The song that kicks your arse every time

[Stefu]

Hmm. For pure kickarsedness, I'll have to nominate Black Sabbath - War Pigs. From the intro on. Dummm... dum dudummmm... dum dum dummmm... dum dudummmmm... dum dum dummmm... ooooooOOOoooooooooOOOoooooooooOOOoooooo

Is just asskicksome, I tell you what.

[Sirotnikov]

I would think some ballad by Metallica.

Or some nice Progressive or Symphonic Rock, by the Scorpions for instance.

A music which is nice to dance to can also help in a bad mood.

And of course, bethoven, brahms, tchaikovsky and bach.

[Buck Birdseed]

Classical music is music designed for rich and powerful people. As such it's naturally crap.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Damn, people. Music is just music. You hear that classic song often enough I'd think you'd get sick of it, just the same as everything else. And I'm with you there, Snapcase, I hate Missy Elliot, but Get Ur Freak On is truly one of my faves.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Snapcase
Classical music is music designed for rich and powerful people. As such it's naturally crap.

This a blatant lie. You know nothing of musical history, as this statement is intensely ignorant.

Most classical music, and particularly the greatest works that survive to this day, are works of genuine artistic expression by geniuses. You seem to ignore the fact that Mozart and Beethoven had notoriously bad relationships with such "patrons," and broke all the rules to produce the music their souls wanted.

Bach's music, without which the music you seem to appreciate would not be the same, was an ardent expression of his deep religious faith. He remains to this day the greatest musical genius who ever lived, and his impact on all forms of subsequent Western music is palpable

Mozart was censored several times by the Austrain government for producing subversive works, and the Marriage of Figaro was, for the times, considered a shocking portrayal of misbehaving royalty while it exhalted their servants. In the finale of Don Giovanni, he revolutionized music by infusing it with real dramatic tension that complimented the actions on stage.

Beethoven refused to be treated like a servant, and his symphonies and chamber works were written for his own sake, no one elses. Read his Geheldenstadt Testament and you will see.

Almost every one of Verdi's operas was censored for fear of inciting the people, as they were intensely nationalist and populist during a time of occupation by Austria. He didn't write anything for the rich and powerful.

Much of what we consider "classical" today was at the time popular music, loved by the masses as much as the "rich and powerful." There is certainly nothing in the works of Brahms, Mussorgsky, Wagner, Mahler, Stravinsky, Britten and countless other composers that supports your assertion. This was music that came from their souls and spoke to everyone. And there is plenty of documented evidence from journals, publications and essays in which these composers wrote and expressed their deep artistic commitment.

Just because some had rich patrons (most didn't, by the way), doesn't in anyway invalidate the artistic merit of their works. That you would somehow dismiss their works makes me wonder how you can profess to be a music critic without knowing anything about the history of music.

[drake]

Don't you know the Snapcase rule Boris?

You can't let his off the wall ideas get ya down

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by drake
Don't you know the Snapcase rule Boris?

You can't let his off the wall ideas get ya down

Bah, ignorance doesn't get me down, just makes me laugh. I laugh at him, ha ha ha.

[Juggernaut]

"Halcyon On & On" by Orbital. Anyone who doesn't like that song should be shot out of pity.

[Chris 62]

Three songs I'm always into,

I wanna be sedated by the Ramones

Miss you by the stones

Welcome to the machine by Pink Floyd.

Those are always good with me.

[Buck Birdseed]

*sigh* I know my classical musical history pretty well, thank you. I was forced to study it as part of a high school music course, and I can probably tell my Bassoon from my Bartok. We were even forced to write some of the wretched stuff.

I still maintain that classical music is largely created either by a small elite or for a small elite. Imposed from above by the church, commisioned by the aristocracy in 1750s vienna, written for the small bourgeoisie that frequented La Scala Di Milano in the 19th century or written by and for a small and increasingly withdrawn contemporary crowd doesn't really matter; I still maintain that in all periods, except possibly the secular Renaissance, Classical Music has largely been the realm of the people who were not the peasantry or the proletariat or the modern middle class, but an educated, powerful and possibly richer elite.

Oh, certainly it was popularised, balldiers, traditional folk musicians and whatever extracted portions and melodies from it to great effect. But please, don't try to convince me that 19th-century bavarian peasants had the money to go see an Opera. Classical music didn't eminate from the people, it wasn't written for the people (you have yet to find an example from all of your ones above that indicates any attempt at all at trying to achieve mass popularity), it largely failed to relate to the people. Something popular music has always been able to do.

Potential Exceptions: Certain baroque composers. Some post-revolutionary russian composers. John Phillip Sousa. One or two 19th-century composers better known for their Nationalism than their music.

[Chris 62]

All that typing and I didn't read it, snappy.

Think Pink.

[MrWhereItsAt]

/me perks his ears up

Pink? There's a video I wouldn't mind seeing over and over again. "Lady Marmalade" - schawinnnnnnnngggg!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Snapcase
*sigh* I know my classical musical history pretty well, thank you. I was forced to study it as part of a high school music course, and I can probably tell my Bassoon from my Bartok. We were even forced to write some of the wretched stuff.

High School? Try reading some real history books about it, take a few college courses. High School music history courses are about as valuable as high school regular history courses--not very.

I still maintain that classical music is largely created either by a small elite or for a small elite.

"By a small elite," incorrect, as classical composers and musicians were regarded by the aristocracy as nothing better than servants. These men were not wealthy aristocrats, by and large. Much of the history of Beethoven's and Mozart's struggles were to overcome that notion and be seen as legitimate artist. Mozart died penniless because he refused to cowtow to the aristocracy in his music. His last opera, Die Zauberflote, was commissioned and written for Vienna's popular music house, which was certainly attended by the poor and masses. His other works were also put on there frequently, much to his pleasure.

During the 19th Century, opera and classical music was often written for and performed for non-elite venues. In the United States, touring groups would bring Verdi and Rossini operas to the general public, even in rural communities (there's a really fun account of one such production in a Western mining town), and the concerts were usually free to the audience, subsidized by the local authorities.

I still maintain that in all periods, except possibly the secular Renaissance, Classical Music has largely been the realm of the people who were not the peasantry or the proletariat or the modern middle class, but an educated, powerful and possibly richer elite.

You are wrong. The only musical period where this kind of situation predominated is the Classical Period which began in 1750 and ended with Beethoven's death in 1821. And the music that survives and is most often played from that period is the music of Beethoven and Mozart, who were anything but aristocratic pawns when it came to what they wrote.

Oh, certainly it was popularised, balldiers, traditional folk musicians and whatever extracted portions and melodies from it to great effect.

And every great composer infused his work with popular folksongs and ballads as well. Brahms, Beethoven, Mussorgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Bartok, Dvorak et al. often employed popular fol melodies in their works, such as Brahms' Hungarian Dances, Dvorak's New World Symphony (which even draws on African-American spirituals), and Mussorgsky's operas, which were loaded with Russian folk tunes.

But please, don't try to convince me that 19th-century bavarian peasants had the money to go see an Opera.

They did. Operas were brought to local folk houses, where they were produced for the masses at a cheap admission cost. The notion only an elite few saw and enjoyed opera is erroneous. And as I pointed out, Verdi didn't write his populist operas for the aristocrats, whom he despised. He wrote it for the Italian people. At his funeral, 90,000 mourners, vastly peasants, spontaneously broke into his "Va Pensiero" chorus from Nabucco. That tune is still an unofficial anthem for Italy. Practically every Italian knows it and can sing it for you. The Gondoliers in Venice would sing Verdi tunes more than anything else, and before "Rigoletto" premiered, he had to swear the orchestra and singers to secrecy about the tune for the tenor aria "La donna mobile," as he had had previous experience that when he wrote a great melody, the gondoliers would be singing it before opening night. He wanted to keep it a surprise for the audience.

Classical music didn't eminate from the people, it wasn't written for the people (you have yet to find an example from all of your ones above that indicates any attempt at all at trying to achieve mass popularity),

Certainly I have, and certainly it was. Beethoven's 9th is another example. He wrote it as a paean to the human spirit, and intended it for everyone. The text of Schiller's Ode to Joy is extremely humanistic, and the 9th's chorale tune was used by Socialists such as Paul Robeson to further socialist doctrine earlier this century of the complete unity of all mankind.

it largely failed to relate to the people. Something popular music has always been able to do.

Bollocks. Everyone in Europe, from rich to poor, knew the tunes of Rossini, Verdi, Beethoven and Puccini. They were vastly popular. They were the equivalent of today's rock stars. Think about how the next time you hear a mother hum the Brahms' Lullaby to her baby. You seem to think that because this century, "classical" music has become (until the last decade) the property of the wealthy and elite that this was always the case, and it was not so.

Potential Exceptions: Certain baroque composers. Some post-revolutionary russian composers. John Phillip Sousa. One or two 19th-century composers better known for their Nationalism than their music.

As I said, the only period where what you claim was really true was the Classical period. The Romantic Era was wrought with passionate, artistic music for its own sake, not the sake of an elite.

And you also fail to make a case that any and all music commissioned by a patron is somehow bad or invalid. The problems with that is that it assumes the will of the patron was not the will of the composer, assumes the patron somehow controlled the music that came out of the composer, and assumes that when writing for a patron, a composer didn't have any thoughts of the music being meant for anyone else or any deeper meaning.

[Stefu]

Don't try to convince Snappers to become classical music afficionado, Boris. You see, if our beloved anti-elitist (which, like antifascism and anti-Christ, is pretty much like elitism, except from whole 'nother perspective) happens to get idea that classical music is good rebellious (must remember to use the correct Snapcase terminology here), he might actually start listening to it, and then we have another form of music ruined by his far-out wacky theories and attempts to keep his view of music patched together to somehow look sensible.

[Playa del Carmen]

The only "song" I could think of like that Brahms' Hungarian Dances.