Well, technically if you're going to be pedantic, it was only in the Late Classical era (approx. 1750-1800) when composers actually diversified the orchestras and the mood of the piece. In the early Classical era there was hardly any 'colour' as Classical orchestras mainly consisted of strings who played normal homophonic melodies, usually within the same dynamics. The little Woodwind or brass that did play in the accompaniment only played natural notes, again not much to add any colour or life. It was only when woodwind and brass had taken a more active role in the orchestra by soloing, that composers thought to add some drama into the piece, by using more extremes in dynamics and, eventually pitch.
But to be honest, who really cares?
If people like to call pieces of music that are instrumental,etc Classical then that's their interpretation, why bother labelling music anyway?
Fair point actually, but suppose other peoples arguments (such as Wikipedia) are right that the classical era only began in 1750; composers then started to diversify orchestras and the mood of the piece early on.
just something to ponder upon.
I know that no one will change the way they call pieces of music but whatever.
Don't you think its really annoying though when you get those people that think they know absolutely everything about music, and you'll let them listen to a piece of medieval music or even a modern neo-classicism piece of music and they will tlk absolute bollox about how and why it is a 'classical piece of music' and how they can tell.
And at the end of the day you can show them that it was composed in 1980 or something and to them it will still be classical music because it was played by an orchestra???
what can ya do.