I like to imagine by own rather than a robot thinks for me😊

@@adilivni8688 I don't mean artificial intelligence, I mean using the tools we have for audio engineering today...

@@CoreyandtheFigs i like technology but in music i am old fashion😎 and i am 31 years old.

They are the editor's dynamic markings.

It isn’t!

BTW, It's not Ligeti, it's Kurtag.

So I guess you must like this work, as it is not a twelve tone work ?

@@arielorthmann4061um well then my teacher was wrong to make us analyze this for a twelve tone project. Either way, what you said is a fallacy. I never said I ONLY dislike twelve tone. And i didnt even say i disliked it. I said its awful because i do believe it is objectively an awful genre of music. And anyway, this piece if not twelve tone is atonal and atonal music I would argue is not even music

@@jannettowers6731 either you misunderstood your teacher or they should be out of a job, since these pieces are very much not twelve-tone and cannot be analyzed as such. though i’m curious to see how you ended up analyzing it

@@sebastianwang670 Ya I agree he should be fired for making us go through twelve tone in the first place XD but he's a good guy, so I don't know if I'd actually want him to be fired. I would rather have a change in curriculum where we study actually good and learn how to become good composers instead of twelve tone analyzers. Maybe this piece is set theory, not twelve tone, but it's still awful

@@sebastianwang670 I didn't say I hate it (although I do) I'm saying it's awful music. I do actually believe there is objectivity in art. There is good art and bad art. It's not all subjective. It's not all a matter of taste. There are aspects of art that may be a matter of taste, but even those who are uneducated in music can tell that heavy metal is not objectively as good as Bach or Mozart. That doesn't mean it's necessarily bad to listen to lesser music, similar to how we can still eat fries even if they aren't as healthy as salads. But salads are still objectively better for consuming than fries. How open-minded do I need to be? That is, how many times do I have to listen to this to finally make a good judgment? There's a benefit to being somewhat open minded but a disadvantage to being COMPLETELY open minded about EVERYTHING. As Chesterton said, "the whole point of being open-minded is to find something to close your mind around" namely, the truth. But I could say that about literally anything. Serial killers find appreciation in killing people. Drug addicts find pleasure in drugs. Alcoholics find pleasure in drinking way too much alcohol. That doesn't mean I have to be open minded to being a serial killer or drug addict or alcoholic. You may think it's unfair to compare art and morality, but I believe that the art we consume, both visually and audibly, can have effects on our moral character. Music has a physical, spiritual, intellectual and emotional effect on humans. Heavy metal, especially satanist rock, damages the spiritual aspect of the human. Shallow pop music does not feed the intellectual part of the human soul. This kind of music definitely is lacking in appealing to the spiritual, emotional and arguably physical parts of the soul in a healthy way. It may be intellectual and people who are more intellectual may appreciate it more than Moonlight Sonata or more emotional music, but that doesn't mean it's objectively good music. This music sounds like it was written by a computer, not a human with a soul. I also don't believe that just because an artist makes something original or different automatically makes it good art. Sorry for the rant.

well you’re more than welcome to go and listen to all the Beethoven you want

@@sebastianwang670No, no, there’s a point. Much of Beethoven is ugly, and there’s a reason it appeals to us as humans.

Just pretend to like it like everyone else

Listen to the last minute of Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 and you'll understand this piece. Just tell me if you want a more in depth explanation.

kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHKaaJWYgpKYfZo Maybe this can help

This stuff is very abstract. Start with something easier. Listen to Schoenberg for a couple weeks and you'll get used to it.

It's refreshing that you have such an open mind to music that feels distant from you. I think that the ability to start to connect with this music is that open mind. I could try to go into how I "understand" this music, but I'm not sure that such an explanation would actually help anyone else to appreciate it. I would just say: keep listening (attentively, not as "background" music) and keep your mind open, and it will begin to click.

@Samu390 yeah, but it’s 70% atonal. I think this second viennese school stuff is not pleasant to the ears.

Corrected comment: I'm sorry but this atonal stuff is bull shit to me. There is nothing beautiful about this to me. To me it's like throwing paint at a canvas and calling it art. Or even better: I don't enjoy pantonal music. I don't find satisfaction in it. It reminds me of paintings in which I can only see randomness. Edit: Yeah, but it's 70% atonal. I think this Second Viennese School stuff is not pleasant to my ears.

The soldier responsible for his death was U.S. Army cook PFC Raymond Norwood Bell of North Carolina, who was overcome by remorse and died of alcoholism in 1955. - Also from Wikipedia. Fascinating. I didn't know anything about Webern's life.

Way too momentary. There are far more intriguing examples in his contemporaries. See the Talkclassical discussion "Instances of Academics Not Being Reliable (Regarding Music History and Other Things)."

к сожалению, это недостаточно выделено и осмыслено музыкантами, поэтому воспринимается, как ошибка.