Who Killed Classical Music?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostI think you mean a licence ?
(off to Pedants corner then )
You're also permitted to create melodies when using tone rows.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diYObAZqXiE
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View PostI understand either will do.
You're also permitted to create melodies when using tone rows.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diYObAZqXiE
Q.When is a melody not a melody?
A :When it doesn't suit somebody's agenda, or career path............I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Honoured Guest View Post. . . the music "progressed" until the audience consisted of few more than the composers and a few academics and performers.
It is true that Brahms produced a passacaglia. But consider: a) it is a tonal passacaglia (which really makes all the difference), and b) he produced only one (as far as I am aware).
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostVerily this shows why tonality is both inescapable and indispensible
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View Postit is the only large-scale structural principle we have.[
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostDodecaphonism affords no equivalent.
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostThe idea of "emancipating dissonance" is as illogical and impossible as squaring the circle
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostEven the common people sense this
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View Postand instinctively cry out upon those interminable passacaglias
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostWe see the proof do we not in the fact that when used as accompaniment to short cinematographical scenes - especially scenes of crime, horror and perversion - twelve-note serialism does not of itself offend; indeed it is considered appropriate.
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostBut in the case of a serious symphony the listener needs to be given a sense of direction.
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostThe key question whenever we listen to music is "Whither is the mind of the composer leading us?"
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostIt is an inescapable fact that fine literature must consist of words arranged on a page in accordance with natural grammar. And it is an equally inescapable fact that fine music must consist of pitched sounds arranged in accordance with the sphere of natural tonal grammar. Art depends upon Nature to that extent.
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostIt is true that Brahms produced a passacaglia. But consider: a) it is a tonal passacaglia (which really makes all the difference), and b) he produced only one (as far as I am aware).
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ahinton View Post["emancipation of the dissonance" is] just an inadequate way of expressing a development in musical language; dissonance is, in any case, in the ear of the beholder up to a point and it does not require "emancipating" from anything.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Richard Barrett
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostVerily this shows why tonality is both inescapable and indispensible: it is the only large-scale structural principle we have. Dodecaphonism affords no equivalent. The idea of "emancipating dissonance" is as illogical and impossible as squaring the circle. Even the common people sense this, and instinctively cry out upon those interminable passacaglias. We see the proof do we not in the fact that when used as accompaniment to short cinematographical scenes - especially scenes of crime, horror and perversion - twelve-note serialism does not of itself offend; indeed it is considered appropriate. But in the case of a serious symphony the listener needs to be given a sense of direction. The key question whenever we listen to music is "Whither is the mind of the composer leading us?" It is an inescapable fact that fine literature must consist of words arranged on a page in accordance with natural grammar. And it is an equally inescapable fact that fine music must consist of pitched sounds arranged in accordance with the sphere of natural tonal grammar. Art depends upon Nature to that extent.
It is true that Brahms produced a passacaglia. But consider: a) it is a tonal passacaglia (which really makes all the difference), and b) he produced only one (as far as I am aware).
Comment
-
Originally posted by ahinton View Post"those interminable passacaglias" - sorry - what's this got to do with anything, let alone the subject under discussion here?
All we see in that is a) a great deal of superstition, and b) eighty years more or less of follow-the-leader group-think, in respect to what was a deeply flawed idea in the first place.
Originally posted by ahinton View Post"The key question whenever we listen to music is 'Whither is the mind of the composer leading us?' " - surely a subconscious question at best when concentrating on listening to a work that engages the attention of the listener sufficiently. Music can tell the listener about where it's going whatever its language if it so chooses.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View Post
No again the member has misunderstood. When we listen to a piece of music that engages our attention, the only thing that occupies our mind is surely "where is the music going? . . . whither are we being taken and why?" Of course I don't mean that question in so many words. All I mean is that as we follow the music our mind is occupied by what is going on in the music. Our attention is wholly engaged and there is nothing subconscious about that process!
nor should it
Comment
-
-
Richard Barrett
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View Postthe "serial method" is simply another name for a passacaglia
PS George Perle's 1962 book Serial Composition and Atonality: An Introduction to the Music of Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern might be a good place to start.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View PostBut doesn't the fact that the second half of your statement here is taken practically for granted nowadays (whereas until at least the middle of the Century "dissonance" was regarded as something that needed resolving - something lacking in itself) suggest that "emancipation" was exactly what was achieved by the composers of Schönberg's generation?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostThe member appears not to realize that the "serial method" is simply another name for a passacaglia.
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostA piece written in that style
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostAll we see in that is a) a great deal of superstition, and b) eighty years more or less of follow-the-leader group-think, in respect to what was a deeply flawed idea in the first place.
Originally posted by Sydney Grew View PostNo again the member has misunderstood. When we listen to a piece of music that engages our attention, the only thing that occupies our mind is surely "where is the music going? . . . whither are we being taken and why?" Of course I don't mean that question in so many words. All I mean is that as we follow the music our mind is occupied by what is going on in the music. Our attention is wholly engaged and there is nothing subconscious about that process!Last edited by ahinton; 24-01-14, 14:43.
Comment
-
Comment