Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Makes me think of a timely discussion on BBC Radio 3 recently: “what exactly is classical music”?
As with all artistic categories, it is very much a case of 'I know it when I hear it'. You can say the same about any genre of music. 'What exactly is rock & roll' is a question that is unconsciously asked and answered every time the people at Apple Music update a 'rock & roll' playlist. And like most such things, 90% of people will agree on 90% of the things that get included in it, but the 10% will vary wildly and will ultimately be up to the individual curators who end up in charge of such things. In the end, it is fundamentally unimportant that the curation is 100% accurate according to everyone who has a boring opinion about the subject (eg me).
Just music by orchestras? But what if the orchestra is playing “pop music” covers?
Certainly not just music by orchestras; that has never been the definition of classical music ('Am I a joke to you?' - H.E. Steinway). Musicals are played by orchestras, but most people (we get back to the 10% issue) would agree musicals aren't classical music. (Let's not worry about the question, 'what exactly is a musical, what exactly is an opera?') The "pop music covers" question answers itself: it's pop music. (but "what exactly is pop music"?) (Unless, of course, it's an *arrangement* of a pop song in a 'classical style' [whatever that means] - I'd say 90% of people familiar with it would have no complaint about Shostakovich's arrangement of 'Tea for Two' / 'Taiti Trot' being included in a 'classical music' list.)

The more contentious gray zone is film scores and ... ugh ... video game music. I shudder, but then I remember that a lot of 'classical music' is dreck (I'm looking at you, Andre R), and the ratio of dreck to gems is *only* about five hundred times worse in the video game world.

Just music from a certain era? One recent Radio 3 commentator argued Bach is more progressive than Stockhausen. And what about music being made now?
If they do not plan on including new music the person behind this should be fired and never be permitted to work anywhere near a creative field again.
What about contemporary electronic/chamber/electro-acoustic music?
See above.
What about “world music”, folk, jazz?
Jazz, no. Jazz needs its own app - as much as classical nerds whinge about metadata, jazzheads have it much worse. Oh, the artist is 'Thelonious Monk Quartet'? Which one would that be? This record is by 'Miles Davis', you say? So, is Miles playing the bass, and the drums, and the piano? 'Oh my god, they're playing 'Autumn Leaves', my favourite song written by John Coltrane I assume!'

"World music" and folk music: This is an interesting one, because it's definitely in the '10%' category (and can we acknowledge how f***ed it is that we've collectively decided to divide the musical universe into the categories 'classical', 'jazz', 'rock', 'pop', 'R&B', 'rap', 'country' (with all of the constellations of sub-genres that fall into those categories!) and then 'everything from every culture that has existed on the planet except europe and north america (but also including european folk traditions and indigenous Americans)'), but we're now getting close to the uncomfortable subject of why it is extraordinarily problematic to elevate 'classical music' (in the European tradition) as something special and unique. And it is ridiculous that people still do this given how rich, say, *every single musical tradition on the planet* is. But elitists gonna elitist (cf: 80% of the posts in this thread), so let's move on from this uncomfortable topic and pretend it isn't an issue, because Apple has made the decision to make classical music its own special app.

(Of course, if Apple *does* include a huge selection of world music in this app, that would be amazing and i take it all back.)
When do things get added to the “classical” descriptor? Will The Beatles be classic in 50 years time?
No. The Beatles wrote music in an entirely different vernacular to any kind of contemporary classical music of the 1960s. Their musical language was based on the blues. It doesn't matter that they cribbed from Stockhausen once. (In case it isn't clear from my diatribe above, this should in no way be taken as a dismissal of the Beatles as somehow being inferior to classical music.)
Improvements in metadata, sorting, discovery, inlay notes*, are much needed. But a whole separate app? A big mistake, in this listener’s opinion. It’ll just create confusion and alienation.
I don't expect classical music to be excised from the main Music app. I'm hoping the new app presents the same music in a better way.
*the lack of the content that existed on the back of LPs / CD inlay cards is the biggest fault of all the streaming platforms. The same with film streaming platforms and the death of the “DVD extras”.
This problem pre-dates streaming and goes back to the digital download era. On the other hand, the Internet exists and contains a lot more information than a CD insert.
 
Last edited:
We don't need an entirely different app just for one type of musical genre. Its a a wasteful piece of clutter.
Yes, we need it. Classical music is the only music genre where you have composers, compositions, opus/set/work/part, specific composer catalog number, editions of compositions, transcriptions, conductors, soloists, orchestras, release, etc. where these are largely interchangeable and one might need to search/browse with a particular filter set. Apple Music is a huge clutter and is oriented towards non-classical music which follows the simple notion of Artist - Album - Song.
 
Last edited:
Why? Why would they do this? This sounds ridiculous. The music app/subscription already represents the entire universe of musical genres. Why a separate app just for one genre, albeit classical? Are they going to charge a separate subsctiption fee too? Let me guess, they assume (rather, they've already got the data for) people that listen to classical music are more affluent (have more money) so they're targeting them... I don't like this. Hopefully it's just more internet propaganda.
 
We don't need an entirely different app just for one type of musical genre. Its a a wasteful piece of clutter.
Having tried to use the Apple ecosystem for classical for twenty years now, which takes hack after hack after hack, it couldn't be clearer how necessary an independent approach is.

I haven't used *any* Apple subscription services for pretty close to a decade now, but this one I'm likely to.
 
  • Love
Reactions: arkitect
Yes, we need it. Classical music is the only music genre where you have composers, compositions, opus/set/work/part, specific composer catalog number, editions of compositions, transcriptions, conductors, soloists, orchestras, release, etc. where these are largely interchangeable and one might need to search/browse with a particular filter set. Apple Music is a huge clutter and is oriented towards non-classical music which follows the simple notion of Artist - Album - Song.
This is the central point. The issue isn't *playing* the music, the issue is *finding* the tracks you're looking for, conveniently, in a way that the artist/album/song paradigm is simply unable to do without manually editing all the track metadata into coherence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
This is the central point. The issue isn't *playing* the music, the issue is *finding* the tracks you're looking for, conveniently, in a way that the artist/album/song paradigm is simply unable to do without manually editing all the track metadata into coherence.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to design a more comprehensive tagging standard that could be applied to all forms of recorded music and implemented across the entire Apple Music platform? Instead of breaking out one genre of music to its own platform?
Digital music tagging/metadata is by and large still stuck in the 90’s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: videosoul and tlab
We don't need an entirely different app just for one type of musical genre. Its a a wasteful piece of clutter.
That one genre spans 2000+ years across hundreds of countries, with hundreds of genres inside the genre, and hundreds of recordings and performers for each one of the works, all described in different languages and ways often in a very long form (e.g The Symphony No. 9 in D minor, Opera 125 = Die 9. Sinfonie in d-Moll op. 125 = Ode to Joy).

If there is one genre that needs its own app, it’s classical music.
 
Wouldn’t it make more sense to design a more comprehensive tagging standard that could be applied to all forms of recorded music and implemented across the entire Apple Music platform? Instead of breaking out one genre of music to its own platform?
Digital music tagging/metadata is by and large still stuck in the 90’s.
Stuck in the 90’s works for most genres. That’s why Apple hasn’t moved away from it, nor have the major streaming services, nor have the labels who provide the metadata in the first place. Only with classical and jazz is it fundamentally insufficient. For twenty years Apple has been trying to split the difference, and they’ve failed.

Apple *has* a comprehensive tagging standard. They’ve had one for a long time.


But labels aren’t retrofitting their metadata to meet it. Why? For most genres, it’s unnecessary.

Treating classical as *not* a special case has failed the classical audience. Apple seems to finally be accepting that. It’s time for a new approach, and it looks like we’re getting it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
That one genre spans 2000+ years across hundreds of countries, with hundreds of genres inside the genre, and hundreds of recordings and performers for each one of the works, all described in different languages and ways often in a very long form (e.g The Symphony No. 9 in D minor, Opera 125 = Die 9. Sinfonie in d-Moll op. 125 = Ode to Joy).

If there is one genre that needs its own app, it’s classical music.
You can say the same thing about a lot of other genres though. Music metadata was set up for a very strictly defined kind of 20th C pop music but is I’ll suited for things like jazz, rap, European classical music, Indian classical music, many kinds of folk music, …. Do they all get their own app? Or should the metadata system be overhauled to include more useful info for all types of music? I’m a hobbyist “classical” composer but I think it’s kind of icky that classical music is treated like this special thing that requires us own categorisation system. All musical subcultures have their own specialised forms of knowledge and hierarchies of information, and the people who came up with digital audio metadata in the 90s out whenever clearly didn’t put enough thought into it.

That said, I’ll use this app. I just don’t like how apple is simultaneously putting a band aid on this problem and ignoring the broader issue, which feeds the elitist idea of “classical” music requiring its own bespoke solution, because it’s special and unique unlike other kinds of music.
 
  • Love
Reactions: MrRom92
It'll be nice to have a music app that doesn't push irrelevant music genres ads in my face. Or will it? In the West, Classical Music implies European classical music. I don't want that getting lost in all kinds of stuff.
 
  • Love
Reactions: arkitect
Why? Why would they do this? This sounds ridiculous. The music app/subscription already represents the entire universe of musical genres. Why a separate app just for one genre, albeit classical? Are they going to charge a separate subsctiption fee too? Let me guess, they assume (rather, they've already got the data for) people that listen to classical music are more affluent (have more money) so they're targeting them... I don't like this. Hopefully it's just more internet propaganda.
Have people forgotten about this previous news mentioned in the OP?


Current Primephonic subscribers will receive six months of ‌Apple Music‌ access for free with access to hundreds of thousands of classical albums that support Lossless and Spatial Audio.
I guess some forget the classical genre is huge, way more then a lot of music genres. ;)
 
Last edited:
I think it’s kind of icky that classical music is treated like this special thing that requires us own categorisation system.
About a week and a half ago I saw a performance of a major work by the guy in my avatar -- one he was excoriated for at the time of writing (1971) for daring include icky electric guitars and bass using rock idioms. It's been my favorite Bernstein work for half my life now.

I think the categorization issue isn't so much about classical vs. everyone else as it's about "needs major metadata" versus "don't care." I'm not much of a jazz listener but, because every jazz recording is a unique affair with a unique confluence of talents and circumstance, that calls for major metadata too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tlab
I just don’t like how apple is simultaneously putting a band aid on this problem and ignoring the broader issue, which feeds the elitist idea of “classical” music requiring its own bespoke solution, because it’s special and unique unlike other kinds of music.
I think you're reading too much between the lines here. There are/were already classical music streaming apps out there to solve the problem of easier search and browsing, IDAGIO and Primephonic being the two most popular ones. They weren't created to promote elitism but to make the life of classical music fans easier. Most serious classical music fans are often of the type that compares different performances of the same work, sometimes even different releases of the same work from the same conductor and orchestra in different recordings (I'll just mention as an example the three recordings of Mozart Requiem with Karajan that are all wonderful). To my knowledge there aren't streaming apps that are dedicated to any other genre besides the mentioned ones, so that should speak about the need for classical music apps that are tailored to the classical music fan needs, rather than to make them feel elite or superior or whatever. I think Apple saw the potential in Primephonic and most certainly did some analysis on their end about how many people use Apple Music for classical music vs Primephonic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: brewsternz
You can say the same thing about a lot of other genres though.

All musical subcultures have their own specialised forms of knowledge and hierarchies of
I would disagree on two grounds.

While covers and remakes and remixes are a thing, very few are actually a big thing, and they’re often about one or two songs. In classical music I can listen to the 9th symphony performed by Abbado, Muti, von Karajan, Davis etc, in different combinations of “locations” (La Scala vs Berliner vs London etc) and different combinations of performers (Callas vs Pavarotti vs Bocelli) and all of those combinations are “the true” piece. Secondly, the various genres of classical music are not “subcultures”. Each one is a primary group that stands on its own. Opera vs Chamber music vs Symphonic etc.
 
I've really been looking forward to an Apple Classical service and app, but realistically, I agree with those who say this should be integrated into Apple Music, and properly indexed based on different characteristics. Since I like lots of other music besides classical, why I would pay for a separate music service from the same provider (Apple)?

I'm a frequent listener to classical (WRR 101.1 in Dallas), usually through their app or a Web browser, but I wouldn't call myself an aficionado or expert. I recently did a Web search for classical apps, and found this article touting idagio:

idagio

Does anyone else here use idagio, and like it? It's an app based in Germany, and the author of the Vogue piece says the advantages it has over apps like Spotify is the indexing and curation of the music. It also offers lossless streaming (paid subscriptions only), uses the Fair Artist Payout Model, and offers video classical music concerts on the app, and on Apple TV. I've just started using it, and haven't signed up yet for a subscription, since I want to delve more into its capabilities.
 
AppleMusic is one of the best inventions ever, but it's flaws for classical music were a little frustrating from the beginning. We should make a request list:
- need to see full-text of long album & song titles
- need to see the composer more easy
- searches for a specific piece should be easier, the classical music catalog is limited and it's nice to compare performances
- playing a work (existing out of several musical parts) should be more easy, don't stick with the idea of track numbers & individual songs, sometimes parts belong together.
- would like to see more video's of concerts, documentaries etc... (please Apple buy content from medici.tv, DG Stage, allow content directly from 'approved' musicians, labels, theaters and music houses)
- need to be able read booklets, usually we get less info than what was on the back-cover (I'm interested to see who the recording engineer was, recording date & location, read about the performers, some musicological background etc...)
- Siri is having difficulties with understanding names of pieces & performers... it's probably just me but AI should be able to learn.
- AppleLossless is great but current AirPods Pro/Max and don't support the required wireless bandwidth for this format. AirPlay2 over Wifi/Ethernet does, even for HighRes, but doesn't use it's full potential and down-samples.
- maybe they should add an option to donate money to a specific album directly. It's awkward that songs in ridiculous compilations get incredible play counts while you can't reward better performances with less counts as an individual.
- just a funny thing that is present for years, when I alphabetical 'browse categories' in AppleMusic (English) and look for 'Classical Music'... I won't find it with the 'C' but with the 'K' from 'Klassik' 😂
- congrats to Apple for there work on spatial audio, moderating all those music categories, supporting musicians as the best within the industry...

1664387610137.jpeg
 
As someone who regularly listens to classical, I don’t want this nor do I see the appeal of breaking this out into its own app/service in the slightest when whatever they’re hoping to implement in this app could just be brought to regular old Apple Music.
Take this with a grain of salt, I'm not saying this is logical, just how I felt about it. I listen almost exclusively to classical, and when I tried Apple Music, I just didn't feel "at home" with it. In addition to the normal classical-specific organizational stuff that is commonly complained about, Apple Music was (and presumably still is) dominated by pop/hip-hop/rap, and every time I opened the app, I'd be presented with splash screens of these artists. Call me a snob, I realize many people like that kind of music, but I don't, and it was detrimental to the user experience for me.

It would be the equivalent of a classical enthusiast wanting to peruse CDs at the record store, but having to walk through rows and rows of pop music to get to the classical section all the way in the back corner of the store. Same with search... lots of extraneous (non-classical) results mixed in.

I then tried Primephonic, and it was a much better experience (though I subsequently decided to just build up my own locally-stored library, and let my subscription lapse after a year or so).

Now, is it "fair" that classical gets a special app? Why not jazz, or country, or reggae? My guess is that perhaps the organizational changes that needed to be made to better accommodate classical music were just simpler to implement in a completely separate app, and also maybe they are trying to appeal to listeners of classical who, perhaps like me, don't even want to see the more contemporary genres of music when they open the app.
 
As someone who regularly listens to classical, I don’t want this nor do I see the appeal of breaking this out into its own app/service in the slightest when whatever they’re hoping to implement in this app could just be brought to regular old Apple Music.

Also, how can Apple claim to cater to classical music fans when they don’t support FLAC? Classical connoisseurs maintain their own digital libraries and use FLAC as standard. Not that ALAC nonsense.
While I'm looking forward--greatly looking forward--to a tool that will help me better manage my classical library, I do agree that my preference would have been to see Music's functionality improved to deal with this right in a single app. I'll accept the two apps as better than the current system, but my preference is like yours. I also prefer FLAC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrRom92
We know how this story ends in 12 months:

Macrumors 2023: Apple Integrates Classical Music App Into Apple Music App. Apple says "this will enhance the listening experience".

aka: Nobody tuned in to the add-on App.
I think it will slowly happen the opposite
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.