Right now, none of the above excite me. I don't drink coffee in any form. I hate fake boobs. I have never smelled Napalm in the morning, but that might be because I am not a morning person. It occurs to me that I have explained my dislike of all of the above except for classical music.

Classical music... Now let me see, the FCC won't let me be... sorry, my mistake that's Eminem and I haven't heard of the FCC giving a rat's ass about anything to do with classical music, even the operas where the women are taking their clothes off. I don't pay $50 to go see women take their clothes off - by the time I leave, I may have spent that - but I don't go to a classical music concert or opera for that (perhaps I should, it might be cheaper). Anyway, I digress.

Years ago I remember watching basketball on TV and Charles Barkley missed a free throw. To this day I remember him screaming "GODDAMNIT". I cannot remember any classical musician ever showing anything resembling that form of passion for what they do. When was the last time at the end of a symphony that a First Violin stood up, raised the violin over their head and screamed "Whoooo, I kicked some serious fucking ass tonight"? Instead I get a polite bow or nod of the head. And you want to convince me that you are passionate about what you do? I get some pompous ass who has spent the whole time waving a stick acting as if he/she is responsible for the entire performance when their entire contribution is obstructing my view of 2nd Violin (damn, she's hot). I get to spend a few hours looking at people who look like they are dressed for a funeral. I can't even get a decent beer (and no, not everyone who shows up wants a glass of wine) while I am being subjected to this indignity.

What could I do instead? Let me count the beers...I meant the TV channels...actually I meant the things I have to do around the house like cleaning the gutters.

Ludwig van Beerthoven

(This article was written by Ludwig van Beerthoven. Enjoy and add your own comments about what you enjoy about Classical Music - OR what you don't. - Maria)

So, what is it? Is it music which was created in the past? Does it only exist as an historic art form? Is it music which requires certain discreet instruments? (as one of my friends views it): Violins, tubas; or discreet ensembles - string orchestras, woodwind quintets; or both in tandem? Is it perhaps tied to form? - Sonata form, Fugue form, Fantasia form.... Or structure? - monophonic, polyphonic, Alberti bass, Chaconne bass, 12 tone.... Can we distill it, boil it down to an essence and state that it is complex music forms and structures performed by humans on instruments traditionally relegated to classical music? What differentiates Classical Music from other genres? Yesterday another friend asked a version of that question: What differentiates Classical from Pop, and quickly answered his own question with "Dynamics". Yes. We are accustomed to hearing pop at one dynamic level. In addition, there is rubato - that sci-fi time manipulator which totally obliterates the concept of a metronome or a click track (so forget dancing to it - even slow dancing).

I am not really interested in capturing a definition. I am extremely interested in perceptions. There is no wrong answer.

Definitions of Classical music on the Web:

Usually signifying serious music intended for the concert hall, the term can also mean any kind of music with lasting value (hence, classical jazz, classical pop songs, etc.)
www.artsalive.ca/en/mus/musicresources/popDictionary.asp

traditional genre of music conforming to an established form and appealing to critical interest and developed musical taste
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

* The European tradition of music which is associated with high culture, as distinct from popular or folk forms (including works in this tradition in non-European countries).* That tradition as well as similar non-European traditions. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical music

THE CLASSICAL MUSIC SOUND

Picture an airbrushed playboy photo. Now picture the classical music sound. All that reverb and room presence has blurred any hope of detail or individual characteristics. All discs sound the same - the same room, the same amount of reverb, the same, the same, the same.

My friend Michael who manages one of the largest independent classical cd stores thinks I record too hot. He's frequently asking me to study the Philips piano recordings. I have. I'm not convinced. I'm still bored. Jerry, another friend and my favorite cellist, thinks the same. Funny because Jerry has such a unique sound I could pick him out of a roomful of cellists with my eyes closed: Brash, loud, sincere yet idiosyncratic phrasing, extreme dynamic range, over the top on everything. How is his playing style compatible with tons of reverb, a concert hall ambiance, microphones backed up all the way to Wales? He'd lose half of what makes him stand out under these circumstances.

I like the mics as close to the instruments as possible and I want NO reverb and as small a room as I can squeeze out of the engineer's software options and my artist co-horts. Of course this means we walk in and we know our shit because recording under these conditions is like walking in downtown stark ass naked. Ain't nothing between your preparation and the final product. The recording session is NOT an expensive practice session. The control does not rest with the engineer, it rests with the performer.

Does this mean I ignore all the great technology in the studio? Hell no. We used a click track through most of the Muczynski cello/piano Sonata (and wove the rubato around it) in order to insure forward motion or at least to insure against backward motion. We drop in re-recorded notes/measures/passages. We bow before cross-fade and pitch tweaking and scootching one instrument forward or back in order to better line up an attack or a release. But all this because we record in large segments - from 48 to 64 measures typically. I like authentic continuity. I like to think I can sense the difference between splicing and dicing and something closer to a live performance.

I also argue my ass off trying to hold back the tide on reverberation when we mix. If there's one thing that destroys a recorded classical performance it's reverberation. It masks everything. Musicians have defaulted to reverberation because it also masks mistakes. Somewhere along the way, we became used to that sound. Yes, it does mirror the quality of a concert hall which I also can't stand - I much prefer dead rooms where my ears can pick up everything. Dead rooms are frequently described as brittle sounding whereas concert halls (and reverberation) are thought to warm up the sound. I find having to fight through the echo to find the detail annoying not warm. Conversely, I find the overstimulation in hearing everything in a dead room really exciting.

Enough bitching. If I don't start practicing I'll have to resort to reverb.

Where do I start? The classical music market is a mess. The environment is stifling. Like my friend, Theo, said yesterday...."going to a classical music concert or listening to classical music is like eating your peas....something that's good for you but not really interesting". Amen.

By age 20 I was like Paul - persecuting classical musicians, compositions. I felt classical music was no longer relevant. I felt the art had archival value but no current relevance.

So why has the desire to save, to resurrect the status of classical music become such a mission for me? I don't need this mission. I don't need a mission to define myself. I am a fulfilled individual. I'd be happy tandeming the Swiss Alps or finally learning how to box or god forbid, learning how to play viola.

Instead, I pull really grueling daily practice sessions at the piano, wrangle with controlling composers, controlling publishers, controlling other artists involved in my projects in order to put forth another option for classical music. I honestly (and some say delusionally) think classical music can sell as many units (cds, digital downloads, whatever) as pop music. I've dispassionately watched audiences respond to my concerts, which are carefully orchestrated in terms of selecting music that I'm sure they'll love and presenting it in a way that moves them. I've sat on the fence debating whether or not to embrace this mission for so long that the Universe is fucking tired of me freeloading on that top rail.

Why am I embracing this mission? "Storm Session", Suite - op. 124, Second Sonata, all by Tomas Svoboda; Villa-Lobos' Second Sonata for Cello and Piano; Theodorakis' "Radar"; Schubert's Fantasie in f minor - the ultimate metaphor for suicide; Milhaud's Quartet for flute, oboe, clarinet, piano - the ultimate metaphor for THE END (overtaking even Jim Morrison's). That's why. These pieces and hundreds more are vibrant, relevant, moving like Picasso's "Guernica". Classical music is not a dead art worthy of being referred to, tucked away and archived in an important museum. It's alive - brutal, visceral, relevant. It needs me because no one else is stepping up to pitch its worth in any way that isn't patronizing, elitist or self-serving.

If I'm very lucky, others will jump in quickly. I don't want to own this show or to even stake out my own niche. This genre needs at least 40 strong charismatic acts within 10 years who are like minded - who can handle and want to see 140 such acts within 15 years. There is no room for divisive competition. I love competition - fucking thrive on it. But I adore and respect and pay homage to worthy competitors as well. Classical music - in order to survive - needs worthy competitors. Bring 'em on!