Aphex Twin piano track

Only sounds corny to you because you fail to contextualise and it's the kind of music that's been copied a million times.

>it's the kind of music that's been copied a million times
and? a lot of it is corny because it's emotiveness is normie-tier.

Again, you're literally incapable of contextualising music. It's corny to you also because you're used to hearing shittier versions of it, done for the umpteenth time; and using buzzwords like "normie-tier" isn't an argument. If you want to "get" classical music, learn the aesthetic principles of the time period in which it was created, because (shockingly), there's a reason music sounds the way it does from a specific time in history, or tone down on the buzzwords and move along.

Shut up you fucking mong

They hated Jesus because He told them the truth.

absolutely based

wow! this is garbage!

>because (shockingly), there's a reason music sounds the way it does from a specific time in history
yes, and? you can say that about anything, including jazz which heavily consists of intolerably pretentious noodling. contextualising doesn't magically change your ear. you can develop an appreciation for the aesthetic but you can't force yourself to like the sound of something unless you're a pseud that likes to feel superior over "shittier versions of it".

There is no amount of contextualising that can be done to force me to like music I don't like, which is most of classical. 20th century minimalism was unironically better than most of what came before. I'd listen to Aphex Twin over some overwrought Chopin mazurka any day.

youtube.com/watch?v=3uhTwxqE4Co

Attached: 1556468812688.gif (413x243, 51K)

Attached: 1519339750548.jpg (800x600, 123K)

youtube.com/watch?v=32F5ve2gljg

Amazing soundtrack amazing movie

you need to try harder

>yes, and?
And it shows you don't quite get that if you call a thousand year old tradition full of different genres, ensembles and musical eras mostly "corny".
>pretentious noodling
Again, more pointless buzzwords that mean nothing.
>contextualising doesn't magically change your ear
It changes your mind. You don't use your ears only like an animal; you listen to music with your brain (memory, listening experience, knowledge) as well.
>you can develop an appreciation for the aesthetic but you can't force yourself to like the sound of something
True. And this is what contextualisation means. If you got that, then you won't call old music "corny" but you will rather use terminology that isn't used by complete non-musical amateurs to describe why you like or don't like something.
>20th century minimalism
As if there was any minimalism before the 20th century...
>unironically better than most of what came before
>Chopin
It shows you don't have much listening experiences and knowledge here. Get better.

based classical elitist

>It changes your mind. You don't use your ears only like an animal; you listen to music with your brain

Attached: Dnt1bSOXsAEktKo.jpg (1122x1003, 96K)

>20th century minimalism was unironically better than most of what came before
You have RYM-charts-level philistine taste in art music, who would've thought. I wouldn't be surprised if Music for 18 Musicians and Chopin were the only two things you've ever heard in your life along with whatever RYM-tier/mu/core garbage you probably listen to.

I'm not even elitist in general. I only call out bullshit when I see it.
Reaction images aren't arguments. You're a human being with a rational mind and a working brain that stores memories, start acting like one.

1. I don't use that site.

2. I don't really care for Reich or Glass

3. I mentioned Chopin specifically in relation to the musical style of his Mazurkas

Fair enough. Weird example though because I don't like Chopin either. My only point is that you should rather start using better terminology and not nonsense like "corny" or "pretentious noodling" when speaking about music if you want to be taken seriously and not be found out as a complete amateur.

I've listened to most of the most popular classical pieces when I was in school and only liked ~10% of it. I wasn't motivated to check out anything deeper as a result. What would you suggest?

>you should rather start using better terminology and not nonsense like "corny" or "pretentious noodling" when speaking about music if you want to be taken seriously and not be found out as a complete amateur.
I guess. I'm hardly a musician though nor an erudite classical critic. I've tried to develop an ear for a lot of classical styles and mostly failed to do so.

>I've listened to most of the most popular classical pieces when I was in school and only liked ~10% of it
>most popular pieces
>in school
There's your problem. How old are you?

>What would you suggest?
Try to find out what was in that ~10% and continue in that direction, I guess. I only started to understand classical music (also jazz and traditional/folk music) when I started playing a few instruments and studying it and once I hit a dead end with music in general around age 20 though, so if you're into some other stuff right now and enjoy it then there's no need to go down that rabbit hole yet.

almost 30. I've played piano since I was 7 though. I think I've always had a bad relation with a lot of classical after being forced to learn it.

Damn, you're even older than me. Well that changes the situation.
>I think I've always had a bad relation with a lot of classical after being forced to learn it.
That's a massive shame and your reaction is sort of understandable. I was raised in a musically illiterate household so I had no trouble connecting with classical when the time was right. Forcing kids to listen to that shit when they're clearly not ready is the worst possible thing to do in my opinion.

bump