in LA there is snootiness and some non-snootiness. The LA Phil
makes its attempt at the bowl and does very well. Up front is snooty
and fancy dinners, in back is less snooty and hot dogs (though still
expensive for many).
In comparison, there are ensembles like the Long
On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:43 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Andrew:
When I read my comment
There is in the U.S. a dogmatic divide between contemporary and
classical music that just does not exist in Europe.
and your reply
I reiterate (for the third time now in this thread, so far w.o
David Froom wrote:
On 1/29/06 7:52 PM, Carl Dershem wrote:
To me, the price of tickets, plus the perception of snootiness are at
least as much what keep the audiences away as anything else.
Carl,
You are absolutely right. As a way of backing up what I say, we have a
festival here
Andrew Stiller wrote:
Only after some thought did I realize that you were using
contemporary to mean popular. To be quite frank, you shouldn't do
this. Every person I've ever encountered who uses contemporary in
this way, does so because they honestly believe that popular music
*postdates*
David Froom wrote:
So, Carl, yes you are exactly right. Get rid of high prices and snootiness,
and classical music of every stripe flourishes.
David Froom
Sounds like a fun series! Does Don Patterson play with you guys?
cd
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/dershem/#
John Howell wrote:
At 5:41 PM -0500 1/30/06, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 30 Jan 2006 at 9:48, David Froom wrote:
So, Carl, yes you are exactly right. Get rid of high prices and
snootiness, and classical music of every stripe flourishes.
Er, when somebody pays the musicians so that the
On Jan 28, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
There is in the U.S. a dogmatic divide between contemporary and
classical music that just does not exist in Europe.
I reiterate (for the third time now in this thread, so far w.o
rejoinder) that this is no longer the case in Philadelphia.
Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jan 28, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
There is in the U.S. a dogmatic divide between contemporary and
classical music that just does not exist in Europe.
I reiterate (for the third time now in this thread, so far w.o
rejoinder) that this is no longer
On 29 Jan 2006 at 12:46, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jan 28, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
There is in the U.S. a dogmatic divide between contemporary and
classical music that just does not exist in Europe.
I reiterate (for the third time now in this thread, so far w.o
On Jan 29, 2006, at 4:17 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 29 Jan 2006 at 12:46, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jan 28, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
There is in the U.S. a dogmatic divide between contemporary and
classical music that just does not exist in Europe.
I reiterate (for the
Christopher Smith wrote:
There is in the U.S. a dogmatic divide between contemporary and
classical music that just does not exist in Europe.
I reiterate (for the third time now in this thread, so far w.o
rejoinder) that this is no longer the case in Philadelphia.
Is it not the case that San
At 2:21 PM -0800 1/29/06, Carl Dershem wrote:
To me, the price of tickets, plus the perception of snootiness are
at least as much what keep the audiences away as anything else.
As to the price of tickets, rock concerts and musicals are more
expensive than the classical fare.
-Randolph
Only stadium rock concerts are more expensive than classical fare,
and then only for massive touring acts like Madonna and U2. Madison
Square Garden is one thing, but seeing even a big-name gig at the
Mercury Lounge or Joe's Pub costs considerably less than going to
Carnegie Hall or
Darcy James Argue wrote:
Only stadium rock concerts are more expensive than classical fare, and
then only for massive touring acts like Madonna and U2. Madison Square
Garden is one thing, but seeing even a big-name gig at the Mercury
Lounge or Joe's Pub costs considerably less than going to
Owain Sutton wrote:
Random unscientific test to see if your claim applies for London:
Richard Ashcroft at the Brixton Academy (hardly U2) - £22.50. Gigs at
the Mean Fiddler - anywhere from £8 to £18. Wembley Arena tickets
around £25.
At the South Bank Centre, you can see the Alban Berg
Carl Dershem wrote:
[snip]
To me, the price of tickets, plus the perception of snootiness are at
least as much what keep the audiences away as anything else.
That would be something I could agree with if it weren't that the same
folks who won't attend the symphony because of ticket
dhbailey wrote:
Or to go to a football game (if you add in the cost of parking and the
vastly overpriced souvenirs and refreshments).
Another very good comparison. And in terms of sheer numbers and
regularity of attendance, one that shows price is not necessarily an
obstacle to huge
dhbailey wrote:
To me, the price of tickets, plus the perception of snootiness are at
least as much what keep the audiences away as anything else.
That would be something I could agree with if it weren't that the same
folks who won't attend the symphony because of ticket prices will pay 3
On 1/29/06, Carl Dershem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dizzy's usually ranges from $7-12 a ticket, and has very good
entertainment.
Dizzy's can be even better than that... I've never been there, but
apparently there are nights when all you have to do is bring your horn
and sit in for a few tunes and
Darcy James Argue wrote:
Only stadium rock concerts are more expensive than classical fare,
and then only for massive touring acts like Madonna and U2. Madison
Square Garden is one thing, but seeing even a big-name gig at the
Mercury Lounge or Joe's Pub costs considerably less than going to
Andrew:
When I read my comment
There is in the U.S. a dogmatic divide between contemporary and
classical music that just does not exist in Europe.
and your reply
I reiterate (for the third time now in this thread, so far w.o
rejoinder) that this is no longer the case in Philadelphia.
I
Chuck Israels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A couple of weeks ago, I had a conversation with my brother, Marc
Bauman, who is a producer for Live From Lincoln Center. He says that
there is great difficulty filling the seats at all the LC venues, and
many events are less than half full. Either
Ken Moore,
when he wrote:
The general pessimism about the state of contemporary music being
expressed in this thread seems to me to represent a US view rather
than a world-wide one. Music in Europe has its difficulties, but some
regular series, such as the BBC Proms and the Cheltenham
In a message dated 28/01/2006 18:35:59 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
contemporary music" AND France.
Certainly French radio seems to give more air time to contemporary
music than does British radio and I have enjoyed some memorable "first hearings"
during my times in France.
30 matches
Mail list logo
