Let’s Talk About Musical Form

It has been quite some time since I have actively participated in writing a thread. But after reading of the the reviews, posts, so on and so forth on this site, I felt the urge to once again grace yall with my mind..hee hee...just kidding.....but on a serious tip, it has occured to me that people whose writings deal with the structure of music or rather the musical form of a piece or song, have absolutely no idea of what they speak.

I wrote a very long and extensive thread that Praised YES for their concrete song structure and economy of musical material months ago. Well since I written that thread, I have found numerous members on this site taking the very same attributes of YES music that I said made that music great and turning it around and using it to criticize and denounce YES music. So I am here to once again clear things up.

First off lets get something straight right off the bat.....having ALOT of ideas, does not in anyway, mean or suggest that your music is any greater. Infact a piece of music with TOO MANY ideas is indeed a sign of weakness as far as formal structure is concerned. The fact is..you can compose a coherent, well balanced, exciting, and daring piece of music that is only based on two ideas...ONE idea if you're really good. SOOO many times I have read this garbage on this site, saying that YES music is too repetitive because it doesn't use ALOT of ideas...I want to shake these people and say..."HELLO, that's a sign of a sophisticated understanding of musical form". One of the greatest things YES ever wrote was Siberian Khatru. It's so compact, and so tightly knit. The whole song is really based on two ideas. But it's what YES does with those two ideas that make the piece wonderful.

Also...when you're composing......YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RE-INVENT THE WHEEL!!!!! Sometimes it's not about doing something new...it's about taking old ideas and doing them in a way that had not been done before. The problem is, prog fans are DELUSIONAL!!!!! They actually believe that progressive rock has something to do with being "PROGRESSIVE" and "INVENTIVE".......that fact is, it couldnt be further from the truth. Prog rock has NOTHING to do with progression or invention. They're taking jazz and classical music..two forms of music which were in existence long before either of our prog heroes were born, and they're mixing OLD forms with rock music. That's NOT new...they're not inventing the wheel. There is a famous quote that reads like this...."Mediocre composers borrow....great composers STEAL".....How true a statement. Stop listening to prog rock for a while, and listen to Classical music....listen to Beethoven, listen to Bach, listen to Mozart......and you will learn TRUE musical form.

When people say....YES music is too repetitive...WHICH BY THE WAY IT IS NOT!!!!!!!!!......they are really showing their complete lack of understanding when it comes to musical form. And then they turn around and say..well another piece had MORE IDEAS and therefore that makes that music better...I hang my head in shame and I think about the destruction of music education in public schools.

YES music is great because IT IS FOCUSED!!!!!............HAVING TOO MANY IDEAS WILL LEAVE A VERY INCOHERENT PIECE OF MUSIC. Supper's Ready fails...because it does not stand up as a thorough and coherent piece of music.

Now overall I find Genesis' music to be extremely structured and very well written. However Supper's Ready is not one of those pieces. In this respect YES were greater than Genesis, because YES were capable of maintaining a 20 plus minute piece with complete structural unity.

Music is not about some set of rules or academic understanding. People don't have to understand why they like or dislike songs. The fact that somebody says they find Yes too repetitive is reason enough. They are not wrong, they just have a different opinion. Sorry to pull that whole monotonous 'music is subjective' argument, but it's the truth.

And i have to disagree with your views on creating new music as well. I think taking jazz and classical music and adding them to rock is new. If it hasn't been done before it's new . Sure, jazz has been done, classical has been done, and rock has been done, but not together. Well they have by now, but you get what i'm trying to say

Top post proglover. I haven't heard heaps of Yes, but i certainly agree with your ideas.

Music taste might be subjective, but "opinion" is a very broad word, to the point of meaninglessness. Sure, a person is entitled their opinion if they think Yes is repetitive. I think musical tastes, though, "opinions", ARE shaped by things such as understanding of musical form (or lack of it). This is why your opinion on classical music might change if you study its musicology, or why you might start to appreciate Steve Vai if you play guitar. What I'm getting at is that if somebody thinks Yes is repetitive, even though they're not "wrong" per se, then that opinion may well be based upon a lack of understanding. (I don't know enuogh about the topic in this case to comment. I would probably disagree with proglover, though, in that I think a liking for repititiveness in songs is probably not based on anything, just taste alone).

It seems elitism itself has culminated into one single human being. Jesus.

Edited by kelecable

Proglover wrote: Now I must disagree with you....they're are two types of music....Good and Bad.....MUSIC IS NOT SUBJECTIVE!!!!!!!!!! And as someone who is going to school for music in one of the BEST graduate programs in NYC, and as someone who is learning about musical form....I must once again say that you are indeed WRONG. There is an academic side to music. The people who dont see it simply are uneducated in music. Period. Oh yes...and people MUST understand why they dislike or like something. There are things in music which can not be argued. Personal tastes can be argued, but one thing that can not be argued is MUSICAL FORM. When people claim that there is no form to music that is absolutely coherent in its form....it's a lack of musical education. Shame on the public school systems!!!!!!!

Oh, piss off until you can stop being such a self-important, pompous idiot. I haven't used that many exclamation marks since I was eight, music degree or no music degree.

Oh proglover here we go again.  You are fanatical in your beliefs and its a bit frightening.  If someone finds Yes repetitive that is their right.  Their is no such thing as good or bad music, period.  Music is entertainment, if someone doesnt like it, it doesnt make the music bad, and vice versa.  For example, I find TD extremely boring and repetitive.  That does not make it bad music, and you saying otherwise (its just and example) does not make it good.  Its relative.  Art is not objective, end of story.  A piece of music can be technically and structurally perfect, utilizing every musical theory trick in the book, and can still be a piece of sh*t.

Which school are you going to by the way I'm in a college hunt. 

Edited by NetsNJFan

cobb wrote: Being educated in Music only means you are trained in analysing music. Don't analyse- just listen. You don't need to understand it to enjoy it. Music is an artform and as such is structured- even if chaotic, but all art forms are composed for the appreciation of the listener/viewer. I get a picture of you carry a notepad with you when listening to music to jot down form and structure. Perhaps your teaching institution has failed in what they had hoped to achieve if all they are turning out is musical snobs. I apologise for anything here you feel is a personal attack- it is not meant to be. I just feel a little saddened by your attitude to music and hope that if you are planning to compose you realise that theory on composition structure and form are there as a platform for you to leap out into the realms of creativity, not a swimming pool for you to dive into and create mediocre works of rehashed past progressions.

 

OH GOD.....this is what I am talking about. Once again my thoughts are being twisted around. I find your words to be empty and totally not based on reality. You DO NOT know ME, and DO NOT know the school I attend...and YOU DO NOT know the music I create. Please get a clue before you go making huge sweeping generalizations.

NetsNJFan wrote: Oh proglover here we go again.  You are fanatical in your beliefs and its a bit frightening.  If someone finds Yes repetitive that is their right.  Their is no such thing as good or bad music, period.  Music is entertainment, if someone doesnt like it, it doesnt make the music bad, and vice versa.  For example, I find TD extremely boring and repetitive.  That does not make it bad music, and you saying otherwise (its just and example) does not make it good.  Its relative.  Art is not objective, end of story.  A piece of music can be technically and structurally perfect, utilizing every musical theory trick in the book, and can still be a piece of sh*t. Which school are you going to by the way I'm in a college hunt.

First off no one, certainly not me is suggesting that music theory and precise analytical application implies great music. Of course it certainly does not. Great music is more than theory.

But dont you dare sit in my face and call my life entertainment.....I f**king spit on that silly idea. Music is ART...art is higher than entertainment. Don't  diminish what I have dedicated my life to, and reduce it to mere entertainment. Im not going to argue with you, whether or not by beliefs are fanatical.....to be honest, your opinion of me means sh*t.......Yes I have a strong set on ideas and beliefs...if thats fanatical ...deal with it....get over it. I find that anyone these days who have a backbone and stand firmly behind what they believe are called fanatical. It's very easy to call someone fanantical when you yourself have no spine to stand you up.

Proglover wrote: goose wrote: Proglover wrote: Now I must disagree with you....they're are two types of music....Good and Bad.....MUSIC IS NOT SUBJECTIVE!!!!!!!!!! And as someone who is going to school for music in one of the BEST graduate programs in NYC, and as someone who is learning about musical form....I must once again say that you are indeed WRONG. There is an academic side to music. The people who dont see it simply are uneducated in music. Period. Oh yes...and people MUST understand why they dislike or like something. There are things in music which can not be argued. Personal tastes can be argued, but one thing that can not be argued is MUSICAL FORM. When people claim that there is no form to music that is absolutely coherent in its form....it's a lack of musical education. Shame on the public school systems!!!!!!! Oh, piss off until you can stop being such a self-important, pompous idiot. I haven't used that many exclamation marks since I was eight, music degree or no music degree.   There is no need to reply to rubbish! And what you have written is complete an utter rubbish!

 

No...wait I will respond.....f**k OFF!!....see I can play that game too.

Proglover wrote: Reverie wrote: Music is not about some set of rules or academic understanding. People don't have to understand why they like or dislike songs. The fact that somebody says they find Yes too repetitive is reason enough. They are not wrong, they just have a different opinion. Sorry to pull that whole monotonous 'music is subjective' argument, but it's the truth. And i have to disagree with your views on creating new music as well. I think taking jazz and classical music and adding them to rock is new. If it hasn't been done before it's new . Sure, jazz has been done, classical has been done, and rock has been done, but not together. Well they have by now, but you get what i'm trying to say Now I must disagree with you....they're are two types of music....Good and Bad.....MUSIC IS NOT SUBJECTIVE!!!!!!!!!! And as someone who is going to school for music in one of the BEST graduate programs in NYC, and as someone who is learning about musical form....I must once again say that you are indeed WRONG. There is an academic side to music. The people who dont see it simply are uneducated in music. Period. Oh yes...and people MUST understand why they dislike or like something. There are things in music which can not be argued. Personal tastes can be argued, but one thing that can not be argued is MUSICAL FORM. When people claim that there is no form to music that is absolutely coherent in its form....it's a lack of musical education. Shame on the public school systems!!!!!!! I fear that you've missed my point on saying that prog rock has very little to do with actually progression. It is not about progression. Prog rock is a title stuck to music which blends jazz and classical with rock music. The title is deceiving. Prog rock draws on elements from the PAST. That's not progression. Im not sayin its a negative thing, Im just saying that it's not progression.

Fair enough, i understand what you mean about the progressive part, but the rest.....

I understand and agree that music has form, but surely you can understand that even form is subjective. Just because you appreciate one kind of form it does not therefore mean that said form is a prerequisite for good music. I don't care what school you're going to, that is completely irrelevant. Music is not about analysis and schooling, bar technique. Musical composition IS 100% subjective.
Sure, you can make music as academic as you like, thus there is an academic side to it, but it all means nothing to me. I agree that Yes has a coherent form about them, and i'm not here to dispute what is form and what is not. What i'm saying is there is no particular kind of form (coherent, incoreherent, whatever) that dictates what music is and isn't.