test 1 test 2 testing 3 testing testing 4
Hi At the Inn, the word "reformers" might be a bit extreme. I don't think the composers are actively trying to reform (like the church or something, maybe except Schoenberg) something. They are simply innovating, creating something that hasn't been heard. And also think that the choice of who to include is problematic, since it will inherently contain biases. I also feel that "reformers" and "innovations" have their own connotations so that it seems we are placing these people on a pedestal. I know you were just concentrating on composers, but if we have such a list I don't think it would be unbiased unless we included development of aspects of performance and instruments and various other logistical matters also. We would also have to come up with a fairly comprehensive list of composers in order to make the composer list sufficiently unbiased. I also noticed that the innovations listed are largely harmonic. We should add textural, rhythmical, and more formal innovations, I feel. It would also be difficult to trace the moment that these innovations were developed. Like for instance you have use of chromatic harmonies for modulations under Brahms for instance. I might not know what you are talking about but I always associate Bach with that, and I think chromatic modulations have been used extensively since the high Renaissance. This might turn into a huge musicology project that might extend beyond the scope of the class. In all, I'm not bashing your idea, but am just giving some opinions about what problems we might run into. - Glacialspring (talk) 01:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)