Importance of melody

[Scarpia]

Our previous poll on the subject, asking people to pick on element in music or give up, seemed to be conceived to achieve an ambiguous result.  I think this poll will allow voters to represent their interest in melody, compared with other elements in music.

Note added:  For the purpose of this pole you can take this definition of melody, which I found in Webster's dictionary:

a rhythmic succession of single tones organized as an aesthetic whole

[Bulldog]

Scarpia:

You might want to alter the first choice.

[Scarpia]

Scarpia:

You might want to alter the first choice.

Thanks, done.

(It originally read, "melody represents the juxtaposition of Dionysian and Apollonian architectonics.)   

[bhodges]

Thanks, done.

(It originally read, "melody represents the juxtaposition of Dionysian and Apollonian architectonics.)   

Dang, and that would have been my first choice. 

--Bruce

[some guy]

I know what I'd like to see: a poll that doesn't assume the major term. Some attempt at definition, so that our choices actually make some sense. Oh, wait. I just realized what I said! I want a poll that makes sense!!

Never mind.

(I'm going to just sit in the corner now and juxtapose some Dionysian and Apollonian architectonics.)

[Franco]

I don't think melody is very important much less a deciding factor, but I do enjoy a well written melody.  Life is too short to get hung up on these choices.

[Gurn Blanston]

I voted for "One among many..." in this poll, and I feel like I voted for exactly the same thing as I did with "no preference" in the other. I will concede that the questions are worded a bit more towards the least common denominator respondent in this one...  0:)

[Bulldog]

I know what I'd like to see: a poll that doesn't assume the major term. Some attempt at definition, so that our choices actually make some sense. Oh, wait. I just realized what I said! I want a poll that makes sense!!

Then create your own poll, but it's a lock that one or more other members will complain about it.

[DavidW]

I don't think melody is very important much less a deciding factor, but I do enjoy a well written melody.  Life is too short to get hung up on these choices.

I think I'm 100% with you on this.  But there is always time to get hung up on such things!!

[DavidW]

I know what I'd like to see: a poll that doesn't assume the major term. Some attempt at definition, so that our choices actually make some sense. Oh, wait. I just realized what I said! I want a poll that makes sense!!

Never mind.

(I'm going to just sit in the corner now and juxtapose some Dionysian and Apollonian architectonics.)

The discussion of what is melody occurred on that catchy tunes thread.  I don't know what the consensus is but this poll looks complete to me, though I think holes are easily poked in all polls.  Wait, I should create another poll! *everyone groans*

[karlhenning]

It all depends on whether or not it is Edith Piaf singing it.

[Franco]

It all depends on whether or not it is Edith Piaf singing it.

I get the impression, that for you, that would not enhance the importance of melody.

[karlhenning]

I could actually have voted for both of the following, but in the event, I selected the latter:

Melody is important, but in relation to other elements such as harmony and rhythm

Melody is one among many elements in music that I appreciate equally

[karlhenning]

I get the impression, that for you, that would not enhance the importance of melody.

But who knows how I'll think about it when I'm 70?

[Franco]

But who knows how I'll think about it when I'm 70?

How do you feel about Buffy St. Marie?

I'm trying to ascertain the relative importance of the goat vibrato and its impact on melody.

[Scarpia]

this poll is just as dumb as the other one, missing the point, isolating one element ... melody comes in many shapes, sizes & guises ...  it also has rhythmic and harmonic content. Harmonies & chords have melodic contours, direction, atmospheres etc. Rhythmic phrases & patterns can be sung, feed melody with accents, provide drive, character etc. It all has to be made to work together to form something special & beautiful.

It is for you that I included the option "I am too confused to answer."   

[Scarpia]

I could actually have voted for both of the following, but in the event, I selected the latter:

I agree that the two choices you cite are very similar, in the end they might be summed together.  I put it in because I am attracted to the notion that that beauty of a melody sometimes comes from its interaction with other musical elements.  For instance, is the melody that begins Bruckner Symphony No 7, first movement remarkable in itself, or only in the context of the remarkable harmonic progressions that accompany it?

[Scarpia]

I voted for "One among many..." in this poll, and I feel like I voted for exactly the same thing as I did with "no preference" in the other. I will concede that the questions are worded a bit more towards the least common denominator respondent in this one...

You have a point, but in the previous pole "no preference" seemed to indicate complete lack of preference between all of the various elements, melody, rhythm, harmony.  I couldn't pick it because I have a inclination towards harmony over rhythm.   I think by focusing on one aspect (melody) and scale people will be able to find a category that they feel comfortable with.

[DavidW]

You have a point, but in the previous pole "no preference" seemed to indicate complete lack of preference between all of the various elements, melody, rhythm, harmony.  I couldn't pick it because I have a inclination towards harmony over rhythm.   I think by focusing on one aspect (melody) and scale people will be able to find a category that they feel comfortable with.

Oh I see what you mean now, okay yeah my poll doesn't address that type of issue.  That kind of poll would be quite complex though, if you really want to get all possible rankings.

[some guy]

...is the melody that begins Bruckner Symphony No 7, first movement remarkable in itself, or only in the context of the remarkable harmonic progressions that accompany it?

This I think is a good example of the cogency of James' remark about the whole situation. The key here is the word "accompany." The music that begins Bruckner's Symphony no. 7 is, like all music, a totality. One can, it is true, separate out some of the elements for discussion, but the total effect of the totality comes from everything sounding together. Like totally!

I'd like to add that I would not phrase things as James has done, either. If "accompany" is false, then so is "feed" and "provide." Seems to me that we've been so accustomed by the vocabulary of theory (whether we've actually attended a theory class or not) to view music as compounded of separable elements, that we've lost sight of the most palpable and obvious things that a moment of actual listening would reveal. That music (indeed all sound) is complex. We've all heard the truism that all melody "implies" harmony. But no melody has any sort of existence at all without the thing we call rhythm, music being something that takes place in time, after all.

Back to the opening of Bruckner's 7th. This music, like all music, is at the very least (leaving the description open for the transcendental stuff, you know) the total of melody, harmony, rhythm, timbre, number of instruments, (ever changing) combinations of instruments,* tempo, dynamics, harmonics, phrasing and all the various patterns of echo set up by all these sounds bouncing off of walls and ceilings and the rapt and shining faces of the patrons in the hall. All of these things, inseparable, make up what we call Bruckner's 7th.

[Wow. What a long-winded way of saying "I don't think there's any such thing as melody "in itself"!!]

*No, of course Kodaly's sonata for solo** cello does not have any combinations of instruments.

**Yes, I'm aware that it's called a sonata for unaccompanied cello.