What's Wrong with Contemporary Classical Music

My compositions were all rejected by universities in Turkey because they were too baroque and not "modern" enough.

Academia and modernists are the problem. They turned their backs on beauty, lyricism and tonality a long time ago. Living in a bubble with no regard for the music consuming public. Write music that's tuneful and enjoyable, and people will flock to it. But for some reason these elites just can't comprehend that. Sad.

Seriously, no audience on this planet gives a shit about "progress"

In recent centuries classical composers seemed to lean to more and more unplayable music. The music of JSBach was said to be too complicated and intellectual. A new, simpler style was preferred by his sons. Beethoven's late works were (and are) hard to understand - and he was proud of this fact. Then Chopin and Liszt brought piano etudes to a new level of difficulty. Scriabin raised from a Chopin like style to an almost atonal style. Then serial music came on the parcours. This could not get on like that. Now computer game music is replacing classical music.

To put it simply: art schools fill you up with nonsensical taboos and destroy your creativity.

Everything

I'll only comment that contemporary classical composers are now all Borodin's. We have day jobs, and use free tools like MuseScore software to write music that we like to write. I know I do. As a result the unlistenable rubbish that you so rightly (and we too) deride, we regard as death throes.

The idea of "progress" or "advancement" is a curse. The problem is they think of music history as if it is the same as evolution in biology. They think older, simpler style must be replaced by newer, more complex style.
But music is not evolution, it is not science and advancement. It is more like fashion, that something trendy in one era will fall out of fashion in another time. They think they are doing something "new" and "innovative", but the truth is they are doing music that has few audience and little social impact in the world.

A bad song is a bad song. Meanwhile people like Jon Gomm, Any McKee are doing the real innovation. Check out Driving Fast by Morf or Passionflower by Jom Gomm. Not classical music, but real innovation.

Is there any contemporary classical music institutions?
I want to research about it .
Thank you .

From my experience, your final question is answered by the "outside (non-academic) world:" audiences seem to be reluctant to attend (and programmers equally reluctant to present) concerts of modern works that have not been proven to be "audience-friendly."

Answer: Everything.

I just wanted a video that said it all sucks.

several things: they compose for one another's approval and not for an audience. They seem to think that audiences should learn to appreciate their techniques, not the end result. I'm very sorry but if I create an elaborate recipe for liverwurst flavored cake that might well be a gastronomic accomplishment, but who wants to eat it? Few people go to hear music because they find it "clever". Or if they do they eventually outgrow it. And lastly wrt dodecaphonic music at least - Do we really want to avoid any semblance of tonality or cultural reference? Fine. Split the octave into 11 or 13 parts, not 12. Permutation alone doesn't make great music. Sophistry doesn't make art. As near as I can tell the real intent IS the sophistry. And who has time for that but other sophists?

This is such a great explanation! A lot of the contemporary music just seems like some weird experiment, not a feeling that someone had, but something almost robotic done for the sake of doing it.

Almost 100 years have passed and nobody likes contemporary classical music. The argument that "are awarded to the time", or that people enter it in the future is false. The professiaites of the intellectuals were never fulfilled; Not even artists from other disciplines listen to shoenberg music

Thank you. I think there is a lot of truth in what you said. I think that any honest person who has ever spent 5 minutes in conservatory composition environment must agree with you. I would like to ask your opinion on a thought of mine : I think that perhaps the move away from melodic-harmonic music may also be a way to globalize musical expression and render it "faceless" and "place-less" as opposed to national musical traditions or even personal harmonic/melodic tendencies. That is, I think it would be almost impossible to determine from which country a piece of contemporary music comes from or even who wrote it in most cases. Do you have any feelings/thoughts about that? In any case, the fact that this video exists gives me a feeling of hope for the future of music.

How is it possible that a subgenre of music so deeply influenced by "postmodernism" which is supposed to question metanarratives of progress, is so totally defined by a very particular notion of what progress means?

Perhaps it is something like Einstein's "No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it." Postmodernism failed to transcend modernism because it failed to understand that the way it was framing the problem was inescapably modernist and defined by a particular (eurocentric) notion of progress. As a result, it ended up reinforcing the worst things about modernism, but now it became much more difficult to criticize because supposedly it was already beyond the criticisms. If we think of postmodernism less as a philosophy and more as a historical time period (see Frederic Jameson), then perhaps we could turn postmodernism on its head by coming to see "postmodernism" (the way of thinking) as itself the product of a certain era of late capitalism. This is the classic "Hegelian" turn. I really recommend reading Zizek, who is critical of postmodernism in a lot of ways and is more of a Hegelian than a Marxist. But I would also advise anyone to avoid tying themselves to any one thinker or way of thinking, because it always becomes yet another layer of attempting to solve a problem with the same consciousness that created it. I submit that postmodernism as an era will only come to an end when eurocentrism is completely dismantled and becomes totally irrelevant. In a way, the sad state of contemporary classical is part of this inevitable historical "progression" where eurocentric music simply becomes so culturally irrelevant that it will effectively disappear.

I absolutely think that we should be making music outside of the commercial paradigm also. What does music look like which falls prey to neither the Scylla of the vapid profit-driven music industry nor the Charybdis of academic anti-commercial music? I think it will look something like what Kendrick Lamar has done, which is why he will be known as an artistic genius for many years to come, long after all these academic scribblers are forgotten.

Well - presented and in some ways, liberating. The arts and sciences are not about the same things and the idea of progress as a guiding principle maybe doesn't translate. A mandate to always innovate at all costs can be stifling. I liked the bit at the end about composers operating outside of academe having a little freedom to experiment. Meaningful musical activity comes from working with the media and sharing the artifacts with others - inevitably that will sound "like" an established style or system. There is more to work with if you are open to existing systems than if you feel obligated to throw out all systems and return to first principles - I think, therefore I am - before writing a note.

100% agree and I appreciate your skill in expressing it clearly, yet not patronizing to anyone who might feel differently. I'd also add, though I don't know enough about it, it seems to me that the idea of music as progress and of confusing music theory with science starts already before Adorno et al, in the Germanic world of the late 19th century. It seems to me that this reflects the rise of capitalist economy in that world, and perhaps underlines the musical world (even unconsciously) trying to 'figure out' how to evaluate music within an increasingly market-centered society - just a thought.

nice!

I tend to think that distinctiveness is a more desirable trait in music than innovation, per se. Well argued video.

Many of the famous "composers" are actually scammers. It's what it is. So sad.

This got me to suscribe!!! :)

Very good points to which I can relate to very well.

I myself have always tried to do a more romanticized contemporary music and I always other teachers and peers thought it doesn't sound contemporary, even though I use plenty of dissonance, sometimes microtones or complex textures. As long as you hear a few major and minor chords somewhere and a clear theme, that's tonal music and you're done. And it's very hard to get to festivals and win competitions with styles that are not "generic modernist" (I'll call it that). And even though I've finished masters and have had some success, I assume many talented people who would want to be composers don't apply, or don't get selected or quit these programs because they do not fit the desired profile. I've been wondering myself often how we can get back to a broader public and how we can get out of the box that we created, starting with the 20th century and continuing into the 21st. Something like Darmstadt, as fresh and cool as it once was seems like the the dying Grail society from Parsifal, that still needs to do the ritual in order to survive, but it's slowly dying in loneliness. We need some kind of Parsifal to return the spear.

It's a bit of a vicious circle. Schools and festivals are run by people who have this mindset that you spoke of, but also conductors and orchestras
often go along with what is hot or not from the modern scene. I think orchestras could have a bigger and more significant impact in choosing repertoire that is suitable for the public and lets them wanting for more. However, I'm afraid most conductors are interested in their own careers and playing Mahler 8th with Berlin phil, so they have little interest into digging deep into promoting long lasting contemporary music.

P.S. I have nothing against generic modernism as I called it or against such composers, but it does bother me that there are double standards on aesthetic in general:"ofc you do whatever you want!!! But you better want what we want so you get picked for festivals".

Innovation has been culturally naturalised over the years, and not just in music. The idea that novelty in style or language is an artistic necessity isn't new but it's very recent. The opposite is so alien to our current perceptions and desires that we have a hard time considering it today. Neither Mozart, Brahms, Balinese musicians or any folk culture… were driven by this modern imperative. Innovation as a deliberate substitute to social functionality could only lead to the narrowing of social reception.

Interesting video, think I share your conclusions.
I honestly think it’s all about the Academic world itself, which pretends to control the progress of something simply called “music”; something that today everybody can create like never before (due to the Tools we have, especially PC). The focus for a real music progress should be only on research and curiosity about new ways of composing music, new rules, new systems…but to be explored freely, and not pretending to define a final “right” solution for music that has to come.
Trying to be original for the sake of it has no sense whatsoever; rather kills spontaneity and creativity.

good points.however! the music is just the product of the PERSON behind the pen / computer making the music making the choices. what is wrong with contemporary classical music COMPOSERS. i would say. too much ADD. too many options. too much Starbucks caffeine. too little personal vision. too many social media places to share music. less emphasis on music as a community service / community event shared live. contemporary composers also DO NOT PLAY AN INSTRUMENT. in the past you had to play an instrument to compose. contemporary composers therefore do not know ORCHESTRATION how to write your specific parts for the characteristics of each instruments!

The kind of thinking of Adorno, Schoenberg, Kandinsky and Wittgenstein is the real cause of this. This kind of thinking, in expressing meaning, is not only progressive but revolutionary, subverts all classical art and the philosophy of the Western tradition. Its conclusion is not some kind of an art or advanced thinking, done by incomprehensible geniuses, which is too lofty and glorious for mere naive mortals, but a complex and schematic work, out of touch with common sense based on the nature of things, made by snobby intellectuals with their anti-tradition and anti-people rhetoric.

Very much needed conversation in the contemporary music world! Thanks for sharing, Michele!
Let's not forget the privilege of the people in these institutions, the elitism behind these research-minded musical practices is exacerbated by the lack of ethnocultural diversity in these milieux, mostly upper middle class white people who see their work as a continuation of the western classical canon and its supremacy.

Classical music is solidly embedded in traditional understandings of scales. Dvorjak said that the music of Afro and Aboriginal Americans will be the music of the future. There is also Indian classical music which is older than European Classical. Music synthesizers and software are providing new forms of music expression including classical, with which I have some input.