Read the second chapter of What to Listen for in Music and respond to the questions listed below. Answers should have multiple complete sentences.
Note: The term "music" will always be used in reference to all music. Pop, rock, jazz, bluegrass, country, punk, alternative, classical...it all counts.
1. Copland writes about how Igor Stravinsky (a Russian composer who wrote pieces like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tGA6bpscj8 (that's him conducting! awwwww) defined his own music as an expressionless "object." This means that it is only meant to be art and has no specific meaning or message. Do you think it is possible for music to exist without expressing something specific? Why or why not?
2. True or False: The composer is obligated to write music that has "something to say" in order to be considered legitimate. Elaborate on you opinion. There is no right or wrong answer.
3. Copland asks you to listen to Bach's 48 Variations on the Theme for the Well Tempered Clavichord and try to identify the mood of each theme. Instead of completing that listening activity using Bach's Theme and Variations piece, we will use a shorter (you're welcome) work with a similar structure.
Take a moment to listen to Mozart's 12 Variations on Ah Vous Dirais-je Maman. The theme will sound familiar to you. Listen to each variation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO-ecxHEPqI&playnext=1&list=PLDBF4639FA2B1E864. Describe what mood you think is being expressed by variations 2, 5 and 8. If they were intended to represent a character in a story, what might that character be like? How (specifically) does Mozart use rhythm, dynamics, pitch and other musical elements to create these moods?
4. What can we do to ensure that we are "actively listening" to the music around us? This is all music-not just classical music. Based on this reading, what are some things we can listen for?
5. Respond to another student's responses to questions 1, 2 or 3. You may agree or disagree, but make sure you support your opinion either way. Make note in your answer of who you are responding to.
All responses are due by Monday, August 29th at 8:00am.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteInstructions clarification:
ReplyDeleteYour response to another student's post should be labeled as number 5 whether it is in a separate comment or in your original comment. Make sure you indicate who you are responding to. Good Luck!
1. Igor Stravinsky did not wake up one day and think to himself that he is going to write music. Something must had prompted him to do this. Since art causes emotion, while he was writing it something was on his mind and was leading him through the piece as he wrote it. Even if he had started writing without prior cause, he ended with one.
ReplyDelete2. False, the artist has full control over what he is writing. He or she has no obligation to write something that "has something to say". Since there are not any laws on what music can be written about. The writer is in the drivers seat.
3. The mood in variation 2 is very calm, well trying to be calm when everything around you is very busy. The main character part which is calmer with less notes, while the second hand is going crazy which I think represents the busyness.
The mood in variation 5 is very laid back. It reminds me of polka music the way it is played. So the character is obviously from Central Europe and likes to take it easy.
In variation 8 there is a lot of worry. Someone is at a crossroads and they do not know what to do, so they do not act upon it and end up getting more depressed and fall asleep.
4. When we listen we have to think about all three "planes". To do that start out with the easiest one which is listening for "sheer pleasure of the musical sound itself". Then move to Plane 2 and Plane 3.
1. Music is a form of art that is very controversial and very easy to interpret in many different ways. For some people, a piece of music may have absolutely no meaning to them at all. On the other hand, a piece of music may be an inspiration to someone who finds it full of meaning. Music’s interpretation isn’t as much about what the composer wanted it to be, but more about what the listener thinks. A composer might have a specific message in mind while writing a piece of music, but when someone listens to it, they might conclude that it means something completely different. And the best thing is that neither one of them are wrong or right. Music is very subjective, so saying that a piece of music has no expression or meaning cannot be true. Some would find the music to have no meaning while others find it to be the most meaningful song in their life. Is the music specific? That could arguably be answered with not always, but music always has some meaning. That is what separates music from a bunch of random sounds.
ReplyDelete2. False. Definitely false. Aaron Copland briefly talked in his book about music’s meaning. He claimed that good music’s meaning or expression is hard pinpoint. His take on defining music: Yes, it is possible to determine that music has meaning, but you will never be satisfied with your description of it (Copland 9). Music that has a specific meaning and music that has “no expression,” while being opposite things, land in the same category to me. Both would be considered inferior to music that has an undefined meaning. That doesn’t mean that there is no meaning, it just means that most likely, each time you listen to the music, some part of it will become more clear or prominent to you. Music by no means has to have a defined message.
3. Variation II seemed to be very busy with a happy expression. The moving 16th notes played with the left hand help to move the song along and make it seem to be faster than it actually was. When the variation ended, it seemed to be very accomplished and very conclusive.
Variation V was played very short and staccato. It had an uptight expression, but at the same time it had a cheery feel. The second half of the variation seemed to be very “angsty,” but it resolved and ended back with the same feel that it started with.
Variation VIII was, for some reason, very hard to describe. I kept getting a “Rhapsody in Blue” feel from the variation. At points in the variation, I felt like it would go with a Western movie, but at other points, I felt like a camel should be walking in front of me in the desert. It was very smooth and connected.
4. Active listening is much different than the listening that we usually do to music. To actively listen to music better, I try and internalize the tempo of the song. Really try and feel all of the aspects of the bass, the drums or percussion, the low brass or winds. When you start taping your foot, you know that you’re one step closer. Listen for the things that you normally didn’t notice. Maybe that is a cymbal crash you didn’t hear before, a bass line that sticks out during a chorus or even the harmonies sung by a backup singer. Listening to the details of the song is how you can really analyze a song on the musical plane. Dynamics, articulation and syncopation are in all types of music, so listen for all the aspects of concert band music in ALL music.
5. Cole Jurgens: I really agree with your interpretation of the variations in question 3. We both thought very similarly, and you even added characters that really, in my opinion, really fit the variations well.
1. I don't think that it is possible for music to not have something specific it is expressing. Music is always going to make you feel a specific emotion. It can make you happy or sad or even confused. If music didn't cause you to feel a specific emotion, then it would just be a bunch of boring notes without any meaning.
ReplyDelete2. I believe this is false, because it isn't necessary for a composer to write music that has something to say, but, in the end, the listener is always going to interpret it to have something to say, whether the composer intended it or not.
3. In variation 2, I thought of a character that is trying really hard to get stuff done and, then, just when they think they're finished, they get more stuff thrown at them. Mozart does this by making the top rhythms really smooth, and the bottom rhythms faster and choppy.
Variation 5 made me think of a person trying to be sneaky and completely failing at it. Mozart did this by making the beginning notes staccato, like the person is tip-toeing around, and then starting to slur the notes and put them closer together, like the person is tripping over their own feet and about to get caught.
For Variation 8, I thought of a thief that's really sly and dangerous. Mozart did this by slurring many notes and using dynamics so you never really knew what was coming next.
4. We can insure that we are actively listening to music by not only listening to music as a whole but, also, in parts. Some things that we can listen for are the different rhythms and pitches the instruments play to complete the song. For example, in a rock song, we can pick out what one guitar is doing from another. We can see, then, that everything that the instruments play separately make the song come together as a whole.
5. I agree with Cole's question number 1. I liked how he said that a composer can begin without a cause, but he cannot end without one. I thought it showed, perfectly, how music has to express something.
3.
5. Chris, I agree with your answer to number 1. That one person can get different things out of the same song. No body thinks alike, so Chris is oh so right. Great answer!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. I think the only way music can have no emotion, is if the performer or musician doesn't portray any emotion. Watching Igor Stravinsky's face while he was conducting "Firebird," I noticed his expression never really changed. I think he was focused more on perfection, than portraying the emotions of the piece. While listening, I would close my eyes, and I could feel emotions in the music that I couldn't really feel while watching him. I was told that the musician or performer has to feel and believe the music to really portray the emotion intended for the piece.
ReplyDelete2. False. I don't a composer should have to bind themselves to creating music that "has something to say" in order to feel legitimate. A composer should have free rein to write and compose as they please, and if they have something to say, the music will tell.
3. Variation II - I think the character in this Variation could be a person who is very busy, but happy, wanting to accomplish everything he needs to, in order to finally relax; and the end is where he finally finishes what ever he was busying about doing.
Variation V - In this variation, I picture two characters, one in pursuit of the other, the chase speeding up, and the pursuer eventually catching the person he was persuing at the end; the last note being his last step or when he grabs the other character.
Variation VIII - I can see something similar to Variation V, but not as...menacing of a pursuit I guess. This one is more fluid as graceful, almost like two characters are dancing with one another, first the female starting alone, then gradually the male joins; and they end together as one.
4. To "actively listen to music" I try to really see or feel the music, first the lyrics, if there is any, by trying to understand all the possible meaning they could have. Then I listen to the harmomies, and how they blend together and with the main vocal or sound, creating a boost to the main sound; and so on. I break the music down, and try to interpret the meaning of each sound and part.
5. I agree with Chris with his answer to number four. I strongly believe in what he said, for I do similar things that he does to really LISTEN to the music that I hear.
1. I do not think there is any way that music cannot have emotions or meanings. Music comes from what is inside of you, and emotions shine through your work whether you intend them to or not. Even if you do not think that there is any meaning to what you compose, another listener may think otherwise.
ReplyDelete2. Absolutely false. Music does not have to have something specific to say in order for it to be legitimate. Music can mean something different to every listener. While the composer might want a specific message to get across, another listener might come up with a whole new meaning to the song. I think that music can have multiple meanings, or no meanings at all, and it can still be a legitimate song.
3. Variation II- I think this character is portrayed as someone who is always busy, and finds it hard to relax. At the end, when everything is said and done, the character finally relaxes and feels satisfied that he or she successfully finished his or her job.
Variation V- In this variation I can imagine two characters always trying to top the other one. The one person is hurrying to get ahead, achieving everything that the second character fails to achieve. In the end they both catch up to each other and finally resolve their battle by agreeing that they both are needed because the other one can help whoever is failing.
Variation VIII- I imagine someone being sad because they are stuck in their house as it begins to rain. Then as the tempo gets a little faster, they begin to realize that they do not have to be stuck inside, they can go out and play in the rain. I think of rain because of the beginning notes being staccato then they turn smoother as the rain begins to steadily fall. The sound becomes brighter as the tempo becomes faster and this is when the character realizes that they do not have to be stuck inside.
4. We can make sure that we are actively listening by imagining different meanings for songs. We can listen closer for dynamics and rhythms. As I listen to music, I try not to only listen to the melody, but to the harmonies that follow it as well.
5. I agree with you on the second question Chris. “Music by no means has to have a defined message”
1. I believe that music cannot exist without emotion. Music is something that has emotion and character either way, even if the composer does not mean to have emotion in it.
ReplyDelete2. False. The composer is not obligated to write music that has "something to say" in order to be considered legitimate. Composers and listeners always have different meanings, and some of the songs just are inspired by life or something along that line. There is nothing that says music has to a message in order to be classified as legit music.
3. Variation II: The mood for this variation is very happy and busy. The character in this variation makes that happen by suing the left hand to play all the 16th notes and the right hand to play all of the longer and more melodic notes.
Variation V: This variation is very light. This is accomplished by the choppiness that the 8th notes create, and gets more laid back towards the end with the 16th, 8th, and quarter note variation
Variation VIII: This is the part in the variation where the character is starting to sucked in by rain or a little storm. This is done by the key signature and how a lot of the notes become accidentals in the music.
4. We can be actively listening to the music around us my listening for all of the different things that are going on in a song. For example, we can listen for the different types of melodies, harmonies, timbres, dynamics, rhythm, and everything else that is going on in the music.
5. I agree with Ally's comment on music portraying music when she says, " Music comes from what is inside of you, and emotions shine through your work whether you intend them to or not"
1. Music, like almost anything, can be interpreted many different ways. Many expressions can be portrayed through music, as can many characters. Many people interpret music differently, feeling different emotions, creating different stories. However, in my opinion, music does not and is not always intended to mean something or represent an emotion. Just as a painting can be made of random colors and lines, giving the painter enjoyment, music is not always meant to mean something. Sometimes music is created by happenstance. For example, a pianist may be playing around on the piano, and plays an interesting rhythm, that eventually develops into a piece. Yet the pianist didn't intend it to mean something; it just sounded interesting and happened. This is argument is actually hard to settle, though, because everyone chooses a different meaning or doesn't choose one, basing it solely on opinion.
ReplyDelete2. Music is music is music is music. A composer does not have to say something specific for it to be legitimate. It is still perfectly legitimate music whether or not the composer was meaning to say something meaningful or not.
ReplyDelete3. Variation 1: this variation sounded to me as fast but resolute, makingbme think of someone on a mission, who is in a hurry. The fast notes in the treble clef and the strong chords in the bass create this. Also, the louder dynamics detract this variation from having a lighter sound.
ReplyDeleteVariation 2: this is very light from the use of eighth notes split between the bass and treble clef. The softer dynamics create a very blight and sweet mood, like a young dancer.
Variation 3: Mozart puts this variation in the natural minor making it sound devious but not angry as a harmonic minor would. It is also in the softer dynamic range, making a character that seems to be sneaking around somewhere up to no good
4. To make sure we are "actively listening," we can listen for musical properties throughout the song. These properties include dynamics, pitch, tempo, key signatures, beats, and rhythms. All of these things can be used to define a mood, meaning, or expression, ensuring that we are actively listening.
ReplyDelete5. I do not agree with Kayla's post on question number one. She said music had to have meaning and expression otherwise it would just be a bunch of boring notes. However, even if it was a bunch of boring notes, it would still be music. It doesn't always have to have meaning or expression. It can simply be art, simply music.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I am going to profess my anger that I did all of this completely, and then accidentally closed the tab too soon, so this isn't going to be as special as my last post as I am rather annoyed.
ReplyDelete1) I don't think it has to have a SPECIFIC meaning, but there is going to be some meaning or feeling in it. Even if it was or was not intentional.
2) I think that this is false. Half the time when musicians make a song they have no idea what they are trying to say. Everyone interprets things differently.
3) The second one kind of reminded me of something like bees buzzing around.
The fifth one reminded me of mice sneaking around somewhere.
I kind of lost track of the variations so this may or may not be the eighth one. This one seemed really graceful like someone dancing in an old castle.
4) We can just try to listen. We can try to make our own meanings for the song and we can try to see what type of mood it's suppose to be in, etc.
5) I agree with Melissa's comment on number two!
1. I think this is false because i believe that when someone is writing a piece of music, the music is being written based on something that the composer has been influenced by. Therefore, i believe that all music has a meaning or based on the specific thing/event the composer has been influenced by.
ReplyDelete2.I believe this is true because all music tends to be written based on something has been inspired by. I believe that all music needs to have something to say because that is where the emotion in the music comes from. If a composer is writing about a specific event, but does not add any emotion to how he feels about it, then the music would be boring and he or she, in my opinion would not be a legitimate composer.
3. Part 2 had a very upbeat feel to it that i found very interesting. It was all eigth notes which gave me the sense of happiness. Also the performer got louder in the middle of the verses which added expression.
Part 5 tended to be softer and more staccato. because of how the melody is presented, it tends to leave a calming impression on me. There are slight dynamics in this variation but not as much as the second one.
Part eight is in a lower key and is presented in a much creepier way because of the soft dynamics and somewhat hollow sound. This reminds me of what it would be like to sneak through a haunted house.
4.We must focus on all parts of the music to make sure we are being active listeners. For example, we must listen to the melody, harmony, tone, pitch, mood, rhythm, etc. to make sure we are being active listeners and hearing all parts of the music.
5. I agree with Chris in his response in number one. I took the point of view from the composer, who in my opinion tends to write about something specific, as Chris also mentioned, because that's where composers get the influence to create a piece of music. I also enjoyed how he took the listener's point of view into account and i thought he brought up some very good points from that perspective.
1) Music cannot exist without a specific meaning to go along with it. It isn't possible, for we as humans, to not put some kind of emotion or feeling to a piece of music. Anytime, and everytime, we hear, feel, see, smell, or taste something, we form an opinion about it. It can't be helped. As the opinion develops, we start to form a story about it, and we think that the specific piece of music is expressing something. Even if the composer intended to write the music for itself, even if they wanted it to be expressionless, it cannot be. This specific piece is named "Firebird", which in itself is an expression of what the composer wanted it to be, despite his intentions. It's not a faceless name, like "Symphony # blah" by Whatshisface. It has a name, and a pretty cool one at that.
ReplyDelete2)I believe that this is false. Although I said music will always speak to those who listen to it, I don't think that the composer has to be the one talking. I don't think that there has to be a specific meaning in a song, put there by the composer. While many songs are inspired by something, they don't have to take a stand on something; they don't have to make a point. Music can be music, and nothing more. People will put meaning to it, but this is their own personal opinion, not always the composers.
3) Variation two is very upbeat. It's the closest of all to what I remember from my childhood, with the least flair. It's really just the melody with a bass line. It reminds me of a peaceful meadow, with bunnies hopping around and bees buzzing. The loud dynamics take away somewhat from the peacefulness, but not to a great extent.
-Variation five is also peaceful, but its staccato notes gave it a choppy quality. It has a happy feeling as well.
-Variation eight adds in accidentials into the mix. This gives it a different feeling from the previous parts. It isn't as happy as the other two.
4) One of the biggest things to actively listen to music is to see the music in your head. Maybe not exactly as it's written, but to visualize the dynamics and notes. Knowing how the different instruments fit together is also another key part. Being able to name what the melody, harmony, or bass line is very important.
5) I disagree with Kirk on question two. I think that music dosen't have to be influenced by anything. Music is music for music's sake. Whether or not we as listeners put meaning to it is a totally different story, but as far as the composer being inspired by something, I think that it's not required.
1) Music can and often does exist without expressing anything more specific than an emotion. I do believe the vaguest it can be is expressing emotion only, but it does not have to be so specific as to express, say, a story of a man living in a busy city.
ReplyDelete2) False! You do not have to write with a meaning to be legitimate. If you just want to let your feelings seep out into a song, that song isn't any less legitimate. While it does still convey an emotion (or several), it still does not necessarily have to have any specific meaning.
3) In variation two, I can imagine a very busy character going about a number of tasks but in a calm, peaceful manner. I believe this image is brought to mind by the rapid movement in the bass line, in conjunction with the melody flowing peacefully. The loud dynamic in the melody stresses that there is a calmness, despite the busy bass line. In variation five, I get the impression that the character is rather timid. The melody seems soft and experimental, as if the composer were simply trying something he didn't expect to actually work. And finally, in variation eight, it seems the character has changed to someone who tries to sneakily sneak through the rules to display their creative intent, but is scared of offending someone. It sounds very different, but the dynamics and accents make me believe that their differences are not in place to stand out, but to simply try something new.
4) Some very important things to listen for are dynamic changes. A subtle little change in the volume can change the whole emotion. The accents are very important for the same reason; different accents show entirely different emotions.
5) I very much agree with Ally in her response to number 2. Lots of music may contain multiple meanings, but that makes it no more legitimate than a piece that the composer is sure has no specific meaning.
Kitt's Post:
ReplyDelete1. I believe that music is formless until it is listened to, that each individual listener interprets it the way they wish to. Even the composer interprets it differently, but his/her opinion on what the music is expressing is not the true one because the truth of music comes from individual interpretation. Even though the composer wrote it, they don't have control over the emotions it might stir. They themselves were stirred to write it, but the personality of the music is too complex to ever be defined to something specific because we as humans are too complex to be defined specifically. In short, yes, music can exist without expressing something specific, but it cannot exist without expressing something.
2. A composer does not have to intend for his or her music to say something in order for it to be legitimate music because music is something that can be interpreted in a plethora of ways. Even if he or she does intend for it to have a certain meaning, it will come to have a different meaning for each person that listens to it. In my opinion, either way is an alright way to write music, whether there is an intended meaning or not.
3. Variation 2 sounds to me a lot like a flustered character scurrying about, like a mouse or even a bee, perhaps. Mozart achieves this by using shorter notes in quicker succession and playing them lightly and making the miniature scales seem to almost fly away by going up high very suddenly from the lower pitches.
Variation 5 reminds me of a deer in a forest meadow, sort of like the scene in Bambi where Bambi and his mom go to the meadow with the other deer for the first time (only less dramatic, and not the scene where Bambi's mom dies) because is sounds both cautious and joyful. The cautious sound is achieved making the melody and harmony take turns being played, whereas the joyful, "prancing" sound occurs with the stacatto chords after the intial phrase. The entire variation remains light because it is played as so and in a piano dynamic.
Variation 8 is reminiscent of a fox or a cat slinking around in the bushes, being sneaky and evil. The change in pitch to Ab with a few accidentals thrown in (I believe those make it Ab minor, but I could very well be wrong) helps set the mood and the staccato lower line makes the audience think of someone sneaking around on light feet, while the more legato top line reminds one of smooth movements to avoid being seen and caught. Along with the softer dynamic and slower tempo, this completes the "sneaky" character variation.
4. A big thing that can help in listening to music according to the text is actively listening for the composer's personal style because it marks a piece as his or her own. Another important thing is to try to not pin a piece of music to one single definition and to leave it open to continuous reinterpretation by yourself so that you can fully and better appreciate its personality. The last thing we can do to more actively listen to music is to also listen to the structure of the music itself, the dynamics, rhythm, key, tempo, etc., because they help express the music's personality.
5. I don't agree with Kayla on the last part of her answer for Question 1. Even if the music is just a bunch of boring old notes, I believe it still expresses something. It may express significantly less than Stravinsky's "Firebird", but it does express something, even if that emotion is sheer, unadulterated bleakness.
Clint's Post:
ReplyDelete1. I disagree with Igor because all artist make an imprint on their music wether purposely or not
2. I agree because if music is not saying something it isn't music
3. variation 2 was very joyus while 5 was calm and 8 was sad and depressing
4. you can listen for a music's mood and motives
5. I agree with Melissa in question 1 because every artists projects their emotions onto their musical piece
Sorry I couldn't get this onto the site.