SR XLVII: "CLEAR!"

Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Rico, is it ture that when there are several tone rows progressing at the same time you're supposed to arrange them so that you can cut the whole thing into blocks of 12 notes? Dunno exactly what you mean (more exactly the "cutting... into blocks"), superimposition of tone rows would be just that. If by 12 you mean dodecaphony, than in it's simplest form, one specific organized row should contained without repetition all the 12 chromatic notes.

I mean that here are four different rows right?

Actually, no, wtf is going on here?




Edited by Vompatti - April 11 2012 at 15:11

Ricochet wrote: no no no NO NO NO I'm discreetly rocking out to Battles

Vompatti wrote: Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Rico, is it ture that when there are several tone rows progressing at the same time you're supposed to arrange them so that you can cut the whole thing into blocks of 12 notes? Dunno exactly what you mean (more exactly the "cutting... into blocks"), superimposition of tone rows would be just that. If by 12 you mean dodecaphony, than in it's simplest form, one specific organized row should contained without repetition all the 12 chromatic notes. I mean that here are four different rows right?

That's purely a compositional choice, then. In this case, none of the voices/instruments have a complete individual 12-tone row (that's not to say they're not serial rows either), so maybe the fuller intent is just to build collective vertical-timbral rows. Although here too, there are serious faults as far as I'm noting (first bar/row, #2 and #3 are the same note - second bar/row, #3 is f but #4 is e-sharp and they're the same sound).

Is this from somewhere by somone, btw?


Edited by Ricochet - April 11 2012 at 15:16

Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Rico, is it ture that when there are several tone rows progressing at the same time you're supposed to arrange them so that you can cut the whole thing into blocks of 12 notes? Dunno exactly what you mean (more exactly the "cutting... into blocks"), superimposition of tone rows would be just that. If by 12 you mean dodecaphony, than in it's simplest form, one specific organized row should contained without repetition all the 12 chromatic notes. I mean that here are four different rows right? That's a compositional choice, then. In this case, none of the voices/instruments have a complete individual 12-tone row, so the intent is just to build collective vertical-timbral rows. Although here, there are serious faults as far as I'm noting (first bar/row, #2 and #3 are the same note - second bar/row, #3 is f but #4 is e-sharp and they're the same sound). Is this from somewhere by somone, btw?

Supposedly it's from Schönberg's String Quartet no. 4.

Vompatti wrote: Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Rico, is it ture that when there are several tone rows progressing at the same time you're supposed to arrange them so that you can cut the whole thing into blocks of 12 notes? Dunno exactly what you mean (more exactly the "cutting... into blocks"), superimposition of tone rows would be just that. If by 12 you mean dodecaphony, than in it's simplest form, one specific organized row should contained without repetition all the 12 chromatic notes. I mean that here are four different rows right? That's a compositional choice, then. In this case, none of the voices/instruments have a complete individual 12-tone row, so the intent is just to build collective vertical-timbral rows. Although here, there are serious faults as far as I'm noting (first bar/row, #2 and #3 are the same note - second bar/row, #3 is f but #4 is e-sharp and they're the same sound). Is this from somewhere by somone, btw? Supposedly it's from Schönberg's String Quartet no. 4.

Oh. k.
I misunderstood the numbering, it's all horizontal, so my complaints aren't valid.
Bottom line, dodecaphonic rows can be created in many ways.

Yodeling (or yodelling, jodeling) is a form of singing that involves singing an extended note which rapidly and repeatedly changes in pitch from the vocal or chest register (or "chest voice") to the falsetto/head register; making a high-low-high-low sound

i watchd that on tv 

aginor wrote: i watchd that on tv

Yodeling or hiccup?

Ninja'd


Edited by Vompatti - April 11 2012 at 15:35

Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Ricochet wrote: Vompatti wrote: Rico, is it ture that when there are several tone rows progressing at the same time you're supposed to arrange them so that you can cut the whole thing into blocks of 12 notes? Dunno exactly what you mean (more exactly the "cutting... into blocks"), superimposition of tone rows would be just that. If by 12 you mean dodecaphony, than in it's simplest form, one specific organized row should contained without repetition all the 12 chromatic notes. I mean that here are four different rows right? That's a compositional choice, then. In this case, none of the voices/instruments have a complete individual 12-tone row, so the intent is just to build collective vertical-timbral rows. Although here, there are serious faults as far as I'm noting (first bar/row, #2 and #3 are the same note - second bar/row, #3 is f but #4 is e-sharp and they're the same sound). Is this from somewhere by somone, btw? Supposedly it's from Schönberg's String Quartet no. 4. Oh. k. I misunderstood the numbering, it's all horizontal, so my complaints aren't valid. Bottom line, dodecaphonic rows can be created in many ways. So is each instrument playing their own rows? And does a new row begin in the third block or why is the 7 repeated? Each instrument is close to having its own tone row. It is hard to tell just from this three-bar example if their row aren't fully achieved or aren't achieved yet. That repetition could be a deviation from the rule.

omg k

Deathrabbit wrote: After today, I am forced to admit Sartre is right.

About what? Crosseyed people are sexy?