2007-09-12 02:19:39 · 20 answers · asked by -=MuZiCiAn=- 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music ➔ Classical
You can't compare whether apples or oranges are better, right, but they are both fruit....
A lot of Classical music has already been proven to be exceptional and has withstood the test of time.
How much current and past rock music can survive the test of time will only be proven long after we are all gone...
Personally I prefer Classical, but I am a trained musician. I also listen to a lot of Rock, though.
2007-09-12 02:25:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Classical music! Unlike rock music, it takes a long time to create a really good work (compared to rock's fast paced schedule to release a record on a certain date). Also, classical music is much more technical, which makes it better. It will surely last for the next thousand years.
2007-09-12 09:57:57 · answer #2 · answered by Redeemer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Define "Better."
Both have intrinsically different functions. There is a lot of good rock music, unfortunately there is also even more bad or at least unremarkable rock. The rock platform is inherently limited in scope. That is why there is so much of it that sounds the same. It is also why exceptional artists, you know the Pink Floyds and Led Zeppelins of this world that stand out and become adsorbed into that odd category "Classic Rock." It is an interesting phenomenon that classical music has declined in appeal since the end of WWII and that coincides with the advent of Rock 'n roll. Rock music, with its emphasis on rhythm and simple melodies is bound to appeal to a wide audience who seek infectious beats to make them move and groove. However, most rock music requires little musicianship, to the point that it is remarkable when a rock musician comes along that is a good musician. It's simplicity much of the time is its strength.
Classical music on the other hand really appeals to the intellect rather than the gut. Much of it is sonic distillations of human intellect and feelings. It is contemplative of the human condition rather than an opiate for it.
It has stood the test of time. One wonders how much rock will endure, most of it is popular for a short while then dissappears never to be heard of again.
2007-09-12 02:54:46 · answer #3 · answered by Malcolm D 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
By every objective standard, classical music is better. Unfortunately, quite a few people believe (because they've been taught to believe) that the only standard is "what I like." If I like it, it's better, so there.
Which is better... the latest Harry Potter novel, or "Great Expectations" by Charles Dickens? I like both of them... and, frankly, I probably ENJOYED the latest HP more than I enjoy reading "Great Expectations." (I love Dickens, but I've never been very fond of that particular novel... though that's a discussion for the Books and Authors section...)
Sometimes I'm more in the mood for light reading... even something really light, like an Agatha Christie mystery. But just because I'm in the mood for something lighter doesn't mean that it's BETTER than a deep, rich, meaningful work of literature. It's not just about me.
2007-09-12 14:09:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
All music styles are as good as one another. Opera for example was the popular music of past centuries. Rock, Rap, R & B are todays popular choice, yet the music of past ages still continues to be appreciated and loved by many.
Popularity is the common denominator here. Culture also plays an important part in the style of music that is listened to.
In my opinion it is all worth having a listen to as all music rocks.
2007-09-12 04:16:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rock all the way! Just ask what most people like to listen to most of the time? Classical looses every time! I'm so sick of all the snobs who claim to know what form of art is "superior" and then lord it over all the "barbarians" who don't get it. Can it only be good if no one listens to it? So I vote rock...
2007-09-12 17:05:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all personal taste. I prefer rock and roll, anything from the 50s to today (but only the good stuff, not a lot of crap that plays on the radio, if you don't know what's wrong with the radio then there is something wrong with you).
Give me the Beatles over Beethoven any day, or Talking Heads over Bach (who my wife is a descendant of, by the way), or Elvis Costello over Mozart.
2007-09-12 02:25:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What does "better" mean?
If "better" means demonstrating more technical skill, then classical music wins.
If "better" means having more appeal to more people over a longer period of time,then classical music wins.
If "better" means having the ability to influence the thought processes of the most sophisticated among us, then classical music wins.
If "better" means the ability to popularize essentially non musical personality, then rock wins.
ya I totally agree to what you say, since I hate rock music very much.....terrible, horrible and vegetable......classical ROCKS?????!!!!
2007-09-12 20:54:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What does "better" mean?
If "better" means demonstrating more technical skill, tnen classical music wins.
If "better" means having more appeal to more people over a longer period of time,then classical music wins.
If "better" means having the ability to influence the thought processes of the most sophisticated among us, then classical music wins.
If "better" means the ability to popularize essentially non musical personality, then rock wins.
2007-09-12 02:30:23 · answer #9 · answered by fredrick z 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I'll answer that question with these questions:
Which is better? New York Strip steak or a cheeseburger?
New England sharp cheddar or Velveeta?
Beverly Sills or Kanye West?
I like all of the above.
It depends on what you're in the mood for.
2007-09-12 03:15:40 · answer #10 · answered by glinzek 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋