I'd have to say something classical - I doubt any rock song will ever stand the test of time like the masters have. Im partial to Mozart, perhaps the Overture to the Marriage of Figaro.
But - if we are talking rock, I nominate Bohemian Rapsody. I would have to say that its the most original and awesome rock song of all time. There is nothing else like it.
Eh. I don't understand this bias.
Obviously what someone heralds as one of the greatest pieces of music of all time is gonna be subjective, but there's no reason it can't come from any genre or any period in music history.
Several reasons why classical music is considered by some to contain the greatest music of all times:
- Just about every aspect of contemporary music was invented in classical music. Just about every chord progression that for instance Dream Theater uses has been used in classical music. Every rhythm and time signature change has been done by Stravinsky and Bartok, every phrasing done by Mozart and Beethoven. There is a reason why modern classical music is largely atonal: the possibilities of tonal music had simply been exhausted near the end of the 19th century: there was literally almost nothing to write that had not been done before. Every theme and harmony had been exploited.
- Connected to the previous point: classical music is huge. Classical music is simply all music that was written in close to 4 centuries in all the western world: this is a huge amount of pieces. Combine this with the fact that many classical composers had a far larger output than most modern artists, and that most classical composers were far ahead in terms of raw compositional skill compared to many contemporary musicians, the purely statistical chance of the greatest music being in classical music becomes quite big.
- Connected to the previous point: classical music is extremely varied, much more so than most contemporary music. Compare Debussy to Palestrina and you'll be hard pressed to find any similarities, yet they still exist under the same name. Compare pop to rock to funk to blues and you'll find that they all use rougly the same progressions, all use the minor pentatonic scale heavily, all play in 4/4, all use major/minor tonality, use roughly the same instruments etc. etc.
- It is the most sophisticated music ever written. Even most progressive music which is fairly complicated by contemporary standards is intellectually dull when compared to for example pieces like Bach's Kunst der Fuge. Only the best modern jazz comes close. Now, mere sophistication does not make great music of course, but at least it's an indication that classical composers were craftsmen of the highest degree, and indeed of a degree virtually unseen in contemporary music of any popularity. The best craftsmen tend to make the best products, think of this what you will.
Now, as you said, greatness is a very subjective term, but these are some reasons why some people (myself included) could consider classical music as containing the greatest music ever written.
Eh. I don't understand this bias.
Obviously what someone heralds as one of the greatest pieces of music of all time is gonna be subjective, but there's no reason it can't come from any genre or any period in music history.
I agree with this. I think classical music has a sort of reverence attached to it that, for the most part, is pretty unwarranted.
Back in the day, other than simplistic folk music, it simply was the only music in town. And it was still heavily encumbered by rules about what constitutes "proper music" and what not.
Your argument about classical music being the only music in town doesn't quite hold: just like today there were scores of composers in previous centuries. Therefore, what we call classical music now actually consists of the top 0.1-th percentile of the music that was made back in the day: it's not like what we are listening to now was the only music produced back then. Furthermore, J.S. Bach's music for instance was virtually unknown during his lifetime and wasn't performed again until almost a century after his death by rabid enthusiasts, at a time when contemporary music was flourishing. It was thus hardly the only music in town, in fact it had never been in town at all! The same is true for D. Scarlatti, Telemann etc.
About your argument that classical music was encumbered by rules, a lot of classical music was definitely not considered "proper music". Think of Stravinsky's audience wrecking the furniture during the first concert of the Sacre du Printemps, J.S. Bach being fired by churches because his music was "unlisteneable", Brahms being considered extremely old-fashioned, Mahler symphonies being rejected, etc. The fact is that many of these composers were so far ahead of their time that their music was hated: it was quite the opposite of "proper music". Of course some composers conformed to the rules of proper music, but this is fairly rare: our classical composers were mostly the trendsetters of the day. An average composer who simply went with the flow is often not remembered: like scientists composers are remembered because they invented something radically new and were great at it.
I'm wondering: how familiar are you with classical music, have you analyzed many pieces for example? The reason why I am asking is that I've never heard anyone who's seriously studied classical music saying its reverence is unwarranted. I'm not trying to have a dig at you, I'm genuinely interested in why you hold this opinion.