Why? I have no idea, but it’s great that I don’t have to play duck-duck-goose just to find a solid recording of a piece I want to experience. 1 in C Minor, and I can read a concise program note about it, and right away I see the “Editor’s Choice.” Helpful! The editor - whoever that may be - chose a 2005 recording by the London Symphony Orchestra. (Today is not an A Major kind of day, I can tell you that much.) 2 in A Major”), I suppose it makes sense. But the way classical works are composed and named (“Viola Sonata No. Works are automatically listed in order of “Popularity” - meaning, how many recordings there are - but I can also filter them by Name of Work, Opus number, or… Key? That last one made me laugh out loud. His music is now organized into Works, which is immediately more useful. In the Classical app, I go into Browse > Composer > Johannes Brahms. In the mood for a saxophone concerto today? This app’s got you covered, baby. You can even drill down to individual instruments. You go into Browse and you can select from Composers, Periods, Genres, Conductors, Orchestras, Soloists, Ensembles and Choirs. Instead of “Songs,” there are “Tracks.” And in addition to the usual “Albums,” “Artists,” and “Composers,” you now have “Recordings” and “Works.” Which is much more intuitive and true to the way this “genre” of music has always worked.įundamentally, the user interface is exactly the same between the two apps, but the system makes much more sense to a classical brain. The first thing you notice when you open the Classical app is a different taxonomy. So the world of Schumann and Schubert always felt shoehorned into that framework. Those terms are reflections of pop as an inherently recorded kind of music, an industry built on singles, singers and long-playing records. At its core are “Songs,” which are grouped into “Artists,” “Albums” and “Composers.” Zoom out and you get a few dozen “Genres,” one of which is Classical.īut classical music - a ridiculously blobby umbrella of a term - isn’t divisible by units of songs, or even really artists and albums. Was your post removed from here? Found a cool site that's not particularly unique or beautiful? Head on over to /r/InternetIsInteresting.Apple’s regular Music app - the software formerly known as iTunes - was designed with a pop mentality. If this subreddit for whatever reason fails to provide the interactivity you need, we also highly recommend a look at /r/interactivewebsites for a less diluted dosage of interactivity. If you exhibit a similar addictive lust for information as you do for internet, we highly recommend you go give /r/dataisbeautiful a sub too. Something different? Try /r/InternetIsUgly. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but we have beheld a lot! This subreddit is highly curated and the moderators frequently must use their discretion and judgement as a team when enforcing our rules.Personal attacks, bigotry, fighting words and otherwise shitty behavior will be removed and may result in a ban. We enforce a standard of common decency and civility here.Includes Facebook, Google+, or otherwise.Įxtensions, software, or other content which requires a download to use. Websites that require a login or email address. Sites that pose a potential security risk. Online stores, paid services, or sites which serve only to sell a specific product. Sites that serve a political agenda or otherwise induce drama Static images, gifs, animations that serve the same purpose of gifs or collections of either. Something not unique (includes generators, blogs, tumblrs, etc.) Something everyone on the internet already knows about (e.g., Netflix, Khan Academy, etc.) What NOT to post (detailed explanations can be found here): Minimal or beautifully designed websites.Īwesome websites that offer a unique service.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |