Classical Mudcat?

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 26 May 02 - 01:14 AM

I have wondered too, because there is a large community of choral music directors doing spirituals. Aside from the whole purist vs. contemporary-performance-practice thing, I have wondered how they would be received here, to discuss the songs themselves.

~S~

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: Escamillo
Date: 25 May 02 - 01:42 AM

I would be a frequent reader, and possibly will post one or two comments. As usual, there will be many people from whom we would learn something.

Un abrazo - Andrés (Escamillo, the romantic bullfighter in Georges Bizet's opera CARMEN)

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: greg stephens
Date: 24 May 02 - 05:41 PM

We get plenty of discussions about Jews taking over the world, people's relationships and farting. I think a little bit of classical music could probably be accommodated without too many people blowing a fuse.

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 May 02 - 02:35 PM

Sounds okay to me. But before long, I would expect to see hot and heavy discussions about the definition of "classical music." It's about as easy to pin down as "folk music." Look up "classic guitar" on eBay and count the number of solid-body electrics they list. OY!! "Classic" is another of those catch-all words. It'd be interesting, though.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 May 02 - 12:27 PM

Ditto, Jerry. Actually I'm pretty sure that anyone starting a thread relating to classical music would get a fair number of responses, and probably that would include a good number of erudite and relevant ones. I don't think we need a separate prefix - we don't have one for pop music after all.

Of course there'd probably be some people posting messages saying "This isn't folk music - how dare you ask about Mozart here", but you learn to ignore that stuff. I believe in the value of identifying and classifying and learning about various different types of music, and then listening to and maybe even playing any of them we like the sound of.

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: GUEST,Pete
Date: 24 May 02 - 10:06 AM

Think what you'd miss if you "didn't waste your time" reading threads you thought you wouldn't be interested in

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 23 May 02 - 08:51 PM

Great response, Kevin! Always enjoy reading your posts. And then, if there was a "classic" prefix, who would know whether they're talking about Honky Tonk Woman by The Stones, Davenport Blues by Bix Beiderbecke, I Can't Get Started by Bunny Berrigan or even Mystery Train by pre-blimp Elvis. Or, maybe they would be referring to a classic episode of the Honeymooners (over here.) Or a 1957 Chevy Belle Aire.

Jerry

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: CapriUni
Date: 23 May 02 - 04:32 PM

Well, I haven't either... but I've often seen a cello played with a horse hair bow... does that count?

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 May 02 - 08:38 PM

Then we could have long threads about "What is classical?", and someone would claim that Casals said that "I never saw a horse playing a cello"...

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: Wesley S
Date: 22 May 02 - 10:37 AM

Also the forum over at Acoustic Guitar magazine has a classical section. Look for the forum at www.acousticguitar.com

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 22 May 02 - 10:23 AM

I love the idea, and agree with Kevin. What about establishing a category-prefix in the style of the existing ones - "CLAS" or something - alerting people that the thread is classical (not restricted to any one instrument) so those who aren't interested wouldn't waste their time. What does everybody think? I'd be all for it!

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 May 02 - 07:11 AM

Some good stuff there - I imagine that is what people who wish the Mudcat would exclude everything that wasn't strictly on topic and to do with folk music would prefer it to be like here. I wouldn't. (Even aside from the fact that the architecture of the Mudcat is so much more user friendly. Well, this user friendly.)

I'd see classical guitar related threads fitting in fine here - I'm sure if he posted any queries or comments he'd be likely to get plenty of knowledgeable responses.

And I think the same would apply to other classical music threads. The Mudcat has stretched pretty far to take in all varieties of popular music, I can't see why it can't do it in another direction if people wish to take it there. After all O'Carolan is a lot closer to other 18th century European composers than he is to Oasis.

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 May 02 - 06:28 AM

Classical Guitar Forum

Subject: RE: Classical Mudcat?
From: Escamillo
Date: 22 May 02 - 05:23 AM

You could find a forum for him, but my suggestion is: why not keeping in contact with folk and blues musicians at the Mudcat ? I am a classical singer (mainly choralist) but my love for traditionals and Afro-American music brought me here one day, and I found a group of knowledgeable and generous people who call me "my friend" and who became friends for me too. And learnt a lot !

Yours, Andrés (in Buenos Aires)

Subject: Classical Mudcat?
From: DMcG
Date: 22 May 02 - 05:08 AM

My son's guitar teacher is interested in the concept of Mudcat but isn't particularly interested in folk or blues - he's more of a classical guitar man.

Any suggestions?