Hi, I know, "Pochi posting in the music section wtf". Anyways, I can't really find any explicit difference between the 2 styles, but I know there are differences, due to my recognizement of a modern music or a classic music when they're played.

And please, this is important. It's not like I really want to know, but I have to know it for a test.

to tell you the truth, music has always been changing, and in that sense it's always stayed the same! it has always been evolving and changing and developing as pioneering musicians have composed new songs and experimented with instrumentation and melodies and all sorts of things that make their sound unique

it's pretty much the same with movies, i guess? newer films have a lot of elements that are reminiscent of old films, but they have their own aspects that make them different (as well as the newer technology we have now)

excuse me if i've failed to explain this well enough, or if i misunderstood your query

Sonically, the one major difference I can think of is in the recording, production and engineering techniques used. Years ago, analog equipment was the norm; nowadays we've mostly shifted to digital. That's had a major impact on music as a whole.

And like Luke said, music is always evolving. Trends come and go. Unfortunately, not everything stands the test of time. An album like Pet Sounds is remembered more fondly than, say, Linkin Park's debut, and many tend to hold Radiohead in higher regard than the likes of Barbara Streisand. Cultural context is important - you don't hear grunge or hair metal on the charts these days because they were products of their respective times.

the difference in classic and modern music is, apart from what Esper and Luke said, in the kind of message / emotion it intends to pass.

classical music, i.e. mozart, vivaldi and haydn, is mathmatically flawless, and was basically used as a form of entertainment in theaters, but also in courts.

but "classical" is a very wide concept; you also have the romantists (maybe the translation is incorrect; im portuguese, sorry) such as beethoven, who tried to pass the most intense emotion possible through music. you might smile a bit listening to mozart, but if you have a slightly above-average sensibility, beethoven can send shivers down your spine, make you feel depressed, give you nightmares... or the exact opposite of all these.

in modern music, the tendency became more commercial, more career oriented. so, it slowly evolved into specific genres designed to fit specific groups, such as metal, rock, jazz... and the culmination was pop music, made to basically have as many clients as possible, but not focusing on actually "good" music. at the very very tip of this iceberg, you have rap, techno, dubstep and other digital trends that basically are made by computer-made sounds and remixes.

personally, and pardon my opinion if it offends anyone (but im studying music for 8 years, i think i know what im saying), i believe music after the 90's (with a few exceptions, justice be made) utterly sucked. instead of memorable, epic themes that either made you headbang like Metallica, AC-DC or Scorpions, or really intheresting and thought provoking lyrics as in Pink Floyd, you have people basically turning music into shameless business. look at lady gaga. ewwwww. justin bieber. SWAGGAH! even madonna.

what annoys me the most is that these musicians are actually very good. lady gaga has a great voice, and so does bieber. they could do GREAT MUSIC. instead, they are total fan sold outs. in 10 years we wount hear from them, just like nowadays you dont hear about many metal bands like machinehead. they simply are not doing good music. its more commerce than music, actually. talk about franchising and marketing tricks.

hope this helps.

I assume I can clarify for you to further your viewpoint. I reason to believe you mean that popular music since after the 90's sucked. Which is completely fair to say for the most part.

However, I think things like YouTube, iTunes, BandCamp, and Soundcloud arrival has shaken up what we can call modern music, as it's taken away from the chokehold the music industry had on things like radio, television, and so on, and gave a simple means of distributing their music for free (or for a price, in iTunes' case). I've found so many songs that I absolutely love, with completely different genres, that I would've never heard on the radio even once. Just scrolling through my YouTube favorites, and those aren't even touching some of the really obscure things that I absolutely love. Point is, back before this era, you either really had to devote your entire being to music and get lucky after dying to be recognized (as much of the major classical music tends to wind up) or be a big enough of a hit for an agent to pick you up for the radio for even 1000 people to ever hear/own your music. Now, sure, there's plenty of bad music, but that's also because we have direct access to any music we want.

Also the typical "modern vs classical" battle is kind of dumb, because general usage of it pretty much comes down to in most people's usage of it is orchestra vs like i dunno rock music or something. I flubbed at my modern but the point is, people will mistake contemporary orchestral music as "classical" if it's orchestral. That's how I've seen it with people who haven't learned music stuff, and it used to bug me, but now I get a laugh out of it when I can.

modern music uses the "verse chorus verce chorus breakdown chorus chorus" song structure almost exclusively

also note that modern pop music is less likely to use complicated rhythms and melodies. things like instrument solos are practically nonexistent, if the song even uses instruments at all
instead the songs tend to revolve around a simple "gimmick", such as whistling.
in the most recent years pop has become more and more streamlined in that many artists such as kanye west use one note throughout the entire song

hip hop breakdowns

electronica in general

downtempo breakdowns

Guys, this wasn't meant to be a "modern vs classical" topic, you know.

And this is the difference between classical and modern, not a topic for seeing wich is better. Also, until now, nobody was able to tell me the answer i'm looking for.

Classical music is for gaylords that's the difference #lmao #owned

i think my answer was pretty solid, i listed genuine musical differences between the two

I don't like to talk about music much because outside of classical (which is a dumb name because its just music and theres a ton of contemporary music thats rooted in western european musical traditions, which sort of defines what this "genre" is) music which I read and analyze daily, I can't say something is s*** if I don't have factual examples on my side.

Theres no difference between older music and newer music if you mean pop because its all s*** for the masses. Trust me as someone who plays pop music half the time and then jazz the rest, there is no merit in pop music since the death of Gershwin and all the tinpan alley composers. They made popular music worth listening to because it always was well composed as opposed to mix and match chord progressions (see the whole Roar and Brave(?) fiasco).