To Cover Yourself in Another's Musical Dogshit

All members of the Kingdom Animalia have physical instincts (e.g. avoid pain, seek pleasure, etc...), in humans, the vehicles of these physical instincts are emotional instincts, and to widen our purview: the vehicles thereof are psychological instincts.  We are not the only animal to have emotional instincts, and probably not the only to have psychological instincts.  My aim in illuminating these vehicles is to make plain the fact that individual humans are as instinctually compelled towards certain music(s) as dogs are instinctually compelled to roll in animal excrement. Thus pop music is born.  There may not be a specific dog whose excriment's scent is particularly moving to all other dogs, but there sure as hell is a combination of scents which will stir the nostrils of vast contingents of the doggy population. Same goes for music and humans.

In modern engineering there are sonic tools to elicit specific responses from your ears.  A skilled producer may achieve an extreme level of precision in regards to which frequencies of which sounds should be louder or softer or echo; he or she can control which sound should come from which direction and how long or short it should be held; he or she, using modern technology, may actually contort the shapes of the sound-waves themselves.  These men and women know that a bass at 50hz will make your romp shake and that a drum at 200hz will make your throat thump.  They know that even with an enormously loud sound pulsing away at those low frequencies, you will still be able to hear Lady Gaga's sweet melodies overhead.

Without having a virtuoso on the Tuba, or muddying an arrangement with excessive tympani, it can be hard for some composers to reach those depths of bowel shaking ferocity which your speakers may not even pick up in electronic pieces like this (listen to the drop at .25 on your computer speakers, then do it again on some good headphones or speakers with a sub):

Composer Max Richter's response to this conundrum is to turn to electronics.  Listen in the following piece to the time leading up to minute 2.50 (make sure it's absolutely blaring on loud speakers).

Make of it what you will, my point is that mastering preferences have changed overtime in addition to changes in simple timbrel preferences.

Remastering Albums and Interpreting Symphonies

The entire reason I started thinking about this topic was that I heard the remastered version of the Beatles' The White Album  the other day (heaven forbid that estate go dry).  While some parts sound nice and crisp, I noticed that the mastering caters to the modern pop audience and thus looses a bit of its sixties character.  Particularly the bass drum was stomping on my vibe in some of the more mellow tracks because engineers these days have an evolved (for better or worse) idea of technical 'right' and 'wrong.'  

Similarly,  when a modern orchestra plays a symphony from the Viennese Classical era there are two schools of thought as to how the piece should be treated.  In pop there's a strong sense of empirical good and bad, whereas in classical there are two equally respected schools: Classical and Romantic.  An orchestra under the management of a 'Classical' music director strives to use the exact type of instruments available in the period of the composer and tenaciously obeys all tempo marks in the origional score.  His or her aim is to provide the audience with the experience of the symphony exactly as it would have been heard by the composer.  On the other hand, a 'Romantic' music director feels that a performance is an interpretation and that the conductor should take liberties where it serves the emotive content of the concert.  The orchestra will use the best instruments at hand, perhaps extra performers will be added to beef up the aural experience.  The NSO's current director Christoph Eschenbach is notorious for his slow orchestral interpretations.  Beethoven himself was not known for his technical prowess but was able to rise above his contemporaries in public acclaim because every music fan for thousands of miles knew that he played with more vigor and emotion than his contemporaries.  In his own words: "To play a wrong note is insignificant; to play without passion is unforgivable."  What a boss.

Back to Beethoven

So, we can all hum the beginning of Beethoven's Fifth symphony, but why is it really so important and well remembered?

The piece was revolutionary in several different ways:

Compositionaly it was the first symphony ever to have one movement lead directly into the next.  The transition between the third and forth movements is one seamless gust which served as a precedent for symphonic cohesion for centuries to come.  Additionally, the connecting passage between the movements was the first such passage ever to bring the orchestra from a dynamic marking of ppp to fff so quickly.  In layman's terms that means it gets REALLY loud REALLY fast.  Here's the forth movement in all of its Indiana Jones inspiring glory:



Those with a little more music theory experience may notice that the tonal center is basically moving from V to I over and over again creating a sense of finality and triumph.  This symphony represents triumph over fate.

Orchestrally this was the first symphony whose score includes any of the following instruments: piccolo, contra-bassoon, trombone. Beethoven simply needed more power than the traditional orchestra could offer so he did what any visionary would and broke the rules.

Many have argued that the fifth symphony is actually the beginning of the Romantic period (I would say it's probably his third symphony). Whether or not that is the case, until Beethoven's works symphonies were often a total of 15 minutes in length (that's right folks, classical music has not always dragged on for hours!), but in many Beethoven Symphonies each movement alone is more than 15 minutes. Sheesh.

DON'T ASK QUESTIONS, JUST TURN UP THE VOLUME AND LISTEN

DON'T ASK QUESTIONS, JUST TURN UP THE VOLUME AND LISTEN:

That was the Dies Irae from Verdi's Requiem premiered in 1874.  And now that I have your attention let's talk about hallucinations...

Auditory hallucinations are an interesting and well-documented phenomenon.  The question is: what's the line between vivid musical creativity and hallucinations?  Is it that one is within the mind's control?  Those of you who have written your own music may have experienced the sensation of original sound spontaneously entering your imagination.  There are those, however, who would do anything to silence the muses in their minds.  Tchaikovsky for example was found weeping as a young child, grieving about the loud music he was hearing which would not cease.  Another example comes from the end of Schumann's life when he gradually went deaf and all real auditory input was replaced by sounds of his brain's own design:

"Schumann spent the end of his life experiencing auditory hallucinations. Schumann’s diaries state that he suffered perpetually from imagining that he had the note A5 sounding in his ears. The musical hallucinations became increasingly complex. One night he claimed to have been visited by the ghost of Schubert and wrote down the music that he was hearing. Thereafter, he began making claims that he could hear an angelic choir singing to him. As his condition worsened, the angelic voices transmogrified into demonic voices." Laqueur, Thomas (2007-09-03). "Spirited Away". pp. 36–42.

 Even Beethoven was seen in his last years dancing and jumping around in fields to the music  coming from between his ears.

     Before we get away from the topic of Schumann though, I'll just throw in a note about his wife Clara for good measure.  Clara was also an extremely talented musician and composer and by some accounts her accomplishments in composition eclipsed those of her husband.  Unfortunately for her, getting your music published as a woman in the 19th century was quite difficult so a lot (though not all) of her compositions ended up being published under her husband's name and even to this day there is some ambiguity about which pieces are hers.
     Robert Schumann was jealous his whole life of his wife's relationship with the composer Johannes Brahms.  The two were extremely good friends (plus Mrs. Brahms was known to rip Johannes' compositions to pieces if she found flaws in them so I could see why he might need a breath of fresh air...).  I'm also kinda into Brahms because he made this:



and also this:



Stay tuned for death music...

Happy Hump Day!!! Time for beautiful music...

7) Max Richter - On the Nature of Daylight 2004
     Richter is a contemporary classical composer.  There has been some debate among music scholars as to whether or not his work should be considered classical but I definitely consider it classical.  The hardest thing for a lot of music scholars to get over is the fact that the form of many of his pieces is so simple.  This piece, for instance, is basically one chord progression repeating with a new voice added each time. The musical form is definitely classical though, and is actually called a "Canon." 

'Canon: a musical form in which a tune is imitated by individual parts at regular intervals; known as a round when each part is continuously repeated. In simple examples, such as "London Bridge is Falling Down," the successive voices enter at a same pitch and at the same speed.  In more elaborate examples, such as the canons in J.S. Bach's keyboard work [optional listening] known as the Goldberg Variation, the voices may enter at different pitches and present the tune at different speeds or even backwards or upside down (in inversion). ' -Enjoythemusic.com

If you give another listen to the famous classic Pachelbel's Canon in D major which was written more than 300 years ago, you will clearly notice the same repetitive form.  If you give a listen to the work of post-rock band Godspeed you! black emperor [optional listening] you will also notice the same form although you will probably end up in an electric guitar-induced frenzy (Godspeed is DEFINITELY NOT classical because the conception of their songs is entirely organic and by ear and not at all rooted in any written tradition).  To me it is clear that Richter's work is art music from a written tradition (aka classical music).  Richter has released albums, done film and television scores.  This piece is riveting.

Suggested listening for those looking to weep over gorgeous string music:

A)Beethoven - String Quartet Opus 132, Movement 3

B)Ralf Von Williams - Fantasia on a Theme by Tallis

C)And today's arguably popular selection: Sigur Ros - Track 3 from the album ()

My dear, Linus and Lucy is not classical... haha!  It seems we have a starting point:)  Before we go any further I want to clarify that for the purposes of this discussion that when I refer to "classical music" I am only referring to Western Classical Music and not the classical traditions of other parts of the world (don't even get me started on how the originally Carnatic musician Ilayaraja has arguably spanned a broader musical scope than any other living  musician).  Anyway, just because something uses piano or violin, etc... does not mean it is classical.  For example this gorgeous track by Tom Waits is still pop music. An overly simplified way of thinking about it is this: there is popular music and there is art music.  Classical music is music which is now considered art music.  Popular music is folk music or  music for consumption. Classical music is music for the sake of music (or I should say for the intellect, for the engaged listener, god anyway I say it I sound like a super douche and am going to catch flack). One is not better or worse than the other. Even 500 years ago there was the same distinction.

Before I proceed please note that each piece linked in this blog has been carefully selected for your appreciation and unless noted otherwise should be listened to and considered in full if this lesson is to achieve its desired goal.

 
Linus and Lucy is music of a folk tradition. Here is a breathtaking example of Polish folk music traditions and here is an example (not a great performance) of Chopin in which he draws on the old Polish folk traditions to create art music.  One of the main differences which usually (though not always) separates the two traditions is that folk music is an aural tradition whereas classical is written.  That is to say musics like Jazz, though now well documented on paper, evolved and were originally passed down by ear whereas classical music is a tradition which has always relied on the written page to evolve and continue.

Throughout the coming weeks I will post some of my favorite classical pieces.  They will be from varied genre's, styles, and time periods.  It will be a lot to chew on but give them a good listen and let me know what you liked the most/least and why and that will be our jump-off point for this learning experience (all of this will be from the past 200 years.  Some really interesting stuff from the 20th and even 21st century later in the week.  For music from before 1800 I am capable and willing to give you all the history you want but I generally don't enjoy it so it would be hard for me to help YOU enjoy it)

 Lesson 1 (since you mentioned Beethoven...)

1) Beethoven Symphony no. 9 in D minor, Opus 125. First movement.  1824

    To dissect the name of the piece a bit:  Symphony indicates that it is a work for full orchestra (almost always without singers or words of any sort, although in the 4th movement of this very piece there are 4 soloist singers and a choir.  There are always exceptions to the rules).  Number 9 indicates that it's the 9th symphony he wrote.  The piece is in the key of D minor.  Opus 125 indicates that it was the 125th piece of music that he published.  First movement - usually there are 4 movements in a symphony.  A good analogy is if a symphony is an album, a movement is a song.  The movements are usually in different keys and different tempos and forms.

Side note, he wrote this piece towards the end of his life while completely deaf.  I particularly like the very end - another word for very end in classical music is "Coda."  As the story goes, after this piece premiered (on May 7th my birthday!) the crowd roared.  Beethoven could not hear it though and when somebody pointed behind him and he turned around and saw the audience's response he wept.  Who really knows if it's true?

Q: Didn't the fact that Beethoven was going deaf for the second half of his life have a psychological impact on the composer?
A: Yes

2) Beethoven-String Quartet C# minor, Op.131-7. Allegro

    The word Allegro indicates tempo, C# minor is the key that the piece is in.  Op. 131-7 just means opus 131, movement 7.  This is one of the very last pieces (if not the last) which Beethoven ever wrote.  This is the seventh movement although string quartets typically have only 4 movements.  Beethoven was cool like that.  Again he was totally deaf when he wrote this.

Stay Tuned for Rock Stars and Promiscuity coming up...