Notes in music?

Started by some guy, May 30, 2019, 11:22:57 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

San Antone

#120
I think the people usually making the claim that music has no expressive aspect nor emotional content are fans of atonal or electronic music.  It is kind of like when academics say that really all paintings are non-representational; just paint on canvas.  I just heard this stated in a documentary about Andrew Wyeth, comparing his brush work to Jackson Pollack.

While it may be true that if you focus on one part of a painting, isolated from the context of the overall content, you can see it's just paint on canvas - but that is certainly to see the trees and not the forest.

amw

I'm a fan of atonal and electronic music but I wouldn't claim that such music has no expressive content—it's often more directly expressive than non-atonal or instrumental music in fact.

San Antone

Quote from: amw on June 06, 2019, 04:14:06 AM
I'm a fan of atonal and electronic music but I wouldn't claim that such music has no expressive content—it's often more directly expressive than non-atonal or instrumental music in fact.

At how many funerals have you heard Stockhausen played?

amw

I've never heard Penderecki's Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima performed at an actual Hiroshima memorial service but I suspect this is not due to a lack of expressiveness. A funeral-going audience wants to hear something that's sort of sad in a detached way, oratorical but not too personal; they don't necessarily want to hear a more realistic expression of what it is like to die.

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

Quote from: Florestan on June 06, 2019, 12:57:11 AM
Not only titles and instructions, but also explicit statements, like for instance:

I know well that music is made to speak to the heart of man, and this is what I try to do if I can; Music without feelings and passions is meaningless --- Luigi Boccherini

I compose music because I must give expression to my feelings, just as I talk because I must give utterance to my thoughts. --- Sergei Rachmaninoff

I saved for last what is possibly the most direct and unequivocal rebuttal of some guy's claim:

My music is the expression of emotional states. I have no interest whatever in sound for its own sake --- Arnold Bax

Are we playing dueling quotes here?

Igor Stravinsky:

"For I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc. Expression has never been an inherent property of music. That is by no means the purpose of its existence. If, as is nearly always the case, music appears to express something, this is only an illusion and not a reality. It is simply an additional attribute which, by tacit and inveterate agreement, we have lent it, thrust upon it, as a label, a convention – in short, an aspect which, unconsciously or by force of habit, we have come to confuse with its essential being."

About the Bax, I find the statement very ironic given that I mainly listen to him to enjoy sound for its own sake.  I listen for the sonorities of bewildering beauty with seem to flit by with no structure, sort of an Irish Koechlin.

Probably Stravinsky is much more successful than Bax because he understands that "expression" in music is a parlor trick. He understands that the expression of the composer's oh-so-tender emotions has nothing to do with the success of a piece of music.


Clever Hans

#125
Quote from: (: premont :) on June 01, 2019, 10:40:12 AM
I find the distinction between score (composition if you want) and performance most important. What I hear in my mind, while I read a score, is of course not an ideal abstract performance but just my interpretation of the score, which is only one of the many ways the score may be interpreted.

Right, and when a composer puts something to score or in film scoring these days to a piano roll midi notation, they are often trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, because all musical notation is insufficient in capturing an individual interpretation as played or thought by the composer (often not the same thing if the composer is not a good piano player), or it is a bit of a bad and rigid influence, like mensural notation or a modern midi sequencer that requires bandaid solutions like tempo automation.

Composers more often than performers constantly change the way their music should be played in more fundamental ways, like changing the meter, because they are not sure which is best for lines they have written, like once they add percussion and so on. Composers always have the license to do this, but sometimes performers do this very successfully if they are covering or transcribing a piece of music.

The problem of notation is why the expression maps in Cubase and articulation marks are so popular for vst sampled instruments. The composer there is pulled in two ways away from direct communication with the listener of the musical piece from the mind. You have to get the software to get an approximation of human performers so it doesn't sound flat when played back, but then if budget allows you have to adjust the score so it can actually be played by hired human musicians (French horn is a good example), and you are still not really capturing the music as it sounded in your head, you are working within limitations and constantly reminded of them.

Btw hope you are doing well :)

San Antone

#126
Quote from: amw on June 06, 2019, 08:11:49 AM
I've never heard Penderecki's Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima performed at an actual Hiroshima memorial service but I suspect this is not due to a lack of expressiveness. A funeral-going audience wants to hear something that's sort of sad in a detached way, oratorical but not too personal; they don't necessarily want to hear a more realistic expression of what it is like to die.

The title Threnody was applied after the work was written: "Penderecki's stated intent with the composition was to "develop a new musical language". Penderecki later said, "It existed only in my imagination, in a somewhat abstract way." When he heard an actual performance, "I was struck by the emotional charge of the work ... I searched for associations and, in the end, I decided to dedicate it to the Hiroshima victims". (from Wikipedia)

This may be heresy, but regarding music related to the Holocaust, I consider the music to Schindler's List more moving and expressive than the Peenderecki work, which just sounds ugly to me.


Ghost of Baron Scarpia

#127
Quote from: San Antone on June 06, 2019, 06:08:29 AM
At how many funerals have you heard Stockhausen played?

A funeral is not an occasion for listening to music, it is a social occasion in which rituals are practiced, one of which is a certain kind of droning, monotonous, somber music.

Quote from: San Antone on June 06, 2019, 03:01:15 AM
I think the people usually making the claim that music has no expressive aspect nor emotional content are fans of atonal or electronic music.  It is kind of like when academics say that really all paintings are non-representational; just paint on canvas.  I just heard this stated in a documentary about Andrew Wyeth, comparing his brush work to Jackson Pollack.

I have not listened to any electronic music, but the originators of atonal music and most of the subsequent practitioners had no desire to avoid an expressive aspect. They wanted to open a new door for "expression," which they felt was needed because common-practice harmony was being driven to its limits. You can argue that they went down a dead end (I wouldn't agree) but I don't think you can really argue that they were not interested in "expression."

And to reiterate my views, expression of extra-musical notions is a common motivation or organizing principal for composer, but I do not view music as any sort of language for communicating extra-musical content. We get to create our own extra-musical experience when we listen to music. What the composer creates is a beautiful assemblage of sound that unfolds in time.

San Antone

Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on June 06, 2019, 12:11:56 PM
A funeral is not an occasion for listening to music, it is a social occasion in which rituals are practiced, one of which is a certain kind of droning, monotonous, somber music.

You consider the Faure Requiem droning, monotonous, somber music?

Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on June 06, 2019, 12:07:21 PM
I have not listened to any electronic music, but the originators of atonal music and most of the subsequent practitioners had no desire to avoid an expressive aspect. They wanted to open a new door for "expression," which they felt was needed because common-practice harmony was being driven to its limits. You can argue that they went down a dead end (I wouldn't agree) but I don't think you can really argue that they were not interested in "expression."

And to reiterate my views, expression of extra-musical notions is a common motivation or organizing principal for composer, but I do not view music as any sort of language for communicating extra-musical content.


I don't know what were the thoughts about emotion/expression in music of the creators of atonal music - but I don't think many people have the same kind of emotional response to atonal music as they do with tonal music.  I know I don't.  Atonal music might be interesting on a cerebral level, but it sure doesn't move me like the Rach PC2, or the Mozart Requiem, or any number of other tonal works of remarkable expressive qualities.

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

#129
Quote from: San Antone on June 06, 2019, 12:25:26 PM
You consider the Faure Requiem droning, monotonous, somber music?

I've never heard the Faure Requiem.

And I've never heard a Requiem performed at a funeral. Maybe it would have been in past times at the funeral of a prince. Every funeral I've attended was accompanied by dreary hymns. The one time I heard enjoyable music at a funeral was after the Oklahoma City bombing and the orchestra played Ravel's 'Pavane pour un infante defunto'. Then, hymns.

Quote
I don't know what were the thoughts about emotion/expression in music of the creators of atonal music - but I don't think many people have the same kind of emotional response to atonal music as they do with tonal music.  I know I don't.  Atonal music might be interesting on a cerebral level, but it sure doesn't move me like the Rach PC2, or the Mozart Requiem, or any number of other tonal works of remarkable expressive qualities.

No, not the same kind of emotional response, but a strong and satisfying one nonetheless. I don't get the same kind of emotional response from Bruckner as from Ravel, from Schumann as from Mozart, from Sibelius as from Bach. Variety is the spice of life.

Florestan

Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

Florestan

Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on June 06, 2019, 08:32:39 AM
Igor Stravinsky:

"For I consider that music is, by its very nature, essentially powerless to express anything at all, whether a feeling, an attitude of mind, a psychological mood, a phenomenon of nature, etc. Expression has never been an inherent property of music. That is by no means the purpose of its existence. If, as is nearly always the case, music appears to express something, this is only an illusion and not a reality. It is simply an additional attribute which, by tacit and inveterate agreement, we have lent it, thrust upon it, as a label, a convention – in short, an aspect which, unconsciously or by force of habit, we have come to confuse with its essential being."

Says the guy who composed The Rite of Spring, Petrushka and The Firebird.  ;D

Imo, this is one of the stupidest statement ever made about music --- provided he said it seriously, which I doubt.
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

Madiel

Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on June 06, 2019, 12:07:21 PM
And to reiterate my views, expression of extra-musical notions is a common motivation or organizing principal for composer, but I do not view music as any sort of language for communicating extra-musical content. We get to create our own extra-musical experience when we listen to music. What the composer creates is a beautiful assemblage of sound that unfolds in time.

Your view is that composers have no clue what they are doing and fail in their goals, but you enjoy the results anyway.
I am now working on a discography of the works of Vagn Holmboe. Please visit and also contribute!

Madiel

#133
And of course, the most enjoyable failures become really famous!  ::)

Isn't it an amazing coincidence how some of these people who had completely the wrong idea about what they were doing managed to be so CONSISTENT in producing enjoyable results?

I mean, what are the chances? You'd think that when you were aiming for the wrong thing entirely it'd be unlikely to hit the correct target over and over again.
I am now working on a discography of the works of Vagn Holmboe. Please visit and also contribute!

Florestan

Quote from: Madiel on June 06, 2019, 01:49:19 PM
Your view is that composers have no clue what they are doing and fail in their goals, but you enjoy the results anyway.

;D
Every kind of music is good, except the boring kind. — Rossini

Madiel

#135
The irony of course is that I suspect this conversation is foundering on a different definition of the word "communicate".

Written language, that great supposed bastion of precision, is failing us because only one of the writers thinks that "communicate" necessarily connotes something precise.

Perhaps, it is acknowledged, it overlaps in meaning with "convey", but then we get to "evoke" and we definitely aren't communicating anymore. We're just sort of firing linguistic pheromones into the air at that point.

That might not be the best way of, ahem, EXPRESSING it. My communication is being rather vague.
I am now working on a discography of the works of Vagn Holmboe. Please visit and also contribute!

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

Quote from: Madiel on June 06, 2019, 01:49:19 PM
Your view is that composers have no clue what they are doing and fail in their goals, but you enjoy the results anyway.

You know that is not my view and I don't think these confrontational and disingenuous rebuttals further the discussion.

If a composer's goal is restricted to making me experience an emotional state which is a mirror of the emotional state that they baked in to the piece, yes you can claim that is a failure. I would say they have created something of great beauty which gives listeners pleasure and allows listeners make to make their own rich emotional associations with the music (which may or may not be what the composer intended) and I define this as success.

Madiel

#137
Sir, there is nothing disingenuous about my rebuttal.

I am quite genuinely trying to get you to think about why you believe that you understand the purpose of music better than some of the people who created music and became very famous by doing so.

Because I always assumed it had something to do with the quality of their work.

And I find it hard to believe that it's possible to create high quality work while not actually understanding what the desired outcome is.
I am now working on a discography of the works of Vagn Holmboe. Please visit and also contribute!

Ken B


Ghost of Baron Scarpia

Quote from: Madiel on June 06, 2019, 02:14:59 PMI am quite genuinely trying to get you to think about why you believe that you understand the purpose of music better than some of the people who created music and became very famous by doing so.

I agree with other people who created music and became equally famous by doing so, so I can ask the same question of you.

Great artists, such as the composers we are discussing, are by nature megalomaniacs who think they are the center of the universe. I don't necessarily take them at their word as to the nature of what they have done and their place in the grand scheme of things.