I have observed, too, that the people of the many countries that I have visited are showing an ever increasing interest in the classical and traditional music of their own cultures.
I pick up the New York Times or Time and it's talking about the latest rock group, which I'm sure is exciting to some people, but it neglects a huge area of music.
The advent of electronically synthesized sound after World War II has unquestionably had enormous influence on music in general.
Although technical discussions are interesting to composers, I suspect that the truly magical and spiritual powers of music arise from deeper levels of our psyche.
If we look at music history closely, it is not difficult to isolate certain elements of great potency which were to nourish the art of music for decades, if not centuries.
In a broader sense, the rhythms of nature, large and small - the sounds of wind and water, the sounds of birds and insects - must inevitably find their analogues in music.
Perhaps many of the perplexing problems of the new music could be put into a new light if we were to reintroduce the ancient idea of music being a reflection of nature.
This is not a happy time for this kind of music in this country.
Perhaps of all the most basic elements of music, rhythm most directly affects our central nervous system.
I am certain that most composers today would consider today's music to be rich, not to say confusing, in its enormous diversity of styles, technical procedures, and systems of esthetics.
As interesting as that music can occasionally be, I don't think it really replaces the other.
I am optimistic about the future of music.
I think we're in a very low point of music right now.
It is easy to write unthinking music.
The development of new instrumental and vocal idioms has been one of the remarkable phenomena of recent music.