I think you are totally missing one aspect of art greatness: standing the test of time. A big part of Beethoven’s perceived greatness is the fact that he wrote his pieces more than 200 years ago and we still listen to them. At the time people certainly appreciated Beethoven’s music, but he probably wasn’t considered the greatest composer of all times. Bach, who is often considered the best composer of all times wasn’t even really famous among his contemporaries. The main reason why Bach and Beethoven are considered great is that their music is still familiar to most listeners more than 200 years later.
By definition, you can’t apply this criterion to the contemporary musicians, since you don’t know which ones will still be remembered even 50 years from now. The best you can do is look back to the previous century. Who were the most influential musicians of the 20th century? I think The Beatles are good candidates both in terms of how well-remembered they are and in terms of their influence on the genre. And yes, I suppose a few tunes by John Williams also qualify.
From the individual’s perspective I am quite sure that at this very moment there are hundreds of musicians out there that are as talented as Beethoven. This follows simply from the growing population and the growing accessibility of education. Beethoven was the best from perhaps a million Europeans who were sufficiently high-class to become a musician. In the modern world billion(s) of people have a chance to become famous musicians, so it follows that there are at least hundreds of musicians as naturally talented as Beethoven.
You rightly say that the value of new music is in its originality. There’s nothing particular in the classical music that modern composers can’t imitate. We don’t have 9 more symphonies like Beethoven’s not because modern composers can’t write them, but because nobody wants “fake” Beethoven even if it sounds as good as the original one. Here Nahre Sol writes new very high-quality music in the styles of multiple great composers of the past, but she does it just for educational purposes:
Ok, suppose there are talented musicians out there, but maybe all the good music is already written and it’s hard to come up with new ideas? I don’t think I buy it. First of all, that would imply that the earlier composers were picking all the low-hanging fruits compared to later music. This did actually happen in science where we can be confident that there are no simple theories like Newton’s laws, that haven’t been found by now. It doesn’t feel this way at all in music. A lot of modern music is fundamentally as simple or simpler than most classical music. Conversely many classical composers wrote in very specific genres, that doesn’t really shrink the space of possible new original music to be written after them.
In my experience, modern music is saturated with great new ideas and pieces. Their problem is that they compete against each other for attention of the public.
I think you are totally missing one aspect of art greatness: standing the test of time. A big part of Beethoven’s perceived greatness is the fact that he wrote his pieces more than 200 years ago and we still listen to them. At the time people certainly appreciated Beethoven’s music, but he probably wasn’t considered the greatest composer of all times. Bach, who is often considered the best composer of all times wasn’t even really famous among his contemporaries. The main reason why Bach and Beethoven are considered great is that their music is still familiar to most listeners more than 200 years later.
By definition, you can’t apply this criterion to the contemporary musicians, since you don’t know which ones will still be remembered even 50 years from now. The best you can do is look back to the previous century. Who were the most influential musicians of the 20th century? I think The Beatles are good candidates both in terms of how well-remembered they are and in terms of their influence on the genre. And yes, I suppose a few tunes by John Williams also qualify.
From the individual’s perspective I am quite sure that at this very moment there are hundreds of musicians out there that are as talented as Beethoven. This follows simply from the growing population and the growing accessibility of education. Beethoven was the best from perhaps a million Europeans who were sufficiently high-class to become a musician. In the modern world billion(s) of people have a chance to become famous musicians, so it follows that there are at least hundreds of musicians as naturally talented as Beethoven.
You rightly say that the value of new music is in its originality. There’s nothing particular in the classical music that modern composers can’t imitate. We don’t have 9 more symphonies like Beethoven’s not because modern composers can’t write them, but because nobody wants “fake” Beethoven even if it sounds as good as the original one. Here Nahre Sol writes new very high-quality music in the styles of multiple great composers of the past, but she does it just for educational purposes:
Ok, suppose there are talented musicians out there, but maybe all the good music is already written and it’s hard to come up with new ideas? I don’t think I buy it. First of all, that would imply that the earlier composers were picking all the low-hanging fruits compared to later music. This did actually happen in science where we can be confident that there are no simple theories like Newton’s laws, that haven’t been found by now. It doesn’t feel this way at all in music. A lot of modern music is fundamentally as simple or simpler than most classical music. Conversely many classical composers wrote in very specific genres, that doesn’t really shrink the space of possible new original music to be written after them.
In my experience, modern music is saturated with great new ideas and pieces. Their problem is that they compete against each other for attention of the public.