Julian and classical music?

Sep 02

Julian and classical music?

Posted by Max Fischer on

I remember reading some little quote about Julian and he said he never had the rockstar fantasy.. he said he wanted to be a modern day composer I believe.. I am wondering if he is still into classical music. If someone here has access to Julian (EZ accesss) find out please! I am curious what Calssical muisc he liked/likes.. I am getting into classical music lately and looking for cool pieces..

For some reason I can imagine Julian becoming the next Danny Elfman of Oingo Boingo and getting into composing if the Strokes were to split..

I also saw someone playing 12:51 on piano and I thought it sounded awsome...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RjlulhoAQ4

I especially love the part at the 1:11 mark.. it sounds like the score of a movie to me..

Replies for this Forum Topic

[quote="SIMON"]
Debussy:
- Two Arabesques
[/quote]

The first one is my favourite piece of music written for piano.

Favourite work is probably Tchaikovsky's 'Romeo & Juliet Overture-Fantasy'.

[quote="SIMON"]Wow, this was pretty hilarious sparring. Nice to see this board hasn't changed much from when I stopped using it, which was early last year I think. The rehaul looks pretty nice... As an aside, I see my old username, Scatterheart, has been taken, so I suppose there will be someone pretending to be me at some stage... as if anyone would care!

Anyway, I guess for me classical is usually wordless instrumental music for conventional instruments, ie. not electronic, and not necessarily scored for an orchestra (that said, I do love many vocal works, usually featuring soprano). My favourite kind of classical is chamber music, which means it can be played by a relatively small range of instruments (probably a crap definition but that's the gist, I think). Anyway, my two favourite composers are Ravel and Debussy - some of my personal favourite pieces:

Ravel:
- Trio for piano, violin and cello
- Sonata for violin and piano
- Le Tombeau de Couperin suite (solo piano version, rather than orchestral)
- Gaspard de la Nuit suite for piano
- Piano concertos in G Major and for the left hand in D major
- Mother goose suite (both orchestral and for piano duet)
- Bolero

Debussy:
- Nocturnes (either orchestral or scored for two pianos)
- Pour le Piano suite
- Estampes, Images and Preludes for piano
- Two Arabesques
- Six Epigraphes Antiques for piano duet
- Sonata for harp, flute and viola
- Syrinx for flute
- String quartet in G

I also adore Villa-Lobos and a good bit of Mahler (especially the 4th movement of the second symphony - possibly the saddest piece of music I've ever heard), and from the more modern era, Gorecki and Part. Current favourite if the Piano Quintet by Schnittke, which is incredible in its creation of a sense of foreboding. I think Knowing You would like it, from what I've seen of his music taste.

Anyway, probably no one will read this or give a shit and I don't intend to make a regular habit of posting here (the Strokes haven't been high on my list of favourite bands since FIOE was released, really) but it's kinda nostalgic. I wonder if any of the other oldies were tempted to join up again...

:idea:[/quote]

I think Jason (eternal) may have posted once in the lets get political thread.

Wow, this was pretty hilarious sparring. Nice to see this board hasn't changed much from when I stopped using it, which was early last year I think. The rehaul looks pretty nice... As an aside, I see my old username, Scatterheart, has been taken, so I suppose there will be someone pretending to be me at some stage... as if anyone would care!

Anyway, I guess for me classical is usually wordless instrumental music for conventional instruments, ie. not electronic, and not necessarily scored for an orchestra (that said, I do love many vocal works, usually featuring soprano). My favourite kind of classical is chamber music, which means it can be played by a relatively small range of instruments (probably a crap definition but that's the gist, I think). Anyway, my two favourite composers are Ravel and Debussy - some of my personal favourite pieces:

Ravel:
- Trio for piano, violin and cello
- Sonata for violin and piano
- Le Tombeau de Couperin suite (solo piano version, rather than orchestral)
- Gaspard de la Nuit suite for piano
- Piano concertos in G Major and for the left hand in D major
- Mother goose suite (both orchestral and for piano duet)
- Bolero

Debussy:
- Nocturnes (either orchestral or scored for two pianos)
- Pour le Piano suite
- Estampes, Images and Preludes for piano
- Two Arabesques
- Six Epigraphes Antiques for piano duet
- Sonata for harp, flute and viola
- Syrinx for flute
- String quartet in G

I also adore Villa-Lobos and a good bit of Mahler (especially the 4th movement of the second symphony - possibly the saddest piece of music I've ever heard), and from the more modern era, Gorecki and Part. Current favourite if the Piano Quintet by Schnittke, which is incredible in its creation of a sense of foreboding. I think Knowing You would like it, from what I've seen of his music taste.

Anyway, probably no one will read this or give a shit and I don't intend to make a regular habit of posting here (the Strokes haven't been high on my list of favourite bands since FIOE was released, really) but it's kinda nostalgic. I wonder if any of the other oldies were tempted to join up again...

:idea:

You should have seen the shit that went down in the folk music thread! Talk about vitriol!

if this is what Classical music forums are like then i'm so glad that i'm not into that shit lol.

[quote="Rick3001"]That was killer !

You can always tell what's really good music by how it sounds unplugged or on piano.

Which leads to my next question - Have the Strokes ever played unplugged, an acoustic set ? That would be interesting as shit to hear. When Nirvana did that, it was amazing - totally changed how their songs felt.[/quote]

Plus it was played by an asian.

I can see Jules taking up Danny Elfman's throne (which are some big shoes to fill) but I definitely can not see the strokes playing an acoustic set. They can do soft stuff with E-L-E-C-T-R-I-C-I-T-Y

I'm done with you. Have fun needlessly mocking other people who have valid opinions and who are privy to Strokes gossip.

Yeah.. you also said you would make a video if ONLY yoiu had a webcam.. but they don't exist where you live.

Then I bring up digital still cameras and those don't exist either apparently.. haha

You are obviously a man of your word.. :lol:

[quote="Max Fischer"]So you don't know anyone with a digital still camera?

That's what you expect us to belive? And you are the 6th Beatle too.. right? That's another claim of yours. :lol:

Whatever man.. I have seen some people desperate for attention but you take the cake..[/quote]

no, I honestly don't know anyone who owns a digital camera, or at least no one who would let me borrow it. so what?

Why are you deliberately misunderstanding the things I have said. I never claimed to be the sixth Beatle. I said that someone who worked with John Lennon 30 years ago told me I was talented when I took his courses 3 years ago.

[quote="Max Fischer"][quote="knowing you"]In that thread where you asked for help on how to start making music, he simply suggested it would be a good idea to learn some musical theory...scales, chord progressions etc. and he's right.[/quote]

Now you are speaking for him again.. LOL

No.. he didn't suggest. He insisted. And then said if you didn't take lessons you would make crap...

Your post above completely contradicts his claim.

Thanks again! Well done![/quote]

I never said that. You just want to be argumentative. I said that you may be good without lessons, but if you're good without lessons, you'll be even better if you receive some training. there is no one who's ever been properly trained who was worse off for having learned about music from more experienced musicians.

This is all very entertaining.

So you don't know anyone with a digital still camera?

That's what you expect us to believe? And you are the 6th Beatle too.. right? That's another claim of yours. :lol:

Whatever man.. I have seen some people desperate for attention but you take the cake..

I don't have a webcam, and I don't own a digital camera. It is possible to get by in today's society without photographing yourself, you know. Not only have you twisted intelligent people's logic into gibberish because you're to simple to understand it, but you've succeeded in making sure that smart, connected people no longer want to talk to you. I could tell you about where Albert will be next week and what he will have done at that event, but instead I'll just tell the people who ask me directly.

So if anyone who's trudged through this thread wants to know, send me a PM next Wednesday.

[quote="knowing you"]In that thread where you asked for help on how to start making music, he simply suggested it would be a good idea to learn some musical theory...scales, chord progressions etc. and he's right.[/quote]

Now you are speaking for him again.. LOL

No.. he didn't suggest. He insisted. And then said if you didn't take lessons you would make crap...

Your post above completely contradicts his claim.

Thanks again! Well done!

In that thread where you asked for help on how to start making music, he simply suggested it would be a good idea to learn some musical theory...scales, chord progressions etc. and he's right.

[quote="knowing you"][quote="Max Fischer"][quote="knowing you"]Max that doesn't imply that education = musicianship. It just alludes to the [u]nature[/u] of [i]Classical music[/i] as I see it. It strives for perfection.

Your inability to understand the simplest concepts is baffling.[/quote]

Answer the question.[/quote]

Can you be technically perfect without training? No you can't. That's just a fact.

Does that mean that the quality of your education is proportional to your musical ability? Absolutely not.

Does that mean that the quality of your [i]musical[/i] education is proportional to your musical ability? Maybe if you ever intend on being a concert soloist. If you just wanna make rock music with a guitar it's not necessary but it certainly doesn't hurt to have some musical theory. It's up to you.

Look at a band like Radiohead. Thom Yorke can't read a single note of music yet is one of the best songwriters of his generation. Jonny Greenwood is a musical prodigy, multi-instrumentalist and in-house composer for the BBC. He scores all the string arrangements for Radioheads songs and really should have won an Oscar for his score for [i]There Will Be Blood[/i]. Guess what? The guy is classically trained.[/quote]

So you DO agree with me and disagree with Celtic Thunder.

Thanks. I'm glad to hear that. I'm glad we cleared that up.

"I don't have access to a webcam"

So use a digital still camera..

"errrr... I don't want to do it. You're an idiot!"

LMFAO

I don't need to point out where you're wrong, and you've just proven to everyone who's read this that you're an idiot. Have fun with that.

[quote="Max Fischer"][quote="knowing you"]Max that doesn't imply that education = musicianship. It just alludes to the [u]nature[/u] of [i]Classical music[/i] as I see it. It strives for perfection.

Your inability to understand the simplest concepts is baffling.[/quote]

Answer the question.[/quote]

Can you be technically perfect without training? No you can't. That's just a fact.

Does that mean that the quality of your education is proportional to your musical ability? Absolutely not.

Does that mean that the quality of your [i]musical[/i] education is proportional to your musical ability? Maybe if you ever intend on being a concert soloist. If you just wanna make rock music with a guitar it's not necessary but it certainly doesn't hurt to have some musical theory. It's up to you.

Look at a band like Radiohead. Thom Yorke can't read a single note of music yet is one of the best songwriters of his generation. Jonny Greenwood is a musical prodigy, multi-instrumentalist and in-house composer for the BBC. He scores all the string arrangements for Radioheads songs and really should have won an Oscar for his score for [i]There Will Be Blood[/i]. Guess what? The guy is classically trained.

hahahahaha

Ohh.. so now you have changed your story. Before you wouldn't do it because you didn't have a webcam.. now it's just because you don't want to.

I am sure everyone here would love to hear 12:51 done RIGHT on Piano.. or any other Stroke song.

You said you want to help us all learn about music.. apparently that's your goal here on the board. So put your money where your mouth WAS. hahahaha

I don't live on campus. I am at home in my apartment and I don't own a digital camera. But since I don't have access to a camera, you will of course assume that I don't have any musical ability, since one always correlates to the other. You're demanding that I go to a lot of trouble to make a video just for you, but you won't tell me how old you are.

[quote="knowing you"]Max that doesn't imply that education = musicianship. It just alludes to the [u]nature[/u] of [i]Classical music[/i] as I see it. It strives for perfection.

Your inability to understand the simplest concepts is baffling.[/quote]

Answer the question.

Cletic Thunder.. you can record movies using MOST digital still cameras. Borrrow a still camera from someone, if you don't have one, and record yourself with that.

Worst case scenario you might have to take several little clips.. but that's perfect for Youtube anyway.

Problem solved. I'll be waiting... :lol:

I'm sorry, but knowing you and I are not the same person. Check the IP addresses if you'd like. I'm an American. What use would a university have for webcams? The film department uses real film of high quality. I don't have a digital camera. It's possible to be modern without owning every last bit of expensive technology. Does every single one of your friends own a web cam? I honestly don't know anyone who has one because they're not very useful to adults. The libraries have nice, new computers, so most students, especially the ones who come here from far away, don't bring computers with them. You don't have to be poor to not have your own computer as a teenager or young adult. If you have a computer with a webcam, it's because your parents bought it for you. Many well-off families just have one computer that everyone uses, and it's not as if the kid who's going to college can take it with him. That's just logical. Besides, there aren't computers in the vicinity of the music bulding anyway. Why would practice rooms need computers in them?

Max that doesn't imply that education = musicianship. It just alludes to the [u]nature[/u] of [i]Classical music[/i] as I see it. It strives for perfection.

Your inability to understand the simplest concepts is baffling.

[quote]Classical music is about being technically perfect though[/quote]

Are you saying you can be technically perfect without being trained by a professional?

No I didn't. If you think I did then please find it and quote it.

Ask yourself. You said it.

Please find where anyone said quality of education determines a musicians ability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_College_Cork

Wow.. everything is being exposed today.. Knowing You and Celtic Thunder ARE one and the same.. I am convinced now. They are arguing as if they are one person..

If you go to a school where they don't have webcams on campus or where the students don't have webcams you must be going to a very poor school..

Now I would have no problem with that.. but Your Very Own Arguemnt is that the quality of education determines a musicians ability. You clearly aren't qualified to be critiquing music if you are going to such a lackluster college... according to you at least.

You can even record movies with digital still cameras... the fact that you act like it is impossible to make a little movie showing you playing piano proves how full of baloney YOU BOTH are coincidentally.

This is hilarious.. I have never seen such insanity..

I guess they don't have digital cameras of any kind in all of Ireland.. hahahahaha

Theres that wonderful inference of yours working overtime again!

what use would a college have for webcams? I go to one of the best universities and Ireland and there's not a single webcam with any of the hundreds of computers there.

This farce is reaching pantomime levels.

hahahah You've been exposed.. what kind of school are you going to where they don't have webcams? Or other students don't have laptops or computers?

You must not be getting a very high quality education.. so what makes you qualified to be commenting on someone elses technique or skills? You say education is so important to making music and you are going to somekind of trade school apparently.. from the 50's where they don't have computers.

hahahahahha

This is entertaining. Keep digging dude.

That is completely asinine. And no, I don't know anyone who has a webcam. Most people don't have webcams. Most people don't even have their own computers on campus; they just use the ones in the libraries. Do you expect me to find a computer and a webcam and bring them into the music building and tape me playing something just to prove to you that I'm not lying? I don't care about your opinion that much. Or at all really. I'd really like to know how old you are. You don't seem to have a realistic grasp of how to converse with adults even if you don't agree with what they're saying.

Oh.. so you are in school.. you should have access to a webcam then.. either at your school OR from someone you know. Surely one of these musicians at your school has a webcam.. or has access to one..

Why am I a douchebag just because I happened to attend a university that had experienced musicians on staff? It means I went to a good school. Why are you throwing out random insults? I'm not high, and even if I were, it wouldn't have any effect on the faculty appointments at my school. Not being able to afford a webcam has nothing to do with my musicianship. Do you think that you need a webcam in order to get good at music? Julian probably doesn't have one. I'm on a message board for the same reason you are: I love the Strokes. As a student, my income is severely limited. You're calling me pathetic for posting on a forum that you also frequent.

[quote]I was taught and praised by John Lennon's producer.[/quote]

hahahahaha It's official. You are the king of the douchebags. So if you are so talented why are you hanging out trolling on bands messageboards? LOL

Are you high? That can be the only explanation for this kind of madness..

[quote]Do you like the Beatles?[/quote]

NO I don't actually. They ended up being pretentious snobs with too high an opinion of themselves just like you.

[quote]Do you respect the people who worked with them and helped create their music as a band and as solo artists? I know a lot about popular and art music, and I don't mind sharing that information with other people.[/quote]

So why don't you go buy a webcam.. and do the Strokes song properly? Surely if you are so talented you can afford a cheap webcam..

[quote]I don't know why you seem to think I'm a lying, talentless, stupid, terrified troll just because I can't afford a webcam.[/quote]

Yup.. it's official.. you are full of baloney..

Hey man.. if you wanted some attention there was no need to go through all this trolling.. Just let me know next time and I'll have a chat with you.

I never said you had to be a music expert to make good music. I said that it helps to take lessons and educate yourself properly. You're being incredibly judgmental, and you're assuming that I'm lying because you don't like what I have to say. You think a song is great. Okay. I don't like it, and I stated my reasons for not liking it. I presented a well-reasoned statement, and even attempted to share some musical knowledge and history with you, and you blasted me because I dared to negatively critique something that's associated with the Strokes. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I was taught and praised by John Lennon's producer. Do you like the Beatles? Do you respect the people who worked with them and helped create their music as a band and as solo artists? I know a lot about popular and art music, and I don't mind sharing that information with other people. I don't know why you seem to think I'm a lying, talentless, stupid, terrified troll just because I can't afford a webcam. As Knowing You has already said, you don't have to be a chef to tell steak from burgers.

Max, for some reason you have decided that your opinion is more valid than anyone else's. It's the internet. Get over it.

[quote]You do yourself no favours with stuff like this. He could be an amazing musician. He could be fucking awful. You don't know. And really, it doesn't matter. You don't need to be a great author to know if a book is good or bad. [/quote]

That's precisely what he is saying! He is saying that to make good music you have to be an expert.. which is not only ridiculous.. but at least if you are going to take that stance then you better show you are an expert.. if not then you are going to get bashed for it.

[quote]You don't need to be a great soccer player to know if a team is playing shit. And likewise, you don't need to be a musical genius to criticize a song.[/quote]

Tell celtic that.. not me.. and ourself for that matter.. you were making the same point yourself earlier..

[quote]The guy isn't 'trolling', he's expressing an opinion. He's totally allowed to do that without you dismissing it.[/quote]

You can do both at the same time.. which he is.. If all you bring to the table is negativity and smart ass remarks you are a troll. Bottomline. And that is all I hear from Celtic Thunder. At least in my threads.

[quote="Max Fischer"]At least if he doesn't want to be viewed as a talentless, pompous blowhard. Which we all know he is.[/quote]

You do yourself no favours with stuff like this. He could be an amazing musician. He could be fucking awful. You don't know. And really, it doesn't matter. You don't need to be a great author to know if a book is good or bad. You don't need to be a great soccer player to know if a team is playing shit. And likewise, you don't need to be a musical genius to criticize a song.

The guy isn't 'trolling', he's expressing an opinion. He's totally allowed to do that without you dismissing it.

Not true.... If someone disagrees with me I don't attack them. I attack people who are clearly trolling or being jerks. That's Celtic Thunder. Who once again is trolling ina thread I started...

If you are going to back him up, then you are putting yourself in a position to take a hit, too.

Bottom line.. if Cletic Thunder is goign to criticize other musicians for techincal reasons then he at the very least needs to post something of his that is better. At least if he doesn't want to be viewed as a talentless, pompous blowhard. Which we all know he is.

Max I don't see how can infer all this shit based on what's been said so far.

Celtic Thunder has, I think, cleared things up pretty nicely. The fact that he isn't posting any of his music means nothing. How can you say that it implies he's talentless/paralysed with fear or knows nothing about music? I don't understand how your mind works. You seem to enjoy attacking peoples personalities and character despite not knowing a thing about them. If anyone disagrees with you in an argument, you get personal and go for the jugular. There's no need to get so defensive. Lots of people are going to have different opinions to you and if you act like this every time it happens then I dunno how you'll have much friends.

You pm'd me after i kinda agreed with you in another thread when you were having a different argument. I dunno why, maybe you were just looking for some sort of confirmation. But then as soon as I disagree with you, I'm the enemy. Everyone who agrees with you is the hero, and everone else is the enemy. It's not that simple.

LOL at you claiming I have an ego.. while you trash someone else for making music when you do nothing but trash them... are you just crazy or stupid on top of it?

[quote]I don't have to justify my knowledge and abilities to anyone[/quote]

If you are going to go around trashing people who actually do soemthing you do.. otherwise I, and probably others, will assume you are full of BS. Which seems obvious. It also seems obbvious you are desperate for attention buyy playing these little reindeer game sin the first place.

If you were really a musician.. and with your obvious desperateness for attention, you would simply make music to get attention rather than playing your reindeer games..

The fact you don't proves that either you know nothing about music.. or you are talentless and so paralyzed by fear trying to make perfect music that adheres to these rules you are always talking about, that you are unable to make any music.

Either way you are screwed...

The fact you can't or won't get a webcam says it all. You've been exposed.

During the Classical period (1750-c.1850), form was emphasized. Neo-Classical composers use the same techniques that were used during the original Classical era. Just like how "Transcendentalist" can refer to either the original Transcendentalist movement and the people who participated in it, or work that is written today in the same style. "Classical" is a word that's mistakenly thrown around a lot which is why this is hard to understand. Everything you consider classical is really art music. Classical music is only one style within that, and it has its own rules and originates from a specific time period.

I don't have to justify my knowledge and abilities to anyone. In any case, I don't have a webcam (and therefore cannot post youtube videos), and I don't have a program that allows me to transcribe my sheet music in a computer file to post here (not that you would be able to read/understand it anyway). It's pathetic that you're letting your ego keep you from taking me seriously. I know what I'm talking about.

Nah, KnowingYou is right, much as I hate to admit it.

Classical music used to be the main form of music a few hundred years ago but it was replaced by "folk music", jazz, and the blues; which in the post-modern age somehow all meshed together in a crazy amalgam as "rock" or "pop" music.

A major difference between the two is that "classical" or art music or whatever you want to call it when you have a big ass orchestra, is almost always scored note for note according to fixed scales. Rock and jazz are more free-flowing and don't abide by conventional scales. That's what this dude did w/ 12:51. He [i]interpreted[/i] it, not [i]regurgitated[/i] it.

All the other shit aside, that's what's cool about the Strokes, they're not some dumbass rock band just playing power chords. There's intelligence behind the arrangements. And weed too, most likely.

Are Celtic and KnowingYou one and the same?

It's hard to believe 2 seperate people could be such snobs and so condescending with nothing to show for their supposed musical genius..

Just a couple tools who think they are too cool to be Stroke fanboys so they trash them to try to make themselves look cool.

Wow, you really cleared up the classical music debate Celtic Thunder...oh wait, no you didn't. If classical music refers to time period over two centuries ago, then how could it be alive and well today? If it is alive and well today, what is it? That's all i'm asking, i don't know why you suddenly went off on musical composition.....but whatever....

Celtic is all TELL no SHOW...

He/she/it is always talking about how much sheit knows about music and not showing anything sheits done...

I wonder why that is? LOL

Like saying this person didn't play 12:51 right and then being unable to do it...

While this persons rendition may be imperfect.. at least they did SOMETHING..

[quote="knowing you"]Look, the thing about classical music is that it's not easy to define specifically. It's a pretty broad term. You could probably define it as music written to be performed by an orchestra. But like I said, I don't really want to argue over the meaning of a word. Basically, I just think that classical music is alive and well; the only thing that's changed is the medium. Back in Mozarts time he was scoring operas. Now composers are scoring films.[/quote]

These kids are just brats who want to become good at music by cutting corners; Max stated in this thread that he's trying to learn piano without learning how to read staff notation first. People who've had music training have been exposed to techniques and aspects of theory that other people haven't. Unless you're Bach (who pretty much invented scales as we know them today) or Beethoven, you can't compose by ear/in your head. Complex harmonies must be worked out on paper because music is one of those cool things where the better it looks on paper, the better it will sound.

I know what you're trying to say, and I know that you're right. "Classical" refers to the music composed between 1750 and around 1850. What most people call "classical music" is referred to as "art music" in academia. "Neo-classical" is a contemporary genre of art music.

Don't worry. Max was asking for advice on how to write songs and he decided I was a moron for suggesting that he learn how to play an instrument first. What Max doesn't realize is that several people who post here know the Strokes and/or the people they know and that those people are very impressed by what the people who post here are learning in their PhD-level music courses and utilizing in their own compositions.

Just saying.

[quote="knowing you"]Look, the thing about classical music is that it's not easy to define specifically. It's a pretty broad term. You could probably define it as music written to be performed by an orchestra. But like I said, I don't really want to argue over the meaning of a word. Basically, I just think that classical music is alive and well; the only thing that's changed is the medium. Back in Mozarts time he was scoring operas. Now composers are scoring films.[/quote]

HAHAHA!!!.....I knew it...you don't know what classical music even is for sure, and yet you're aruing that it is alive and well...HAHAHAH...I love it....another typical argument from knowing you....

Stick to what you know! Yeah!?!?!

Look, the thing about classical music is that it's not easy to define specifically. It's a pretty broad term. You could probably define it as music written to be performed by an orchestra. But like I said, I don't really want to argue over the meaning of a word. Basically, I just think that classical music is alive and well; the only thing that's changed is the medium. Back in Mozarts time he was scoring operas. Now composers are scoring films.