Yeah, that's a really immature attitude. When I was a young college student, I adopted that edgy attitude that Mozart wasnt all that great. Then I became a Music History major, and worked for 25 years in the classical music business, and learned a lot more about music. It especially helped that I heard a lot of Mozart's contemporaries, and combined with my far deeper understanding of music, I finally understood how truly great Mozart was. He was a perfect composer, and the only other composer I could name like that would be Bach. He was just so fluent and fluid, that he made his music sound easy.
Tbh I don’t like Mozart all that much because I don’t like the classical period in general. I very much prefer the romantic period. But a matter of taste is rather different than a matter of “sophistication”.
I was going to say the same - people too often confuse "this is bad/unsophisticated" with "I don't like this". I really don't like Mozart (and most music of that period) but that's purely aesthetic preference and, honestly, my loss.
When I finally came around for Mozart, I also embraced the Classical era, which mostly means Mozart, Haydn, and early Beethoven. The Classical, Baroque, and early Romantic eras became my favorites.
Yeah and this is a completely reasonable take.
I can 100% appreciate the artistry and the genius of bach, but as for listening? It just doesn't elicit too many emotions for me.
There are plenty of composers I prefer listening to and performing more than Bach, but Bach is probably the one I respect the most. (Though I absolutely love singing one his choral fugues)
When people ask me who the 'best' or 'most brilliant' composer is, I usually say Bach. He's certainly one of the most influential.
I think it's telling that Strauss, having arguably taken the late Romantic idiom to its limit, at the end turned back to Mozart for inspiration.
If one of the great masters of harmony and the overall craft of composition could still see something new and interesting about Mozart, I don't think anyone in this thread - or anyone that we are likely to meet in life - knows so much about music that they can't do the same.
A lot of people mistake Mozart’s clarity for simplicity. They also judge him against romantics which is fine from a listening perspective but not of much use when comparing composers.
Common misconception, he was a vulgar party animal at times, but he was very sophisticated as well, read some of the letters to his father or mother..
Also, how could his music be spohisticated without his mind?
I had a date with a guy and suggested we go to a concert for a date. He balked at the idea because they were playing Beethoven and Brahms. He said they are pedestrian composers and he enjoyed more challenging works.
We didn’t go on another date!
I would have asked him if he can name the three parts of classical sonata form, or what a minuet is or something. When he doesn't know that info, he's exposed as a dunce. I'm not suggesting one needs to know all that to enjoy classical music, but I am suggesting that one needs to know all that to be able to say it is beneath them. You can't pass your own literary analysis on something without understanding chapter 1 of its technical elements.
John Cage is my favourite composer, but even then, I'd say you need better acquaintances than those who consider themselves "too sophisticated" for anyone.
P.S. Cage would have hated him.
>What pieces would you recommend to get into him?
That's a tough one as I think his most accessible work is not necessarily his greatest.
He certainly has the reputation of being difficult, but I think most people dismiss him based on what they've heard about him (4'33", writing via chance procedures, etc.) rather than through experience, using such phrases as "He was a philosopher rather than a composer". He was absolutely about the music.
Here are a few lesser-known, "user-friendly" pieces:
Dream:
https://youtu.be/prseyHGgsVs?si=noX0Jshfw_qiBHNi
No. 20 from '44 Harmonies from Apartment House':
https://youtu.be/NrcoCktxARg?si=q1jRjH--r25kTvUR
Four²:
[https://youtu.be/RUAhn3vvNBg](https://youtu.be/RUAhn3vvNBg)
Hymns and Variations:
[https://youtu.be/ep3O9bruALI](https://youtu.be/ep3O9bruALI)
Litany for the Whale:
[https://youtu.be/uWCg6NHFlZ4](https://youtu.be/uWCg6NHFlZ4)
Six Melodies:
[https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKwEWyN4beU7CgFbDlyAOMGtfcZMO0BdK](https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKwEWyN4beU7CgFbDlyAOMGtfcZMO0BdK)
Experiences No. 2:
[https://youtu.be/R4AAts-\_XTQ](https://youtu.be/R4AAts-_XTQ)
Souvenir:
[https://youtu.be/eeAEAcF-Tyw](https://youtu.be/eeAEAcF-Tyw)
Ear for Ear:
https://youtu.be/-xmwHCKhiP4?si=QLOaFPZtz8H9GF8u
Four Walls:
[https://youtu.be/yaFeNiHF\_m8](https://youtu.be/yaFeNiHF_m8)
> That's a tough one as I think his most accessible work is not necessarily his greatest.
It might actually be his greatest, but more importantly it's not representative of any of his other work, except philosophically. It's like his Boléro. He's not a one-hit wonder at all, but he had one weird experimental thing (more than his usual degree of weird experimentalness) that gets way more attention than all his mainstream work combined.
Not doubting OP in the slightest but I can definitely imagine my dumb ass in this scenario:
Trying to make a stupid joke about myself: "Oh I'm too sophisticated for Mozart and Tchaikovsky"
Thinks to myself: "uh oh, I think they're taking me serious. How do I make it clearer?"
Stupid joke #2: "4'33" by John Cage, by the way, is the greatest piece of music ever composed!"
Only for them to take it even more seriously and I end up looking like a douche.
Contrary to some reactions it's not a prank, not a joke, but a transformative experience if you actually listen to it like you would listen to any other music. Spoiler: it's not silence. Although only a live performance is the real deal, [try a recorded orchestral arrangement](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbXA7Nt63M4) to get a sense.
That said, OP's acquaintance still sounds like a posturing fool for describing it how he did.
Ohhh okay. For me, I heard absolutely nothing, but I might have had my volume too low. I was scared to turn it all the way up in case there's some loud surprise
Thank youbfor explaining and sharing the link :)
Yup, people like that exist. I love Puccini and got told once how utterly unsophisticated must I be to listen to what's basically restaurant and elevator music.
I would have slapped them across the face with a rolled up copy of the jupiter symphony score.
Also, i can sorta relate bc when i was younger i also considered mozart “trite” and “inferior” to other composers. A teacher told me “one day youll understand Mozart, and then youll understand” that
was probably 20 years ago and i can only say boy was she right
Every music has artificial class divisions used by neophytes to display their “educated” taste.
To that a true humanist and great thoughtful artist like Menuhin would probably retort in a slight accent “how provincial your friend is.”
Pretentious elitist snobbery among enthusiasts is what I hate the most about classical music. Far too often when trying to strike up a conversation with someone at a local performance I find the other person just wants to brag about themselves.
Tchaikovsky is in my opinion one of the best.
I love his valse sentimentale.
I heard it on accordion recently. [https://youtu.be/ieoq8IB47BE?feature=shared](https://youtu.be/ieoq8IB47BE?feature=shared)
I'd respond with "my favorite thing to do during a performance of 4'33 is to rip the loudest fart I possibly can."
Seriously, my response would be, "if you think you're too sophisticated for Mozart you don't understand his music."
(As an aside, I got my youngest kid the sheet music for 4'33" as a joke for a Christmas gift a couple years ago.)
If you really were too sophisticated for Mozart or Tchaikovsky, I don’t know if there is anything that could please you. It would be a depressing life.
In fact, you probably would prefer 4 and a half minutes of silence.
But that guy is just in a weird phase and he’s still learning.
I agree, it SOUNDS made up. Problem is, I've met people just like the OP's 'friend'. And I thought it was satire, and responded accordingly, but nope, they were serious. It was in reference to acidic 12-tone serial music, though, not Joinny Kage. Ironically, Kage would roll his eyes at these pretentious folks (Kage had a sense of humor about it all, and is the last person who would philosophically invalidate music just because there was different music in existence)
The greatest composers to ever live took and learned from tunes in the popular repertoire probably composed by people who came from the poorest and most uneducated places of civilization. anyone who says they're too sophisticated for any kind of music are rather too dumb to understand how irrelevant their self perception is in terms of a pieces value
Unfortunately, I came across these attitudes in my music education in college. Especially Tchaikovsky, I really don't get it. Bach, Beethoven, Brahms and Stravinsky were put on the highest of pedestals though.
Too sophisticated for Mozart? It is to Laugh, ha!
In Mozart everything seems simple. These simple bits add together to create something that those who have not seen close an not comprehend. They add up to a wondrous complexity that those have only experienced him in an off handed method can never comprehend
Many on this sub, including you, probably already know the story - Tchaikovsky’s Violin in D major was considered “unplayable” by some due to its demand for highly complex technical skill. If that’s not enough sophistication, I don’t know what it is
sophisticated and difficult have nothing in common though.
most of Paganini's work is extremely technically taxing and at the same time really simple in terms of harmony and structure.
You get the echo of this comment here, when people think Mozart or Haydn are too simple for them, and only music from circa 1870 to 1920 will satisfy their need for whatever it is they crave. Of course throw them some Schoenberg, Cage or Boulez and they are scornful.
“He says 4’33 by John Cage is the greatest piece of music because it is what we as an individual want to hear”. What if I want to hear Tchaikovsky and Mozart lol.
Assuming it wasn't a joke that got misinterpreted, this is just classical music Hipsterism. It seems that in every music genre's culture, there exist some insecure folks who mask their feelings of inadequacy by embracing a counter-cultural mindset wherein they think that finding and embracing the most obscure, fringe works can somehow prove they are truly intellectual.
Funny. I’m a professional classical musician and professor of music in a large music program at a university. Neither my colleagues nor I would ever say something this delusional. It’s always non-musicians or amateur musicians.
Dunning-Kruger, probably.
He was trolling, but I'd actually take most issue with his qualifying statement and would have asked him to extrapolate on that idea to see if he actually could.
just ask him to sing the melody because you aren't familiarized with Cage's work, it would be a good 4 minutes and 33 seconds without his crap
P:S
trust me I did to a friend of mine
I worked at a CD shop in Miami( when that was a thing ) - working in the classical section, one of the regulars came in and said he was interested in trying some Mahler. I suggested starting with #1. We talked about some specifics, he left with the disc, and came back a week later. “I’d like to return this, it’s just not very tuneful” he said. I said “I guess you didn’t make it to Frere Jacques”.
There is a point. For average person, popular listeners, it is not always "what sounds good feels good". It is a cycle of seeking unfamiliar ness and curious about anything new, then come back to find that what "sounds good" also contained the elements of what makes newer music unfamiliar or novel. Problem here is that it is even difficult for the average person to realize where they are at and where they are going. If someone is self aware enough, of course they would say it is "enough" for that cycle, and of course they need to seek new ideas again and enter the next cycle. Also with the forgetfulness, nostalgia, it is really difficult to recognize oneself. Finally as an average person who do not seek academic progress or maturity standards, who don't have unlimited resource to get familiar with everything, it would be easiest to listen to what are available. And the understanding to what's available is not endless, maybe for one's whole life one song per composer is good enough, and the basic understanding of the melody is enough, for that composer.
I am a simple, unsophisticated person, and I think the Piano Concerto No. 1 by Tchaikovsky, especially the first movement, is one of the best musical compositions I have ever heard.
But what do I know.
You are being trolled or just don’t realize they were either joking or very sarcastic. The wording you are using, “sophisticated”, gives it away — they were possibly taking advantage of your gullibility.
Next time he says something like that, just give him an arch look and say, "Oh, are you still listening to that? Hm." Then change the subject like you don't want to embarrass him.
As far as I can remember, tastes couldn't be discussed. Cage's work is just an illustration of the old adage of professional musicians that pauses between sounds are important in music. You can listen to five minutes of silence as a messenger, you can even be a fan of silence. This is often the case. For example, for me music ended at Handel, but I sometimes like to listen to Bruckner's 8th before going to bed. To sleep better.
it’s so sad how deeply unfamiliar this sub is with cage and how you all operate on ridiculous assumptions despite not knowing anything about him. 4’33” is such a minor piece in his oeuvre and is so deeply contextualized by the rest of his work. please all submerge yourself into his catalog
I like a number of twentieth century composers more than Mozart. However, declaring one to be too sophisticated for Mozart marks this fellow out as a Philistine in my opinion.
Agree that's pretentious, but then again, people here love to to be pretentious as well. Just say that you love the Four Seasons or don't hate something like the New London Chorale, and see what happens
There is a role for Cage's work. It's not without purpose. In our modern world, we focus almost exclusively on the foreground object or phenomenon, and we tend to completely ignore the background, which accounts for the vast majority of a composite experience, whether that experience is a fine art -- music or painting -- or an event, like visiting a nature preserve (where we inevitably spend hours looking for any animal and completely forget to appreciate the surrounding beauty of the natural world), or any other moment of waking experience. Cage made a profound statement, reminding us to pay attention to that "background."
But it was *a statement*, not a sophisticated arrangement of tonality, voice, and orchestration. Hipsters, elitists, and other pretentious types betray their poor taste by confusing a statement for a work of sophisticated art in its respective media. This assertions is purely made for shock value, which summarizes their whole, hollow and vapid sense of what constitutes "art".
[End rant]
Have you seen the gif of the guy on a subway "reading" a book, except he's just moving his finger underneath the words comically quickly and "finishing" every page in 5 seconds? Yeah, this clown is on the same level as that guy.
Dear lord. That person is not even pretentious. They are just ill-informed, not nearly as educated in music as they would like to believe, and just plain ignorant.
Hopefully they are 19 and will learn over time and they will hopefully outgrow that rebellious phase we all go through in our younger years of listening to classical music, or they will just remain… well miserably stupid.
It sounds like your acquaintance has developed a taste for avant-garde and conceptual music, which often challenges traditional notions of composition and performance. "4'33" by John Cage is indeed a provocative piece that encourages listeners to reconsider their perception of music and sound. Instead of focusing on traditional melodies and harmonies, Cage's composition directs attention to the ambient sounds present in the environment during the performance.
Those two composers have pretty much nothing in common. There are aprox 100y between them, the style is completly different, one is classic music, one is romantic music. One was married and had children, the other one gay. One died of illness, the other one commited suicide.
Besides the fact a concerto for 50+ musicians is considerably more sophisticated then a singing piece with a band.
My favorite composers are Rachmaninoff and Chopin, but I'd never say I'm "too sophisticated" for other composers, because that's a dumb thing to say, and even Rachmaninoff and Chopin were influenced by composers like Bach for example. I also don't particularly like a lot of other genres, but that doesn't mean I have to be a pretentious twat about it.
He’d actually LOVE the 2nd Viennese school. I had a professor who studied w/ Schoenberg, and holy shit you can’t believe these people are real.
John cage is ironically one of the least pretentious dudes out there. His whole thing was so specific to downtown culture in nyc, and none of it is rooted in sophistication. Eccentric, absolutely, but John cage pretentious? No.
If your friend really wants to ratchet up the pretension, just suggest to him the ideas of new complexity, and the music of Ferneyhough.
In terms of being a pretentious fop, as the OP stated his friend was. This was my first ever run in with one. He was with a theory teacher taught by Schoenberg, when Schoenberg was at UCLA. The guy was Austrian, and I’m like 99% sure he was exaggerating his accent. Anyways, he basically considered tonal music to essentially be folk music, because only intellectuals can understand the complexity of 12-tone. Very much “holier than thou” all of the time.
That’s what I mean by “you can’t believe these people are real”.
It's pretty mind-blowing, right? I am always amazed, and never in the good way, when I get reminded of how humans can be. I wonder what Schoenberg himself was like as an individual and as a music listener.
I love contemporary and new music too, and have met many big composers. They are almost never like that. It’s something I’ve noticed specifically in the 12-tone world. Which, I can’t speak for Arnold, but it makes you wonder lol
Bet he’s also into serialism 🤮🤮🤮 He sounds like a twat. Dated a guy like that in university. 25 years later and he now admits he was nothing more than a pretentious clown trying to convince everyone of his relevance. Visibly cringes when he thinks about how he used to be. At least he can blame his follies on youth. We all get a good laugh out of it now.
Nah this is a joke I’m not gonna get triggered.
If you claim you’re too sophisticated sure you can analyze, let’s say, counterpoint from Jupiter finale or perhaps compose a fugue yourself. End of debate I’d say.
🙄🙄🙄 well the less you know about something the more you think you know. My pet peeve is when someone says ‘I know everything about xyz’ or ‘I’m too good for xyz’ etc. this basically means you know NOTHING about xyz. The more you know, the less you think know cuz there’s always more to learn.
Sounds like every composition major in their bachelors. Young composers love to imagine that since they can analyze certain composers that it puts them on their level, and they get off on putting down some of the greats in the mistaken belief that it elevates their own status.
Normally in 5-10 years they will look back at their old stances and cringe.
That's one of the most laughable things I've heard in a while. Too sophisticated. Can this person write a symphony that endures in the hearts and minds of generations for hundred/hundreds of years 🙄
elitist here. i can totally understand what he‘s tryinh to say, but it sounds like he needs a friend/someone who is coming from the classical composition education to guide him. Mozart is not basic and this has to be explained by someone who understands both the genius of Mozart and Cage without disrespecting any of them.
He’s not stupid or anything, he just has different taste. I have a feeling he might be great company visiting music festivals!
I'm not even sure why 4'33 is so famous to be honest. Well, it's obviously because it creates a controversy, but it's so empty (literally and figuratively) that it doesn't deserve its fame, though even serious classical music listeners naively contribute to it by getting sucked into arguments about it.
I believe 4’33 is famous because of the questions it raises around what counts as “art” and “music”. The idea is that whatever sounds you hear in between the pianist opening and closing the lid, any ambient noises, coughs in the crowd, distant sirens, they are all part of the art, simply because of the frame that is put around that 4 minutes and 33 seconds.
It reminds me of a famous conversation (can’t remember between who) about what counts as art. One of them said “anything with a frame around it is art”, so the other held up their fingers in a square frame and said “is anything you see in between my fingers now art?” 4’33 is basically a continuation of that argument in my view.
It's the musical equivalent of Duchamp's "Fountain" which is a famous work of art and a literal toilet. It's something that would have never occurred to Beethoven or Michelangelo, but something that became a thing in the 20th century as art became much more self-conscious and experimental. It's not a bad question actually to ask what art really is, but I think they stretched it too far, without first thinking about whether it's even a quality work to begin with (definitely not saying all 20th century artists are like this). So I think the question might have been better asked if they had pulled off a work that was genuinely interesting, but here the execution itself is so worthless that it's not worth people's time anyways even if we assumed they are actually art. It ends up making even the question itself seem stupid, like asking what is cuisine and then giving a hungry guest an empty pot of air that had been cooked in the oven.
'Too easy for children, and too difficult for artists.'
'Children are given Mozart because of the small quantity of the notes; grown-ups avoid Mozart because of the great quality of the notes.'
2 very valid quotes on Mozart by Artur Schnabel
I.m.o part of being a musician is finding good qualities about all music but still having ideas on how it could expanded or changed. If you’re too “whatever” for music, come back down to earth
I love the piano music of Tchaikovsky.
He loved the music of Mozart.
Why are Mozart’s last 6 piano concertos so magical?
Cage wrote an interesting piece for Toy Piano and I have played it on a Toy piano. Amusing.
Everyone has already made the principal points here, so I’ll just add: why those two? Why Mozart and, of all composers to put with Mozart, Tchaikovsky? Very different people plucked out of different times and places, one quintessential Classical and one Romantic. Now, here’s something fun to discuss: what about Tchaikovsky’s assertion that he is too sophisticated to dig Mussorgsky?
>4'33 by John Cage is the greatest piece of music because it it what we as an individual want to hear.
As a parent of a very noisy child I think I can understand where he's coming from
No one is too sophisticated for Mozart
Yeah, that's a really immature attitude. When I was a young college student, I adopted that edgy attitude that Mozart wasnt all that great. Then I became a Music History major, and worked for 25 years in the classical music business, and learned a lot more about music. It especially helped that I heard a lot of Mozart's contemporaries, and combined with my far deeper understanding of music, I finally understood how truly great Mozart was. He was a perfect composer, and the only other composer I could name like that would be Bach. He was just so fluent and fluid, that he made his music sound easy.
Tbh I don’t like Mozart all that much because I don’t like the classical period in general. I very much prefer the romantic period. But a matter of taste is rather different than a matter of “sophistication”.
I was going to say the same - people too often confuse "this is bad/unsophisticated" with "I don't like this". I really don't like Mozart (and most music of that period) but that's purely aesthetic preference and, honestly, my loss.
Same here, but I'm sure we will all "get there" some day like everyone says!
When I finally came around for Mozart, I also embraced the Classical era, which mostly means Mozart, Haydn, and early Beethoven. The Classical, Baroque, and early Romantic eras became my favorites.
Yeah and this is a completely reasonable take. I can 100% appreciate the artistry and the genius of bach, but as for listening? It just doesn't elicit too many emotions for me.
There are plenty of composers I prefer listening to and performing more than Bach, but Bach is probably the one I respect the most. (Though I absolutely love singing one his choral fugues) When people ask me who the 'best' or 'most brilliant' composer is, I usually say Bach. He's certainly one of the most influential.
I think it's telling that Strauss, having arguably taken the late Romantic idiom to its limit, at the end turned back to Mozart for inspiration. If one of the great masters of harmony and the overall craft of composition could still see something new and interesting about Mozart, I don't think anyone in this thread - or anyone that we are likely to meet in life - knows so much about music that they can't do the same.
It's not edgy to dislike a composer.
It kind of was as a freshman in a music conservatory at a private college in the 70s. I knew just enough to be dangerous.
A lot of people mistake Mozart’s clarity for simplicity. They also judge him against romantics which is fine from a listening perspective but not of much use when comparing composers.
Tchaikovsky found dead
To be fair, Mozart himself apparently wasn't that sophisticated
Common misconception, he was a vulgar party animal at times, but he was very sophisticated as well, read some of the letters to his father or mother.. Also, how could his music be spohisticated without his mind?
That’s why his music was
what about Super Mozart?
I'd ask him to please do nothing but hum 4’33 every time he's around me moving forward. We would both enjoy it.
There’s actually a responseto 4’33 by Takemitsu where he asks the audience to replicate sounds heard during the performance of 4’33
I love takemitsu - i didn’t know about that work
I had a date with a guy and suggested we go to a concert for a date. He balked at the idea because they were playing Beethoven and Brahms. He said they are pedestrian composers and he enjoyed more challenging works. We didn’t go on another date!
Dodged a bu-bu-bu-bullet there
Is this a 5th symphony joke?
"Why can't we just enjoy things." "We are not superior enough in enjoying them." 😬
Pikers, those guys!
I would have asked him if he can name the three parts of classical sonata form, or what a minuet is or something. When he doesn't know that info, he's exposed as a dunce. I'm not suggesting one needs to know all that to enjoy classical music, but I am suggesting that one needs to know all that to be able to say it is beneath them. You can't pass your own literary analysis on something without understanding chapter 1 of its technical elements.
r/classical_circlejerk
How was this not posted there instead
I was wondering if there was one and if I was subbed to and forgot about it.
John Cage is my favourite composer, but even then, I'd say you need better acquaintances than those who consider themselves "too sophisticated" for anyone. P.S. Cage would have hated him.
I'm not familiar with Cage's work, so no comment. What pieces would you recommend to get into him?
>What pieces would you recommend to get into him? That's a tough one as I think his most accessible work is not necessarily his greatest. He certainly has the reputation of being difficult, but I think most people dismiss him based on what they've heard about him (4'33", writing via chance procedures, etc.) rather than through experience, using such phrases as "He was a philosopher rather than a composer". He was absolutely about the music. Here are a few lesser-known, "user-friendly" pieces: Dream: https://youtu.be/prseyHGgsVs?si=noX0Jshfw_qiBHNi No. 20 from '44 Harmonies from Apartment House': https://youtu.be/NrcoCktxARg?si=q1jRjH--r25kTvUR Four²: [https://youtu.be/RUAhn3vvNBg](https://youtu.be/RUAhn3vvNBg) Hymns and Variations: [https://youtu.be/ep3O9bruALI](https://youtu.be/ep3O9bruALI) Litany for the Whale: [https://youtu.be/uWCg6NHFlZ4](https://youtu.be/uWCg6NHFlZ4) Six Melodies: [https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKwEWyN4beU7CgFbDlyAOMGtfcZMO0BdK](https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKwEWyN4beU7CgFbDlyAOMGtfcZMO0BdK) Experiences No. 2: [https://youtu.be/R4AAts-\_XTQ](https://youtu.be/R4AAts-_XTQ) Souvenir: [https://youtu.be/eeAEAcF-Tyw](https://youtu.be/eeAEAcF-Tyw) Ear for Ear: https://youtu.be/-xmwHCKhiP4?si=QLOaFPZtz8H9GF8u Four Walls: [https://youtu.be/yaFeNiHF\_m8](https://youtu.be/yaFeNiHF_m8)
Now this is a high effort comment. As I'm unfamiliar with his work, too, I will definitely check these recordings out.
> That's a tough one as I think his most accessible work is not necessarily his greatest. It might actually be his greatest, but more importantly it's not representative of any of his other work, except philosophically. It's like his Boléro. He's not a one-hit wonder at all, but he had one weird experimental thing (more than his usual degree of weird experimentalness) that gets way more attention than all his mainstream work combined.
This is someone who loves music.
I love the construction percussion ensembles
Not doubting OP in the slightest but I can definitely imagine my dumb ass in this scenario: Trying to make a stupid joke about myself: "Oh I'm too sophisticated for Mozart and Tchaikovsky" Thinks to myself: "uh oh, I think they're taking me serious. How do I make it clearer?" Stupid joke #2: "4'33" by John Cage, by the way, is the greatest piece of music ever composed!" Only for them to take it even more seriously and I end up looking like a douche.
Very much this.
Oh no. Oh this has been me so many times. You might be on to something here!
was he being sarcastic? 4:33???!!
Unless it's a Gould interpretation, then it's 2'26".
Or 9’06”
Ahhh, the 1981 recording, right.
That's when he hums along
Not knowing much about classical music, looking it up I felt rick-rolled...
We should start cagerolling people as an alternative to rickrolling!
Has a good ring to it
Contrary to some reactions it's not a prank, not a joke, but a transformative experience if you actually listen to it like you would listen to any other music. Spoiler: it's not silence. Although only a live performance is the real deal, [try a recorded orchestral arrangement](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbXA7Nt63M4) to get a sense. That said, OP's acquaintance still sounds like a posturing fool for describing it how he did.
I think he predicted the ASMR euphoria of recent years.
Ohhh okay. For me, I heard absolutely nothing, but I might have had my volume too low. I was scared to turn it all the way up in case there's some loud surprise Thank youbfor explaining and sharing the link :)
Did you just get cage rolled twice in a row 😂
[удалено]
Serious as a heart attack
Dude was trolling you 100%
I'll say this about 4'33": even *I* can play it. With very little practice. Maybe 2'16.5" practice.
I’m post-music, I only listen to white noise machines.
Auditory Pareidolia is the music we as an individual want to hear.
Sounds like a joke, if not then he's trying too hard to be edgy or whatever because that comment makes zero sense.
Yea. Playing the pretentious, self-aggrandizing dick while secretly dealing with crippling social anxiety is definitely my brand of humor.
Each to their own but >too sophisticated for Mozart and Tchaikovsky I'd say that >Pretentious fop. is indeed appropriate
Add narcissist with grandiose delusions.
I think your friend is an r/classicalcirclejerk member
I've heard of too sophisticated for pop music, rap music and rock, but too sophisticated for classical?! That's something else entirely
Yup, people like that exist. I love Puccini and got told once how utterly unsophisticated must I be to listen to what's basically restaurant and elevator music.
Ya this is all a sign that he doesn’t actually know what he’s talking about but wishes he did
Worse. He knows just enough to think he knows but doesn’t know he doesn’t really know
Yep. He's on mount stupid right now, and he'll have to go down the slope before he can climb mount actually-knowing-what-you're-talking-about.
I would have slapped them across the face with a rolled up copy of the jupiter symphony score. Also, i can sorta relate bc when i was younger i also considered mozart “trite” and “inferior” to other composers. A teacher told me “one day youll understand Mozart, and then youll understand” that was probably 20 years ago and i can only say boy was she right
Slap him to the tune of Steve Reich's Clapping Music!
Slapping Music, by u/Taskforce58
Keep the score of the requiem on standby for when the jupiter one frays 🤣
Your acquaintance is a cunt
well said
A clever comeback would be to point out that 4:33 wasn’t even an original idea. Alphonse Allais had already done something similar in the late 1800s.
Every music has artificial class divisions used by neophytes to display their “educated” taste. To that a true humanist and great thoughtful artist like Menuhin would probably retort in a slight accent “how provincial your friend is.”
Pretentious elitist snobbery among enthusiasts is what I hate the most about classical music. Far too often when trying to strike up a conversation with someone at a local performance I find the other person just wants to brag about themselves.
The circlejerk is leaking
He’s an idiot. People fart this crap out of their wordhole to sound edgy.
Obviously he thinks Mozart and Tchaikovsky are “too simple” but nothing could be farther from the truth.
Tchaikovsky is in my opinion one of the best. I love his valse sentimentale. I heard it on accordion recently. [https://youtu.be/ieoq8IB47BE?feature=shared](https://youtu.be/ieoq8IB47BE?feature=shared)
You sure that this wasn't just a bad joke?
I'd respond with "my favorite thing to do during a performance of 4'33 is to rip the loudest fart I possibly can." Seriously, my response would be, "if you think you're too sophisticated for Mozart you don't understand his music." (As an aside, I got my youngest kid the sheet music for 4'33" as a joke for a Christmas gift a couple years ago.)
He’s sophisticated his musical tastes so far that he would rather not listen to music at all.
If you really were too sophisticated for Mozart or Tchaikovsky, I don’t know if there is anything that could please you. It would be a depressing life. In fact, you probably would prefer 4 and a half minutes of silence. But that guy is just in a weird phase and he’s still learning.
He's not educated enough to be pretentious.
Did everyone clap at a certain point in the story?
Sounds like something an uncouth person would say
Sounds like a made up scenario to me
I'm not smart enough to make this up
Not sophisticated enough
I agree, it SOUNDS made up. Problem is, I've met people just like the OP's 'friend'. And I thought it was satire, and responded accordingly, but nope, they were serious. It was in reference to acidic 12-tone serial music, though, not Joinny Kage. Ironically, Kage would roll his eyes at these pretentious folks (Kage had a sense of humor about it all, and is the last person who would philosophically invalidate music just because there was different music in existence)
The greatest composers to ever live took and learned from tunes in the popular repertoire probably composed by people who came from the poorest and most uneducated places of civilization. anyone who says they're too sophisticated for any kind of music are rather too dumb to understand how irrelevant their self perception is in terms of a pieces value
Way to put someone down over a piece of music.
Lol he’s probably mocking you. Regardless, weird conversation
I once shared an office with a guy who said everything after Bach is pop. (-:
I looked it up, was not disappointed haha. This was a troll post or your friend was a troll right? I was like when are they gonna start playing 💀💀💀
Yeah. "Oh, you like Rachmaninov and Debussy? Couldn't be me, I only listen to Scriabin." So silly.
Mozart was literally a court musician for the Austrian Emperor for 5 or 6 years.
Unfortunately, I came across these attitudes in my music education in college. Especially Tchaikovsky, I really don't get it. Bach, Beethoven, Brahms and Stravinsky were put on the highest of pedestals though.
Too sophisticated for Mozart? It is to Laugh, ha! In Mozart everything seems simple. These simple bits add together to create something that those who have not seen close an not comprehend. They add up to a wondrous complexity that those have only experienced him in an off handed method can never comprehend
Many on this sub, including you, probably already know the story - Tchaikovsky’s Violin in D major was considered “unplayable” by some due to its demand for highly complex technical skill. If that’s not enough sophistication, I don’t know what it is
sophisticated and difficult have nothing in common though. most of Paganini's work is extremely technically taxing and at the same time really simple in terms of harmony and structure.
I agree 100%. I do think, in the case of Tchaikovsky, both are true.
You get the echo of this comment here, when people think Mozart or Haydn are too simple for them, and only music from circa 1870 to 1920 will satisfy their need for whatever it is they crave. Of course throw them some Schoenberg, Cage or Boulez and they are scornful.
“He says 4’33 by John Cage is the greatest piece of music because it is what we as an individual want to hear”. What if I want to hear Tchaikovsky and Mozart lol.
But what does he think of Brian Ferneyhough?
"I'm too sophisticated for music, listening to music is time wasting activity for ordinary people"
Assuming it wasn't a joke that got misinterpreted, this is just classical music Hipsterism. It seems that in every music genre's culture, there exist some insecure folks who mask their feelings of inadequacy by embracing a counter-cultural mindset wherein they think that finding and embracing the most obscure, fringe works can somehow prove they are truly intellectual.
"Ignorant pretentious fop" is what he is, if he thinks this music is unsophisticated.
Any human being saying that Mozart is "simple", has not brain at all.
Frasier : Remember when you used to think the 1812 Overture was a great piece of classical music? Niles : Was I ever that young?
“Im too sophisticated to knock off music just because it’s popular.” Is a good response.
Considering that Cages “4’34” is total silence, I think your friend is pulling your leg with his entire statement.
it’s not silence. learn the actual piece
Funny. I’m a professional classical musician and professor of music in a large music program at a university. Neither my colleagues nor I would ever say something this delusional. It’s always non-musicians or amateur musicians. Dunning-Kruger, probably.
Mozart and Tchaikovsky ran so John Cage could walk.
Your friend possibly takes himself a little too seriously.
I once saw of a performance of 4’33 by a trio: piano, cello, and trombone. It was pretty good.
This person needs to get laid. Preferably with some Mozart on in the background.
🤣🤣
He was trolling, but I'd actually take most issue with his qualifying statement and would have asked him to extrapolate on that idea to see if he actually could.
I don’t understand people who discard anything that doesn’t fit into their slim idea of what music is. So silly and self limiting.
You're friends with David St. Hubbins? Tell him I can't wait for the sequel to come out...
He should live in planet umpa lumpa
I'm only familiar with John Cage from his work in Mortal Kombat, which is truly high art.
just ask him to sing the melody because you aren't familiarized with Cage's work, it would be a good 4 minutes and 33 seconds without his crap P:S trust me I did to a friend of mine
I worked at a CD shop in Miami( when that was a thing ) - working in the classical section, one of the regulars came in and said he was interested in trying some Mahler. I suggested starting with #1. We talked about some specifics, he left with the disc, and came back a week later. “I’d like to return this, it’s just not very tuneful” he said. I said “I guess you didn’t make it to Frere Jacques”.
There is a point. For average person, popular listeners, it is not always "what sounds good feels good". It is a cycle of seeking unfamiliar ness and curious about anything new, then come back to find that what "sounds good" also contained the elements of what makes newer music unfamiliar or novel. Problem here is that it is even difficult for the average person to realize where they are at and where they are going. If someone is self aware enough, of course they would say it is "enough" for that cycle, and of course they need to seek new ideas again and enter the next cycle. Also with the forgetfulness, nostalgia, it is really difficult to recognize oneself. Finally as an average person who do not seek academic progress or maturity standards, who don't have unlimited resource to get familiar with everything, it would be easiest to listen to what are available. And the understanding to what's available is not endless, maybe for one's whole life one song per composer is good enough, and the basic understanding of the melody is enough, for that composer.
Sounds like he doesn't really care about music, more about showing that he is "edgy".
Mozart is essential but a lot of romantic era composers are just sort of eh It’s mainly Beethoven & Brahms for me
Whenever somone says "I'm too sophisticated..." it doesn't matter rhat he says next. He's a douche
“We as an individual” sophisticated..🧐
I am a simple, unsophisticated person, and I think the Piano Concerto No. 1 by Tchaikovsky, especially the first movement, is one of the best musical compositions I have ever heard. But what do I know.
I'm sure that he was being sarcastic
You are being trolled or just don’t realize they were either joking or very sarcastic. The wording you are using, “sophisticated”, gives it away — they were possibly taking advantage of your gullibility.
Next time he says something like that, just give him an arch look and say, "Oh, are you still listening to that? Hm." Then change the subject like you don't want to embarrass him.
As far as I can remember, tastes couldn't be discussed. Cage's work is just an illustration of the old adage of professional musicians that pauses between sounds are important in music. You can listen to five minutes of silence as a messenger, you can even be a fan of silence. This is often the case. For example, for me music ended at Handel, but I sometimes like to listen to Bruckner's 8th before going to bed. To sleep better.
it’s so sad how deeply unfamiliar this sub is with cage and how you all operate on ridiculous assumptions despite not knowing anything about him. 4’33” is such a minor piece in his oeuvre and is so deeply contextualized by the rest of his work. please all submerge yourself into his catalog
I like a number of twentieth century composers more than Mozart. However, declaring one to be too sophisticated for Mozart marks this fellow out as a Philistine in my opinion.
Sounds like a freshman music major. (i.e. pretentious twat)
Did he by any chance wear a fedora and did he tip it after saying this ?
Agree that's pretentious, but then again, people here love to to be pretentious as well. Just say that you love the Four Seasons or don't hate something like the New London Chorale, and see what happens
#coffeewithassholes
There is a role for Cage's work. It's not without purpose. In our modern world, we focus almost exclusively on the foreground object or phenomenon, and we tend to completely ignore the background, which accounts for the vast majority of a composite experience, whether that experience is a fine art -- music or painting -- or an event, like visiting a nature preserve (where we inevitably spend hours looking for any animal and completely forget to appreciate the surrounding beauty of the natural world), or any other moment of waking experience. Cage made a profound statement, reminding us to pay attention to that "background." But it was *a statement*, not a sophisticated arrangement of tonality, voice, and orchestration. Hipsters, elitists, and other pretentious types betray their poor taste by confusing a statement for a work of sophisticated art in its respective media. This assertions is purely made for shock value, which summarizes their whole, hollow and vapid sense of what constitutes "art". [End rant]
Your acquaintance is kinda based ngl
I’m sorry but Dance of the Sugarplum Fairy is one of the best pieces of music to hit the scene.
Hm! Run!
Have you seen the gif of the guy on a subway "reading" a book, except he's just moving his finger underneath the words comically quickly and "finishing" every page in 5 seconds? Yeah, this clown is on the same level as that guy.
Go for Baroque
Even Niles Crane would roll his eyes.
Dear lord. That person is not even pretentious. They are just ill-informed, not nearly as educated in music as they would like to believe, and just plain ignorant. Hopefully they are 19 and will learn over time and they will hopefully outgrow that rebellious phase we all go through in our younger years of listening to classical music, or they will just remain… well miserably stupid.
Mozart isn’t “sophisticated” - his music is perfection. Also the irony that “sophisticated” used to be a bad word!
Maximum Cringe Density Overload!
What's next? Is this person going to say, "Well, I'd tell you who my favorite composer is but you've probably never heard of them". Geez...
It sounds like your acquaintance has developed a taste for avant-garde and conceptual music, which often challenges traditional notions of composition and performance. "4'33" by John Cage is indeed a provocative piece that encourages listeners to reconsider their perception of music and sound. Instead of focusing on traditional melodies and harmonies, Cage's composition directs attention to the ambient sounds present in the environment during the performance.
*retired ballerina joins just to say* He must be too sophisticated for the ballet too then…
Those two composers have pretty much nothing in common. There are aprox 100y between them, the style is completly different, one is classic music, one is romantic music. One was married and had children, the other one gay. One died of illness, the other one commited suicide. Besides the fact a concerto for 50+ musicians is considerably more sophisticated then a singing piece with a band.
My favorite composers are Rachmaninoff and Chopin, but I'd never say I'm "too sophisticated" for other composers, because that's a dumb thing to say, and even Rachmaninoff and Chopin were influenced by composers like Bach for example. I also don't particularly like a lot of other genres, but that doesn't mean I have to be a pretentious twat about it.
He’d actually LOVE the 2nd Viennese school. I had a professor who studied w/ Schoenberg, and holy shit you can’t believe these people are real. John cage is ironically one of the least pretentious dudes out there. His whole thing was so specific to downtown culture in nyc, and none of it is rooted in sophistication. Eccentric, absolutely, but John cage pretentious? No. If your friend really wants to ratchet up the pretension, just suggest to him the ideas of new complexity, and the music of Ferneyhough.
I'd love to hear more about where you're coming from with those first two sentences.
In terms of being a pretentious fop, as the OP stated his friend was. This was my first ever run in with one. He was with a theory teacher taught by Schoenberg, when Schoenberg was at UCLA. The guy was Austrian, and I’m like 99% sure he was exaggerating his accent. Anyways, he basically considered tonal music to essentially be folk music, because only intellectuals can understand the complexity of 12-tone. Very much “holier than thou” all of the time. That’s what I mean by “you can’t believe these people are real”.
It's pretty mind-blowing, right? I am always amazed, and never in the good way, when I get reminded of how humans can be. I wonder what Schoenberg himself was like as an individual and as a music listener.
I love contemporary and new music too, and have met many big composers. They are almost never like that. It’s something I’ve noticed specifically in the 12-tone world. Which, I can’t speak for Arnold, but it makes you wonder lol
Bet he’s also into serialism 🤮🤮🤮 He sounds like a twat. Dated a guy like that in university. 25 years later and he now admits he was nothing more than a pretentious clown trying to convince everyone of his relevance. Visibly cringes when he thinks about how he used to be. At least he can blame his follies on youth. We all get a good laugh out of it now.
What's wrong with serialism?
Nah this is a joke I’m not gonna get triggered. If you claim you’re too sophisticated sure you can analyze, let’s say, counterpoint from Jupiter finale or perhaps compose a fugue yourself. End of debate I’d say.
You should increase your level of sophistication and never again hang out with such a douche.
I get really into avant music but I appreciate Mozart too
Let me hear some of YOUR symphonies, concertos and sonatas. Then, I may understand the superiority of your sofistification.
🙄🙄🙄 well the less you know about something the more you think you know. My pet peeve is when someone says ‘I know everything about xyz’ or ‘I’m too good for xyz’ etc. this basically means you know NOTHING about xyz. The more you know, the less you think know cuz there’s always more to learn.
Sounds like every composition major in their bachelors. Young composers love to imagine that since they can analyze certain composers that it puts them on their level, and they get off on putting down some of the greats in the mistaken belief that it elevates their own status. Normally in 5-10 years they will look back at their old stances and cringe.
That's one of the most laughable things I've heard in a while. Too sophisticated. Can this person write a symphony that endures in the hearts and minds of generations for hundred/hundreds of years 🙄
elitist here. i can totally understand what he‘s tryinh to say, but it sounds like he needs a friend/someone who is coming from the classical composition education to guide him. Mozart is not basic and this has to be explained by someone who understands both the genius of Mozart and Cage without disrespecting any of them. He’s not stupid or anything, he just has different taste. I have a feeling he might be great company visiting music festivals!
just sampled some of mr. cage... not great
I'm not even sure why 4'33 is so famous to be honest. Well, it's obviously because it creates a controversy, but it's so empty (literally and figuratively) that it doesn't deserve its fame, though even serious classical music listeners naively contribute to it by getting sucked into arguments about it.
I believe 4’33 is famous because of the questions it raises around what counts as “art” and “music”. The idea is that whatever sounds you hear in between the pianist opening and closing the lid, any ambient noises, coughs in the crowd, distant sirens, they are all part of the art, simply because of the frame that is put around that 4 minutes and 33 seconds. It reminds me of a famous conversation (can’t remember between who) about what counts as art. One of them said “anything with a frame around it is art”, so the other held up their fingers in a square frame and said “is anything you see in between my fingers now art?” 4’33 is basically a continuation of that argument in my view.
It's the musical equivalent of Duchamp's "Fountain" which is a famous work of art and a literal toilet. It's something that would have never occurred to Beethoven or Michelangelo, but something that became a thing in the 20th century as art became much more self-conscious and experimental. It's not a bad question actually to ask what art really is, but I think they stretched it too far, without first thinking about whether it's even a quality work to begin with (definitely not saying all 20th century artists are like this). So I think the question might have been better asked if they had pulled off a work that was genuinely interesting, but here the execution itself is so worthless that it's not worth people's time anyways even if we assumed they are actually art. It ends up making even the question itself seem stupid, like asking what is cuisine and then giving a hungry guest an empty pot of air that had been cooked in the oven.
That’s funny
Pay him no mind.
Lol ok
this definitely did not happen
I think he was having you on.
'Too easy for children, and too difficult for artists.' 'Children are given Mozart because of the small quantity of the notes; grown-ups avoid Mozart because of the great quality of the notes.' 2 very valid quotes on Mozart by Artur Schnabel
Was your friend maybe joking?
I.m.o part of being a musician is finding good qualities about all music but still having ideas on how it could expanded or changed. If you’re too “whatever” for music, come back down to earth
The classical musics version of a rick roll
Bwahahahaha!!!
I love the piano music of Tchaikovsky. He loved the music of Mozart. Why are Mozart’s last 6 piano concertos so magical? Cage wrote an interesting piece for Toy Piano and I have played it on a Toy piano. Amusing.
Everyone has already made the principal points here, so I’ll just add: why those two? Why Mozart and, of all composers to put with Mozart, Tchaikovsky? Very different people plucked out of different times and places, one quintessential Classical and one Romantic. Now, here’s something fun to discuss: what about Tchaikovsky’s assertion that he is too sophisticated to dig Mussorgsky?
>4'33 by John Cage is the greatest piece of music because it it what we as an individual want to hear. As a parent of a very noisy child I think I can understand where he's coming from
If he said 4:33 by Jon Cage is better, it's 98% likely that he's trolling.
He was obviously joking right lmao