Comparing Composers

[Luke]

What are these mysterious rules, Saul? Where can I buy a book which tells me what I should or shouldn't do, as a composer, in order to follow them.

There is no one set of rules. There are guidelines which composers set for themselves. Brahms has a different set of guidlines to Mendelssohn, who had a different set to Chopin, who had a different set to Schumann, who had a different set to Beethoven, who had a different set to Mozart, and so on and on. That's why their music sounds different, after all. And thank goodness it does, too. If all composers adhered to some single set of rules, how devoid of personality and interest it would all be.

You can wrap it up in talk about rule-breaking if you want, what this is really about is your taste. You like music composed within the guidelines which Brahms set himself, but not, presumably, those composed within the guidlines which, say, Medtner set himself (to mention a composer of rigorous skill and enormous historical awareness who is nevertheless the halfway point between Brahms and Rachmaninov, to invoke the traditional Medtnerian cliche). That's OK, Saul, but you shouldn't really extrapolate further from that personal taste of yours any of this stuff about 'composers who follow the rules/break the rules' because, as I say, there are as many sets of rules as there are composers. 

Honestly, this thread is just too bonkers for words....

[Saul]

What are these mysterious rules, Saul? Where can I buy a book which tells me what I should or shouldn't do, as a composer, in order to follow them.

There is no one set of rules. There are guidelines which composers set for themselves. Brahms has a different set of guidlines to Mendelssohn, who had a different set to Chopin, who had a different set to Schumann, who had a different set to Beethoven, who had a different set to Mozart, and so on and on. That's why their music sounds different, after all. And thank goodness it does, too. If all composers adhered to some single set of rules, how devoid of personality and interest it would all be.

You can wrap it up in talk about rule-breaking if you want, what this is really about is your taste. You like music composed within the guidelines which Brahms set himself, but not, presumably, those composed within the guidlines which, say, Medtner set himself (to mention a composer of rigorous skill and enormous historical awareness who is nevertheless the halfway point between Brahms and Rachmaninov, to invoke the traditional Medtnerian cliche). That's OK, Saul, but you shouldn't really extrapolate further from that personal taste of yours any of this stuff about 'composers who follow the rules/break the rules' because, as I say, there are as many sets of rules as there are composers. 

Honestly, this thread is just too bonkers for words....

Its called music theory, sonata form, exposition , development and conclusion, Harmony and Melody, rhythm and tone color. And an overall good feel of sounding classical, and harmonious.

All the greats Bach, Haydn, Beethoven Mozart Mendelssohn, Brahms, Vivaldi Chopin and even to some extend Schuman, Shubert and Grieg attuned their music to these set of rules, mediums and forms.

[Mirror Image]

I view classical music beginning from the Baroque Era as the High Mountain, those who tried to stay on the mountain were great, those who decided to leave it, departed from greatness and contributed to its diminishing.

You have a very closed-mind. You think every composer should walk in the same line and eat the same foods. I don't. Thanks for an enlightening conversation. I know now that you and I could never possibly agree on anything, so let's just part ways.

Anyway, Teresa has made some excellent points and I agree with her kind of thinking. She and I should have some great conversations down the road.

[PaulR]

Its called music theory, sonata form, exposition , development and conclusion, Harmony and Melody, rhythm and tone color. And an overall good feel of sounding classical, and harmonious.

All the greats Bach, Haydn, Beethoven Mozart Mendelssohn, Brahms, Vivaldi Chopin and even to some extend Schuman, Shubert and Grieg attuned their music to these set of rules, mediums and forms.

music theory doesn't end after the Romantic period, nor does the application of the said theory ends.  Different styles of composition (such as 12-tone music) are added to the theory.  Different composers use a different "set of rules", as well as different set of tools. 

By the way, you can still find sonata form in 20th century music, in some form or another.

[Saul]

  I know now that you and I could never possibly agree on anything, so let's just part ways.

Funny,

I'm looking to find people who don't agree with me so we can have a fruitful discussion.
What is there to talk about with those that I already agree with?

Anyways,

Cheers

[Luke]

Its called music theory, sonata form, exposition , development and conclusion, Harmony and Melody, rhythm and tone color. And an overall good feel of sounding classical, and harmonious.

All the greats Bach, Haydn, Beethoven Mozart Mendelssohn, Brahms, Vivaldi Chopin and even to some extend Schuman, Shubert and Grieg attuned their music to these set of rules, mediums and forms.

Really, Saul, no, they didn't. Sonata form as you are thinking of it was not conceived of in Bach's day. It wasn't even really conceived of in Mozart's or Beethoven's day - they followed what you could call the sonata principle, which was a feeling for the confluence of key and structure, not a set of rules. The sonata form rules you are talking about were only codified later, and were arguably pretty stultifying, except in the case of genius - Brahms, Alkan, and others, who were able to see the wood for the trees.

So, all that you have said above could be applied, for instance, to a piece like Berg's Piano Sonata - a piece written within the context of an immeasurably better command of music theory than you or I will ever have, a piece clearly in this ellusive sonata form of exposition, development and conclusion, (recapitulation, if you are wanting to give it the rulebook name), a piece which undeniably has 'Harmony and Melody, rhythm and tone color', though I guess these aren't to your taste in this particular work.

Which issue - taste - leads on to the last of your rules, snuck in round the back - 'an overall good feel of sounding classical, and harmonious.' In your own words, Saul, that's a 'feel' not a rule. IOW, it's a matter of personal taste*. I reckon Berg had a pretty darned impeccable sense of what sounded classical and harmonious, even if he chose to use more complex harmonies and more extreme textures and rhythms than suits your own tastes.

* the danger on this crazy thread is that in saying those words one ends up putting oneself closer to Teresa's equally crazy mantras, a world in which Mozart can be described not merely as 'not to my taste' but as incompetent. I'd better get out of this mad thread before it implodes....

[Mirror Image]

music theory doesn't end after the Romantic period, nor does the application of the said theory ends.  Different styles of composition (such as 12-tone music) are added to the theory.  Different composers use a different "set of rules", as well as different set of tools. 

By the way, you can still find sonata form in 20th century music, in some form or another.

Exactly, classical music didn't end after the Romantic period. Anybody willing to listen to Webern, Berg, or Prokofiev with an open-mind are able to understand that music has to grow and breathe. It can't possibly do this by conforming to the same practices that made Brahms or Haydn great. There has to be growth, experimentation, and new developments in music in order for great things to happen.

[Saul]

music theory doesn't end after the Romantic period, nor does the application of the said theory ends.  Different styles of composition (such as 12-tone music) are added to the theory.  Different composers use a different "set of rules", as well as different set of tools. 

By the way, you can still find sonata form in 20th century music, in some form or another.

Then its not 'Classical music', call it something else.

[Mirror Image]

Funny,

I'm looking to find people who don't agree with me so we can have a fruitful discussion.
What is there to talk about with those that I already agree with?

Anyways,

Cheers

Who actually agrees with you on this thread?

[Saul]

Exactly, classical music didn't end after the Romantic period. Anybody willing to listen to Webern, Berg, or Prokofiev with an open-mind are able to understand that music has to grow and breathe. It can't possibly do this by conforming to the same practices that made Brahms or Haydn great. There has to be growth, experimentation, and new developments in music in order for great things to happen.

You call modernity in music a progression, I call it a deterioration. There's no way that these modern composers composed their music in accordance to classical values, what they produced is not classical.

[Mirror Image]

Then its not 'Classical music', call it something else.

What 20th Century composers do you enjoy to listen to?

[Saul]

Who actually agrees with you on this thread?

Well, you're not the one that's clear.

[Mirror Image]

Well, you're not the one that's clear.

You've made your musical tastes quite clear. You tread a very narrow line in classical music history whereas I am open to exploration in all eras.

[PaulR]

You call modernity in music a progression, I call it a deterioration. There's no way that these modern composers composed their music in accordance to classical values, what they produced is not classical.

Modernity is progression (well....sometimes)  You forgot that Beethoven was once modern, and pushed music forward, even creating one of the first atonal pieces (Grosse Fuge).  Beethoven was among the firsts to use the Scherzo instead of the Minuet and Trio, as well as including new instruments in the orchestra (such as trombone).  The 4th piano concerto also was on of the first concerto's not to have a long orchestral introduction.

But maybe Beethoven started the deterioration.  I don't know!  But I can say that I love the music by Shostakovich, and a lot of other 20th century composers. 

[Saul]

What 20th Century composers do you enjoy to listen to?

I might enjoy listening to them, but I wont call them 'Classical composers' or their music 'classical music' nor attribute any greatness to them.
As I said, enjoyment and greatness are two different things. You make the same error as Teresa where she believes that her own enjoyment is a perfect medium of deciding what is great and what is not.

[Mirror Image]

Modernity is progression

Amen to that.

[Mirror Image]

I might enjoy listening to them, but I wont call them 'Classical composers' or their music 'classical music' nor attribute any greatness to them.
As I said, enjoyment and greatness are two different things. You make the same error as Teresa where she believes that her own enjoyment is a perfect medium of deciding what is great and what is not.

To deny Stravinsky's, Shostakovich's, or Schoenberg's greatness is to live in a blind world. Trust me you're as closed-minded as they come. As I said, you won't change my opinion and I know I won't change yours, so why don't we discuss some composers that both of us enjoy?

[Saul]

Amen to that.

Depends in what. Not all aspects of modernity are beneficial and progressive.

Look at the visual arts of years passed, and look at the rubbish in today's galleries. The differences are astronomical. Same is with music. Connect the dots.

[Saul]

To deny Stravinsky's, Shostakovich's, or Schoenberg's greatness is to live in a blind world. Trust me you're as closed-minded as they come.

Thank you, I would love to close my mind to all the rubbish of the world, the task is daunting, but it would be a noble achievement.

[Mirror Image]

Depends in what. Not all aspects of modernity are beneficial and progressive.

Look at the visual arts of years passed, and look at the rubbish in today's galleries. The differences are astronomical. Same is with music. Connect the dots.

I don't need to connect the dots. I know a piece of rubbish when I see one. I don't consider splashing colors onto a piece of paper art, but then again my opinion of visual art is completely different than my opinion of music. Music is it's own language. There are a lot of different ways to express this language. I think a composer like Berg and Bartok did a beautiful job of expressing this language. I think they're GREAT composers that helped define an era in classical music history. They kept the music alive as did many other GREAT 20th Century composers.