# Secular Music



## Rufus

I recently made a thread about whether or not movies are sinful, and now I'm doing the same with secular music. I do not believe it is, and that it is a matter of Christian liberty, obviously idolizing the music/artists and certain songs/bands/etc. should be avoided but not the gift of music entirely. What was the Puritan position on secular music? What about the Reformers or other significant Christian figures?

And how do you individually look at music? I used to be a fan of extreme metal (black, death, doom, and thrash metal) before and for a short time after my conversion, I don't view it as particularly sinful to listen to some heavy metal groups but I still prefer not to. At the same time I'm still a gigantic fan of The Clash a punk band which could be criticized as being anti-authoritarian or too socialist, etc. however I've found that they are cleaner than most music that is popularly listened too.


----------



## Jack K

"Secular" music is not inherently evil, although particular songs might be.

But it is highly reflective of the culture, which glorifies sin in several ways, and it is captivating. So we ought to be very careful and discerning when we invite it into our holy homes, holy cars and holy ears. A good test is to remember that we are sanctified. Holy. God dwelling in us. Then ask ourselves if the music we're piping into our ears is fitting for such a holy vessel.


----------



## Somerset

I think classical music is fine, as long as one doesn't spend too much time and money on it. A lot of country has a strong moral aspect, though violence and casual sex seems to be more prevalent amongst modern performers - I tend to listen to Hank, Owens and others of an older era. Old rock and roll is also generally OK. I am very wary of any type of modern rock, of all genres. The area I struggle with is PUL community music - all too easy to find myself singing along to a paramilitary song on one of the PUL radio sites.


----------



## PaulCLawton

It's considered a sin in my household to dislike Bob Dylan, though I'm willing to submit to correction on that point...


----------



## Kim G

I think it's subjective and depends on the person. I have no problem listening to popular secular music as long as the lyrics are decent. I refuse to listen to songs that glorify those things that the Bible condemns. For example, I don't mind when Katy Perry's song "Firework" comes on the radio station. The message is decent. But I wouldn't listen to most of her other songs because they're antithetical to Christian living. And if a song's style makes me feel uncomfortable, I don't listen to it, but I don't care if anyone else does, because it's not a Bible issue.


----------



## Edward

Somerset said:


> PUL community music



OK, I knew what the "Orange Order" was on the other thread, but what is PUL community music?

---------- Post added at 04:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:37 PM ----------




Somerset said:


> Old rock and roll is also generally OK



I usually opt for 'Oldies' on the car radio, but some of the lyrics from my youth are as bad as the bulk of the current rock. (Leaving out rap, of course, the bulk of which has NO redeeming social characteristics.


----------



## Somerset

PUL music is music specific to the "Protestant, Unionist and Loyalist" community over here. There are several strands: traditional folk songs; songs about the battle of the Boyne; songs about the Ulster Division at the Somme - I think these are all fine. But there are also a lot of songs about Glasgow Rangers football club and anti IRA stuff (often anti RC and with swearing) and songs about the UDA and UVF paramilitaries - these vary, though many do glorify violence.


----------



## John Bunyan

I would say most secular musics are silly love/betrayal songs or some kind of gangsta-lust-loving-anthem, but some are really cool and somewhat neutral.

To avoid any objectionable content you should just listen to orchestral music like Mozart, Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Pachelbel, Handel or modern movie soundtrack's (The Gael, all of Hans Zimmer's stuff, etc), or old songs, or some random songs you can find in youtube (even Lady Gaga must have some redeemable song).


----------



## Rufus

John Bunyan said:


> I would say most secular musics are silly love/betrayal songs or some kind of gangsta-lust-loving-anthem, but some are really cool and somewhat neutral.
> 
> To avoid any objectionable content you should just listen to orchestral music like Mozart, Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Pachelbel, Handel or modern movie soundtrack's (The Gael, all of Hans Zimmer's stuff, etc), or old songs, or some random songs you can find in youtube (even Lady Gaga must have some redeemable song).



I don't listen to popular secular music (i.e. the majority of those silly love songs/thug songs,etc.), so Lady Gaga is out and has been out.


----------



## Rich Koster

John Bunyan said:


> I would say most secular musics are silly love/betrayal songs or some kind of gangsta-lust-loving-anthem, but some are really cool and somewhat neutral.
> 
> To avoid any objectionable content you should just listen to orchestral music like Mozart, Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Pachelbel, Handel or modern movie soundtrack's (The Gael, all of Hans Zimmer's stuff, etc), or old songs, or some random songs you can find in youtube (even Lady Gaga must have some redeemable song).



Some of Rick Wakeman's instrumental efforts are an enjoyable mix of classical, rock and hymns. I often play them.


----------



## kvanlaan

I opted for country because it was the cleanest out there without purchasing music (the most popular country station here is run out of a community of Mennonites and so there is rarely anything more than 'oh my gosh' said on the morning program). That being said, there are still an alarming number of songs that I have to turn down because they glorify ungodly things, and it seems there are more and more of them all the time.


----------



## O'GodHowGreatThouArt

It's more of conscience than outright sin (unless of course, you listen to an artist encouraging sin). In my case, I'll only stick with biblical Christian music because of the nature of most secular songs. I've gotten the classical music suggestion before (and many people consider me to be that type). The problem with that is twofold.

1) It's a massive (while relatively unknown) influence of one of my favorite (former) music genres, which I will not articulate here.
2) I simply cannot stand music that doesn't glorify God in praise. Classical music, while being music, does not do that because there is no words to praise with. I've had too many tangos with secular music, so I've simply "elected" to completely isolate myself from it.

So in my case, due to my past, it's a grievous sin to step outside the biblical realm unnecessarily (brother is a music major, so I do make exceptions for that).


----------



## timmopussycat

John Bunyan said:


> I would say most secular musics are silly love/betrayal songs or some kind of gangsta-lust-loving-anthem, but some are really cool and somewhat neutral . . . (even Lady Gaga must have some redeemable song).



She does, hear Fugue on a Theme by Lady Gaga - YouTube

---------- Post added at 08:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 PM ----------




John Bunyan said:


> To avoid any objectionable content you should just listen to orchestral music like Mozart, Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, Pachelbel, Handel.



And don't forget Bach, Brahms, Bruch, Haydn, Schumann, Dvorak, Mendelssohn, Shostakovich, Vaughn Williams, Tallis, Elgar and Holst. Not to mention chamber music by the aforesaid.


----------



## Philip

O'GodHowGreatThouArt said:


> I simply cannot stand music that doesn't glorify God in praise. Classical music, while being music, does not do that because there is no words to praise with.



Bach's Cantatas? Handel's _Messiah_? There's a vast world of classical church music out there (granted, much of it is in Latin or German).


----------



## John Bunyan

P. F. Pugh said:


> O'GodHowGreatThouArt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I simply cannot stand music that doesn't glorify God in praise. Classical music, while being music, does not do that because there is no words to praise with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bach's Cantatas? Handel's _Messiah_? There's a vast world of classical church music out there (granted, much of it is in Latin or German).
Click to expand...


Dies Irae has a particularly christian theme - the day of judgment.


----------



## Rufus

John Bunyan said:


> P. F. Pugh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> O'GodHowGreatThouArt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I simply cannot stand music that doesn't glorify God in praise. Classical music, while being music, does not do that because there is no words to praise with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bach's Cantatas? Handel's _Messiah_? There's a vast world of classical church music out there (granted, much of it is in Latin or German).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dies Irae has a particularly christian theme - the day of judgment.
Click to expand...


Dies Irae the Gregorian Chant?


----------



## John Bunyan

Rufus said:


> John Bunyan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P. F. Pugh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> O'GodHowGreatThouArt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I simply cannot stand music that doesn't glorify God in praise. Classical music, while being music, does not do that because there is no words to praise with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bach's Cantatas? Handel's _Messiah_? There's a vast world of classical church music out there (granted, much of it is in Latin or German).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dies Irae has a particularly christian theme - the day of judgment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dies Irae the Gregorian Chant?
Click to expand...


And Mozart's... ah... "remix" too.


----------



## Phil D.

O'GodHowGreatThouArt said:


> I simply cannot stand music that doesn't glorify God in praise. Classical music, while being music, does not do that because there is no words to praise with.



Johann Sebastian Bach inscribed the letters "SDG" ("Soli Deo Gloria") on all of his religious musical manuscripts, as well as many of his secular ones. 

There are also a number of credible testimonies of Bach's music being the instrument through which people began a conversion to Christianity. I recall one musical scholar who was so struck by the "mathematical" perfection of some of Bach's compositions, taken in connection with the prominant attribution of "SDG", that it became the catalyst through which the Holy Spirit began to first awaken him to the gospel of Christ. 

I would never go so far as to say Bach's music was directly Inspired, but I do think it is marvelously inspirational.  His _Jesus, Joy of Man's Desiring_ is one of my favorite songs of all time.


----------



## Philip

I'm partial to BWV 80 "Ein Feste Burg ist Unser Gott" (_A Mighty Fortress is Our God_") by Bach. I also enjoy choral settings of the Latin Mass (the sung sections are theologically unproblematic, unlike those of a requiem mass).


----------



## Constantlyreforming

wow, this thread did NOT go the direction I was thinking it would.


----------



## Peairtach

All _good_ things, both secular and sacred are given by God

Piping In The Square: SFU Pipe Band Pachelbel's Canon - YouTube

Simon Fraser University - Scotland Practice - Tom McAllister - YouTube


----------



## O'GodHowGreatThouArt

Constantlyreforming said:


> wow, this thread did NOT go the direction I was thinking it would.



That would be my fault. Sorry.


----------



## jwithnell

I don't have a problem with the different forms of music, but I sure do object to some of the content. I also have not-great associations with some music from the 1970s (read non-Christian days) so I rarely listen to it. Many years ago, I recall reading a biography about a woman who quit singing opera, though she had been commercially successful, because she believed so many of the story lines conflicted with her Christian world view. 

Classical, swing, American "roots" music, a little blues and a smattering of blues-influenced rock make up my playlists.


----------



## Rich Koster

Constantlyreforming said:


> wow, this thread did NOT go the direction I was thinking it would.



I could put up a YouTube of the Ramones to divert some of the flow


----------



## Rufus

Rich Koster said:


> Constantlyreforming said:
> 
> 
> 
> wow, this thread did NOT go the direction I was thinking it would.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could put up a YouTube of the Ramones to divert some of the flow
Click to expand...


Best Ramones song (In my humble opinion):

[video=youtube;uCBZ6NSfVhY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCBZ6NSfVhY[/video]


----------



## Rich Koster

Me and my big mouth .


----------



## Rufus

Rich Koster said:


> Me and my big mouth .



Do you not like The Ramones?


----------



## Rich Koster

I find them amusing, but some of their lyrics are one phone call short of a strait jacket.


----------



## RobertPGH1981

I like a lot of different types of music Secular and Christian. 

I can say that depending on the music it can change my mood for the good or bad. I usually listen to music when I workout, and like listening to hard metal, House (Form of Techno) or Rap. I can say that when I listen to Christian music it doesn't seem to effect me in negative ways. However, some of the songs I hear on the radio (Positive encouraging K-love.) that are Christian, could be sung to your wife (or husband depending on who you are) and the lyrics would work in a worldly sense. 

My Favorite Band: Journey


----------



## Bill The Baptist

While some secular songs have lyrics that are clearly evil,I do not think it is wrong to listen to secular music as long as it has its proper place and does not become an idol. Anyone who has ever been to a Christian concert can attest to the fact that even so-called "Christian" music can become an idol to many people.


----------



## Tripel

O'GodHowGreatThouArt said:


> I simply cannot stand music that doesn't glorify God in praise. Classical music, while being music, does not do that because there is no words to praise with.



Good, beautiful, true, and creative music is glorifying to God regardless of the presence of words.


----------



## Constantlyreforming

I am a big fan of The Shins. They have a new album coming out soon, and here's a song from it.

It's quite good music.

http://vimeo.com/36263084


----------



## Tripel

I view music as being either _bad_ or _good_. I listen to _good_ music, and that includes a wide variety of genres. Jazz, classical, rock, and various alternative styles are mostly what I enjoy. I definitely don't listen to country and rap, but that is purely due to preference and not some moral position.

From my experience, "secular" music offers many more good and beautiful options. Yes, there are some good "Christian" examples, but I find them few and far between. Christians used to be at the forefront of musical creativity, but for the past several decades they have worked in a subset of popular music (and popular culture) that attempts to copy what the "secular" world creates and add a splash of Jesus. It's the opposite of creativity and beauty, and Christian music has gotten a deservedly bad rap because of it. We need fewer people making "Christian" music, and more Christians making _good_ music.

And there's no need for any of you to point out such-and-such Christian artist who is the real deal. I'm not denying such exists, but rather arguing that they are in the vast minority. I think it is slowly changing, and I hope it continues.


----------



## Constantlyreforming

Tripel said:


> I view music as being either _bad_ or _good_. I listen to _good_ music, and that includes a wide variety of genres. Jazz, classical, rock, and various alternative styles are mostly what I enjoy. I definitely don't listen to country and rap, but that is purely due to preference and not some moral position.
> 
> From my experience, "secular" music offers many more good and beautiful options. Yes, there are some good "Christian" examples, but I find them few and far between. Christians used to be at the forefront of musical creativity, but for the past several decades they have worked in a subset of popular music (and popular culture) that attempts to copy what the "secular" world creates and add a splash of Jesus. It's the opposite of creativity and beauty, and Christian music has gotten a deservedly bad rap because of it. We need fewer people making "Christian" music, and more Christians making _good_ music.
> 
> And there's no need for any of you to point out such-and-such Christian artist who is the real deal. I'm not denying such exists, but rather arguing that they are in the vast minority. I think it is slowly changing, and I hope it continues.




YES, I could not agree with you more.

about everything. including the country music.


----------



## Alan D. Strange

Sean:

There's been a bit of confusion here it seems to me. You asked about secular music. Handel's _Rinaldo_, an opera, would be such. Handel's _Messiah_, an oratorio, would not be classed with his secular music but with his sacred music. BTW, in thinking of an earlier thread, oratorios were originally composed for the Lenten season, it not being thought appropriate to go to the opera during Lent.

So those urging either "classical" or "no classical"--generally a stand-in for "serious" music, or some like term--might cause some confusion. What is called classical covers both sacred and secular music. There is a great deal of sacred "classical music." I would urge you to check out both the sacred and secular of this vast spread on the musical landscape. 

Given the time period covered by the term "classical", which, again, is serious Western music of the last five hundred years or more (depending on how far back you go in terms of medieval and Renaissance music), there's so much here that everyone should find something to like. It is a great impoverishment, in my view, to fail to avail oneself of the great treasure trove that we enjoy in the Western world. Give it a sample; surely you'll find something that suits your fancy. Tim C., I can't believe that as a trombonist you did not mention Wagner, Bruckner, or Mahler! 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## J. Dean

It's impossible to say "secular music" in the broad sense is all wrong, because something can be secular but not necessarily sinful. Eating a cheeseburger (which I always advocate) is a secular activity, but not sinful. So is singing "happy birthday." Every song has to be taken on a case by case basis.

It can be difficult to do, because some songs have tremendously good and bad elements to them. I think of the song "Galileo" by the Indigo Girls: on a purely musical level the song is excellent. It's a folksy pop song that is EXTREMELY good at sticking in your head with it's catchy melody and lush harmony. On the other hand, the song essentially promotes reincarnation, and if I recall correctly the Indigo Girls are lesbians. So if you ask me if I like the song Galileo, I would say "Very much so-from a musician's point of view." But I wouldn't download it to iTunes or go buy the CD. The bad in my opinion outweighs the good.

Growing up in the household I did, I was exposed to everything under the sun musically. My dad, who also played guitar and taught me a little bit, played side one of Van Halen I while he and I would get ready for preschool; I have those songs burned into my memory, and I still love the instrumental "Eruption." I heard classic rock, pop, country, metal, jazz, classical, blues-you name it, my dad heard it and had me listen to it as well. So in doing that I learned as both a musician and a music lover to appreciate everything from Mozart to Metallica, and to a degree I still do. But as a Christian, I also know that I need to filter out songs that overtly promote anti-God ideas, no matter how great the piece may be from a musical standpoint. I love Randy Rhodes' guitar licks, but I have no desire to go out and buy an Ozzy album. Kerry King of Slayer is an insane guitarist, but I'm not going to download "South of Heaven" or "War Ensemble" for it.

By the way, not to get too off topic, but in doing a study of secular artists who were into the occult, I learned that more often than not it was the pop stars who indulged in paganism/occultism than the heavy metal guys did. Your average "Satanist" heavy metal band is all image about it, like Slayer is. They admitted to this. While that doesn't make the promoting of the schtick right, it does come off as a little ironic.


----------



## timmopussycat

Alan D. Strange said:


> . Tim C., I can't believe that as a trombonist you did not mention Wagner, Bruckner, or Mahler!



Those 3 composers stretch tonality to a vast extent. While some people fall in love with classical music on hearing one of them, esp. Wagner, for the first time, I suspect more are put off if they do not arrive at these composers by way of the others I mentioned.


----------



## Peairtach

> In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD'S house shall be like the bowls before the altar. Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts. (Zech 14:21)



What makes the secular sacred? The person listening to the secular music?


----------



## AJ Balmforth

Rufus said:


> And how do you individually look at music? I used to be a fan of extreme metal (black, death, doom, and thrash metal) before and for a short time after my conversion, I don't view it as particularly sinful to listen to some heavy metal groups but I still prefer not to. At the same time I'm still a gigantic fan of The Clash a punk band which could be criticized as being anti-authoritarian or too socialist, etc. however I've found that they are cleaner than most music that is popularly listened too.



It seems you come from a similar background music wise as myself; pre-conversion and growing up I loved thrash metal and other forms of heavy music, however since conversion I have totally steered clear of it. 

Part of the reason is a large majority of that kind of music (the popular stuff anyway) is either blatantly blasphemous, sinful and certainly not edifying in ANY way. I know there are many Christian groups who play music of the heavy metal variety but I still steer away from it. It seems odd to me now if I listen to a band with heavy-tuned guitars and someone screaming out their lungs at all regardless of the lyrical content and especially when more pleasant music (to my ears these days) exists out there.

The older I get (I'm only 26) the more I get rid of my secular music it seems. I don't believe I am being legalistic, it just holds less of an appeal to me now. I also was a big fan of The Clash but I don't know where my old CD's are anymore, I've lost them somewhere along the way and I don't really miss them.

Most of the music I listen to now seems to be Christian based: Stuart Townend; Sovereign Grace; Matthew Smith etc.


----------



## Alan D. Strange

Tim C:

I was joshing with you a bit about Wagner, Bruckner and Mahler (as a no-longer active trombonist myself). They do indeed stretch tonality, and I love it! And there's nothing quite like hearing the CSO trombone section play these giants (and some wonderful atonal composers). I've heard Jay Friedman in the Mahler 3rd twice. His legato in the great first movement solo is magnificent.

To me, the question is not secular or Christian, Sean, but good music. There's good serious ("classical") music that is both secular and sacred. Not all serious music is, by any means, what I prefer. I do, however, find much (not all) contemporary popular music to be insipid and jejune, whether Christian or secular, because of its compositional structure. Much popluar music tends toward the banal. I don't mean that it can't be listened to and enjoyed. I do listen to and enjoy popular music. But it's not my main musical diet because it lacks the musical substance to sustain such. Personally, for the expression of Christian truth, I prefer sacred music or the psalms and hymns of the church.

Sean, have you ever heard Handel's _Messiah_, Haydn's _Creation_, Mendelssohn's _Elijah_, or Brahms's _German Requiem_? These are some well-known sacred pieces that are a good place for anyone to start. I am sure that you would enjoy Mozart's, Beethoven's, Schubert's, Dvorak's or Sibelius's symphonies. At the risk of offending, I do think that these have an ennobling beauty and profundity that the kind of music that you mentioned lacks. Let me encourage you not to think of your musical horizons in terms of metal or punk. And don't even think, "should I listen to this CCM over the thrasher?" Learn to enjoy a richer musical diet and you will come to appreciate what Keats, in "Endymion," said: "A thing of beauty is a joy forever."

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Martin

When I first was converted, I gave up secular music for the most part. I loved Classic Rock at the time (still do) but gave it up because I saw it as sinful. I do not feel that way any longer. I think you have to judge the content of the song to see if you should listen to it or not. For example, I love Lynyrd Skynyrd. They have some very good songs that are okay to listen too: Free Bird, Sweet Home Alabama, Tuesday's Gone, Every Mother's Son etc. But they also have a song called On The Hunt which is about being "On The Hunt" for promiscuous activities. So I would say you have to judge by listening to the song. I also prefer folkish, blues, old country, bluegrass and classical music. Also, I prefer these types of music because bands like Lynyrd Skynyrd, The Allman Brothers, and Led Zeppelin have a level of talent and musicianship that is unmatched by modern day bands.


----------



## Rufus

Eric said:


> When I first was converted, I gave up secular music for the most part. I loved Classic Rock at the time (still do) but gave it up because I saw it as sinful. I do not feel that way any longer. I think you have to judge the content of the song to see if you should listen to it or not. For example, I love Lynyrd Skynyrd. They have some very good songs that are okay to listen too: Free Bird, Sweet Home Alabama, Tuesday's Gone, Every Mother's Son etc. But they also have a song called On The Hunt which is about being "On The Hunt" for promiscuous activities. So I would say you have to judge by listening to the song. I also prefer folkish, blues, old country, bluegrass and classical music. Also, I prefer these types of music because bands like Lynyrd Skynyrd, The Allman Brothers, and Led Zeppelin have a level of talent and musicianship that is unmatched by modern day bands.



I can understand the song content discernment, I do the same thing for certain bands.



> Let me encourage you not to think of your musical horizons in terms of metal or punk. And don't even think, "should I listen to this CCM over the thrasher?" Learn to enjoy a richer musical diet and you will come to appreciate what Keats, in "Endymion," said: "A thing of beauty is a joy forever."



I actually do enjoy a great deal of variety in music. I love bluegrass, old country music, folk, and I love Samuel Barbers _Adagio for Strings_. Oh and the oldies, I love the oldies .


----------



## py3ak

timmopussycat said:


> Alan D. Strange said:
> 
> 
> 
> . Tim C., I can't believe that as a trombonist you did not mention Wagner, Bruckner, or Mahler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those 3 composers stretch tonality to a vast extent. While some people fall in love with classical music on hearing one of them, esp. Wagner, for the first time, I suspect more are put off if they do not arrive at these composers by way of the others I mentioned.
Click to expand...


That's interesting - I find that I have rather less patience for, e.g, Brahms and Bruckner than I used to, whereas I increasingly value the genius of Haydn and find much cause to reject my earlier view of considering him relatively superficial. I suppose the development of musical taste would be a topic for another thread; but the words of Huxley resonate with my own experience quite forcefully:



> The disintegration of the old traditions of form in music and in poetry has had the effect, among other things, of showing up very clearly the defects and dullnesses of the minor composers and the minor poets. The important artists have, of course, evolved new forms possessing as much validity, as much right to their existence, as much cohesion and unity within themselves, as the old. The lesser men have not had the capacity to make their own forms. Bereft of the support and guidance of the old conventions they are lost, and the ideas they have are expressed chaotically instead of in order. Furthermore, the mere working out of the old formal rules, if it was done skillfully and intelligently, did something, in the work of the lesser men, to make up for any inherent dullness or weakness in the root ideas. A Toccata by Galuppiu, shall we say, may not be particularly profound in its emotional or intellectual import—though there always is, as a matter of fact, a curious little flavor about Galuppi which lingers very pleasantly on the palate—but there is, in its polished and patterned form a certain elegance, a style, a traditional swagger. It is, perhaps, an unreal, an extrinsic elegance, which the composer did not create. But an elegance it is, and it gives the hearer pleasure. (...)
> ...it is perhaps unfair to compare the Ravel and the De Falla with these [a piece each by Handel and Beethoven -RZ]. But with C.P.E. Bach, that man of sound learning and respectable genius, they may be compared on equal terms. The fact that emerges from this comparison is that C.P.E. Bach said what he had to say very much more fully and completely and satisfyingly in his brisk contrapuntal allegro and penetratingly beautiful adagio than Ravel and De Falla have succeeded in doing in the free and elaborate orchestral contrivances of the “Valse” and the “Gardens of Spain.” Carl Philip Emanuel's work has the extrinsic elegance of traditional form coupled with the intrinsic elegance of form that is born of the right, the inevitable expression of an idea. Ravel and De Falla have neither the one nor the other. “The Gardens of Spain” is rambling, thin, and weak; the “Valse” is diffuse and heavy. There is no emotional logic in either; they have no inevitable shape. The result is that they bore one, as one listens to them, most unconscionably.
> What is the moral of all this? I hardly know. The pedagogues might deduce a moral obligation on the part of our contemporaries to write like Carl Philip Emanuel. But that, of course, won't do. No, the only conclusion I can draw is the not very cheering one which follows. Those who, working outside the old formal tradition, try to evolve new forms and who fail in the attempt, must expect to be more boring than the older musicians of no greater caliber, who had the extrinsic elegance of traditional form to supplement their lack of ideas.


-Aldous Huxley, “The Question of Form”
(Disclaimer: I think his remarks about Galuppi cease to apply when one turns to his sacred music: then it is no longer merely a pleasing flavour, but exceptional brilliance that one discovers, as witnessed below.)
[video=youtube;L74ZRKvYAV0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L74ZRKvYAV0&feature=watch_response_rev[/video]


----------



## Micah Everett

Alan D. Strange said:


> Tim C., I can't believe that as a trombonist you did not mention Wagner, Bruckner, or Mahler!



Strangely, I find that I enjoy performing these men's works more than listening to them. Their use of the instruments of the orchestra is the work of genius, and every trombonist likes to play beautiful chords very loudly! However, I sometimes find Romantic-era composers to be somewhat self-indulgent, with wide swings of emotion in works that seem to go on and on. As a listener, I am very much drawn to the order, structure, and measured expression of the late Baroque and Classical composers, particularly J.S. Bach. While these men wrote very little for trombone, I do enjoy playing their solo and chamber works by way of transcription.

Of course, one might point out that many of our Reformed forbears would have eschewed this entire discussion, and probably would have viewed my line of work as ungodly. I think they are mistaken, given that this view abandons entire areas of legitimate human endeavor to the Enemy, but I will confess to sometimes wishing for greater advice from them when questions occur about how to behave as a Christian in this area, particularly when one encounters a situation that Scripture does not clearly address, such as when one asked to participate in a performance of a work that may not be blatantly vulgar, but is sub-Christian in the professed worldview. 

Finally, and I think this has already been addressed, not all "classical" music is necessarily clean, nor is all "popular" music necessarily vulgar. Some of the plots of eighteenth and nineteenth-century operas could fit nicely in a modern soap opera or reality TV show--they just sound like "art" to us because they are set to wonderful music, and we are oblivious to the content when the work is sung in Italian or German.


----------



## Wretch67

" Love not the world, or the things in the world"... I have found that, at least in my walk, that the enemy will use the music of this world which arouses the senses, to bring me into a frame of mind that not only takes my thoughts of of heavenly things, but brings back old memories of my times in the flesh. As a former musician, I understand the extent of the power music has over our flesh, and it is my advice to not walk, but run from the music of this world. Entertainment in of itself is distracting us from our true purposes. If we become aware of anything that that distracts us from heavenly thoughts, lets pray for the grace to break those old habits and move on to perfection.


----------



## Alan D. Strange

Micah and Ruben:

I get both of your points about baroque and earlier and love all of that, but also the hyper-Romanticism of Mahler. I can especially appreciate, Ruben, your comment about aging and changing tastes. My wife used to like the larger music with me but really likes baroque and before more now. I guess I'm a die hard. And Micah, you're absolutely right about the opera (and its sometimes questionable libretti). I am such a devotee of beautiful singing that I can't forbear, however. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## py3ak

Alan D. Strange said:


> Micah and Ruben:
> 
> I get both of your points about baroque and earlier and love all of that, but also the hyper-Romanticism of Mahler. I can especially appreciate, Ruben, your comment about aging and changing tastes. My wife used to like the larger music with me but really likes baroque and before more now. I guess I'm a die hard. And Micah, you're absolutely right about the opera (and its sometimes questionable libretti). I am such a devotee of beautiful singing that I can't forbear, however.
> 
> Peace,
> Alan



Your wife sounds like mine, Dr. Strange. If it were not for Beethoven's string quartets and 9th Symphony it's perfectly possible that Heidi would never listen to anything composed post-1800. But while I'm around she still gets Paganini, Schubert, and Donizetti _inter alia_.


----------



## timmopussycat

Alan D. Strange said:


> Tim C:
> 
> I was joshing with you a bit about Wagner, Bruckner and Mahler (as a no-longer active trombonist myself).



That makes 3 trombonists on the board.




Alan D. Strange said:


> They do indeed stretch tonality, and I love it! And there's nothing quite like hearing the CSO trombone section play these giants (and some wonderful atonal composers). I've heard Jay Friedman in the Mahler 3rd twice. His legato in the great first movement solo is magnificent.



If one of the times you have heard Jay was in the last couple of years, when he was using his new Thein trombone for this repertoire, I am strongly tempted to envy. Sooner or later I'll have to download that CS/Haitink performance. (Jay's tone is too baritonish in the Solti recording.) Yet I can't forget how Gordon Sweeney, formerly of the Toronto Symphony played that solo. As someone who had to repeatedly study and play that excerpt for professional auditions, It seems to me that Gord's performances were closer to Mahler's expressed wishes than any recorded performance I've ever heard. He perfectly captured Mahler's legato, rubato and portamento and as you may know that's *not *easy to do. Unfortunately the TS never recorded it while he was there.


----------



## Alan D. Strange

Jay does sound better (on his Thein) in this latter recording, presumably, at least he did live when I heard him play it at Ravinia (under Conlin) and then in Orchestra Hall (under Haitink). Achieving Mahler's wishes is seldom easily done! What an incredible palette he painted with; what a remarkable orchestrator. 

It's too bad that Gordon's rendition was not recorded. It sounds magnificent. Under whom did he play that?

Peace,
Alan


----------



## timmopussycat

Alan D. Strange said:


> Jay does sound better (on his Thein) in this latter recording, presumably, at least he did live when I heard him play it at Ravinia (under Conlin) and then in Orchestra Hall (under Haitink). Achieving Mahler's wishes is seldom easily done! What an incredible palette he painted with; what a remarkable orchestrator.
> 
> It's too bad that Gordon's rendition was not recorded. It sounds magnificent. Under whom did he play that?



Andrew Davis, in the years before the Sir.


----------



## heartoflesh

Just give me that good old Grateful Dead....

Actually I can't listen to that stuff anymore, as tame as it is. Brings back too many memories. As an avid musician myself, I am keenly aware of the mysterious powers of music. Like the first time I really "understood" jazz music  . Yeah, something like that.....

It definately is an issue of "what is good?" "what is beautiful?". I find modern thrash guitar distortion to be most ungodly, but a Telecaster through a 59' Bassman is another story altogether!

Maybe it's order vs. disorder. Classical music is quite orderly. Coltrane, Miles Davis, not so much.....


----------



## Alan D. Strange

Tim:

I thought that it would have been Sir Andrew. It's hard not to call him that as we say it quite a bit around here since he is the MD at the Lyric Opera. I know he still conducts the TSO. I think he's their conductor or director laureate , or something like that.

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Philip

heartoflesh said:


> Classical music is quite orderly. Coltrane, Miles Davis, not so much.....



There's a logic to it. It's not disorder, it's deconstruction and reconstruction. Jazz improv (particularly for piano) is one of my favourite genres. It's not the difference between order and disorder (at least with Jazz) but between two different kinds of ordering. To some degree it's similar to the difference between romantic and classical styles. Order does not guarantee beauty, by the way: try listening to Schoenberg's music, written in a 12-tone scale. It's highly ordered and also rather ugly.

This is an excellent explanation of the logic behind jazz improv.


----------



## timmopussycat

Alan D. Strange said:


> Tim:
> 
> I thought that it would have been Sir Andrew. It's hard not to call him that as we say it quite a bit around here since he is the MD at the Lyric Opera. I know he still conducts the TSO. I think he's their conductor or director laureate , or something like that.



Yep. But when the TS did Mahler 3 under him, it was while he was still the Music Director.


----------



## J. Dean

P. F. Pugh said:


> heartoflesh said:
> 
> 
> 
> Classical music is quite orderly. Coltrane, Miles Davis, not so much.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's a logic to it. It's not disorder, it's deconstruction and reconstruction. Jazz improv (particularly for piano) is one of my favourite genres. It's not the difference between order and disorder (at least with Jazz) but between two different kinds of ordering. To some degree it's similar to the difference between romantic and classical styles. Order does not guarantee beauty, by the way: try listening to Schoenberg's music, written in a 12-tone scale. It's highly ordered and also rather ugly.
> 
> This is an excellent explanation of the logic behind jazz improv.
Click to expand...

For the improv musician, jazz is freedom. Philip is right: when jazz is correctly done there is an underlying order to the apparent chaos. Trust me when I say that, if you're a jazz musician, you have to know your theory rules, and you also have to know how to bend them.


----------



## Alan D. Strange

When I said I thought that it would be Sir Andrew, I meant when he was plain old Andrew Davis. The "it's hard not to call him that" meant that it's eay to back project since that's all we hear these days: "Sir Andrew." He just did a very nice _Don Giovanni_ at the Met with a killer cast, inlcuding Gerald Finley as the Don, Bryn Terfel, Matthew Polenzani, Marina Rebeka, Isabel Leonard, et al.

Peace, 
Alan


----------



## Manuel

Wretch67 said:


> " Love not the world, or the things in the world"... I have found that, at least in my walk, that the enemy will use the music of this world which arouses the senses, to bring me into a frame of mind that not only takes my thoughts of of heavenly things, but brings back old memories of my times in the flesh. As a former musician, I understand the extent of the power music has over our flesh, and it is my advice to not walk, but run from the music of this world. Entertainment in of itself is distracting us from our true purposes. If we become aware of anything that that distracts us from heavenly thoughts, lets pray for the grace to break those old habits and move on to perfection.


 " singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord" (Eph 5:19)

While I don't think that listening to secular music is sinful, I find myself too often struggling to make melody in my heart to the Lord throughout the day, because secular music comes to my mind constantly from all the years in the past that I used to listen to it, so I don't listen to it anymore.
"


----------



## J. Dean

Manuel said:


> Wretch67 said:
> 
> 
> 
> " Love not the world, or the things in the world"... I have found that, at least in my walk, that the enemy will use the music of this world which arouses the senses, to bring me into a frame of mind that not only takes my thoughts of of heavenly things, but brings back old memories of my times in the flesh. As a former musician, I understand the extent of the power music has over our flesh, and it is my advice to not walk, but run from the music of this world. Entertainment in of itself is distracting us from our true purposes. If we become aware of anything that that distracts us from heavenly thoughts, lets pray for the grace to break those old habits and move on to perfection.
> 
> 
> 
> " singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord" (Eph 5:19)
> 
> While I don't think that listening to secular music is sinful, I find myself too often struggling to make melody in my heart to the Lord throughout the day, because secular music comes to my mind constantly from all the years in the past that I used to listen to it, so I don't listen to it anymore.
> "
Click to expand...

Now what about listening to a secular musician and realizing that God gave him/her that talent? When I listen to a great many guitarists who are not Christians, I give God the glory for the great abilities they have.


----------

