Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Peter, the moderator

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Hi John

 

> An interesting point, and you are right, it is in the entire work which

> should be compared. But would you say that most rock, or even prog rock

> albums, are a single work linked conceptually in some way?

 

Most have a musical " theme " running through them, even if the words of the

songs do not have a conceptual link.

 

> Yes, I would. But wander through a romantic sympony and there polyrhthms

are

> the norm, not the exception, key and time changes occuring every few

> minutes, not merely occasionally.

 

I have to disagree.

 

> Personally, I also feel that prog rock rarely takes the time to develop

and

> expand ideas and themes, trying to cram too much into a single track, or

> even a single album. And so in the space of a single work of two minutes,

> there will be enough material and complexity to fill fifteen minutes of

> symphony (or an hour if you're talking about Mahler).

 

Hmmm - a two minute prog song - that would certainly be a novelty. Perhaps

you'd care to share which 2 minute songs you're talking about.

 

> But this seems to be

> compression of complexity rather than an increase in it, and if you take,

> say, Scenes from a Memory, which is a longer work, the complexity is

> 'diluted', rather than there being more of it.

 

I can't think of any way to respond to this other than that you are

completely wrong. If this is your view of SFAM, then I don't really think

you know the album as well as you think you do.

 

> It takes someone of real

> musical genius to maintain a level of complexity and coherence over a

longer

> work...Bach, Mozart, Brahms...and perhaps the most extreme case, of

course,

> Wagner.

 

It's been a long time since I've done any Brahms, but I am familiar with

Bach and Mozart, having performed both frequently, and recently. These

composers do not maintain any form of complexity in their works at all -

they follow pretty much all the standard " rules " of musical theory, and

create pieces which, while very effective (and possibly some of the most

entertaining music ever written) could not be described as complex in any

sense of the word.

 

> I think that they are so common that the average classical musican doesn't

> even notice such things as unexpected. Polyrhthms, for example, occur

across

> an orchestra all the time - I'm listening, to my shame, to Strauss at the

> moment, and even in one of his most cliched waltzes I'm hearing

polyrhythms

> and rhythmic shifts every minute or so.

 

And yet, professional musicians find them so hard to cope with. Just

recently, I remember getting incredibly bored sitting in the choir stalls

while Brian Kay struggled for about half an hour to get the orchestra to

play the 5/4 bar correctly.

 

> But the individual musicians often

> aren't even aware of this. As I'm sure you know, part-writers try and make

> the part as easy to read as possible, so instead of changing from 3/4 to

5/4

> to 7/8, etc., they'll keep it in 4/4 and merely have the rhythms crossing

> the bars. Parts of the orchestra may be in one time signagure, other parts

> in another, thus achieving polyrhythms without having to make the

musicians'

> lips quiver. Classical music is often hugely more complex than the

musicians

> realise, whereas, I guess, in a prog group, where the musicians are also

the

> composers, they are more aware of this.

 

Again, I fear that you are simply making things up about classical to try to

prove your point. I am fairly conversant with classical music, and I

understand it far better than you give me credit for.

 

BB

Peter

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release 19/05/03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi John

 

> True. The use of a liet motif/returning melody is a common one. But the

> extent of the development varies greatly. Bach frequently introduces

several

> apparently separate themes, only to gradually show through development

that

> they are really the same theme, or draws a second theme out of a part of

the

> first, develops it, upon which it is seen that the first really came out

of

> the second, etc.

 

Standard prog practice. To me, the " ultimate " example of this is Chance by

Savatage.

 

> Hmm. Possibly. But I tend to be of the opinion that a work must stand on

its

> own. Haydn was constricted by the orchestra available at his court,

> Palestrina was banned from using various 'demonic' chords, Mozart was

> essentially a jobbing musician who - in theory at least - wrote what he

was

> told. But you can't judge, say, a Haydn symphony based on what he might

have

> written, or a prog track based on what they might have played if they had

> the space. Well, you can, I suppose. But it does rather lead to the 'what

> if' type of argument.

 

Here's my favourite " what-if " type argument. What-if Mozart, Bach,

Beethoven, etc. had lived in our own era rather than one dominated by

classical music? I wonder if they'd have still been classical composers, or

if they'd have chosen a different outlet for their talents.

 

> As an aside, a classical solo performer playing live

> will frequently extemporise on cadenzas, etc., though this is not an

> increase in complexity so much as virtuosity.

 

During most rock concerts (prog or otherwise) each of the musicians get a

chance to show off in a solo atmosphere - many choose to extemporise on

classical pieces. I think my favourite was John Petrucci doing the Flight of

the Bumblebee with a subtle segue into the theme from Coronation Street and

ending with the William Tell Overture. Of course, all done with a variety of

different progressions away from the main themes.

 

BB

Peter

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release 19/05/03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

It could be either - although I tend to go with the other hand. People

don't usually have just one talent, and may be able to pursue some of them

in only a minor way i.e. as a hobby.

 

Jo

 

> Could be. And there is the famous argument that a thousand Shakespeares,

> Einsteins and Mozarts have been born, just most of them in the wrong place

> or circumstance, and so unable to take advantage of their abilities. On

the

> other hand, there is the contrary argument that says that if someone such

a

> phenomenal talent, they will find a way to make use of it. Hard to know

> which is right, as neither is really provable.

>

> John

>

> -

> " Heartwork " <Heartwork

>

> Wednesday, May 21, 2003 2:21 PM

> Re: Peter, the moderator

>

>

> > Hi John

> >

> > It could be that there have been (or are) many thousands of people who

> > possess that ability. Not all of them manage to be famous for their

> talent,

> > or choose to follow another path for various reasons, so therefore it

> > follows that we would not have heard of them. While I know Peter is a

> > talented person I'm sure he's not unique for that talent.

> >

> > Jo

> >

> > > Well, that is something that is hard for me to argue with. And if you

> have

> > > that gift, then I am very envious. But I will point out that

throughout

> > the

> > > history of classical music, there are only a handful of people who

> > possessed

> > > the ability you are describing. A few composers - Mozart, Bach,

> > Mendellsohn,

> > > one or two conductors...But even the great arrangers such as

Mussorgsky,

> > > Elgar, Debussy, didn't possess it, and had to sit down and work out

more

> > > complex harmonic progressions, etc.

> > >

> > > For myself, I can hear parts in my head, can generally hear the

harmonic

> > > progression in a simple folk or pop track, and sometimes the harmonic

> > > structure of a more complex prog rock track or Baroque concerto. But

> > > symphonies, chorales, sonatas, even motets...they are far beyond my

> > > instinctive grasp, and indeed the grasp training in musical analysis

has

> > > given me. I can follow someone else if they lead me through the form,

> but

> > > can not work it out on my own.

> > >

> > > I think you are right, that here is the crux of the matter, and that

> this

> > is

> > > why I claim classical music to be more complex. Because I can, with

> effort

> > > (a lot of effort, now that my university years are far behind me), sit

> > down

> > > and analyse most prog rock put before me. But there is no way I can do

> > that

> > > with most romantic classical music, and certainly not contemporary and

> > 20th

> > > c. works. And from that, I reach the assumption that this music is

more

> > > complex. If, on the other hand, you can equally analyse all of this

> music,

> > > be it prog or classical, then it is understandable if you don't see

one

> as

> > > more complex than the other.

> > >

> > > John

> > >

> > >

> > > -

> > > " Peter " <Snowbow

> > >

> > > Tuesday, May 20, 2003 5:40 PM

> > > Re: Peter, the moderator

> > >

> > >

> > > > Hi John

> > > >

> > > > > It takes a lot of

> > > > > training to hear all the parts in any piece, let alone a classical

> > work,

> > > > and

> > > > > certainly it is beyond me.

> > > >

> > > > I think we now come to the crux of the matter. At the risk of

sounding

> a

> > > bit

> > > > boastful (not intended that way, though), I have particularly

> sensitive

> > > > hearing, and my brain seems to somehow be able to distinguish

exactly

> > what

> > > > is happening in any piece of music. This is why I know very little

> music

> > > > theory - I simply have an affinity with musical tone, rhythm and

> > > character,

> > > > which makes the learning of theory a little pointless. This is

> something

> > I

> > > > have been able to do since childhood (apparently I started singing

> when

> > I

> > > > was about 2 years old, but don't have any particular recollection of

> > > that!).

> > > > Like some people can pick up a painting and know exactly how the

> artist

> > > held

> > > > his brush, and how many brush strokes they used, etc - I can do that

> > with

> > > > music. I know exactly how a piece will sound if a particular

> instrument

> > is

> > > > removed without having to hear it. From that point of view, I have

> never

> > > had

> > > > any training (although I have had some training in things like vocal

> > > > technique to help improve my own music making).

> > > >

> > > > The point I'm making is that, with this understanding, I can take a

> > piece

> > > of

> > > > music apart in my mind very easily, and understand how it is made up

> > > > (although I would have no ability to explain that piece of music in

> > > anything

> > > > approaching recognisable music theory). This is why I am so

confident

> in

> > > > stating that progressive metal (in general) is as intricate /

complex

> as

> > > > classical (in general).

> > > >

> > > > BB

> > > > Peter

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ---

> > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

> > > > Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release 13/05/03

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > To send an email to

-

> > > >

> > > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

John

 

It's always good to discuss different points of view, and to stick-up for

things you like.

 

Jo

 

> Perhaps it does. But I do strive to see everything as objectively as

> possible, so whilst I've many flaws, I'd like to hope that this isn't one

of

> them. On the other hand, I do tend to defend the genre more rigorously

than

> I'd defend, say, rap music, so I guess that in itself is a kind of

> overlooking of its limitations, or at least, encourages a glossing over of

> them to concentrate on its strengths. Hmm.

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release 19/05/03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

John

 

> True. The use of a liet motif/returning melody is a common one. But the

> extent of the development varies greatly. Bach frequently introduces

several

> apparently separate themes, only to gradually show through development

that

> they are really the same theme, or draws a second theme out of a part of

the

> first, develops it, upon which it is seen that the first really came out

of

> the second, etc. My favourite example at the moment is a Schumann work,

> where he begins with a theme meant to represent himself. Then a theme

> representing his wife appears, merges with Schumans', to become something

> greater, Schumann's then falling away to leave a celebrationary version of

> his wifes'.

 

I know what you mean. Savatage do that in one (maybe more) of their albums,

and you don't realise beforehand that they are going to conect up later.

 

> Hmm. Possibly. But I tend to be of the opinion that a work must stand on

its

> own. Haydn was constricted by the orchestra available at his court,

> Palestrina was banned from using various 'demonic' chords, Mozart was

> essentially a jobbing musician who - in theory at least - wrote what he

was

> told. But you can't judge, say, a Haydn symphony based on what he might

have

> written, or a prog track based on what they might have played if they had

> the space. Well, you can, I suppose. But it does rather lead to the 'what

> if' type of argument. As an aside, a classical solo performer playing live

> will frequently extemporise on cadenzas, etc., though this is not an

> increase in complexity so much as virtuosity.

 

It would be very interesting to consider the 'what ifs though'.

 

Jo

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release 19/05/03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Peter,

 

> Alternatively, maybe you only *think* that you can fully analyse a prog

> metal piece? Perhaps you (as with many classical musicians) miss many of

the

> subtleties of prog metal.

 

Possibly. It is rather hard for me to tell what I'm missing! I do know,

though, that 'classical' analysis is a tool which can be used to dissect any

form, not just classical. Rather in the same way a 'classical'

training/practise regime can help play in other genres...I remember

(smugly!) that when I first started playing folk, the folkies were impressed

that I could play and memorise folk tunes pretty much on sight. The reason

being that they consisted for the most of scales, arpeggios and simple

modulations, which I'd been practising for fifteen years or so already. Mind

you, I've also heard classical/jazz musicians say the opposite, that

classical training hampered their jazz style.

 

> And as for contemporary classical - I tend to steer away from that, as I

> find it mostly to be incredibly tedious. The worst piece of music I've

ever

> sung was Hymn to Cecilia by Byron Adams. Of course, I'm assuming when you

> say " contemporary music " , you're not including modern composers who write

in

> a more traditional style.

 

No. I actually used the wrong term - I should have said modern rather than

contemporary, as the two are no longer the same. I'm not a fan of anything

pantonal or serialist, and not much of a fan of minimalism. In fact, most of

my favourite contemporary music seems to be in films - the scores of

Ghormenghast, Harry Potter, and of course Lord of the Rings.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi John

 

> I've also heard classical/jazz musicians say the opposite, that

> classical training hampered their jazz style.

 

I think a lot depends on the sort of person and the style of music. I

remember once playing in a ragtime group with a classically trained

pianist - it was terrible - he was a good pianist, but if he ever made a

mistake, he stopped playing and went back to correct it!

 

I always astonish everyone I sing with, because I refuse to sing from

music - even major works. They can't understand how I can remember it all,

but to me it's the way that music is meant to be!

 

> No. I actually used the wrong term - I should have said modern rather than

> contemporary, as the two are no longer the same. I'm not a fan of anything

> pantonal or serialist, and not much of a fan of minimalism. In fact, most

of

> my favourite contemporary music seems to be in films - the scores of

> Ghormenghast, Harry Potter, and of course Lord of the Rings.

 

Ah yes - I definitely like that sort of music. You should check out some

Rhapsody - they describe themselves as " Epic Hollywood metal " , basically

their major influences are John Williams (as in Star Wars soundtrack) and

Iron Maiden! Very interesting music.

 

BB

Peter

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release 19/05/03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

John

 

I enjoy this music too, especially Lord of the Rings.

 

Jo

 

> In fact, most of

> my favourite contemporary music seems to be in films - the scores of

> Ghormenghast, Harry Potter, and of course Lord of the Rings.

 

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release 19/05/03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

IndiaDivine Telegram Group IndiaDivine WhatsApp Group


×
×
  • Create New...