/classical/
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
Mustache edition
Why is it that /classical/ is full of band kids who still are afraid of late-20th century/21st century music?
>>65316800
Because most of it isn't actually music, but nice try
>>65316800
Calm down friend...I'm still exploring the early stuff. In it's due time i will start to listen to more stuff made after ww2.
I simply like to have a better understanding of things, who influenced who and why did things went in a certain direction.
>>65316800
>implying we don't meme Carter and Schoenberg all the time
>>65317035
>late 20th century/21st century music
>>65317229
Still Carter.
And Wuorinen and Rihm and Rzewski and probably a handful of others people shill. Hell CLT used to meme Reich.
The mustache man himself
>>65317526
>died because he couldn't properly shave himself
Embarrassing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oZPg_ylMcc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-kN5cwyvag
Beards > mustaches
Is this a good musical period?
https://clyp.it/3ihdhijl
>>65316800
A bigger question I have is why nobody here likes anything electronic based, even though it's one of the biggest and most important things to happen to serious music in human history (and is still a relatively new thing). Do you not recognize it as classical or something?
>>65319281
I'm fine with electronic classical. Stockhausen ftw
Now musique concrete - eh, I like some of Varese's stuff and most of John Cage's
>>65319382
>Stockhausen ftw
go away
>>65319281
Lots of us do. From early Stockhausen and Babbit to Xenakis and Tristan Murail. Some of us even enjoy musique concrete.
Its interesting to see one of the earliest popular electronic instruments (the Theremin) implemented in a lot of Lera Auerbach's orchestra pieces. There's a Martinů fantasia that includes a theremin too, although the best performance is on an Ondes Martenot, which has much more stable pitch, especially for a Martinů piece where pitch is very important and there's a lot of leaps.
>>65316800
20th century is one of my favorite periods though. There are plenty here who love 20th/21st century. One tripfag is even called "schoenberg defense force"
>>65319273
what a lame harmony
>>65319382
WHAT STOCKHAUSEN DID FOR ELECTRONIC MUSIC:
- Wrote banal chamber pieces featuring electronic instruments vaguely exploring acoustic space
- Did some really crappy generative pieces
- Made a slightly more scientific version of Messiaen's shit.
PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY MATTERED:
>Pierre Schaeffer
The grandfather of electronic music. Pioneered the current dominant thought of thinking of sound objects (Treatise on Musical Objects)
>John Chowning
FM SYNTHESIS.
>Miller Puckette
Created extremely user friendly and commercially viable software.
>Jean-Claude Risset
Waveshaping, FM, invaluable in terms of psychoacoustic research.
>Iannis Xenakis
GRANULAR SYNTHESIS, wrote proper, scientific process pieces.
>Lasse Thoresen
Codified Schaeffers thought into an easily communicateable system for education and realization of electro-acoustic scores.
>Denis Smalley
Early digital synthesis, elaborated on Schaeffer.
>Michel Gerzon
Ambisonics.
what composer has the best name and why is it schoenberg?
>>65319520
>>65319460
>stockhausen haters
>>65319520
>Stockhausen is banal
>Schaeffer isn't
HAHAHA
of those you mentioned only Xenakis is worth saving and that is for his acoustic music
>>65319573
you forgot to add ftw you fucking faggot
>>65319544
>not Little Josse of the fields or Clement not the Pope
The Germans also have Schlick and Shite.
>>65316781
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIenFNUUNfI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE_7aqtgquo
Is Jacob Obrecht the true patrician's Renaissance composer? Josquin was a pussy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua4aQDnppVo
>>65319805
Funny you should say that, since even his contemporaries and music theorists consider Obrecht to be the more accessible, more palatable, and more straightforward composer than Josquin, who was a "lover of the unusual"
>In so far as Obrecht displays his talent, it is directed to the listener-meaning perhaps that any complexity or artifice is motivated in terms of the listener's musical experience. Writing music of direct appeal, the composer achieves 'a certain wondrous grandeur and an intrinsic quality of moderation'
Of course the Maria Zart mass stand pretty apart from the rest of Obrecht's works, so it's not really representative.
>>65319805
GESUALDO
E
S
U
A
L
D
O
Composer too
>>65316781
i like giacinto scelsi quite a bit but i never get replies when i mention him
>>65320056
It's not distinct from the rest of his work at all except in its proportions. Exact same voice-leading tendencies (producing harmonic motion by thirds), same prioritization of melody over rules (one encounters successive same direction leaps regularly), and a tendency to vary a motive or compositional idea in a sectionalized approach.
>>65320082
Better then Monteverdi, but still nah.
>>65320162
>Better then Monteverdi
>>65320161
nice rymcore fag
happy, you attention-whoring pedophile?
>>65320206
wow a meme replied who could've predicted it
>>65320259
didnt know he was rymcore. im fine with that. also i fucked up the post. was meant for >>65316800
>>65320259
>knowing what's on RYM
you do it to yourself.
she's cute though
>>65316781
LINKS TO /CLASSICAL/ ARCHIVES
https://mega.co.nz/#F!mMYGhBgY!Ee_a6DJvLJRGej-9GBqi0A
https://mega.co.nz/#F!lIh3GRpY!piUs-QdhZACFt2hGtX39Rw
https://mega.co.nz/#F!Y8pXlJ7L!RzSeyGemu6QdvYzlfKs67w
https://mega.co.nz/#F!kMpkFSzL!diCUavpSn9B-pr-MfKnKdA
https://mega.co.nz/#F!ekBFiCLD!spgz8Ij5G0SRH2JjXpnjLg
https://mega.co.nz/#F!4EVlnJrB!PRjPFC0vB2UT1vrBHAlHlw
https://mega.co.nz/#F!ygImCRjS!1C9L77tCcZGQRF6UVXa-dA
https://mega.co.nz/#F!il5yBShJ!WPT0v8GwCAFdOaTYOLDA1g
https://mega.co.nz/#F!DdJWUBBK!BeGdGaiAqdLy9SBZjCHjCw
http://crudblud.sjm.so/
>>65320162
>>65320162
>It's not distinct from the rest of his work at all except in its proportions.
You are joking right, the style is so far from his mature masses that it represents a break almost as clean as that between the mature masses and the early masses. And the proportions of the mass are strangely one of the few things that it retained unchanged. The mass just seem long because of the four additional duets and trios in the Gloria and Credo, if you take those out, the mass is basically the same length as the Je ne demande mass, with roughly the same length in each subsection.
>Exact same voice-leading tendencies (producing harmonic motion by thirds)
Not really, everyone from his generation used the harmonic cliche of parallel tenth motion, Obrecht just used it slightly more frequently, and strikingly, as in the second Agnus for the Je ne demande mass.
>same prioritization of melody over rules (one encounters successive same direction leaps regularly)
>rules
What rules, the rules of Palestrina counterpoint that were formulated decades after Obrecht's death? There are no rules forbidding such a thing in contemporary treatises, and just a cursory glance of the music of Obrecht's contemporaries will tell you that they wrote whatever melody pleases them, no matter how jagged the contour. Funnily enough Maria Zart mass is actually one of the few Obrecht masses where the melody are less energetic than typical.
>>65320449
What is the value of saying "if you take x out, then y is as long as z?"
>harmonic cliche of parallel tenth motion
That is melodic, not harmonic. I am talking about his harmonic approach, in which harmony often shifts freely between thirds, this is related to a medieval practice that would disappear thereafter.
>There are no rules forbidding such a thing in contemporary treatises
That's because practice precedes theory, and Josquin is one who practiced the "smooth" style, and in fact after Obrecht, nearly everyone did.
Objective best Mahler recordings of each symphony
1 - Kegel
2 - Steinberg
3 - Horenstein
4 - Horenstein
5 - Schwarz
6 - Kondrashin
7 - Kondrashin
8 - Solti
9 - Ancerl
10 - Gielen
How true is this?
>>65320162
>>65320162
>a tendency to vary a motive or compositional idea in a sectionalized approach.
Did you even listen to the mass? This is one feature of Obrecht which disappears almost completely in the Maria Zart mass. In fact this is a signpost that he has moved away from his signature style that he developed in the early 1490s. Compared to the absolute crystal clear structure that is current in the mature masses, think the opening of the Fortuna desperata mass, the opening of the Gloria, Credo and Sanctus sections of the Malheur me bat and Rose Playsante masses, there is nothing in the Maria Zart mass that presents such well-thought out sections with a clear goal, and well defined.
Take a look at the opening Gloria of the Rose Playsante mass for comparison. Note the literal repetition of sections between different voices, punctuated by regular cadences, grants the music an extraordinary drive forwards. The gradual rise of the "theme", together with the increase in scoring, helps to build an anticipation and a increase in intensity that leads to the cantus firmus entry. This is music with a clear goal, masterfully executed to keep the listener captivated. These type of sections are typical of the mature masses at large, but entirely absent in the Maria Zart mass. You will not find a single example like it, since Obrecht seems fairly content to just let the lines wander without building up to anywhere.
>>65320628
>all of them are jewish
>>65320628
>Objective best Mahler recordings of each symphony
>4 not Mengelberg
Opinion discarded
>>65320628
you'll only know once you hear multiple versions of each symphony, now, won't you?
in all seriousness, Klemperer > for Mahler 2 and Maderna > for Mahler 9 if you're fine with his liberties with interpretation
>>65320628
>Solti
>best anything
>>65320628
lol
>>65320678
Horenstein's is at least as good, plus with better sound
>>65320632
>without building up to anywhere
You ask if I've listened to the mass? Am I even reading this right? Have you heard the benedicimus te sequence in the Gloria? That doesn't build anywhere?
>>65320681
>Klemperer
i honestly hate him
>Maderna
exaggerated
>>65320693
Solti's Mahler 8 is an absolute classic in the history of recorded music and has the best singers of any 8th
>>65320723
>That doesn't build anywhere?
Once again you used an example where the difference between the Maria Zart masses and the previous masses come to a fore. Just look at the relentlessness of the motivic useage in this passage. The voices are fairly content to repeat the single pattern, without building up to anything. They state it lower, then higher. In fact, Obrecht deliberately breaks up the statement in the superius, and inserted extra rests in bar 39 so that any sense of regularity is dashed. And what does this lead to? Nothing, not even a cadence when the cantus firmus stops sounding, the music winds on, with no obvious change in texture, register or note values. Wegman describes it quite succintly:
>Given the very length and irregularity of the passage, and given that it does nt appeaer t make a specific musical point, the discourse is best described as spinning-out. For that is what happens: the motivic writing goes 'on and on', and avoids, if anything, the suggestion that the music has to lead anywhere in particular.
If you cannot hear the difference between this passage and the previous one, then you really aren't paying attention to the music at all.
>>65320745
why do you hate Klemperer?
>>65320917
That is ridiculous. You are repeating the words of a theorist without believing them yourself. How can one possibly consider the rest (the most beautiful aspect of the sequence) as a “disruption”? Since, of course, during the rest the lower voices continue to sound the motive, and afterwards it is continued by the superius, as if in a sharpened light, more tranquil and beautiful than ever, until the motive is essentially inverted for gratias. No, instead the rest is to let the listener know that something special is about to happen, to give them time to prepare. And happen it does. While I'll agree that the following passage is "spun out" in no way would I consider that to connote directionlessness.
>>65321061
all of his orchestras sound so hard and rigid
>>65320599
>I am talking about his harmonic approach, in which harmony often shifts freely between thirds, this is related to a medieval practice that would disappear thereafter.
This is blatantly false. The typical Obrecht in his mature masses does not do this, and it is another signature break from his early masses that his harmonic handling has become extremely concise and straightforward, with focus on the "tonic" and "dominant", and therefore sounding very modern in a sense. Consider the opening of his Crucifixus, the bass states almost no other pitch other than E and A, with emphasis on the resolution to A, for all intents and purposes this sounds like A minor to our modern ears. This harmonic tightness allows him to present regions of great tension where he move to another "key", and resolve it. It's one of the reasons why his mature music is so immediately appealing to us.
>and Josquin is one who practiced the "smooth" style, and in fact after Obrecht, nearly everyone did.
It was just one of the styles that an astonishingly versatile composer like Josquin used from time to time. He is perfectly content to strange effects if there was a need for it and hence sacrificing the smoothness of his melody lines. It wasn't only until the generation of syntactic imitation that smooth lines became the norm, which was more than 10 years after the death of Josquin, and 30 years after the death of Obrecht.
>>65319281
It seems to me like most electronic people base their stuff in obnoxious timbres and rely on the novelty of the electronic medium rather than on solid ideas when they make music, so it sounds really lazy and redundant.
>Renaissanceanon wrecking some pleb
Good thread so far.
>>65321086
>You are repeating the words of a theorist without believing them yourself.
Since I was the one who edited and typeset the edition you're seeing from its (error ridden) 15th century print, and who has listened and contemplated it countless times during the editing process, I say I know a little more about what Wegman is talking about than you do, pal.
>How can one possibly consider the rest (the most beautiful aspect of the sequence) as a “disruption”?
>No, instead the rest is to let the listener know that something special is about to happen, to give them time to prepare.
You won't even notice it as the music flows by. In fact you probably don't even know there was such a rest which disrupted the regularity superius until I told you so. Hardly something for the listeners if it was so inconspicuous isn't it, especially considering the typical Obrecht is so straightforward and brash, you wouldn't need to scrape the bottom of the barrel to justify what development happens.
>>65321360
You want to see what build-up in Obrecht actually is? Check out the first section of the Crucifixus of the Malheur me bat mass, the entrance of the cantus firmus locks the bass at E, which creates a harmonic tension. Remember what I said previously about the region of tension? The upper voices move in a filigree, with great motion, but no direction to exacerbate the tension, then the bass moves to C, and stays there for the next ten bars or so. Still no resolution to A, and we a lead to a deceptive cadence on G in bar 39. Finally, Obrecht sets to resolve it in the most straightforward, some may even say coarse manner as possible, the entirety of bar 40-45 is just one long extended Perfect Authentic cadence, resolving on the "tonic", A, with as much satisfaction as one can think of, exacerbated by the E-chord (acting as V) which lasts an entirety of two bars. This is what one means by development and direction in Obrecht's music, it's simple and straightforward, yet unmistakable even to the layman. Are you seriously trying to claim that the ambiguous, subtle passage in the Maria Zart mass is comparable? That the Maria Zart mass represents no change from the typical Obrechtian procedures as demonstrated here?
>>65321185
>Renaissance anon
He prays hard, but he wrecks even harder
bunmp mpinbm
>>65320628
kondrashin is fast as fuck in the 6th, I really like that. he's definitely one of my favorites
>>65316800
But isn't before Bach and after Ives patrician?
>>65320628
There are too many good recordings for each of the symphonies for me to only stick with one conductor. Even in the 4th where I by and large prefer Mengelberg, I also like to occasionally listen to others as well.
My personal list would probably go like:
1 - Kegel, Kubelik, Horenstein, Hengelbrock, Scherchen
2 - Klemperer (any version, but '51 is best), Stokowski (preferably live), Scherchen, Kegel (GOAT chorus), etc. (honestly, there are lots of pretty good resurrections)
3 - Martinon (GOAT sound), Kubelik, Horenstein, Adler, van Beinum
4 - Mengelberg, Rosbaud, Britten, Swarowsky, Kegel, Horenstein
5 - Walter, Maderna, Tennstedt (NY set), Kubelik (preferably '51 but later live one is good too), Scherchen (VSOO), Swarowsky (GOAT balance. very slow finale though), Mitropoulos, Boulez (early BBC)
6 - Kubelik, Mitropoulos ('55), Horenstein, van Beinum, Rosbaud
7 - Kondrashin, Gielen, Kegel, Rosbaud, Scherchen
8 - Stokowski, Horenstein (haven't really heard any too terrible 8ths, though.)
9 - Maderna, Kubelik, Ancerl, Horenstein, Walter, Kondrashin, Rosbaud
>>65320745
Dunno how you can call Maderna exaggerated but praise Solti when he is probably way more exaggerated. Maderna's exaggerations mostly stem from his abundant use of rubato and ritardandos. Solti doesn't display as much of a flexibility in terms of tempi (and thus, it is less exaggerated in that regard) but the dynamics and balances are certainly over-exaggerated. Especially in terms of the brass which is downright vulgar. During Solti's tenure of the CSO he developed a house sound and the orchestra was particularly noted for its overly loud and brash brass. In-fact, there was often a large plexiglass panel placed in front of the brass players in order to 'protect' the players ahead of them.
>>65322227
He's pretty good but Kubelik is basically the same approach but with better balances due to the sound stage of the recording and the superior orchestra seating.
>>65316800
20th century music is literally edgelord music. Stuff like Bartok and Schoenberg are so angsty that it is painful to listen to.
>>65319520
>PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY MATTERED
no Max Mathews, Gottfried Michael Koenig and Francois Bayle, no Xenakis UPIC....
/mu/ why you never miss a chance to confirm your illitteracy?
>>65317590
>died
He merely joined with the super conscious.
>>65323723
are these angsty?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1wwGZXeSR0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPKONxWZDeU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4cpMepVZyc
>>65323723
>associating lack of tonality with angst/edginess
You've been watching too many horror films.
>>65323653
>Dunno how you can call Maderna exaggerated but praise Solti when he is probably way more exaggerated.
Well it's a different symphony, the 8th particularly is well served in Solti's orchestra
>Maderna's exaggerations mostly stem from his abundant use of rubato and ritardandos.
This is what I mean and it's not bad but definitely not what Mahler would've wanted to hear. I personally find it overemotional which not very Mahler, who was more about tense energy.
>He's pretty good but Kubelik is basically the same approach but with better balances due to the sound stage of the recording and the superior orchestra seating.
I don't get the Kubelik hype, I find him kinda bland in everything I've heard from him, his 1st is okay though
I really don't understand the point of cataloguing an endless list of recordings for the same old works. It's like fetishism and more about the colllection than it is about the music.
>>65324191
>I don't know what I'm talking about but I'll give my opinion anyway!
>>65324232
Great retort, exactly what I expect from /classical/
The experience of discovering a new composer far outrivals finding different, older recordings of the same masterworks
>>65324259
False dichotomy
>>65324259
>Often it is simply this way: if a dilettante has listened only a few times to a symphony by, for example, Beethoven, and thus has become accustomed to it, immediately he makes so bold as to claim impudently that he knows the symphony very well, and then he asks-this dilettante!-for something else, something new, always something _else_ and _new_: in short he wants what is called "progress." For his sake, Beethoven, whose worth is virtually obliterated precisely by estrangement and emaciation, is put aside and one steps "forward" to something allegedly new and better, in other words, this dilettante, like a child, is given a doll, which he soon throws away only to ask for a new one. That is how wretchedly lazy and destructive this dilettante is; that is how the great music-loving public relates to that redeeming force called art!
>>65323653
you don't rate steinberg's resurrection?
>>65316781
how did Mahler manage to turn from an African teenager into a German young man?
>>65320628
where's bernstein
>>65324292
he's jewish
>>65324267
You have to spend your time focusing on something.
>>65324271
Oh boy, CLT pasta.
How about an argument of your own?
>>65324306
In the trash can of course
>>65320133
He played new age music before it became mainstream buddha bar soundtrack
>>65323653
Please upload Swarowsky?
>>65324316
all I see is straight outta compton
>August 2016: release of our next CD, Pierre de la Rue, Missa Nuncqua fue pena mayor, Missa Inviolata, Salve regina VI, Magnificat sexti toni. Hyperion Records CDA 68150.
Two previously unrecorded La Rue masses, based Brabants save the day once again.
>>65324331
Rude.
Now stand in the corner and think about your behavior.
>>65324331
Here we see the record fetishist/classical poseur pretending to be above the distinguished 20th century conductor by insinuating that his flagship Mahler cycles and three recordings of Mahler 9 are not worth anyone's time, despite the overwhelming consensus that they are.
The fetishist does this because their identity is staked upon a false-elitism of listening to as little music as possible but as many old recordings as possible: if they admit Bernstein is a great conductor of Mahler, the illusion fails and suddenly there is no cause for them to obsess with recordings over compositions.
>>65324331
greetings generic-shitposter, no one gives to you a single laugh
>>65324405
>fetishist/classical poseur pretending
Name-calling
>despite the overwhelming consensus that they are.
Ad populum
>if they admit Bernstein is a great conductor of Mahler, the illusion fails and suddenly there is no cause for them to obsess with recordings over compositions
Non sequitur
Try again
>>65324344
Particularly the 5th please
>>65324450
Ah, an 18 year old who just learned fallacies, too!
>>65324536
Character assassination/Ad hominem
>>65324191
Its more about finding the best recording. Each one is individual, there's usually a better version out there somewhere. I know certain symphonies where I've only heard one good recording and the rest make it sound like shit. In cases like that, the specific recording can be the different between enjoying a piece and writing it off for life.
>>65324440
that because we're all agreeing. Bernstein is an awful Mahler conductor.
>>65324405
Hot meme
>>65324633
>hi, i'm classical and i am a single entity
yeah yeah...nice refrain...
>>65325209
that has always been the opinion of /classical/ though Bernsteins tempi for Mahler is draggy as fuck, and his whole aesthetic is over sentimental.
The BIDF is in full force right now.
Post good Mahler conductors.
Is any of Argerich's Lugano Festival stuff good?
how are you doin', poseurs
>>65324115
>and it's not bad but definitely not what Mahler would've wanted to hear. I personally find it overemotional which not very Mahler, who was more about tense energy.
From what we know of Mahler from the piano rolls that he left us and the few anecdotes left by musicians who played under him/knew him/rehearsed with him/studied with him/etc. he had a style that was closer to Mengelberg than Walter, which is to say that he liberally utilized tempo fluctuations in his interpretations. Perhaps not as exaggerated as Mengelberg could sometimes be, but just a step or two below that. Which is probably why he was so comfortable with Mengelberg as a conductor of his works, since the two had similar approaches.
>>65324286
Nah, it's pretty good too. The sound on it is a bit tinny though and awkwardly centralized iirc.
He was a good conductor who sadly hasn't had enough of his stuff publicly released.
>>65324344
Later, maybe.
>>65324191
>>65324259
It isn't like you'll be able to indulge in that kind of autism with most composers anyway. Mahler and Beethoven are arguably way over-recorded, there are some renaissance composers which haven't received very many good performances--let alone performances at all of certain works.
I would also say that some composers are vastly easier to get satisfied with than others. I've gone through way too much Chopin performances for example, but I can be easily satisfied with most Bach performances.
>>65326920
This is true. I collect a lot of opera recordings but when it comes to classical symphonies like ones from Mozart I am more easily satisfied and do not feel the urge to collect more.
Would /classical/ be willing to offer comments and critique for my first ever composition?
Apparently Bandcamp generals aren't about that
>>65327077
I'm sure at least one person here will say something constructive about it
I'll just post it.
stuartcampbellmusic.bandcamp.com/releases
any comments?
>>65327206
Despite as you've mentioned being a total ripoff it's quite listenable probably better than anything /mu/ has made outside of /classical/
Having said that the piano is dull and machinistic sounding and the dissonances are irritating and not well sewn into the music(0:40 particularly)
Love the thick drone-ish orchestral texture though
Reminds me of Chrono Trigger
Not bad overall
>>65327931
>Having said that the piano is dull and machinistic sounding
The midi or the part?
I'll probably rework that chord desu.
Thanks for the comments!
Bump
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmVlfCtoRrk
>>65328080
The whole part honestly
Lacks dynamic and rhythmic variety imo
But don't take me too seriously I'm a casual and have been listening to classical music for less than a year
>>65327206
this track is just screaming "i have no idea what I'm doing I'm a shitty untalented composer"
>>65327206
>first 2 piano notes are a perfect interval
"no"
>>65330307
How so?
>>65330555
lol
>>65330275
Meh you don't show it, I'd say the other guy claiming it's just untalented shite knows less than you. ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8jLzW9kxBo
What are some string quartets like Shostakovitch's 8th - simple motifs, dreary, spooky - but without so much wank? Like, those 20 minutes could easily be boiled down to 4.
Greatest composer of all time, coming through.
>>65332380
>reminder
>WHAT IS LE BEST MAH-LUH RECORDING???
>BEST WAGNER CYCLE????
>GERMAN MUSIC SUX
>BACH BACH BACH BACH BACH BACH BACH
>ROMANTIC SUX!!!
>A U T I S M xD
>BEETHOVEN RUINED MUSIC!!!
>SEE THIS POPULAR COMPOSER??? HE IS PLEN AND THIS IS WHY
>MAH-LUH
>MOZART IS UNDERRATED AHEHAHAHAHA (he actually is)
why are these threads so fucking shit?
>>65332853
>>>/v/ and take your loss edits with you
Bump
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNx7_lLgILs
