Jump to content
Guest Anonymous

Now Playing

Recommended Posts

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2018 at 9:51 PM, Enrico_sw said:

 

[...]

 

 

All this rambling on for still trying to call music that it isn't even that weird as noise and their composers as not "real musicians"...

So just a couple of things

 

On 12/14/2018 at 9:51 PM, Enrico_sw said:

It was forbidden by monks during a long time!

Anyway, my point was to show that the definition of dislikable music (= noise) has changed over time. So, it's essentially subjective and that's Schönberg's point (I agree with him on that). My strong disagreement with Schönberg (and I have the right to disagree with him, even if he's supposedly "brilliant") is the following: inventing weird stuff that come from nowhere, throwing away his predecessors' work is not a sufficient prerequisite for good music. Being "original" doesn't necessarily imply being "good".

 

It wasn't forbidden...

Guido D'arezzo though issued a sort of "prohibition" of it for his hexachordal system but that's pretty much it. The "diabolus in musica" denomination appears around the 18th Century

 

It doesn't imply it being "good", but even being the weird stuff that it is (because it is weird and that's what makes it interesting), it doesn't come out of nowhere. It comes from a very direct influence from the music that came before. Mahler and Wagner being some of the most important.

 

On 12/14/2018 at 9:51 PM, Enrico_sw said:

Sure, maths helps to understand a lot of things in music, it brings explanations on some consonant intervals (special ratios, etc.), but, maths fails to completely explain consonance/dissonance. Thank God, tastes are subjective and maths hasn't made us robots yet.

 

On 12/14/2018 at 9:51 PM, Enrico_sw said:

 

The Perfect fifth is the basis of the tonal system, it's the most consonant interval after the unison and the octave (and maths are useful on this one: it's a 3/2 ratio).

The tritone was used to be employed (brilliantly sometimes) to show ruptures/disruptions in classical pieces. It's a very interesting interval and some musicians made great things with it.

 

Weren't you saying maths fail completely on explaining consonance/dissonance?? 

 

And no, the perfect fifth it's not the basis of the tonal system. In the sense that it doesn't define it. Most scales contain it and are built around the fifth interval.

Actually, we don't even use the perfect fifth anymore -the one that has the 3/2 ratio - because of the Equal Temperament system we use today (it's pretty close though but it isn't the actual perfect fifth)

The tonal system is based on the major scale, the tritone that this scale has and the Dominant chord that contains it.  The tonal system is based on tension and resolution and that tension in provided by the tritone that appears on the Dominant chord. 

ALL musicians working within the tonal system make use of the tritone because what ultimately defines the tonal system is the V7 -> I movement.

 

On 12/14/2018 at 9:51 PM, Enrico_sw said:

There are lot of other composers that Ennio, of course. I love Williams, Zimmer and Shore. If by the "use atonal resources" you actually mean introducing ruptures, originalities, some dissonance in their music... then a lot of composers have been doing this for a long time. These are not "atonal resource".

Composers know how to introduce dispruptions without knowing anything of Schönberg's theories.

 

Oh, the denial.... :cain:

Horror movies are filled with atonal music btw.

 

On 12/14/2018 at 9:51 PM, Enrico_sw said:

 

The point is that you brought the skills of your musicians has an argument to prove that you were right. So, I brought skilled musicians who disagree with your point. Both of our statements were pretty useless, I agree :rofl:

 

No. I brought that because of your statement of "real musicians".

 

On 12/14/2018 at 9:51 PM, Enrico_sw said:

 

Still not proving it :laugh:

 

The denial again...

It's all there for you to listen. The influence is clear to the ear. My guess is you just want to deny it out of not liking the atonal music.

Also, Schoenberg was one of Mahler's students. He learned directly from him.

 

 

I'm not even arguing if that music is good. 

My point here is that it IS music. Not noise. And that those who make it are real musicians and not some guy hitting random notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Stormbringer said:

All this rambling on (...)

 

@Stormbringer  This is supposed to be a discussion, even if it's a lively one. I don't get why it should become dismissive. :ninja:

 

I'm annoyed by a lot of post modernists (in painting, music...) who are bourgeois who defend political views above a lot of things. That did not target you, you have the right to like what you want, and, I have the right to like what I want.

 

I'm gonna answer to your points, though it's not supposed to be a feud. Disagreeing with someone is actually good when it's factual.

 

17 minutes ago, Stormbringer said:
On 12/15/2018 at 1:51 AM, Enrico_sw said:

Sure, maths helps to understand a lot of things in music, it brings explanations on some consonant intervals (special ratios, etc.), but, maths fails to completely explain consonance/dissonance. Thank God, tastes are subjective and maths hasn't made us robots yet.

 

Weren't you saying maths fail completely on explaining consonance/dissonance??  

 

I said (and you quoted it): "maths fails to completely explain" which does not mean the same as "maths completely fails...". It's just not the same at all. Be fair and don't call it "semantics" again, the two sentences have nothing to do with each other. Mine means that maths doesn't explain everything, which is true. Complex ratios and their consonance/dissonance can't be explained by maths. There are people who spend years of research on it, it's not trivial.

 

33 minutes ago, Stormbringer said:

Actually, we don't even use the perfect fifth anymore -the one that has the 3/2 ratio - because of the Equal Temperament system we use today (it's pretty close though but it isn't the actual perfect fifth)

 

Sure, but it's still called a perfect fifth (even the equal tempered version of it, despite the fact that it's not exactly 3/2)

 

50 minutes ago, Stormbringer said:

The tonal system is based on tension and resolution

 

Yes, that's what makes it more interesting than a system where everything is equal.

 

1 hour ago, Stormbringer said:

The tonal system is based on tension and resolution and that tension in provided by the tritone that appears on the Dominant chord.  

ALL musicians working within the tonal system make use of the tritone because what ultimately defines the tonal system is the V7 -> I movement.

 

Sure, the V7 is a key chord in the tonal system and it has a tension due to the tritone, a tension that is calling for a resolution, but that doesn't mean "the tritone is the basis of the tonal system". You use a "circle of fifth" to build chords, scales, etc. Anyway, all you show is that it's the asymmetry of the tonal system that brings its flavor.

 

22 minutes ago, Stormbringer said:

The denial again... 

 

Still not proving it... :ermm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...
Do Not Sell My Personal Information