QUOTE AUTHOR GOES HERE]Art_Deco said[/cite]My tendency is to say "serious" music. Not classical, which is the common default for most people to use, because to me that's the music of a specific period. Between the Baroque and Romantic periods. Not forgetting the Rococo of the late Baroque, if you wanna really get precise.
But I'm not sure about "Academic" music, which seems to imply some kind of instructional or collegiate connection. And then there's the Academic School of painting in the 1800s, which is something altogether different.
So I'm just not sure about Academic music as a term I would use.
Mmmmm, saying that is kind of elitist in an artistic way, well, I agree with you that "classical" is not the right term for calling music that is a part of canon, classical or neoclassical its a period of art that starts in 1750, some classical musicians are Mozart or Haydn.
Theres some serious music that is not part of the academy and its still being SERIOUS, like progressive rock or some kind of jazz pieces, and still being hard to play and got high composition standarts, when I say "academic music", I say music that is part from a music CANON, like Ravel, Stravinsky, Palestrina, Schumann, Buxtejude or Bach. Theres American (colonial) baroque, that is not part of the occidental canon, and still being baroque, academic and SERIOUS music (just search Gaspar Fernandes, Tomas de Torrejón y Velasco), and they was BIG musicians. So, I do not agree with you, when you say that its better to calling "serious music".