jesus christ i don't know the first thing about classical music
Jinnigan
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
what is an opus or an etude? how are these songs organized? why do i care which key this song is in? holy crap i am thoroughly overwhelmed
why is this album i have of vivaldi's 4 seasons break his tracks into 3 bits each? aren't they all part of one song? am i being willfully ignorant here or what
DENIZENS OF D&D
I CHARGE YOU TO TEACH ME THE FIRST THING ABOUT CLASSICAL MUSIC
why is this album i have of vivaldi's 4 seasons break his tracks into 3 bits each? aren't they all part of one song? am i being willfully ignorant here or what
DENIZENS OF D&D
I CHARGE YOU TO TEACH ME THE FIRST THING ABOUT CLASSICAL MUSIC
Jinnigan on
0
Posts
Elendil likes it.
The key of a piece will determine a lot of things about it, having mostly to do with harmony. The emotional or artistic merit or mood may be greatly influenced by key choice, however, the most common distinction being between major keys, which are treated as "happy" or "light" and minor keys, which are considered more "sad" or "dark" than major keys.
The traditional division in most works is not by album, album track, or anything like that. If a work is large or long, it will most likely have movements - the Four Seasons, for instance, is broken into four musically distinct movements, each representing one of the four seasons. Movements are usually distinct stopping points, and a new theme or direction will be taken; that is not always the case, however, as there are lots of cases where movements are notated in the score but there is no stop between them (segue), and there can be lots of development and exploration even within movements.
You may indeed be willfully ignorant. I'm not sure - all I know is that I'm in a bad mood right now, and I'm willing to say that if you have heard of it, it's probably overrated. Like the Four Seasons. And Beethoven's Fifth.
One piece, composed of three parts (movements).
symphony - generally a large-scale, multi-movement orchestral work (though the definition is somewhat nebulous)
concerto - work for a solo instrument accompanied by an orchestra
sonata - usually a multi-movement work for a solo instrument
etude - work for a solo instrument, generally meant at least partly as a skill exercise
prelude - an introduction to a work, or a short stand alone piece
Concertos usually have three movements too. Fast, slow, fast. (allegro, andante, allegro) That actually holds true for a lot of pieces with three movements, maybe thats true of four seasons.
Nothing usually has anything these days, remember.
But while we are here. Here is some of my Favorite Opera, Favorite Ballet
And favorite Classical related Parody part 1 part 2
Anyone dropped a tab and listened to Glass?
Oh and somone send out the Poldy Bat Signal...
While it's certainly true that modern classical music commonly departs from the typical structure, it does not change the fact that the form still accurately describes the vast majority of concerti written before the 20th century. And there is no need to be a dick to people who know less about classical music than you.
Listen to Jupiter, part of The Planets Suite by Gustav Holst. Preferably with a sound system with good bass. It is absolutely superb.
http://www.essentialsofmusic.com/
My bad, I wasn't trying to be a dick.
You'd be suprised how little I know about anything.
I Second Mahler, his orchestral works....wow...
A fugue is a polyphonic (several lines of music occuring simultaniously) structure where one line starts with a theme, then the theme is copied as later lines enter. Usually there are counter-themes which do the same, and on.
It's a little like a round (frere jacques, row row row the boat), except longer, more complex, and less exact. The difficulty of anything in that form is making the theme as long, complex as possible while remaining precise, as obviously the more lines are playing at once and copying the previous line, the more likely they are to become dissonant.
...dissonant = bad sound.
Did you just use 'elucidating' without any irony?
You have truly out-Podly'd yourself.
Copland would disagree.
No, he didn't, though it would probably be better to define dissonance as chords that need to be resolved or are transitional. Though I understand what I mean, someone who doesn't know anything about it would then equate all dissonance to be bad.
Copland has a book talking about interpreting/listening to music. Dissonance is a way of building tension (along with many other techniques). The buildup and then dissipation of tension is integral to good music.
Fuck yes, Nixon in China. NEWS NEWS NEWS
Sure, but I'm doing the layman's version.
Well, yes. But your bracketed bit is the kicker. Much music of absolute genius has been written which 100% avoids dissonance. One of the most popular 'buildup & dissipation' techniques (counterpoint) came from periods of music which considered avoiding dissonance to be an absolute.
So dissonance isn't even remotely necessary to that idea.
I would maintain in even baroque music, that you'll be finding dominant seventh chords being resolved, or even (If you expand your concept of dissonance) suspended fourth chords. Infact, that is the whole point of a cadence, the musical "full stop" if you will.
In my opinion, there is still dissonance in every music, but comparitive to it's era. I'm pretty sure we're not going to find some Rite Of Spring esque harmonies in The Marrige Of Figaro...but you know what I mean.
Anyway, it's fairly meaningless to talk about traditional rules of harmony in anything but the common practice period. You guys should know - atonality changed everything.
If it makes you feel any better, I think they're both derived from the same word, sonare (to sound).
Well there you go. We're probably talking semantics here, a lot of English musical terminology is very different to US terminology while using many of the same terms, it's annoying. By the definition I'm talking, a note/s which merely requires resolution (ie sevenths etc) isn't dissonant. But even with your meaning, baroque & classical composition is very much centered around avoiding dissonance except in a very few set of circumstances, and I disagree that the difference between composers of those periods (on this one issue) was particularly great. Nobody in Europe wrote atonally in the 1600s.
Apart from that, serial method, Indian octotones, Japanese percussive harmonics...yes, there are no global rules.
Would you consider a minor key to be dissonant? Because music of that time is often written in minor modes, and therefore dissonant. Music doesn't have to be atonal to be dissonant.
Huh? I don't understand your question. There are many different instrument keys in the 'wind' category, and all string instruments are in C. You definitely can, the music just has to be transposed so that instruments in different keys can read it the same.
EDIT: I'm sorry, I was just confused because you said two keys, and then said the same key twice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitonal
Usually, especially when you become more and more versed. For instance, I think Bernstein's prelude to Tristan is the best I've ever heard, but I like Carlos Kleibers better on the whole.
If it's piano works, I have been told that there are some people that you don't and some people you do listen too. And don't start an argument about Yo-Yo Ma's sense of "feel". Everybody looses.
Part of my music course last year included comparing different recordings of classic pieces. There are obviously two important points: how the piece is performed, and how it is recorded. I have never, ever heard a bad recording by Deutsche Grammophon. However, there are different schools of thought on how pieces should be performed. Some believe that an ideal recording is one featuring musicians playing instruments built as they would have been during that particular period, in that particular style, while others prefer to put more modern twists in, where appropriate. Vivaldi's Four Seasons, for instance, were written to showcase the talent of the musicians he was teaching, so you can see the argument for the soloist in the recording to add their own personal touch to the performance.
The way I've gone about it is to listen to big collections (those 5 CD type things) and pick out particular pieces I like. Then I'll get hold of a collection by that particular composer, and from there I'll buy the best recording I can find of the complete works from which I've heard and enjoy particular pieces. It's slow going since I'm a student, but libraries tend to have plenty of classical CDs which will save you time and money.
If there's a particular piece or work that you already know you want, it's probably best just to ask here. I asked in the last thread for a good recording of Elgar's Enigma Variations, and someone recommended one by Sir Adrian Boult which has both Enigma Variations and Holst's Planets Suite. It is absolutely fantastic.
You, sir, have brilliant taste.
(Beside that, I'd personally recommend Mahler's Symphony No. 5, Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance marches (the first one is like the Queen's Theme these days) and most of Bach's keyboard work, really. Plus Mozart's Requiem Mass in D Minor (Lacrimosa).)