Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte
View Post
Musical questions and answers thread
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by EdgeleyRob View PostBeen meaning to ask for a while.
Mordents and trills.
Am I correct in thinking that a mordent can sometimes be played as a trill but not the other way round.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostNot entirely, Edgey. A mordent is a sort of miniscule trill, (think of the opening notes of the Shostakovich 4th Symphony: dadiYaaaH - the "dadi" bit is the mordent. The opening of the "Bach" D minor Toccata & Fugue is an Inverted Mordent: the second note is lower than the two around it) but a trill is a Mordent that doesn't stop.
Presumably the Shostakovich is fully notated; not sure about the T&F.
Like the general description, though. Some trills do indeed go on and on and on, but I think they do stop eventually! Mine certainly do when my fingers can't take any more!
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Pulcinella View PostBut wouldn't a symbol normally be used for a mordent?
Presumably the Shostakovich is fully notated; not sure about the T&F.
Like the general description, though. Some trills do indeed go on and on and on, but I think they do stop eventually! Mine certainly do when my fingers can't take any more![FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Richard Barrett
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostGood question - is a mordent/trill/turn/ornament of choice just the symbol or the sound produced by said symbol?
Ahem. But an interesting issue here is how one hears the difference between a mordent à la Bach (attrib.) (unless it's played as a trill, as Ton Koopman rather disconcertingly does) or a written-out mordent à la Shostakovich... the former is understood as an "ornament" and the latter as something more "inside" the musical material. I remember a well-known composer with whom I once had a couple of lessons describing the rhythmic subdivisions in Ferneyhough's music as "ornamental" which was certainly a serious misunderstanding of what he was doing. But what does "ornamental" actually mean? (This is my "musical question" by the way!) It seems to imply something peripheral; although in Baroque music, Couperin and the French school in particular, there's no sense that it could be left out. (Although I do leave out some ornaments when I attempt to play Baroque keyboard music because I can't make my left hand do them properly - in Rameau's L'entretien des Muses strangely I can continue the long left-hand trills ad infinitum but I can't make the left-hand mordents sound convincing at all.) What about the opening of Beethoven's "Spring" Sonata? Here the ornaments are of course written out, but somehow they're still ornaments...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View PostYou could say the same about "notes" of course. Does music consist of notes, or of sounds (and/or silences)? If the latter, does it consist of oscillatory phenomena in the atmosphere and/or the responses these engender in the minds of performers and listeners (and composers)?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View PostBut what does "ornamental" actually mean? (This is my "musical question" by the way!) It seems to imply something peripheral; although in Baroque music, Couperin and the French school in particular, there's no sense that it could be left out.
I suppose it all goes back to early Music publishing? The sounds that performers would improvize being represented as a symbol (= "ornament") above the note being "twiddled"? And these sounds becoming incorporated into the way composers thought as they played/imagined and then wrote down their Music? So that the "ornament" became the carrier of the essential expressive content of a phrase, such that the piece becomes weakened in expressive force if the "ornament" is ignored or substituted?
Dunno, really.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostYes - I think "ornament" is like "Functional Harmony" with its "essential" and "non-essential" notes: the most interesting sounds (the "most Musical" it might be said) are produced by the "non-essential" notes.
I suppose it all goes back to early Music publishing? The sounds that performers would improvize being represented as a symbol (= "ornament") above the note being "twiddled"? And these sounds becoming incorporated into the way composers thought as they played/imagined and then wrote down their Music? So that the "ornament" became the carrier of the essential expressive content of a phrase, such that the piece becomes weakened in expressive force if the "ornament" is ignored or substituted?
Dunno, really.
PS: second thoughts! Probably only the trill falls into that category.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Pulcinella View PostSome trills do indeed go on and on and on, but I think they do stop eventually! Mine certainly do when my fingers can't take any more!
Comment
-
-
Richard Barrett
Originally posted by Pulcinella View PostBut weren't ornaments also a means of sustaining sound/a sound on perhaps not very resonant instruments?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dave2002 View PostThis "Trill" has been going on for at least 50 years - perhaps even 60! http://www.pet-supermarket.co.uk/Pro...ll-budgie-seed
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Dave2002 View PostThis "Trill" has been going on for at least 50 years - perhaps even 60! http://www.pet-supermarket.co.uk/Pro...ll-budgie-seed
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostNot entirely, Edgey. A mordent is a sort of miniscule trill, (think of the opening notes of the Shostakovich 4th Symphony: dadiYaaaH - the "dadi" bit is the mordent. The opening of the "Bach" D minor Toccata & Fugue is an Inverted Mordent: the second note is lower than the two around it) but a trill is a Mordent that doesn't stop.
Comment
-
Comment