Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 150 posts

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#141

Post by 1718627440 »

hearsathought wrote: post #137
lordleft wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that a comment such as mine would rankle. I acknowledge that art is subjective, that there's no accounting for taste, etc. And yet, I don't really believe that, deep down. If I did, I'm not entirely sure how I could speak meaningfully to the differences between great and no so great art. Is War and Peace really as good as any other novel? Would it be possible for any two people to meaningfully communicat…

> I understand that a comment such as mine would rankle. It doesn't rankle. It just makes you look childish and immature. > If I did, I'm not entirely sure how... God you bore me. I'm not interested in having a discussion on the philosophy of art here. Just say he's your favorite musician so far and be done with it. Just like whoever was your previous favorite musician before bach.

> God you bore me. I'm not interested in having a discussion on the philosophy of art here.

You are not, but he is and made his comment in this spirit.

> Just say he's your favorite musician so far and be done with it.

Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible).

When you say about a technical concept of your expertice, that X is the best way to do Y, it does not preclude, that there isn't a better way to be invented, or that exists elsewhere, that you just are not aware of. The same is true here.

I honestly can agree with lordleft. In addition he [Bach] is also (jokingly) called the fifth evangelist, at least in Germany. Not sure, if this remark is known elsewhere.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#142

Post by jawilson2 »

cons0le wrote: post #66
reactordev wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See, music isn’t just math, it’s feel. I guess that’s why I dislike him the way I do. It’s too robotic. Truth is, they were ALL Justin Bieber. It’s all pop music of the time.

Ahh yes, so robotic https://youtu.be/_1xJoVzoIQg?list=RD_1xJoVzoIQg Also they were not all justin beiber. Bach was a working church musician when mozart was out touring europe getting drunk and shitting on women. Only one of them was in it for the fame. In fact you could say that mozart and liszt were 2 of the first "pop stars" because that archetype didn't exist before them. There was basically no "beatlesmania" ove…

I'm sorry, I just can't listen to Bach piano pieces unless Glenn Gould is making strange sounds in the background that the sound engineer can't remove.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#143

Post by throaway123213 »

lukan wrote: post #125
throaway123213 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its well-known that Mozart had a poop obsession. https://www.thepiano.sg/piano/read/mozart-and-his-infamous-l...

Hm. Not convinced that this qualifies for a poop obsession. Rather sounds like using language for a shock effect(on 2 occasions), but thanks for the link.

Well, in their family, they had a good-night verse that went like this. Maybe not an obsession but definitely a healthy interest!

Gute Nacht (good night)

Scheiss ins Bett dass es kracht (shit into the bed so that it bangs)

Reck den Arsch zum Mund (stretch your ass towards your mouth)

und sei recht kugelrund (and be spherically round))

And Mozart wrote a canon from it

"Buona Nox - bist a rechter Ox" (and the end of the text is what I wrote above)

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#144

Post by tgv »

hearsathought wrote: post #136
tgv wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a riposte at the level of "Then name all composers. Nanananana." Obviously, the answer to your question is going to be "no," but really a great amount of music is available to us, and everything that came before the Renaissance was, crudely put, simple music. So the commenter can be considered to be able to weigh Bach's merits against those of other artists'. IMO too, Bach is the greatest. There's really no-o…

> This is a riposte at the level of "Then name all composers. Nanananana." It isn't. It's pointing out silly fanboying of silly people. > and everything that came before the Renaissance was, crudely put, simple music. Does "simple" mean worse? Using your logic, then eminem or taylor swift are greater musicians than bach. After all, pre-digital era, music was, crudely put, simple music. But then again, there are dunce…

> After all, pre-digital era, music was, crudely put, simple music.

That's based on absolute lack of knowledge, and hoping that modifying a argument will result in one with the same truth and weight. It doesn't. Or it was plain trolling.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#145

Post by hearsathought »

1718627440 wrote: post #141
hearsathought wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I understand that a comment such as mine would rankle. It doesn't rankle. It just makes you look childish and immature. > If I did, I'm not entirely sure how... God you bore me. I'm not interested in having a discussion on the philosophy of art here. Just say he's your favorite musician so far and be done with it. Just like whoever was your previous favorite musician before bach.

> God you bore me. I'm not interested in having a discussion on the philosophy of art here. You are not, but he is and made his comment in this spirit. > Just say he's your favorite musician so far and be done with it. Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible). When you say about a technica…

> You are not, but he is and made his comment in this spirit.

He made the comment in the spirit of being a silly fanboy. Just like most respondents so far.

> Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible).

Agreed. That's my point.

> When you say about a technical concept of your expertice, that X is the best way to do Y, it does not preclude, that there isn't a better way to be invented, or that exists elsewhere, that you just are not aware of. The same is true here.

We are talking about art. Not an objective "technical concept". Not only that, it's nearly impossible to say X is the greatest author/writer/etc, X is the greatest painter, X is the greatest musician, X is the great film director, etc. If we can't even decide within a particular art form, who is the greatest, it even more laughable to say X is the greatest artist FULL STOP. That's my point. Not to mention that it's is nearly impossible to have consumed and understood all art, even within a genre. And we haven't even addressed the subjective nature of art.

> In addition he [Bach] is also (jokingly) called the fifth evangelist, at least in Germany. Not sure, if this remark is known elsewhere.

Who cares? It just proves my point.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#146

Post by 1718627440 »

hearsathought wrote: post #145
1718627440 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> God you bore me. I'm not interested in having a discussion on the philosophy of art here. You are not, but he is and made his comment in this spirit. > Just say he's your favorite musician so far and be done with it. Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible). When you say about a technica…

> You are not, but he is and made his comment in this spirit. He made the comment in the spirit of being a silly fanboy. Just like most respondents so far. > Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible). Agreed. That's my point. > When you say about a technical concept of your expertice, that…

>> Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible).

> Agreed. That's my point.

You do? You agree, that "X is the greatest Y" is just a valid statement as "X is my favourite Y" and conveys different information? Wasn't my observation, but then the discussion is finished. Actually the former is a better statement on a discussion website, since it allows discussion, while the latter is basically a useless statement, that you can't even object to.

> We are talking about art.

So what. You can still discuss this. Also music is also a science and Bach did some important work in this direction. There are different tastes, but whether a given artist caters to a taste the best, is something you can discuss objectively. Also composing is a craftsmanship, and you can still discuss the craftsmanship even if you don't agree with the final work.

> X is the greatest author/writer/etc, X is the greatest painter, X is the greatest musician, X is the great film director, etc. If we can't even decide within a particular art form, who is the greatest, it even more laughable to say X is the greatest artist FULL STOP.

"hearsathought" is the greatest discusser! There I just did it. Doesn't seem to be impossible to me.

> it even more laughable to say X is the greatest artist FULL STOP.

Why? lordleft didn't even claim to talk for all humans.

>> In addition he [Bach] is also (jokingly) called the fifth evangelist, at least in Germany. Not sure, if this remark is known elsewhere.

> Who cares? It just proves my point.

How so? I don't get your point than, because to me it proves the opposite.

> Who cares?

A lot of people found it useful to spark a discussion and it is currently the first comment.

> He made the comment in the spirit of being a silly fanboy. Just like most respondents so far.

Nah, that's just your opinion.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#147

Post by 1718627440 »

hearsathought wrote: post #145
1718627440 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> God you bore me. I'm not interested in having a discussion on the philosophy of art here. You are not, but he is and made his comment in this spirit. > Just say he's your favorite musician so far and be done with it. Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible). When you say about a technica…

> You are not, but he is and made his comment in this spirit. He made the comment in the spirit of being a silly fanboy. Just like most respondents so far. > Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible). Agreed. That's my point. > When you say about a technical concept of your expertice, that…

>> Saying someone is your favorite X and someone is the greatest X are different things, you can think of someone as the greatest X and not like them (unlikely but possible).

> Agreed. That's my point.

You do? You agree, that "X is the greatest Y" is just a valid statement as "X is my favourite Y" and conveys different information? Wasn't my observation, but then the discussion is finished. Actually the former is a better statement on a discussion website, since it allows discussion, while the latter is basically a useless statement, that you can't even object to.

> We are talking about art.

So what. You can still discuss this. Also music is also a science and Bach did some important work in this direction. There are different tastes, but whether a given artist caters to a taste the best, is something you can discuss objectively. Also composing is a craftsmanship, and you can still discuss the craftsmanship even if you don't agree with the final work.

> X is the greatest author/writer/etc, X is the greatest painter, X is the greatest musician, X is the great film director, etc. If we can't even decide within a particular art form, who is the greatest, it even more laughable to say X is the greatest artist FULL STOP.

"hearsathought" is the greatest discusser! There I just did it. Doesn't seem to be impossible to me.

> it even more laughable to say X is the greatest artist FULL STOP.

Why? lordleft didn't even claim to talk for all humans.

>> In addition he [Bach] is also (jokingly) called the fifth evangelist, at least in Germany. Not sure, if this remark is known elsewhere.

> Who cares? It just proves my point.

How so? I don't get your point then, because to me it proves the opposite.

> Who cares?

A lot of people found it useful enough to spark a discussion and it is currently the first comment.

> He made the comment in the spirit of being a silly fanboy. Just like most respondents so far.

Nah, that's just your opinion. If you don't agree, it would have been more useful to give a contradicting argument, than to dismiss the statement as inexpressible a priori.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#148

Post by lo_zamoyski »

1718627440 wrote: post #135
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Jewish culture emphasizes education and Christian were forbidden to take interests in the middle ages. So the Jews became the wealthy educated elite. "Take interests"? If by that you mean in education, then this is false. If you look at the centers of learning in the Middle Ages and who was contributing the most, these were Christians and it was the Church. The first universities-as-universities were founded th…

> "Take interests"? If by that you mean in education, then this is false. No. > because Jews were permitted to issue loans with interest to non-Jews Exactly, what I was saying, so you did get it. > And not all Jews were rich, either. This is an exaggeration. I did not say that. What I stated was that the rich educated were disproportionally (secular) Jews.

> No.

Not a great response.

> What I stated was that the rich educated were disproportionally (secular) Jews.

That came later, in the 19th century with the so-called emancipation of the Jews. Before that, "secular Jews" were not really a thing.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#149

Post by 1718627440 »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #148
1718627440 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Take interests"? If by that you mean in education, then this is false. No. > because Jews were permitted to issue loans with interest to non-Jews Exactly, what I was saying, so you did get it. > And not all Jews were rich, either. This is an exaggeration. I did not say that. What I stated was that the rich educated were disproportionally (secular) Jews.

> No. Not a great response. > What I stated was that the rich educated were disproportionally (secular) Jews. That came later, in the 19th century with the so-called emancipation of the Jews. Before that, "secular Jews" were not really a thing.

> Not a great response.

>> If you ment ... > No I didn't.

What more is there to say?

> That came later, in the 19th century with the so-called emancipation of the Jews. Before that, "secular Jews" were not really a thing.

Yes, I was talking about the German culture from late 19th to 20th century, which was what the Nazis found and were eager to destroy. This did have roots in the middle ages, which I mentioned.

A few rich people are enough to hate a whole group. White men are also not all rich, yet they are displayed as the privileged which need to be disadvantaged by some today.

Re: Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video]

#150

Post by 1718627440 »

1718627440 wrote: post #62
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I presume you know Zelenka as well, a contemporary of Bach's (both knew each other and respected each other as composers).

There were a lot of these components in middle Germany at that time. Basically every reigning dynasty employed one, and there were a lot of those. They aren't famous now, but Bach wasn't famous at that time either. That he is famous now, is due to Mendelsohn.

s/components/composers/
Post reply on HN