Why acoustic and not electric?

[MN Dave]

I don't know much about modern serious music composition, but I get the feeling pieces are still being written mainly for acoustic instruments. Why is that? Why not electric? Force of habit? To keep acoustic musicians in business?

Thanks.

[Josquin des Prez]

Because electric instruments sound terrible live.

[MN Dave]

Because electric instruments sound terrible live.

Is that really the reason? Depends on your soundman, I guess.

[Kullervo]

Saariaho has written several pieces for instruments and electronics. John Adams's Dharma at Big Sur is for electric violin and orchestra. The French "spectralists" (Tristan Murail, Gerard Grisey et. al.) wrote several pieces in the 80s for orchestra and electronics.

[Josquin des Prez]

Is that really the reason?

Probably not, but it's true nonetheless. Natural acoustics are superior to speaker generated sounds and the disparity is particularly evident on live settings, which is the natural and rightful habitat for classical music.

[MN Dave]

Saariaho has written several pieces for instruments and electronics. John Adams's Dharma at Big Sur is for electric violin and orchestra. The French "spectralists" (Tristan Murail, Gerard Grisey et. al.) wrote several pieces in the 80s for orchestra and electronics.

Right. I'm aware of that type of thing. I was thinking more along the lines of your basic electric guitar, bass and drums set-up.

[some guy]

I suspect that a good deal of modern serious composition uses electronics or electricity somehow or other. Turntables, CDs, electronic circuitry, laptops, samplers, synthesizers, tape (yeah, some people still use tape)--there's a lot of music out there that uses these means of producing sound. (The first are played as instruments, yes.)

But, and this partly accounts for your feeling, concerts with these kinds of tools are not taking place in symphony halls generally, nor are they getting any sort of publicity except for some scattered references now and again to things like Stockhausen's Helicopter quartet, which makes that whole world of music seem scattered and inconsistent itself.

It's being done. You're just not hearing about it. I'm about to go to the 24th annual SEAMUS festival of electroacoustic music, one of dozens of electroacoustic festivals around the world. How many people here have even heard of SEAMUS much less heard any of the music presented there. This year will consist of fourteen concerts over three days (totaling about 80 new pieces of music). Then a month later, I'm off for France for the Bourges festival, which is nearing its 40th anniversary. That festival consists of three or four concerts a day for ten days.

Most of the concerts I go to here in Portland (about two a month on average) use electronics in one way or another. Even the largely instrumental concerts use synthesizers or laptops or just heavy amplification as part of the mix.

Plus, acoustic instruments are still nice. And you can get noises out of them that no one would have ever imagined a hundred years ago ... or even fifty. OK, maybe fifty. And with electronic extensions...!

[71 dB]

Why not electric? Force of habit?

Yes, force of habit and prejudice.

Acoustics instruments are being developped for centuries and sound really good. That does not mean electric instrument can't sound good too. Perhaps combining acoustic and electric gives the best, most interesting result. That's what I anticipate to happen. Electric instruments can expand the timbral space of acoustic instruments. It just takes talent to combine these well.

[c#minor]

Why do composers still write in the traditional forms? Why does the symphony still exist? String Quartet? Concerto?

[MN Dave]

Why do composers still write in the traditional forms? Why does the symphony still exist? String Quartet? Concerto?

Why do birds suddenly appear every time you are near?

[Kullervo]

Why do birds suddenly appear every time you are near?

Force of habit, mostly.

[MN Dave]

Force of habit, mostly.

[jochanaan]

...Perhaps combining acoustic and electric gives the best, most interesting result...

The trouble is that unless the sound engineer really knows what s/he's doing, the electronic instruments overwhelm the acoustic ones.  (You have the same problem with an ensemble of period and non-period instruments.  I don't know how many recordings of Baroque music I've heard where a lone harpsichordist has to play against a full modern string orchestra, and usually all you hear from the keyboard is an annoying rattle. )

Also, most concert halls are designed for acoustic instruments.  Put a sound system in there, and unless the sound engineer keeps a tight rein on it, it sounds really unbearable.

However, in some smaller concerts and venues, I've heard some really interesting experiments with electronica, often in combination with acoustic instruments.

[Symphonien]

Why do composers still write in the traditional forms? Why does the symphony still exist? String Quartet? Concerto?

Probably because these ensembles have become standard, and it is thus more convenient and economically feasible in performance for a composer to write for an orchestra or string quartet rather than a new type of ensemble. Composers may also be commissioned to write a concerto for a certain soloist, or an orchestral work for an orchestra they may be attached to. As for the forms themselves, there are very few composers today who will still label their works Symphony No. 1, String Quartet No. 1, etc - they will usually just name it something else. And these titles no longer mean much anyway, since composers generally won't write a strict sonata/rondo or whatever form (although they may still follow principles of development, but in their own unique way), or even have a varied fast-slow-fast layout. Look at Gorecki's 3rd Symphony (1976) for example, which consists of three slow movements.

[71 dB]

The trouble is that unless the sound engineer really knows what s/he's doing, the electronic instruments overwhelm the acoustic ones.  (You have the same problem with an ensemble of period and non-period instruments.  I don't know how many recordings of Baroque music I've heard where a lone harpsichordist has to play against a full modern string orchestra, and usually all you hear from the keyboard is an annoying rattle. )

Also, most concert halls are designed for acoustic instruments.  Put a sound system in there, and unless the sound engineer keeps a tight rein on it, it sounds really unbearable.

However, in some smaller concerts and venues, I've heard some really interesting experiments with electronica, often in combination with acoustic instruments.

Sound engineers have difficulties because this have been done so little. In time they learn to do things the right way. In electric side the concert hall acoustics can be taken into consideration (signal prosessing) but it's also very important to place the loudspeakers among the players, where the acoustics works the way it should.

[canninator]

I don't know much about modern serious music composition, but I get the feeling pieces are still being written mainly for acoustic instruments. Why is that? Why not electric? Force of habit? To keep acoustic musicians in business?

Thanks.

Some very serious composers have written, of course, for the ondes Martenot in this century including Messiaen, Varese, Honegger, Milhaud, and Jolivet. My 2 cents.

[mikkeljs]

1) The theory pofessor Jan Maegaard has written, that it is more practical to do something with acoustic instruments, since the same sound richness would take a lot more time to make with a tape.

    - I´m not sure if I agree with that explanation. It takes time to practice with the instrument.

2) I think the acoustic music allows the composer to limit the musical idea in order not to fix it with a closed electronic sample.

3) I also think living musicians and their instruments and live concerts is something that makes sence, even if there was no need of them. Music goes beyond the amount of physical work!