Hacker News Reader

Comment by unparagoned | Hacker News Reader

If the music was actually really good and people liked it then the money would be there.

Maybe Bach style music isn’t really a good as modern music.

Bach probably brings in more money for classical musicians than most classical composers (I assume he's in the top 10-20 behind the major symphony orchestra composers), and that music definitely is "good" according to many people. He is also the inspiration for a lot of subsequent musicians. There just aren't good economics in writing more music that is Bach-like.

The money in modern music isn't there for greatness. It follows the lowest common denominator. See: Taylor Swift and Beyonce.

Bach was writing pieces that were commissioned. Commissioned artwork always has a different character than artwork created for mass consumption.

The money today for classically-trained composers is also mostly in film music. The next biggest market is video game music. After that, symphonic works (eg openers and large works for full symphony orchestras) are a distant third.

The money has always been in commissioned music,* it's just about what is getting commissioned. Counterpoint rarely gets commissioned, let alone enough counterpoint to become Bach.

* Mozart's catalog is a great example: Salzburg Mozart wrote masses and organ fugues, while Vienna Mozart wrote operas and secular pieces. It's what he was paid to write.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com