Let’s Talk About Musical Form

Some very interesting points being shared and some very silly ones also .Proglover, I spoke to you eons ago when you first came on to the site.You haven't mellowed one jot and for that I congratulate you.Like you I would argue that Yes compositions in their halcyon days were superior to any other band, Gabriel's Genesis included.Where I would take issue with you is on the musical qualification side.Having a top degree and all the letters in the land after it doesn't mean jack sh*t.I've known two remarkable keyboard players in my time and wrote music with both and both were qualified from the Royal Academy of music in Glasgow.Willie Gilmour was a genius and by that I mean virtuoso wise and writing wise.As good as Emerson and Wakeman.Willie joined the Enid in 1976 after I got homesick and returned home from Bristol.His potential was awesome but was lost and he should have waited until I had gotten over my homesickness.In that he didn't was both our losses.The other was Robert Mcgregor; fabulously gifted, Chopin inspired and again a good writer.I will not bore the site as to the whys and whats of all that went wrong.But through that time I met and knew others who qualified and who couldn't write a song to save themselves.They had all the attributes you could ask for and could play most pieces put in front of them, but ask them to play by ear or busk and they were lost.Apart from having the ability to play they had no inspiration and no idea how to write a simple tune.So having the papers that says you can play is not the same as having the wherewithall within that makes a musician and a writer.Proficiency can be acheived by many, but without feeling and ability to transpose that into the music then its of limited use.And we have all heard and shared the adage ' Another man's meat'

Congratulations to Easy Livin and Tony R our new Head Honchos

Well, it´s difficult to say, some people enjoy brazilian funk music (A shame for my country). If you can, search for Tati Quebra Barraco and see how low can be the musical taste of a person, but they like it, and there´s 1000 times more brazilian funk fans than progressive rock fans nowadays.

I understand that a well-composed song cannot be called bad. But some people find it boring, like Yes. You know, there are people that hate Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Liszt, Vivaldi, Rossini, Chopin, Tchaikovsky, Maller, just to name a few. But their music is great, fantastic. You know, taste isn´t attached to quality. Some people love to hear tribal percussion, that anybody with arms can play more than a symphony orchestra, where all musicians mastered their instruments for at least 10 years.

Different people have different interests. Yes music is marvellous, Genesis music too, most of the bands of this site make fantastic songs. There are lots outside that make fantastic things too.  And there are millions of crap musicians and artists that are always in the radios, MTV, in the top of the charts and in the popular taste. And we have to accept and keep on listening good songs, as we do.

Reverie wrote: Proglover, i understand your love for music. Music is my life as well. I play in bands, i compose, next year i am going to a music school, music is what i live for. I completely respect your connection and love for music and i do not at all wish to seem hostile towards it, or you, or anything you stand for. I completely agree with you that having an understanding of the science behind music, why music is, why a piece of music changes the way it does etc. can give a person a greater insight into the mechanics behind the piece of music, but i disagree with you on one point - subjectiveness. You say you get frustrated when people don't listen to you, they just talk at you and seemingly ignore your posts. To me, that's how you're coming across. Once again, i'm not saying this to rile you up or anything, just stating what i see, which could very well be wrong. You must understand, however, that others (like me) have the same pride in theif beliefs about music. Like you, i'm not about to back away from what i believe music to be. You say that there is undoubtedly good music and bad music, and it seems that you are saying good music is music with clean and uncluttered form. That's how it's coming across to me anyway. You've used Yes as an example. But doesn't that mean if a band like Yes creates music that is undoubtedly good, anybody who likes good music must like Yes? See the thing is i don't. You may very well say that the fact that i don't like Yes and i do like bands like Art Zoyd and Univers Zero, with seemingly random and cluttered form means that i have a bad taste in music. But to me my music taste is the best there is. I don't like any bad music, and the music i don't like is bad. Therefore Yes is bad, regardless of form. Do you understand what i'm trying to say? See music to me is not about form, and it's not about what other musicians say, and it's not about classical composers, and it's not about arrangement. Personally, yes i do find too much clutter and randomness to be 'ugly' and i think that a good composition is one that takes into account textures and arrangements. Having said that, such things are only part of music. Music is not about intelligence, it's about feeling, it's about the heart. And if somebody can feel music within their heart and soul (that sounds so cheesy, but it's true ) then they are as qualified as anybody else to comment on music. And since everybody is different, so is good and bad music. I'm not saying you have suggested otherwise as i know you have an emotional connection with music, i'm just putting my view on music out there. I'm just saying that music to me is not academic. It has an academic side, but in my personal opinion, it is not what music is about. You may disagree with me as i'm disagreeing with you, but it won't change anything. We just have different beliefs about music, which is fantastic

Thank you....I really appreciate your post....seriously. However I would like to clear things up...hee hee, I thought I tied all the loose ends but I see still there is still things left to be said. As stated before..music is indeed a very complex subject simply because of its vastness and ability to incorporate and include many things at once. This might be a little confusing but I'll try to do the best I can to make myself clear.

Form has nothing to do with beauty.

Form has EVERYTHING to do with beauty

Form doesn't necessarily mean that a piece is good....after all composition is much more than skill, it's also creativity.

That being said great pieces of art TEND to have great form

Just because you dont like YES does not mean that you have bad taste in music

Musical Form has nothing to do with musical tastes

HOWEVER...musical form MAY be tied to certain people's preference in regards to musical taste

That being said musical form or rather the recognition of that form does come with formal training in some instances

Music is about BOTH intelligence and feeling

Basically what Im trying to say....Form does not equal GREAT MUSIC.....HOWEVER GREAT MUSIC tends to have great form....even the music you think has no form.

As it relates to this academic side of music...there certainly IS an academic side to music, that can not be argued. As stated before how its very tricky when figuring out how to deal with music. I said in a previous post that I certainly have mixed feelings about art being placed within the walls of academia. I feel that there must be a equal and respectful balance. Music is a living breathing entity. How do we then, respect music as being ALIVE, and not some artifact in a museum, and YET still recognize its use and NEED to be in the academic world? It's sort of an oxy-moron. But as stated before, there must be an equal and respectful balance. I feel that it does harm to neglect one aspect and accept the other. We must recognize that music is both. Thank you once again...I wish everyone's response was as wonderful and kind-hearted as yours.

ivan_2068 wrote: Proglover, in my case I agree with most parts of your post, I also agree that structure and Musical Fopork is important, but you throwed your art studies in our faces as if we were a bunch of ignorants. I have been taught not to judge people for their credentials or degrees only, I value much more the ideas and how they feel or appreciate the music. Backl in the early 80's we  had a gardener who was a native from a far town in the Peruvian Mountain he never heard about classical music or Chopin, but I saw him sitting with truth emotion while I was playing The Heroic Polonaise on my turntable, a piece of music that caused no reaction on my College friends who valued more the top 40 hits. I even mentioned you some Clasical musicians that broke the so called sacred rules of music and you simply answered me with a phrase that I consider offensive something like don't talk me about Classical Music because I know more than you. And to be honest I never proked you, called you arrogant, pedant or pompous, and as in my case, some of your posts were offensive to members that only gave you their honest opinion. Something I hate is when somebody puts words on my mouth I never said, you accused me of saying Close to the Edge had no structure, still you haven't quoted me saying something remotely similar. Your ideas are Ok for you, surely you know more than most of us about structures, but as I said before and you answered in your post, nobody needs a degree to appreciate good music. So the problem is not what you say, the problem way you say them, as if you were the owner of the musical Holy Grial. In other words and as a paradox, your main problem are the forms Iván

I appreciate your thoughts and I agree with them.....the amazing thing is...I totally agree with everything you said WHILE still holding strong to my beliefs....which leads me to believe that one of us were simply not listening to the other

And I would like to apologize to YOU for the comment I made about, not throwing classical music in my face...that was indeed immature and Im sorry.

yargh wrote:

With all due respect....now I have tried to somewhat make amends...however, it seems that some of you just cant have enough of the drama....I appreciated what you said about me in an earlier post....so for that I must thank you. HOWEVER...if you are going to openingly and publically say that"NO ONE CARES WHAT DUKE ELLINGTON SAID ABOUT MUSIC".....you are crazy....because I know plenty of people who DO CARE....Like for example 90 percent of the JAZZ world and even those beyond the jazz walls.

Secondly please do not insult my school, or me, or the great line of music history and theory. It is soo upsetting that even after pouring my heart out in that last thread that Im still receiving responses like this.

[/QUOTE]

You need to understand that you never offended me, nor was it was not my aim to offend you.  Of course I think there is a value in a formal music education -- I said as much in my first post on the matter, and I think that too many people did not give it the level of respect that they should.  That said, there are some problems with the educations that go on these places, and that is what I addressed.  If you are going to have the attitude that you had (and there's nothing wrong with that, IMO), do DO need to be able to back up some of what you say, instead of going on about how upset you are. 

As for Ellington, my comment was intended partly as hyperbole, but it's nevertheless true -- he's remembered for the music he played and wrote, not his comments about music.   

[/QUOTE]

Hee hee, ummm not to stir the pot but I'm going to once again disagree with you on this Duke Ellington issue.....books are written about the man's life and the words he spoke......why?.....simply because people are indeed interested.

sleeper wrote: I'd like to point out to Proglover that in vectors 2+2 can equel 0 and so it depends on were your coming from, as it does with music.

How True......

yargh wrote: Proglover wrote: Also on a side note....I just want everyone to be reassured that I am not naive as to why people think the way they do, and have the feelings that they do. Music is such a tricky subject, because it is so vast and so extensive..... A famous Jazz musician by the name of Wayne Shorter once said..."the word 'jazz' to me means 'no category'"......Well I'd like to take that a step further and say...that the word MUSIC to me means no category. In my mind music is undefinable. How do you correctly define a living, breathing entity....which is what music IS....Music IS a living, breathing entity. Now once again I know why people think the way they do...in terms of composition....it's part creativity, and also part skill. Well you ask the question...how can you teach creativiy???.....Well...YOU CAN NOT teach creativity.....HOWEVER you can teach SKILL...you can teach FORM and Structure! It's just like learning math or science.....2+2=4....there is no subjectivity involved at all. There are things in music which subjectivity is NOT an issue. Something either has form or it doesnt.....something either has good form or it doesnt.....these are things which can be TAUGHT! Personal tastes aside....once again I believe that music is greater than personal tastes. Beethoven's 9th fails as a piano concerto.  Does that mean it can't be a great symphony? "Forms" are just constructs invented by men, not immutable "laws" of music.  Whatever can be constructed can be de-structed and good music can lie at any place in between. The objective truth of 2+2 equalling four is not analogous to whether or not a piece of music is "good;" it is analogous to whether a piece of music is of a particular form (sonata, fugue, etc.).

I feel that you have missed my point. I was saying that FORM is not subjective, and not whether a piece of music is good or not. People please start understanding me...I feel like a broken record

Also, one could argue that a concerto is a symphony for soloist and orchestra.....one could argue that a piano sonata is a symphony for piano.....this stuff is much more detailed and indepth than I am describing, so perhaps thats why many of you are misreading and misintepreting what I am saying. Please read between the lines ladies and gentlemen....I'm not shallow, I promise you.

Also...the constructs of music were invented by men....so what else do we go by? Music as tones and pitches exist in nature however it is man who organized that sound. So while form is indeed a man made construct....SO IS the formation of what we call music period.