Search Results
6/21/2025, 5:23:13 PM
>No. People who actually understand music are aware of the Hornbostel-Sachs instrumental classification, where an organ is clearly an aerophone, while a violin and a piano are both chordophones... but in practice, one is mostly bowed and the other is struck by hammers, making it far more percussive in nature. Harpsichords are plucked, celestas don't even have strings (they have metallic bars). So no, they aren't "just strings again".
>>the human voice only done in the limited style
>Wrong again, dipshit. You have
>>recitatives (speech-like)
>>arias (highly melodic, ornamented)
>>choral textures (complex polyphony)
>>extended vocal techniques (20th century Sprechstimme, whispers, shouts, growls, spoken word, tone clusters, overtones, multiphonics, etc.)
>>pure gestural or phonetic vocalizations
>In classical music, the human voice is extremely diverse.
>>All these things are used in other genres as well on top of even more
>As I've already explained in this thread, you're committing the fallacy of equating number of available instruments in theory with actual timbral variety in practice. It's not this flat, one-dimensional idea that if there are more instruments, there's automatically more variety. That's demonstrably false. It's what you actually DO with those instruments; how they're combined (orchestration), balance of forces, dynamics, articulation, registers, extended techniques, texture and layering, temporal unfolding over long forms, etc., all of which classical music blows every other genre out of the fucking water.
>And that's not even touching the fact that classical music was the first to use electronic instruments, invented electroacoustic music, musique concrete, etc. It's no contest, really.
>Oh, and in pop music, it's more often than not sampling instruments, so it's not even fucking accurate to say they have "all that and more".
>>the human voice only done in the limited style
>Wrong again, dipshit. You have
>>recitatives (speech-like)
>>arias (highly melodic, ornamented)
>>choral textures (complex polyphony)
>>extended vocal techniques (20th century Sprechstimme, whispers, shouts, growls, spoken word, tone clusters, overtones, multiphonics, etc.)
>>pure gestural or phonetic vocalizations
>In classical music, the human voice is extremely diverse.
>>All these things are used in other genres as well on top of even more
>As I've already explained in this thread, you're committing the fallacy of equating number of available instruments in theory with actual timbral variety in practice. It's not this flat, one-dimensional idea that if there are more instruments, there's automatically more variety. That's demonstrably false. It's what you actually DO with those instruments; how they're combined (orchestration), balance of forces, dynamics, articulation, registers, extended techniques, texture and layering, temporal unfolding over long forms, etc., all of which classical music blows every other genre out of the fucking water.
>And that's not even touching the fact that classical music was the first to use electronic instruments, invented electroacoustic music, musique concrete, etc. It's no contest, really.
>Oh, and in pop music, it's more often than not sampling instruments, so it's not even fucking accurate to say they have "all that and more".
Page 1