Classical Music Forum banner
761 - 780 of 848 Posts

·
Read Only
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
How do you know what "most listeners" would think.
Just spitballing, like I said.

That may be true, i.e. Berg intentionally constructed his tone rows using thirds, and even diatonic triads, and because of his dramatic talent, there is a narrative quality to his music. All this results in atonal music which is very expressive.
Which kind of proves the point.
 

·
Registered
Sibelius, Beethoven, Satie, Debussy
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
No, but its about the breadth of the spectrum of possible expressions. Why would you restrict yourself by sticking to a restrictive serial method before you even conceive a work? The twelve-tone technique for example. What if a composer finds out during composing that he just wants 10 tones and less dissonance? The twelve-tone technique just doesn't make sense in the first place, because its an unnecessary restriction.

I always thought twelve-tone-technique and serialism is meant. All this talk about what atonal means is diversion, isn't it?
"Why would you..." Because you want to. Duh!

As for "what is meant", chipia has not exemplified what is meant by citing specific examples of what is meant. It's not for us to assume or guess what is meant by " like Boulez". Lots of contemporary composers don't write anything like Boulez.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
Yes, but the point is it's not as immediately apparent. I don't need the composer's indication to feel the particular emotion of this, for example:
You just pointed out one of the main reasons why I like SVS, atonal, dissonant, avant-garde and contemporary classical music so much.

It is because the emotional content is not so obvious and spelled out so plainly by the composer, that is one of the aspects of these types of classical music that makes them so compelling and intriguing.

For me, with CP classical music, the obviousness of the emotional response the composer is trying to elicit, comes off as predictable and trite.

Yes, the emotional response is not so apparent, and that is a good thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,159 Posts
Often when I see discussion of emotion in music (emotional expression, emotional enjoyment etc) I wonder what the poster means by emotion. Isn't an emotion a thought? And isn't the difference (between a thought that can be called an emotion and one that won't be called an emotion) a matter of whether or not it is accompanied by physical feelings (butterflies in the stomach, a faster heartbeat etc)? Given this it seems that it is mostly down to what the listener experiences. We are back to our old friend subjectivity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #767 · (Edited)
most people with whom I discuss Berg almost always observe how his music is so much more "emotional" than other atonal composers.
But I don't think anybody was saying that serial music is "not emotional" but that it doesn't convey positive emotions like happiness well, or at best relatively. In the Schönberg Piano Concerto the outer movements have a less dark vibe compared to the inner ones, but they don't really recall happiness or an "easy life" by themselves. The first movement seems rather eerie to me.

This Boulez Sonata on the other hand is supposed to sound "hysterical" and "disordered" (according to the analysis by Samuel Andreyev on Youtube) and I find that more convincing:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,088 Posts
But I don't think anybody was saying that serial music is "not emotional" but that it doesn't convey positive emotions like happiness well, or at best relatively. In the Schönberg Piano Concerto the outer movements have a less dark vibe compared the inner ones, but they don't really recall happiness or an "easy life" by themselves. The first movement seems rather eerie to me.

This Boulez Sonata on the other hand is supposed to sound "hysterical" and "disordered" (according to the analysis by Samuel Andreyev on Youtube) and I find that more convincing:
I am not going to conduct a survey of music from the Second Viennese School in order to show you works which I think demonstrate what you claim is missing from the music. I won't do this because it would be very time consuming to assemble the material and frankly, I do not think you are intellectually honest enough to benefit from my work.

Needless to say, I know you are wrong, and more to the point, whatever you get or miss from this music is not proof of anything other than the limits of your perception - limits we all have for various things.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
- "I don't find atonal music to be able to convey varied emotions as well as CP can."

-"I don't listen to music for emotional conveyance anyway. It's a red herring."

(examples of "emotional" CP music)

"How dare you say atonal music can't convey emotions?" :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #770 ·
I am not going to conduct a survey of music from the Second Viennese School in order to show you works which I think demonstrate what you claim is missing from the music. I won't do this because it would be very time consuming to assemble the material and frankly, I do not think you are intellectually honest enough to benefit from my work.

Needless to say, I know you are wrong, and more to the point, whatever you get or miss from this music is not proof of anything other than the limits of your perception - limits we all have for various things.
I don't think my opinion is caused by bias - Simon Moon, who apparently listens mostly to contemporary music admitted himself that emotions tend to be more vague than in CPT and actually said that's a good thing. Is he "wrong" as well?
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
chipia said:
But I don't think anybody was saying that serial music is "not emotional" but that it doesn't convey positive emotions like happiness well, or at best relatively.
You know, I think that's true. I don't hear joy or happiness in atonal music. Mostly I hear "analytical" and even coldness or hardness, which has its place.
SanAntone said:
Needless to say, I know you are wrong, and more to the point, whatever you get or miss from this music is not proof of anything other than the limits of your perception - limits we all have for various things.
So much for individual interpretation. If you don't hear this just like I do, you're wrong and intellectually dishonest. And limited.
 

·
Registered
Sibelius, Beethoven, Satie, Debussy
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
But I don't think anybody was saying that serial music is "not emotional" but that it doesn't convey positive emotions like happiness well, or at best relatively. In the Schönberg Piano Concerto the outer movements have a less dark vibe compared to the inner ones, but they don't really recall happiness or an "easy life" by themselves.
So? Is that what music is required to do?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,088 Posts
I don't think my opinion is caused by bias - Simon Moon, who apparently listens mostly to contemporary music admitted himself that emotions tend to be more vague than in CPT and actually said that's a good thing. Is he "wrong" as well?
Simon Moon is entitled to his opinion, I will leave it to him to explain or not.

I am not the one claiming that a certain kind of music does or does not express emotions. I don't happen to listen to music for that purpose, but I also perceive that all music, atonal music included, is open to that kind of perception by a variety of listeners. I also think that as listeners we have holes in our perception which can leave some music outside of our appreciation.

The difference between you and I is that I don't blame the music.

You know, I think that's true. I don't hear joy or happiness in atonal music. Mostly I hear "analytical" and even coldness or hardness, which has its place.
So much for individual interpretation. If you don't hear this just like I do, you're wrong and intellectually dishonest. And limited.
I have never said that. This is a paraphrase of some of what I have said, different people will hear different things in any music. Only, some blame the music for what they don't get out of it.
 

·
Registered
Sibelius, Beethoven, Satie, Debussy
Joined
·
1,708 Posts
Well happiness is one of the most fundamental human emotions, so I think it should be part of music just like anything else. I see no good reason to exclude it.
Who's excluding it? I'm simply saying it's not required. I'm pretty sure Ravel wasn't aiming for happiness when writing Pavane pour une infante défunte.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
988 Posts
No YOU implied it's a standard which "Bubbles" failed to meet.
You're using Equivocation. You were the very first one to use "standard". I thought you meant a personal standard, personal criteria I used. When judging, a person will use both their personal standards and biases in addition to universal standards such as the example I gave. I explained in post #727 this difference which you ignored. There are standards to the craft of composition no matter what the "practice" (your term) is. Like the example I gave in post #725 DOESN'T MATTER if it's Classical, Romantic, Tonal, Serial, Microtonal, Impressionistic...it doesn't matter.

That standard applies to all music. There are other standards of orchestration, such as writing an A below the staff in a bassoon part. The standards of the craft of composition do not allow for this, no matter what the "practice" is.

In fact, that is why the composer of "Bubbles" removed those very notes from his children's improvisation. He was following the "standards" of the craft of composition as set by history and experts, to help the judges determine his piece as a piece of better quality than it would have been determined had he not followed that standard.

The point is that that standard was set by composers who were in turn violators of standards. Standard-bearer Saint-Saëns felt that Debussy et al were violators of all that was high and holy while you now use those same composers as a standard yourself.
That's where you are wrong. The vast majority of standards of compositional craft have been developed from ALL great composers and compositions since the very beginning. It is what they all have in common. Like I said, the two examples I've used so far in orchestration apply to ALL PERIODS and ALL STYLES and ALL COMPOSERS, regardless of whether the music you're orchestrating moves the listener or not. It doesn't matter. That is afterwards.

And you do not know what reason it was, whether it's some personal bias (he doesn't like the harmonies or something), or whether it is an actual standard regarding the actual craft of composition.

Quite frankly, if any standard whatever it is, did change in the future, does not mean I can not use it or that it is invalid TODAY. We are judging music at this very moment in time, not music according to the POSSIBLE likes and dislikes of people who haven't even been born yet. If all standards as I know them today were negated 100 years in the future does not forbid me to use them today to discern music of quality from the rest.

To put it briefly, the standards which you use to dismiss "Bubbles" are not set in stone.
When listeners go to an orchestra concert, is it unfair of them to have a universal set of minimum standards of professional performance (which is what they are paying the performers for)? Like you go to a Mozart symphony concert and several players play 80 cents sharp or flat of every note they play, it wouldn't be fair of anyone to say they didn't meet standards of quality performance because standards are never set in stone, right?

a possible rejoinder these days is that that consensus, history, standards, traditions and "good reasons" have been imposed at least in part from above, in the service of power structures.
I once heard one time that a possible reply to that is that they should probably take that up with the Olympics committee then, given that standards, traditions, "good reasons", and expert opinion and consensus is what gives people like Simone Biles gold medals. And about a million other competitions, like International Chopin Competition, etc. But I'll let you pass that on to them, since I don't want to argue with the wrong people and you're just their dutiful messenger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
988 Posts
I once composed a piece in college at the age of about 20 and had it performed by our concert band. It used the 12-tone technique, but I kind of did my own thing with it and what I did was instead of just writing single note pitches for each tone of the row, I would write a complete major triad using the pitch from the row as the root.

For the rhythm, I used the technique used by Michael Torke in Ecstatic Orange but instead of in 4/4 time, I used 6/8. I also used Stravinskian additive form where the rhythms would start very, very simple and get more and more difficult until they built up to the major themes of the piece. I don't have a recording, but it sounded incredible (please excuse me for flattering myself). I am actually going to write it again soon. It sounded very happy.

Anyway, I wrote the following piece in college at the age of 21. It is 12-tone (first theme anyway) and sounds a bit happy I would say...I would have written the rhythms much more interesting if I had written it today as they are quite boring, but you could make it more "happier" if that is what you are looking for:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,088 Posts
Anyway, I wrote the following piece in college at the age of 21. It is 12-tone (first theme anyway) and sounds a bit happy I would say...I would have written the rhythms much more interesting if I had written it today as they are quite boring, but you could make it more "happier" if that is what you are looking for:

Nice! Bravo, and :tiphat: for posting it here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,309 Posts
I once composed a piece in college at the age of about 20 and had it performed by our concert band. It used the 12-tone technique, but I kind of did my own thing with it and what I did was instead of just writing single note pitches for each tone of the row, I would write a complete major triad using the pitch from the row as the root.

For the rhythm, I used the technique used by Michael Torke in Ecstatic Orange but instead of in 4/4 time, I used 6/8. I also used Stravinskian additive form where the rhythms would start very, very simple and get more and more difficult until they built up to the major themes of the piece. I don't have a recording, but it sounded incredible (please excuse me for flattering myself). I am actually going to write it again soon. It sounded very happy.

Anyway, I wrote the following piece in college at the age of 21. It is 12-tone (first theme anyway) and sounds a bit happy I would say...I would have written the rhythms much more interesting if I had written it today as they are quite boring, but you could make it more "happier" if that is what you are looking for:

You just made sticking with this thread worth the trouble, and that was no mean feat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Anyway, I wrote the following piece in college at the age of 21. It is 12-tone (first theme anyway) and sounds a bit happy I would say...I would have written the rhythms much more interesting if I had written it today as they are quite boring, but you could make it more "happier" if that is what you are looking for:

This pieces has meaningful rhythms, instrumentation and it sounds (pseudo-)tonal for me. I'm curious if its possible to interpret the harmonies as fast changing tonal. However this is different to how Schönbergs 12-tone pieces sound. It is something very different to typical serialism.
 
761 - 780 of 848 Posts
Top