Musicians

[priya978]

Who is saying that theory is a limitation??<BR>I'm saying that theory is not music. Sure it's a part of musical study, but it's not music. Music is the sound that comes out of the notes on the page that the conductor interprets. (and that gives a feeling to the listener.)

[bignaf]

That;s a lot better Eugene. <BR>i also wasn't comfortable with the original comment about form of Eric :confused: I think. it sounded too much like he's waiting to learn how to compose. which is something you cannot do.

[SymphonyMan]

Sorry bignaf I did make it sound that way. I'm not necissarily waiting to compose, I love to improvise because that's really all I can do (with the exception of small choral part writing). But I would like to throw in the theory knowledge to back my ambition.<P>I have also been doing some ear training including one part dictation in my piano lessons over the past couple weeks.<p>[ 12-31-2002: Message edited by: Eric ]

[OperaTenor]

Sorry Eugene, maybe misinterpretation on my part. I'm not saying that theory is music, but rather, it is the fundamental standard by which composers put their genius on paper in a form that a performer can interpret and reproduce to conform to the original idea of the composer. Without its core format and rules, it would be like me writing something out in Hebrew and you, not knowing any better, trying to read it aloud in Swahili, because no one set any rules for me to write by and for you to read by. <P>The most progressive composer today generally writes his or her music out the same way Mozart or Chopin did, and still subscribes to the same rules of tonality, harmony and counterpoint. The difference is that they conciously step over the boundaries set by previous eras, and know exactly where they cross and how far, and I believe that is what still separates music from disorganized noise.<P>Not to put notariety ahead of the ideal of artistic expression, but do you know of one composer worth listening to who was not grounded in formal theory? <P>As a performer (can also be read "prima don"), I must take a little exception to your refence concerning interpretation by the conductor. :p

[bignaf]

Eric,<BR>Good luck. would like to hear something of yours when you start cmposing seriously.

[bignaf]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by operatenor:<BR><STRONG>The most progressive composer today generally writes his or her music out the same way Mozart or Chopin did, and still subscribes to the same rules of tonality, harmony and counterpoint. <BR>As a performer (can also be read "prima don"), I must take a little exception to your refence concerning interpretation by the conductor. <BR>oK now I'll be sane. when dealing with an ensemble the conductor should decide EVERY LAST THING! when there are soloists there is room for some interaction between the conductor's and the soloist's interpretation (except for singers) The soloist will come up with his/her phrasing for the whole thing but I think the conductor should modify it if it clashes with his/her conception.

[OperaTenor]

Bignaf, what I meant was that they (Mozart, Chopin, et. al.) use the same basic symbols and framework to communicate their ideas. I didn't mean to say they composed in the same style. Granted, new notations have developed (i.e. pedal signs and more dynamic extremes as you noted), but whether I'm reading Palestrina or Rutter (of course there are exceptions like Norman Luboff), I use the same set of fundamental rules to read them. <P>As I said, I feel performance is a <I>collaborative</I> effort on the part of the conductor and the players. There is give and take, and yes, the conductor usually is the single biggest influence over the work as a whole. Even so, I have had instances where I was the soloist and the conductor pretty much completely deferred to me with the orchestra following him. Of course that doesn't release me from the responsibility of staying on the same planet as the conductor with regards to musical intent. When it comes to ensembles, I agree of course that the director/conductor should dictate the details of the performance, but I don't feel those dictates are the sole influence of the performance, intentional or accidental. <P>Keeping my voice part in mind, HOW DARE you say that singers are ONLY instruments!!!?! <p>[ 12-31-2002: Message edited by: operatenor ]

[SymphonyMan]

Do conductors ever have too much to deal with and can't get to every section of the symphony (or any performing ensemble). I mean on a professional level. I ask this because over the summer I played in a symphony at a music camp with many outstanding players. Even so, there were some pieces where our conductor didn't even mention some of the sections as she was too busy with the dominant sections. Which would mean either <BR>a) the other sections that don't have the theme or a dominant part are all interpreting the piece the same from the page...<BR>or b) the conductor just doesn't get to these sections because of their lack of importance..leaving the sections to interpret themselves.<BR>Of course, sectionals and whatnot would unify the sound of section. But, because of my little knowledge of how professional symphonies rehearse, I was just wondering if the conductor ever runs into TOO much to deal with (meaning too many style issues, etc), leaving sections to interpret on their own.

[OperaTenor]

Eric, I believe it's probably less a case of the conductor being overwhelmed than perhaps a case of them being content with the performance of the section(s) they're not riding. I once had a german conductor for Lohengrin who didn't even mark the beat - he just cued sections or singers IF he thought it necessary. There were some passages where I'm certain he didn't move for perhaps 20 or 30 measures! He had this serene little smile on his face the whole time. I'd like to think it was because we were all doing such a splendid job, but nevertheless it was a little unnerving.

[bignaf]

O.T.,<BR>You are a instrument face the facts! :p

[SymphonyMan]

I saw something like that very recently! I went to Florida State University Philharmonia performance of Dvorak's 6th Symphony. In the middle of the 3rd movement the conductor just stopped conducting for a about a minute. I've never seen the score of the piece but I imagine, due to the fast tempo, that it was quite a few measures! Glad to see the group stayed together...it was their last performance of a weekend tour of Florida. They all looked really exhausted. <P>By the way, the jokes are great! I'm just glad I sing bass in the church choir.<BR> <p>[ 12-31-2002: Message edited by: Eric ]

[bignaf]

In the chorus I sing bass also but I think of switching to tenor. Uh-oh then those jokes will apply to me?<BR>Bass jokes: How can you tell in "don Giovanni" when they exchange the statue of the Commendatorre (sp?) with a bass?<BR>the "statue" becomes more stiff.

[OperaTenor]

How many tenors does it take to screw in a light bulb?<P>One. He stands, holding the light bulb and the world revolves around him. <P>How many sopranos?<P>Two. One stands on a ladder, and the other stands next to her and asks:"Excuse me, dear, isn't that a little high for you?" <P><BR>That's the best of the best for me. <P>Gotta scrounge for some good pianist/composer humor (no, I'm not going for the "12-inch pianist" or "decomposing" jokes)! <p>[ 12-31-2002: Message edited by: operatenor ]

[bignaf]

you know I was browsing the internet for music jokes and they simply have the same ones over and over again. don't worry about moving the jokes to the other thread. i just decided it is not nice to derail this thread with jokes so I opened a new thread.

[brickroot]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eugene a.:<BR><STRONG>Yes, but too much thought into piece, makes the piece too technical. And technicality isn't what music is about. Do you think that the audience of a Beethoven Ninth concert are going to be like "Ohh, when he composed this openeing he decided to build a Bb major chord with a 7th."<BR>No, they aren't going to know that, nor are they going to care. What they hear sparks something inside of them, a feeling that the music places in their being. It's what they hear not what is written on the page in ink, that is going to matter, what comes out of those little black dots is what they hear.</STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>The audience may not have been thinking that, but Beethoven certainly was when he wrote it. And what they hear is what's written...the performer's job is different than the composers'.<p>[ 01-03-2003: Message edited by: brickroot ]

[OperaTenor]

I thought I'd resurface this thread since we seem to have a couple more musicians posting these days and I for one would like to more about them.