To the gentleman who referred to the advanced structural and theoretical considerations of the European musical tradition, as 'crap', might I suggest a passing acquaintance with the musical forms he is denigrating so roundly.
'Classical music' is probably rather too wide a designation to be meaningful in any specific sense, but we all know to what is being referred in general. If one is to be punctilious, the Classical period ran from circa 1750 to 1820 AD. It was preceded by several earlier forms, including the Mediaeval, the Renaissance, and the Baroque. And it was followed by the Romantic, the late Romantic, and Contemporary serious musical forms. The Classical period was probably the most defining era for the western musical tradition, and many basic musical forms became highly developed, from sonata form, to symphonies and opera. One of the great legacies of western civilisation is what we term Classical music. The surviving range of works is vast, and dwarfs any other musical traditions, and the complexity of its structure is truly awesome.
By way of comparison, a popular song creates a single mood - be that happiness, nostalgia, or sadness. A symphony, tone-poem, or concerto creates an entire range of emotions. To discount one of the most important musical experiences of mankind - stretching back over centuries - as 'crap' is to truly expose one's ignorance. To do so on a public forum is even more incredible. :shock: