Here’s a cool story about Simon & Garfunkel and Frank Zappa. Frank explains: I was in Manny’s Musical Instruments in New York sometime in 1967, and it was raining outside. A little guy came walking in, kind of wet, and introduced himself as Paul Simon. He said he wanted me to come to dinner at his house that night, and gave me the address. I said okay and went there. As I walked in the door, Paul was on his hands and knees in front of what appeared to be a Magnavox stereo - the same model preferred by “the Stumbler” from Sun Village. He had his ear right up to the speaker, listening to a Django Reinhardt record. Within moments - for no apparent reason - he announced that he was upset because he had to pay six hundred thousand dollars in income tax that year. This was completely unsolicited information, and I thought to myself, If only I could earn six hundred thousand dollars. What did you have to earn in order to have to pay that much tax? Then Art Garfunkel came in, and we talked and talked. They hadn’t been on the road in a long time, and were reminiscing about the ‘good old days.’ I didn’t realize that they used to be called Tom & Jerry, and that they once had a hit song called “Hey, Schoolgirl in the Second Row.” I said, “Well, I can understand your desire to experience the joys of touring once again, and so I’ll make you this offer. . . we’re playing in Buffalo tomorrow night. Why don’t you guys come up there and open for us as Tom & Jerry? I won’t tell anybody. Just get your stuff and go out there and sing ‘Hey, Schoolgirl in the Second Row’ - just play only your old stuff, no Simon & Garfunkel tunes.” They loved the idea and said they would do it. They did the opener as Tom & Jerry; we played our show, and at the encore I told the audience, “I’d like to bring back our friends to do another number.” They came out and played “Sounds of Silence.” At that point it dawned on everybody that this was the one, and only, the magnificent SIMON & GARFUNKEL. On the way out, after the show, a college-educated woman walked over to me and said, “Why did you do that? Why did you make fun of Simon & Garfunkel?” - as if I had pulled some kind of cruel joke on them. What the fuck did she think had just happened? That these two SUPERSTARS had dropped in out of nowhere and we had FORCED them to sing “OOO-boppa-loochy-bah, she’s mine!”? Simon & Garfunkel Clark Gymnasium, SUNY, Buffalo, NY, May 2, 1969 FZ & Peter Occhiogrosso, The Real Frank Zappa Book, 1989, p. 98-99
I remember hearing "Hey, Schoolgirl" on the radio when I was in grade school. Sounded a lot like The Everly Brothers. Later, when S&G hit the bigtime, I was surprised when I read in a fan mag that they had been Tom & Jerry.
What if the difference between popular songs and art sons is that popular songs have that certain special popular flair ( of some sort) which is lacking in art songs? Perhaps something like La Donna e mobile could well be regarded as a popular song rather than an art song because it possesses a clear 'popular' quality.
Glenn Miller. He was seen in much the same way as Mozart and Haydn were in their time.Mozart and Haydn were similarly popuar in bth senses of the word in their time. Duke Ellington, of course. Oscar Peterson as a pianist and Sarah Vughan as a singer. In a much-derided category, Roy Clark for virtuosity. Classical music is not great for being inaccessile due to mass audiences. Snobbery is for schmucks. Let's remember that olk music often fetilizes great music, whether that of Dvorak, Ives, Barto, Villa-Lobos, or Chavez, Indeed, the greatest works of DSCH, his string quartets, are infused with folk elements. Folk music at its best is melodically coherent, and that is where we start.
The listening position, at least in concerts, of the listener perhaps differ when listening to the 'art song recital' : heating sternly a seat and wearing a kind of elaborate wig.
I agree that Paul Simon is one of the finest songwriters. In the limited universe of pop artists whose oeuvre most closely overlaps with a "classical" lieder sensibility I might also include Joni Mitchell. I see a lot of other suggestions in the comments for artists that, even though they are fine, don't really match what you're driving at.
Thank you for pointing this out. I'm a composer and composition teacher in a conservatory (a very nerdy and minutious one) and yet my musical sensibility was first formed during many years of listening to my father's tiny record collection, which included some of the best popular records from the marvelously creative 60's and 70's, of which S&G's songs were some of our favorites. Yes, their songs are some of the most beautiful ever written, and in the second half of the 20th-century the best and most artful songs one can ever dream of are found in the popular canon, not in the "art" one. My dad also had half dozen classical records which spurred my interest, so for me both worlds were always endlessly fascinating since I remember existing, so much so that I ended up graduating in (classical) composition, and I'm still eternally curious about both universes, in fact I think curiosity is the best key to treasure-finding in any music. As much as I delight in savoring and learning from Bartok's works or from the incredible symbolic details in Schumann's opening song of "Frauenlieben", if someone tries to tell me that Chico Buarque and Edu Lobo's "Beatriz" is not a manifestation of genius I'll think to myself I'm talking to someone who has no clue about music from outside the conservatory tradition, by pure irresponsibility of who educated them musically and critically. My greatest professor of aesthetic thinking on music was João Gilberto, since a teacher dedicated one of his classes to his work. His music still has that reference status for me, and I maintain that the best popular music can bring us as much richness and fulfillment if we care to knowing it beyond the obvious, which many classical snobby-idiots, despite their supposed "intelectual" outlook (so often supporting an idiotic prejudice based on social class), won't do. People should be educated in experiencing how good it is to be able to find beauty in the most diverse and unpredictable places (and if they applied that mindset for people as well, we wouldn't have such a violent world). It's just about listening to anything as long as the listening is attentive to the content itself, with a critical mind. Music can be marvelous in so many ways if we accept the premises it's built upon! Besides, the mythical 19th-century European musical world which feeded that kind of snobbery is just one there was, and it is no more, people have to grow out of it even if they are in awe (justifiably, of course) about the perennial masterworks it brought to our enjoyment.
Oh Dave, you are so right there. This made up distinction between Art and Pop is an artificial one. The songs of the Beatles, your American Liederbuch or the wonderful Schlager of the Weimar Republic are musical and lyrical gems. Thank you Dave for these insights.
I look forward to Hugo Wolf becoming popular when he’s just marketed properly. After all, he’s one of the greatest exponents of the “art song” so presumably should be popular. Forgive me if I don’t hold my breath however…
I wholeheartedly agree with your take here, Dave. Working at Tower Records in the 1980s, I got to experience snobbery from both the classical and popular worlds. On my lunch hour (when I had the $) I'd cross Sunset Boulevard to the big Main Store and buy albums by Metallica and U2 and Jane's Addiction. The clerks there were like, "You work at Classical, right? How can you listen to that crap?" Then I'd go back to the Classical Annex and some coworkers would see what I bought and say, "How can you listen to that crap?" It was sort of annoying then and seems downright silly now, because I've always thought there was just good music and bad, the genre didn't matter.
So long Frank Lloyd Wright! I remember well when my sister offered " bridge over troubled water" so beautiful! 1971! Thank you...an other great melodist : Burt Bacharach Thank you for your eclecticism ( in french eclectism! I must be careful!)
This is a wonderful segment. I think songs like “America,” “The Sounds of Silence,” and “Bridge Over Troubled Water” will be played centuries from now; if we last that long.
Thanks, Dave, for the Paul Simon plug. I couldn't have said it better myself. Fantastic music, poetic lines, and species counterpoint. Who could ask for more?? ❤
Are we going to have the Beatles and The Beach Boys next? I hope so! More emotionally expressive and topical than Pet Sounds and Revolver? Don't think so...
Dave, what's the difference between classical music and art music? Is there a difference? And where do you draw the line between popular music and art/classical music? Where does prog bands like ELP, Genesis, Henry Cow and Univers Zero fall? Are they art/classical music or popular music? I have a hard time defining Henry Cow as popular music, but I don't know if they are classical music either. I would love to hear your thoughts on this.
This is a great review. I always said they had the quality of Schubert, but don‘t forget, Burt Bacherach said, where would we sing writers be without Schubert?
Really totally agree. In particular the expansion of accompaniments to voice (whether acoustic or electronic) in the popular songs of the later twentieth century was remarkable. So, although I like reams of other popular song, Lennon/ McCarntny “I am the Walrus “ deserves to be right up there with Schuberts “Doppelgänger “. However I’d hope this discussion doesn’t lead to people being put off Lieder (and analogues). Sure, there was snobbery and class distinction) going on here after WW2 particularly- European and other elites re establishing themselves after the disruptions. Hence the cult of the Salzburg liederabends etc, and maybe the Wigmore hall here in London. Same with the bel canto revival in opera. But Schubert, Schumann, Mahler etc songs can outperform that social situation and are some of the great things in 19th century music, so we should definitely keep on listening nonetheless:-)
Great stuff. The "classical" lieder you mention are quite often ballads and/or love songs of one kind or another. They are no different in essence than those of modern balladeers like S&G, Joni Mitchell, Gordon Lightfoot and many others.
In spite of all the curses of modernity, as a musician, I still feel so lucky and privileged to be living in this era, in which I can get funky with Prince for awhile, weep with Mahler's adagios the next, rock with Ozzy, yearn with Larry Gatlin, ruminate with Joni, bossa nova with Joyce Moreno, and chill with Bill (Evans). Like another great lieder writer said 'it's still rock and roll to me'.
One of my very favorite Lieder is "Remembering Marie A." from Brecht's play "Baal" - sung by David Bowie. His cover of Jacques Brel's "My Death" is also amazing.
I remember very well your video "My Lieder Problem" several years ago. Let's say I wasn't immediately convinced, but I've come to see the truth in it over the years. Whenever I need a reminder that a song is just a song, I think of Die Forelle, which I can't abide. And I worship Schubert!
Indeed some of these "popular" songwriters are up there with the best! A similar case can be made for some great artists from the French chanson. I'm thinking of great names like Jacques Brel and Georges Brassens, and more recently Francis Cabrel.
Out of interest, what do you suppose it is that prevents any - any - “classical lieder” from becoming popular (even its greatest exponents such as Schubert, Schumann and Wolf)?
Language barriers, custom and culture, and marketing. Popular artists use classical materials all the time, but they aren't encouraged to do so in a systematic way.
I don't know if they are so well known out of Spain, but here we have two of the best song writers in all History of Music: Joan Manuel Serrat and Luis Eduardo Aute. For me, they are up in the top also at the same level than (yes!) Schubert.
"The Sounds of Silence" exists in two studio versions, but the parts actually sung and played by Simon and Garfunkel were the same. Simon and Garfunkel actually broke up after "Wednesday Morning, 3 A.M." and Simon was on vacation in London when someone at Columbia Records had the idea that "The Sounds of Silence" could be a pop hit. So they hired producer Tom Wilson to add a rock-band accompaniment and dub it into the record. The song was a huge hit and so Simon and Garfunkel reunited and made a whole album in the same style. Also "At the Zoo" was originally written for the scene in "The Graduate" which takes place at a zoo, but director Mike Nichols chose not to use it.
Your (very wise) philosophy reminds of something I heard the the great musicologist, Karl Haas, say many many years ago (and I might be paraphrasing slightly), “There are only two types of music: Good music and bad music.”
Widely quoted and everyone tends to agree. A moment’s thought reveals it as obvious nonsense since no two people will necessarily agree on what is good and what is bad. I’d argue a more rigorous test is the passage of time..
Elvis Costello and Ann-Sofie von Otter made a great album together called “For the stars”. Ann-Sofie singing songs from Costello and other modern songwriters in pop and rock music. It’s sometimes called crossover when a classical artist performs modern popular music, but I thinnk you can interpret a song in many different ways and styles, the song is still the song. It’s snobbery to call it crossover, maybe implying that you take a step into an inferior area of musical styles.
I actually think S&G hit their peak on “My Little Town”, released on Paul Simon’s solo album, Still Crazy After All These Years (a classic, imho). Ironically, this was five years after they officially split.
It was also on Garfunkel's current album, "Breakaway." The B-side contained a song from each album: "Rag Doll" by Art Garfunkel, "You're Kind" by Paul Simon.
Thanks for a this appreciation of those great songs. Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem to imply that the two of them wrote the songs together. Garfunkel had a great voice, but Paul Simon was the sole songwriter, words and music.
Yesss! When I heard that Bob Dylan was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature I screamed "What about Paul?" The Boxer is right up there with Schubert's Gute Nacht.
Dylan's prize was more for his lyrics, which are packed into his relatively simpler songs in abundance. In terms of songwriting alone, Bob has many equals or superiors.
@@bobk4402Of course I know Dylan was awarded the prize for his poetry only, it is after all the prize for literature, not songs. What I am expressing is that Simon's poetry is no less beautiful than Dylan's. But Dylan's verses have a political dimension and a bigger social/cultural impact,. Thus he is more deserving of the prize, I guess. I remember trying to read some of Dylan's lyrics without playing the music in my head. They are still beautiful but IMHO, not Nobel material. So what I was trying to say is: if Dylan is deserving of the prize, so does Simon. But now that I've reminded myself of the politics of the 60s, I guess I'll have to begrudgingly agree with the Nobel Committee.
Thomas Beecham defined great music as that which "enters the ear with facility and quits it with difficulty." If that definition has any validity, a lot of "popular" music would qualify as great. When I discovered classical music, I knew it was classical, but to me, it was really just great entertainment. Like today's leap day birthday boy, Rossini. The one distinction I'd make between classical song and the popular variety is that the former only require sympathetic, able interpreters while the latter will always only make its FULL effect as performed by the original interpreters and recordings. Der Lindenbaum or In dem schatten meiner Locken will always be strike home with a fine singer and pianist but S&G need S&G; Beach Boys the Beach Boys; The Gambler really needs Kenny Rogers. Sure, others can do covers, but it's not the full experience. The full effect is in those recording sessions and will always be. That's just the nature of popular song in the modern era. It wasn't true even of earlier 20th century writers like Gershwin, Porter, Berlin or Kern.
I disagree with you. For example, I think Elton John's "Lucy In the Sky with Diamonds" was far superior to the Beatles' original. You have to judge these things one performance at a time.
I’m glad that Dave did this. He makes a good point about what makes a great dong. However, while they were a partnership, it should not be suggested that in any way this was a songwriting team like George and Ira Gershwin. Simon not only wrote all the songs-he composed all the music. Garfunkel was never a composer. If anything, Simon is the Cole Porter of his generation.
I can't believe it. I was just telling my brother recently that I thought Paul Simon was the greatest singer/song writer of the 20th century, and possibly of any century. The following are more "hit and miss" than Paul Simon, but each has at least a few truly great songs: Steely Dan (Peg, Bad Sneakers, Reelin in the Years, Do It Again) Sting (Fields of Gold) Bruce Springsteen (My Hometown, Born to Run) Jethro Tull (Skating Away, Living in the Past) John Denver (Country Roads, Rocky Mountain High)
A "Tune," a "simple" melody, are not as easy to create as some might think. Why wouldn't these be competitive with lieder or classical music in general? "For No One" on Revolver is a McCartnery two minute wonder -- and there were others -- and recognized as such on the recent re-release of Revolver as noted by a critic at the Wall Street Journal. Of course Simon and Garfunkel's THE BOXER is heartbreakingly beautiful and memorable.
As probably the least musically educated of your viewers, I'm surprised no one gave the reason Classical snobs look down on pop songs, think they're inferior to "art" songs. Through Composed vocal works are superior to strophic songs. The fact that they're easy to whistle means they have less merit. They may not say that, but I think they believe it. When I bought "complete " sets of composers' works, I noticed that most of the contents were vocal works. They wrote, in the Nineteenth Century, for a Middle Class audience that entertained themselves by singing at the piano. In the Twentieth, with recordings that faded and in the Twenty First, it's pretty much gone. My difficultly with art song is language. Having to follow a text is tedious and since I buy budget discs, there are usually no texts.
I'm glad you gleefully deflated the pompous attitude that would erect an artificial barrier between "serious" or "art" music and popular music. That kind of thinking is so tiresome and self-defeating. Music is either interesting and moving (to you), or it's not. I'd happily stack the best popular music (in the broad sense, to include rock, soul, blues, etc.) against classical Lieder any day of the week. I'd much rather break out an 80's Iron Maiden album than listen to Erlkönig again.
Видеоклипы
Here’s a cool story about Simon & Garfunkel and Frank Zappa. Frank explains:
I was in Manny’s Musical Instruments in New York sometime in 1967, and it was raining outside. A little guy came walking in, kind of wet, and introduced himself as Paul Simon. He said he wanted me to come to dinner at his house that night, and gave me the address. I said okay and went there. As I walked in the door, Paul was on his hands and knees in front of what appeared to be a Magnavox stereo - the same model preferred by “the Stumbler” from Sun Village. He had his ear right up to the speaker, listening to a Django Reinhardt record. Within moments - for no apparent reason - he announced that he was upset because he had to pay six hundred thousand dollars in income tax that year. This was completely unsolicited information, and I thought to myself, If only I could earn six hundred thousand dollars. What did you have to earn in order to have to pay that much tax? Then Art Garfunkel came in, and we talked and talked. They hadn’t been on the road in a long time, and were reminiscing about the ‘good old days.’ I didn’t realize that they used to be called Tom & Jerry, and that they once had a hit song called “Hey, Schoolgirl in the Second Row.” I said, “Well, I can understand your desire to experience the joys of touring once again, and so I’ll make you this offer. . . we’re playing in Buffalo tomorrow night. Why don’t you guys come up there and open for us as Tom & Jerry? I won’t tell anybody. Just get your stuff and go out there and sing ‘Hey, Schoolgirl in the Second Row’ - just play only your old stuff, no Simon & Garfunkel tunes.” They loved the idea and said they would do it. They did the opener as Tom & Jerry; we played our show, and at the encore I told the audience, “I’d like to bring back our friends to do another number.” They came out and played “Sounds of Silence.” At that point it dawned on everybody that this was the one, and only, the magnificent SIMON & GARFUNKEL. On the way out, after the show, a college-educated woman walked over to me and said, “Why did you do that? Why did you make fun of Simon & Garfunkel?” - as if I had pulled some kind of cruel joke on them. What the fuck did she think had just happened? That these two SUPERSTARS had dropped in out of nowhere and we had FORCED them to sing “OOO-boppa-loochy-bah, she’s mine!”? Simon & Garfunkel Clark Gymnasium, SUNY, Buffalo, NY, May 2, 1969 FZ & Peter Occhiogrosso, The Real Frank Zappa Book, 1989, p. 98-99
Great story!
Wonderful story!
I remember hearing "Hey, Schoolgirl" on the radio when I was in grade school. Sounded a lot like The Everly Brothers. Later, when S&G hit the bigtime, I was surprised when I read in a fan mag that they had been Tom & Jerry.
What if the difference between popular songs and art sons is that popular songs have that certain special popular flair ( of some sort) which is lacking in art songs? Perhaps something like La Donna e mobile could well be regarded as a popular song rather than an art song because it possesses a clear 'popular' quality.
I would like to hear the professor's view of other popular music as well.
Glenn Miller. He was seen in much the same way as Mozart and Haydn were in their time.Mozart and Haydn were similarly popuar in bth senses of the word in their time. Duke Ellington, of course. Oscar Peterson as a pianist and Sarah Vughan as a singer. In a much-derided category, Roy Clark for virtuosity.
Classical music is not great for being inaccessile due to mass audiences. Snobbery is for schmucks. Let's remember that olk music often fetilizes great music, whether that of Dvorak, Ives, Barto, Villa-Lobos, or Chavez, Indeed, the greatest works of DSCH, his string quartets, are infused with folk elements. Folk music at its best is melodically coherent, and that is where we start.
The listening position, at least in concerts, of the listener perhaps differ when listening to the 'art song recital' : heating sternly a seat and wearing a kind of elaborate wig.
Couldn't agree more. Simon's songs are up there with the best.
If a song is performed and recorded 100 years after the date of composition, it is probably a classic.
Great American Songbook.
I agree that Paul Simon is one of the finest songwriters. In the limited universe of pop artists whose oeuvre most closely overlaps with a "classical" lieder sensibility I might also include Joni Mitchell. I see a lot of other suggestions in the comments for artists that, even though they are fine, don't really match what you're driving at.
You're right. I think Joni Mitchell's best is as good as it gets. 'Coyote'!
Thank you for pointing this out. I'm a composer and composition teacher in a conservatory (a very nerdy and minutious one) and yet my musical sensibility was first formed during many years of listening to my father's tiny record collection, which included some of the best popular records from the marvelously creative 60's and 70's, of which S&G's songs were some of our favorites. Yes, their songs are some of the most beautiful ever written, and in the second half of the 20th-century the best and most artful songs one can ever dream of are found in the popular canon, not in the "art" one.
My dad also had half dozen classical records which spurred my interest, so for me both worlds were always endlessly fascinating since I remember existing, so much so that I ended up graduating in (classical) composition, and I'm still eternally curious about both universes, in fact I think curiosity is the best key to treasure-finding in any music. As much as I delight in savoring and learning from Bartok's works or from the incredible symbolic details in Schumann's opening song of "Frauenlieben", if someone tries to tell me that Chico Buarque and Edu Lobo's "Beatriz" is not a manifestation of genius I'll think to myself I'm talking to someone who has no clue about music from outside the conservatory tradition, by pure irresponsibility of who educated them musically and critically. My greatest professor of aesthetic thinking on music was João Gilberto, since a teacher dedicated one of his classes to his work. His music still has that reference status for me, and I maintain that the best popular music can bring us as much richness and fulfillment if we care to knowing it beyond the obvious, which many classical snobby-idiots, despite their supposed "intelectual" outlook (so often supporting an idiotic prejudice based on social class), won't do.
People should be educated in experiencing how good it is to be able to find beauty in the most diverse and unpredictable places (and if they applied that mindset for people as well, we wouldn't have such a violent world). It's just about listening to anything as long as the listening is attentive to the content itself, with a critical mind. Music can be marvelous in so many ways if we accept the premises it's built upon! Besides, the mythical 19th-century European musical world which feeded that kind of snobbery is just one there was, and it is no more, people have to grow out of it even if they are in awe (justifiably, of course) about the perennial masterworks it brought to our enjoyment.
Oh Dave, you are so right there.
This made up distinction between Art and Pop is an artificial one. The songs of the Beatles, your American Liederbuch or the wonderful Schlager of the Weimar Republic are musical and lyrical gems.
Thank you Dave for these insights.
I look forward to Hugo Wolf becoming popular when he’s just marketed properly. After all, he’s one of the greatest exponents of the “art song” so presumably should be popular. Forgive me if I don’t hold my breath however…
I wholeheartedly agree with your take here, Dave. Working at Tower Records in the 1980s, I got to experience snobbery from both the classical and popular worlds. On my lunch hour (when I had the $) I'd cross Sunset Boulevard to the big Main Store and buy albums by Metallica and U2 and Jane's Addiction. The clerks there were like, "You work at Classical, right? How can you listen to that crap?" Then I'd go back to the Classical Annex and some coworkers would see what I bought and say, "How can you listen to that crap?" It was sort of annoying then and seems downright silly now, because I've always thought there was just good music and bad, the genre didn't matter.
I love the band Kiss and Boulez works
How about the Great American Songbook, Duke Ellington (I can't wait until you get to the E's)?
So long Frank Lloyd Wright! I remember well when my sister offered " bridge over troubled water" so beautiful! 1971! Thank you...an other great melodist : Burt Bacharach
Thank you for your eclecticism ( in french eclectism! I must be careful!)
This is a wonderful segment. I think songs like “America,” “The Sounds of Silence,” and “Bridge Over Troubled Water” will be played centuries from now; if we last that long.
What a beautiful, luminous 12 minute listen from DH.
Im already so grateful to him for recordings i now own.
Thanks, Dave, for the Paul Simon plug. I couldn't have said it better myself. Fantastic music, poetic lines, and species counterpoint. Who could ask for more?? ❤
Well done & happy you did it.
Those songs are simply "untouchable " and served as the soundtrack to tons of people...and continue to. 👍
Are we going to have the Beatles and The Beach Boys next? I hope so! More emotionally expressive and topical than Pet Sounds and Revolver? Don't think so...
Dave, what's the difference between classical music and art music? Is there a difference? And where do you draw the line between popular music and art/classical music?
Where does prog bands like ELP, Genesis, Henry Cow and Univers Zero fall? Are they art/classical music or popular music? I have a hard time defining Henry Cow as popular music, but I don't know if they are classical music either. I would love to hear your thoughts on this.
This is a great review. I always said they had the quality of Schubert, but don‘t forget, Burt Bacherach said, where would we sing writers be without Schubert?
The first album I ever owned was Sounds of Silence. I still have that 55-year-old copy.
Really totally agree. In particular the expansion of accompaniments to voice (whether acoustic or electronic) in the popular songs of the later twentieth century was remarkable. So, although I like reams of other popular song, Lennon/ McCarntny “I am the Walrus “ deserves to be right up there with Schuberts “Doppelgänger “.
However I’d hope this discussion doesn’t lead to people being put off Lieder (and analogues). Sure, there was snobbery and class distinction) going on here after WW2 particularly- European and other elites re establishing themselves after the disruptions. Hence the cult of the Salzburg liederabends etc, and maybe the Wigmore hall here in London. Same with the bel canto revival in opera.
But Schubert, Schumann, Mahler etc songs can outperform that social situation and are some of the great things in 19th century music, so we should definitely keep on listening nonetheless:-)
Great stuff. The "classical" lieder you mention are quite often ballads and/or love songs of one kind or another. They are no different in essence than those of modern balladeers like S&G, Joni Mitchell, Gordon Lightfoot and many others.
Much like your experience with Cecelia, my favorite song in first grade was Centerfold by the J. Giles Band...
I couldn’t agree more. There is also the’Old Friends’ compilation.
love to hear your take on Joni Mitchell
In spite of all the curses of modernity, as a musician, I still feel so lucky and privileged to be living in this era, in which I can get funky with Prince for awhile, weep with Mahler's adagios the next, rock with Ozzy, yearn with Larry Gatlin, ruminate with Joni, bossa nova with Joyce Moreno, and chill with Bill (Evans). Like another great lieder writer said 'it's still rock and roll to me'.
Have you heard Paul's new album Seven Psalms? It's such a perfect addition to an already legendary catalog.
My introduction to Simon and Garfunkel was "Bridge Over Troubled Water". Wonderful album. "El Condor Pasa" was magnificent.
One of my very favorite Lieder is "Remembering Marie A." from Brecht's play "Baal" - sung by David Bowie. His cover of Jacques Brel's "My Death" is also amazing.
I agree totally ! Nice video! Thanx.
El Condor Pasa: “I’d rather be a hammer than a nail”, passage reminds me of Eroica 2nd movement intro part
I remember very well your video "My Lieder Problem" several years ago. Let's say I wasn't immediately convinced, but I've come to see the truth in it over the years. Whenever I need a reminder that a song is just a song, I think of Die Forelle, which I can't abide. And I worship Schubert!
I, too, would place Paul Simon in the very top rank. But in terms of personal resonance, I make no apology for preferring Schubert.
How about reviewing other popular music, Lennon, McCartney, The beach boys maybe...
We’ll see.
@@DavesClassicalGuide ...or Burt Bacharach a pupil of Milhaud.
Indeed some of these "popular" songwriters are up there with the best! A similar case can be made for some great artists from the French chanson. I'm thinking of great names like Jacques Brel and Georges Brassens, and more recently Francis Cabrel.
The beatles next ?
Out of interest, what do you suppose it is that prevents any - any - “classical lieder” from becoming popular (even its greatest exponents such as Schubert, Schumann and Wolf)?
Language barriers, custom and culture, and marketing. Popular artists use classical materials all the time, but they aren't encouraged to do so in a systematic way.
I don't know if they are so well known out of Spain, but here we have two of the best song writers in all History of Music: Joan Manuel Serrat and Luis Eduardo Aute. For me, they are up in the top also at the same level than (yes!) Schubert.
"The Sounds of Silence" exists in two studio versions, but the parts actually sung and played by Simon and Garfunkel were the same. Simon and Garfunkel actually broke up after "Wednesday Morning, 3 A.M." and Simon was on vacation in London when someone at Columbia Records had the idea that "The Sounds of Silence" could be a pop hit. So they hired producer Tom Wilson to add a rock-band accompaniment and dub it into the record. The song was a huge hit and so Simon and Garfunkel reunited and made a whole album in the same style. Also "At the Zoo" was originally written for the scene in "The Graduate" which takes place at a zoo, but director Mike Nichols chose not to use it.
I feel that Carol King was one of the great song writers in the 60s.
Your (very wise) philosophy reminds of something I heard the the great musicologist, Karl Haas, say many many years ago (and I might be paraphrasing slightly), “There are only two types of music: Good music and bad music.”
Widely quoted and everyone tends to agree. A moment’s thought reveals it as obvious nonsense since no two people will necessarily agree on what is good and what is bad. I’d argue a more rigorous test is the passage of time..
Elvis Costello and Ann-Sofie von Otter made a great album together called “For the stars”. Ann-Sofie singing songs from Costello and other modern songwriters in pop and rock music. It’s sometimes called crossover when a classical artist performs modern popular music, but I thinnk you can interpret a song in many different ways and styles, the song is still the song. It’s snobbery to call it crossover, maybe implying that you take a step into an inferior area of musical styles.
I really dislike almost all classical-pop crossover but I love this album. It's the only Costello record I like.
Bravo !!!!
So, would you say that box is the Reference Recording?
No. It's not on period instruments.
I actually think S&G hit their peak on “My Little Town”, released on Paul Simon’s solo album, Still Crazy After All These Years (a classic, imho). Ironically, this was five years after they officially split.
It was also on Garfunkel's current album, "Breakaway." The B-side contained a song from each album: "Rag Doll" by Art Garfunkel, "You're Kind" by Paul Simon.
I wonder if we can really speak of popular songs before the age of sheet music and especially the radio.
Sure we can.
Thanks for a this appreciation of those great songs. Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem to imply that the two of them wrote the songs together. Garfunkel had a great voice, but Paul Simon was the sole songwriter, words and music.
I know.
Yesss! When I heard that Bob Dylan was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature I screamed "What about Paul?" The Boxer is right up there with Schubert's Gute Nacht.
Dylan's prize was more for his lyrics, which are packed into his relatively simpler songs in abundance. In terms of songwriting alone, Bob has many equals or superiors.
@@bobk4402Of course I know Dylan was awarded the prize for his poetry only, it is after all the prize for literature, not songs. What I am expressing is that Simon's poetry is no less beautiful than Dylan's. But Dylan's verses have a political dimension and a bigger social/cultural impact,. Thus he is more deserving of the prize, I guess. I remember trying to read some of Dylan's lyrics without playing the music in my head. They are still beautiful but IMHO, not Nobel material. So what I was trying to say is: if Dylan is deserving of the prize, so does Simon. But now that I've reminded myself of the politics of the 60s, I guess I'll have to begrudgingly agree with the Nobel Committee.
Bravo.
Where do you think Bob Dylan ranks as a poet/ musician?
High.
Great poet and songwriter. Lousy singer, though. Frank Sinatra might have sung his works better... maybe the two just didn't get along.
@@paulbrowerlove Dylans voice, they actually did get along
Thomas Beecham defined great music as that which "enters the ear with facility and quits it with difficulty." If that definition has any validity, a lot of "popular" music would qualify as great.
When I discovered classical music, I knew it was classical, but to me, it was really just great entertainment. Like today's leap day birthday boy, Rossini.
The one distinction I'd make between classical song and the popular variety is that the former only require sympathetic, able interpreters while the latter will always only make its FULL effect as performed by the original interpreters and recordings.
Der Lindenbaum or In dem schatten meiner Locken will always be strike home with a fine singer and pianist but S&G need S&G; Beach Boys the Beach Boys; The Gambler really needs Kenny Rogers. Sure, others can do covers, but it's not the full experience. The full effect is in those recording sessions and will always be. That's just the nature of popular song in the modern era. It wasn't true even of earlier 20th century writers like Gershwin, Porter, Berlin or Kern.
I disagree with you. For example, I think Elton John's "Lucy In the Sky with Diamonds" was far superior to the Beatles' original. You have to judge these things one performance at a time.
I’m glad that Dave did this. He makes a good point about what makes a great dong. However, while they were a partnership, it should not be suggested that in any way this was a songwriting team like George and Ira Gershwin. Simon not only wrote all the songs-he composed all the music. Garfunkel was never a composer. If anything, Simon is the Cole Porter of his generation.
I can't believe it. I was just telling my brother recently that I thought Paul Simon was the greatest singer/song writer of the 20th century, and possibly of any century. The following are more "hit and miss" than Paul Simon, but each has at least a few truly great songs:
Steely Dan (Peg, Bad Sneakers, Reelin in the Years, Do It Again)
Sting (Fields of Gold)
Bruce Springsteen (My Hometown, Born to Run)
Jethro Tull (Skating Away, Living in the Past)
John Denver (Country Roads, Rocky Mountain High)
A "Tune," a "simple" melody, are not as easy to create as some might think. Why wouldn't these be competitive with lieder or classical music in general? "For No One" on Revolver is a McCartnery two minute wonder -- and there were others -- and recognized as such on the recent re-release of Revolver as noted by a critic at the Wall Street Journal. Of course Simon and Garfunkel's THE BOXER is heartbreakingly beautiful and memorable.
As probably the least musically educated of your viewers, I'm surprised no one gave the reason Classical snobs look down on pop songs, think they're inferior to "art" songs.
Through Composed vocal works are superior to strophic songs. The fact that they're easy to whistle means they have less merit. They may not say that, but I think they believe it.
When I bought "complete " sets of composers' works, I noticed that most of the contents were vocal works. They wrote, in the Nineteenth Century, for a Middle Class audience that entertained themselves by singing at the piano. In the Twentieth, with recordings that faded and in the Twenty First, it's pretty much gone.
My difficultly with art song is language. Having to follow a text is tedious and since I buy budget discs, there are usually no texts.
I'm glad you gleefully deflated the pompous attitude that would erect an artificial barrier between "serious" or "art" music and popular music. That kind of thinking is so tiresome and self-defeating. Music is either interesting and moving (to you), or it's not. I'd happily stack the best popular music (in the broad sense, to include rock, soul, blues, etc.) against classical Lieder any day of the week. I'd much rather break out an 80's Iron Maiden album than listen to Erlkönig again.
You and me both.