Music using traditional instruments has received a great deal of attention around the world. Some people consider music performed on traditional instruments to be ‘traditional’ regardless of the form of the song or the way it is performed. However, others argue that in order to be called traditional music, the components of the music, including the instruments, the score, and the performance method, must be traditional.

In the past, Korea, formerly known as Joseon, was heavily influenced by China and developed its own traditional music. However, this was interrupted by Japanese colonial rule in 1910, which sought to break up the culture of Joseon, including its language and music, and in the process, much of the music, including that passed down orally, was lost. Fortunately, some music was preserved, and Korea is now trying to revive its traditional music by extrapolating from it the music of the Joseon Dynasty.

Korean traditional instruments have their own fascinating sound, which has attracted the attention of modern composers, many of whom have mixed traditional instruments with Western instruments such as the piano and violin to create new music. We call this crossover music. Crossover music, which mixes Korean traditional music with music from other genres, has generated interest in Korean traditional music from the Korean public, which is an important opportunity for the development of Korean traditional music in a musical culture that does not develop without demand.

However, there are those who argue that it cannot be called traditional music. For the reasons outlined above, the use of traditional instruments does not make it national music. Let’s take a look at the European case to see what can be called traditional music. Around 200-300 years ago, around the same time as the Joseon Dynasty, Europe had what we call classical music. In the case of classical music, the form and performance changed with changes in thought, usually at intervals of about 50 years. Hundreds of years later, you can hear a huge difference between the music of J.S. Bach and the music of G. Ligeti. So can we call Bach’s music traditional and Ligeti’s music non-traditional? If so, what is more traditional when comparing Bach’s music to music from an earlier time when the staff system didn’t even exist? What I’m saying is that ‘tradition’ changes. What we consider traditional now was once modern, then old-fashioned, and then traditional.

In conclusion, crossover music, which we may not say is traditional now, may eventually become traditional if it remains well-developed into the future. For now, it seems that we have the responsibility to develop various musical techniques and technologies that we can use and combine them with some parts of traditional culture rather than judging what is traditional and what is not.