The Death of Serialism?

[Symphonien]

I'm still waiting for someone to have the courage to just write a good tune.

You mustn't have listened to a lot of contemporary music then... There are plenty of composers who write "good tunes".

[mikkeljs]

First of all, let me get this misconception out of the way: serialism is NOT a style. It is a technique and only a technique, just as 16th, 17th, or 18th century counterpoint is a technique and only a technique. The good or bad qualities of a piece written with serial technique should be attributed to the composer and not to serialism.
Second, this birth/death analogy for musical techniques and harmonic systems (tonality, serialism, minimalism, etc.) is fundamentally flawed, for these things are not born and they do not die: they evolve. Serialism emerged, quite logically, from Wagnerian chromaticism. Since the 1970's and 80's serialism has evolved into what is called set theory, in which composers use smaller groups of notes (usually 3-6) to compose. Sets can be manipulated in all of the same ways as 12 tone rows, but have more transpositional possibilities.

That´s exactly why it seems vierd in my opinion, if serialism have lost its popularity among composers today. But perhabs it´s only a question about 10 years before it will get regularly trendy again. Maybe also strict counterpoint will inspire the next composer generation more than today. 

[karlhenning]

Maybe some composers would like people to listen to their music? I'm still waiting for someone to have the courage to just write a good tune.

Listen to music much?  Each era, each culture, has its own criteria for what makes "a good tune."

[greg]

Maybe also strict counterpoint will inspire the next composer generation more than today. 

yeah, cuz contemporary music sounds to me like some of the least contrapuntal music in history..... it's like it died with serialism.
There's exceptions, like Reich, but not much, really. There's not actually any counterpoint going on with the spectral composers, either (and not much with the minimalists, or anyone else).

[Norbeone]

yeah, cuz contemporary music sounds to me like some of the least contrapuntal music in history..... it's like it died with serialism.

And that's where I come in!  hahahah! ....which reminds me...I must post a few of my more recent compositions here.

[Haffner]

I must post a few of my more recent compositions here.

I hope you will!

[rappy]

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,6749.0.html

- themes
- counterpoint
- good? dunno

[some guy]

Depends on the particular heart.

Hahahahaha, I just made this exact same point not more than a week ago, on another forum!!

So I guess I'm saying "we agree"!!

Truly, listening to music of any complexity requires some background. With tonal music, a lot of background is a given, a social, cultural, historical thing that's just pretty much just there. That's not all the story by any means. But tonal music seems easier than serial, at first, because it carries with it centuries of familiarity.

Non tonal musics are just as beautiful, just as listenable, just as valuable as any tonal musics.

Given trained ears, there's lots of music that will "speak to your heart," as it were.

[Kullervo]

yeah, cuz contemporary music sounds to me like some of the least contrapuntal music in history..... it's like it died with serialism.

Not sure. It seems to me the counterpoint found in new music has more in common with the Renaissance polyphonists than those of the Bachian variety. More of a loose association of musical lines rather than strict counterpoint. </pseud's observation> 

[Robert Dahm]

Not sure. It seems to me the counterpoint found in new music has more in common with the Renaissance polyphonists than those of the Bachian variety. More of a loose association of musical lines rather than strict counterpoint. </pseud's observation> 

Exactly. I would suggest that a great deal of good contemporary music is much more highly contrapuntal than anything from the Classical or Romantic eras. Check out Ferneyhough, Dench, Barrett, et al. Although perhaps 'counterpoint' is a term less useful than 'polyphony', in this case.

[eyeresist]

Re My previous post and responses;

Can anyone name some contemporary composers who are talented melodists?

[mikkeljs]

Re My previous post and responses;

Can anyone name some contemporary composers who are talented melodists?

I find that harder to define. But what do you think about Stockhausens Tierkreiz?

[Robert Dahm]

Re My previous post and responses;

Can anyone name some contemporary composers who are talented melodists?

Very difficult to define. First you would need to spell out the criteria of a 'good melody'. Perhaps the issue you have is that your criteria are just different from those of many composers.

But off the top of my head I would say that composers still living include:
Brian Ferneyhough
Michael Finnissy
Chris Dench
Per Nørgård
Heinz Holliger
Elliott Carter
Gyorgy Kùrtag
Mauricio Kagel

many many many others

If you wish to cast the net further back I would say:
Ives
Schoenberg
Berg
Skryabin
Nono
Berio
Feldman
Bernd Alois Zimmerman
Claude Vivier

[pjme]

Re My previous post and responses;

Can anyone name some contemporary composers who are talented melodists?

Sure - but don't expect Bolero-like tunes that you can whistle after one hearing .

Olivier Messiaen : several of his early works ( Poèmes pour Mi, Trois petites liturgies...) have very recognisable melodies/tunes. In his last (unfinished) composition, Concert à quatre he used a (1938) "Vocalise" that is achingly sweet and beautiful ( flute, oboe, piano, cello & orch.)
André Jolivet : Messiaen's composer-friend . Many of his works have  strong, long-lined lyrical melodies that summon incantation, mystery, prayer...( celloconcerto nr 1, Incantations for  flute solo, the slow movement of trumpetconcerto nr 2...)

Jean Louis Florentz, Thierry Escaich, Phillippe Hersant, Nicholas Bacri, Phillippe Fénelon, Guillaume Connesson...are all fairly young French composers who write in a "free tonal" manner. Florentz ( who sadly died far too young) wrote several large scale orchestral works that abound with ( what I find as) gorgeous melody ( l'Enfant des iles, lAnneau de Salomon etc). He was also a biologist & ethno-musicologist ( African & Arab music) and that is reflected in his work as well : lush ,almost Romantic ( cfr. Villa Lobos...).

Berio's Sinfonia, Dallapiccola's Canti di prigionia....


Anyway, I'm listening to Berg, Webern, Schoenberg, Penderecki etc for more than 30 years now: I know many works almost by heart and can "sing" them . try Webern's Cantata nr 1 : Kleiner Flügel Ahornsamen".... that's as elegant and refined as a Schubert song....

[greg]

Webern's Cantata nr 1 : Kleiner Flügel Ahornsamen".... that's as elegant and refined as a Schubert song....

or the finale of the 2nd Cantata!


(humming to that one)

[mikkeljs]

Re My previous post and responses;

Can anyone name some contemporary composers who are talented melodists?

The Adagio from Bergs Lulu! I´m humming it often (all the voices by changing between  them very fast.  )

[lukeottevanger]

Start at the top - Boulez. There are few more memorable melodies than e.g. the opening vocal line of Pli Selon Pli or the soprano's 'lizard' recitatives in Le Soleil des Eaux. Once heard, never forgotten - pure melody regardless of questions of era, style, a/tonality.

[Ephemerid]

John Adams: Harmonlielehre (particularly the sweeping melody of part III-- VERY hummable).

Messiaen, Takemitsu & Feldman are very melodic.

[DavidW]

Re My previous post and responses;

Can anyone name some contemporary composers who are talented melodists?

If by contemporary you mean anything in the past few decades (i.e. you are using the label to make it clear that you're not talking just modern) then--

Arnold, Glass, Gorecki, Penderecki, and Schnittke should fit the bill for melodic music.

[drogulus]

limiting music to just easily-digestable simple direct easily recognizable tunes is narrow (& becomes boring) if that is all you want best stick with pop music perhaps...obviously music is far more expansive to keep it to just that, and there is plenty of mediocre tonal & modal stuff also, like serial ...if one has been exposed to lots of music from all periods of classical music you'd soon realize that melody can come in a multitude of guises, perspectives, shapes & sizes so to speak...this makes it all the more fun for the listener IMO. For me, I don't think there really is such a thing - in isolation - as a beautiful melody....more beautiful harmonization/melody...the horizontal & vertical in different perspectives and working beautifully together.

     Is this a good characterization of the stretched tonality that's produced so much good music in the last century? I don't think it is. I can usually tell pop music from tonal classical music, and the latter doesn't seem to be trying to conform to the standard of the former. And it doesn't bother me much if no very bright line can be drawn between the more ambitious forms of popular music and some forms of classical.

     Likewise I don't care whether classical works fit into a modernist framework or a traditional one. What I respond to is not something easily resolved into categories like that. When I hear something that sounds theory-driven I tend to lose interest, because something is in the way of me appreciating what I hear. The music can be strange and unfamiliar and I will give it a hearing, so long as some overriding concept isn't interfering. If you like these concepts, I can see how you might feel differently.