Metal and children.

[cmargir]

So, what are be the characteristics that needs to be present in the music that would acceptable for children?

I'm thinking something simple yet evocative like the Four Seasons by Vivaldi would work, but what else?

[More Celt Than Sassenach]

The four seasons, simple? And why stop at just Vivaldi when there are clearly more talented Baroque composers. I have yet to here classical music that would not be suitable for a young mind.

Also as a side note the Mozart effect does increase your spatial awareness but only for about fifteen minutes, so listening to Mozart does not make your children smarter.  

Some of my first memories I ever had where of my farther and Grandfather performing Bach. And he has ever since been close to my heart. Also my farther used to perform many folk tunes on accordion and guitar. Children admire there parents, if they don't it usually is a result of bad parenting. So I find they listen to and enjoy what ever there parents do.

If I had to choose a date with which to have my children explore metal I would start at twelve to thirteen. For I think by this time a child is developed enough in order to see metal in a positive manner.

[Agni]

So, what are be the characteristics that needs to be present in the music that would acceptable for children?

I'm thinking something simple yet evocative like the Four Seasons by Vivaldi would work, but what else?

That is a good idea. 'Four Seasons' had been latently existing in my memories though I never knew its name or its composer's till a recent hearing which brought tears to my eyes. It is one of the sweetest compositions along with Träumerei by Schumann.

[Divus_de_Mortuus]

Spring was the first song I ever learned how to play on the piano. Fuck off more celt, Vivaldi rules.

[More Celt Than Sassenach]

Spring was the first song I ever learned how to play on the piano. Fuck off more celt, Vivaldi rules.

I never said he was not a good composer, but when you share an era with Bach and Handel it is impossible to escape comparison. And against two of the most highly praised composers who ever lived, few come out well from such a comparison. Much in the same manner as the the reputation of Bach's sons always seems very poor but only because of who their farther was.

[Divus_de_Mortuus]

I was kidding pal.

But, if you look at the history of Baroque music you will see Vivaldi is in the genealogy of J.S. Bach's work, in the same way Judas Priest is in the bloodline of Slayer, or how Slayer is in the bloodline of Morbid Angel. This makes one on one comparisons difficult and not really logical. Vivaldi was one of Bach's primary influences.

The Four Seasons is better than any metal album.

[More Celt Than Sassenach]

The Four Seasons is better than any metal album.

That I can easily agree with.

While it is true Vivaldi along with the Italian baroque style in general was a large influence on him, so were the northern and southern styles of baroque and the French composers of the era. He took from to many places to be seen as the logical evolution of Vivaldi.

And while I do agree that a one on one comparison can be odious, but can one not say that Judas Priest is better then Elvis, even so there is a clear path between the early white man blues/rock of Priest and the white blues of Elvis?

If one needs a reason to put Bach higher then Vivaldi one needs to look no further then the fact that Bach perfected every musical form that existed in his time and gave a great variation in emotion, not to mention the mathematical conclusions that can be drawn from his music and the theism encoded in his music.

Vivaldi mostly only wrote concerti, and while he was a highly innovative composer who helped bring the period closer to the classical he lacks the many dimensions that Bach possessed.

A more personal reason for my preference of Bach over Vivaldi is that Bach's music is far more serious and sombre, creating a life affirmation by looking to serious ideals, where Vivaldi wrote music that is for the most part playful and flamboyant.

Regardless both composers are suitable for children as is all classical music. Although I would hope one would avoid the degenerate composers that may posses all the forms but work against classical intentions. Folk music is also another positive role model. And I would extend this to ambient music in the vein of Dead can Dance. I would, if I had children expose them to rock music, but be fairly mindful of what rock I did show them. But since I really only listen to King Crimson this shouldn't be a problem.

Come to think of it as long as you take any accepted forms of music here asides from the aurally abrasive one should be fine.

[Divus_de_Mortuus]

Bach is better than Vivaldi in a head to head comparison. Morbid Angel is better than Judas Priest in a head to head comparison. I don't deny this. My point was that the head to head comparison isn't that logical, and when judged in context they are on the same level. Anyway, we can both agree they both rule. That should be enough.

A bigger problem than music selection for children is finding a way to limit their exposure to the TV.

[chyll]

Remember that Bach looked up to Vivaldi and his music on many occasions, not least when transcribing some of the latter's string concertos for keyboard, which was quite a huge compliment at the time.

[chrstphrbnntt]

A bigger problem than music selection for children is finding a way to limit their exposure to the TV.

Isn't that simple? Just don't own one.

[Divus_de_Mortuus]

Sounds easy, but I, like any balanced and normal human being, can avoid American Idol, Lost and Jerry Springer while still finding other shows and channels worthwhile.

But the V-chip is amazing.

I wish my cable company allowed me to pick and choose the channels I wanted. PBS, the Discovery Channel family and ESPN networks would make up the bulk of it. I don't know why I have to pay for BET and the shopping network.

[chrstphrbnntt]

Sounds easy, but I, like any balanced and normal human being, can avoid American Idol, Lost and Jerry Springer while still finding other shows and channels worthwhile.

But the V-chip is amazing.

I wish my cable company allowed me to pick and choose the channels I wanted. PBS, the Discovery Channel family and ESPN networks would make up the bulk of it. I don't know why I have to pay for BET and the shopping network.

I occasionally watch something that catches my eye on PBS, Discovery, et al, too. I believe there are a few satellite TV packages that allow you to pick and choose what you pay for. You might also want to investigate a TV tuner card for your computer, which gives you similar flexibility. Currently, I just torrent whatever interests me.

edit: Oh, and this was the best $20 I've ever spent. It's almost as effective as smashing the target TV with a hammer, but I'm a lot less likely to get sued.

[More Celt Than Sassenach]

I think the first time I ever watched TV was when I was eight, this is because my parents did not own one until this time. I think TV's can have interesting content contained within them, and are as such not inherently wrong but I would strong go against using them as a baby sitter. Parents needs to entertain and look after their children, this allows their relationship to be a healthy one.

Before I was introduced to TV my forms of entertainment that can be considered comparable were stories that were read to me, music that was performed by my farther. When my farther was a teenager music was not as accessible as it is today thus forcing him to perform music beyond what is common today, and this habit has never really died. These are the things that I consider healthy to a child.

But I agree with the sentiment of being able to choose which channels, after all I only watch one, the History channel. Could one ever need any more information on WWII?

[buckets_of_rain]

Here's some interesting stats I took from a college test on music and perception:

"Children are typically unable to discriminate atonal from tonal melodies until what age?
About the age of 7 or 8.

At about what age is continued musical development entirely attributable to environmental factors such as musical instruction or training, or through general exposure to music?
About the age of 10.

Identify four features of lullabies that make them especially suited to infants. (Hint: compare with infant-directed soothing speech.)
(1) slow, (2) average pitch is higher, (3) few changes of pitch direction, (4) greater proportion of descending pitch intervals.

At what age do children typically show less spontaneous body movement in response to music?
About the age of 5.

At what age do children typically show substantial rhythmic coordination?
About the age of 10.

Indicate the relative order of the child's development for each of the following musical/auditory attributes: rhythm, tonality, localization, pitch, style.
Order of development: (1) localization, (2) pitch, (3) tonality, (4) rhythm, (5) style.

Adolescence is an important time in the forming of musical tastes. What might account for the musical importance of adolescence?
Socially, adolescence is an important time to build peer-support relations to supplement family-support relations. Adolescence is characterized by a strong need to belong, or identify with a peer group. Group identity is established, in part, by clothing, manners, speech patterns, food and music preferences. Oxytocin levels are generally high during adolescence, and so bonding is facilitated.

At what age does a child normally exhibit secondary emotions?
Commonly between 3 and 4 years of age.

---

It's up to you if you believe this stuff.

[ASBO]

"Normal" implies an average of intelligence and other traits that doesn't exist.

Smart kids like music, but their ears need to grow into it. You know they're mature when they chuck all that crappy rock music and get into classical.

Nothing wrong with some metal in the mix, of course.