# Baroque Analysis?



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Do you like Baroque Music?

I do. And it's a personal taste.

But can you look into yourself and say *what qualities of Baroque Music you find attractive?* Or if you are more knowledgeable than me, can you do a bit of musicological analysis, and tell us what is *the musical quintessence of the Baroque style*?

It would be nice to know *which composers* you particularly like, too.

Or maybe you *don't* like Baroque? Again, a personal taste. But can you *isolate* what it is in Baroque Music that gives you the pip? And again, *if you know something about music*, could you analyse what makes Baroque Music tick? And is there *one composer in particular* that makes you reach for the off-button *pdq*?

I'm hoping we'll get some really interesting posts, like we did on the Beethoven Thisness thread - well, I thought so anyway.

:tiphat: Thanks in advance for any replies.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Again, here is another non-poll thread which could open up in a number of ways.

What do I find attractive about Baroque? The neatness and the pattern, primarily, especially as worked out in counterpoint. 

However, my favourite, really, is French Baroque, which is plainer & more 'melodic', in my opinion. With Lully and Couperin, my favourite French Baroque composers, what gets to me is the elegance and sense of being 'in' the moment - hard to put it, but when I listen to these pieces, I feel I can transport myself back to their age. 

How about you?


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I look forward to this thread, Ingélou. You've posted it just as I've been picking out baroque compositions from an anthology by the group Il Giardino Armonico. Even some famous ones are new to me. One is Biber's wonderfully inventive "Battalia," according to Wikipedia "a programmatic 'battle' piece which anticipates such latter-day techniques as polytonality and col legno playing":






To briefly state something I admire in baroque music, it's the occasional tendency in some composers to think through the nature of music by juxtaposing passages of "order" and "chaos."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Ignaz_Franz_Biber


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

I stumbled across this the other day and found it an interesting overview.

http://www.aug.edu/~cshotwel/4350.Baroquetraits.html


----------



## ericdxx (Jul 7, 2013)

The Baroque Composers had a better understanding of counterpoint than any other composers.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

I've yet to meet a Baroque composer I didn't like.

I know, technically, the pre 1600 period is usually called Renaissance, but I like almost everything from 1470 through 1750 and some of the Baroque leftovers beyond that like Leopold Mozart. In England, the enduring popularity of Handel ensured the success of Charles Avison, William Boyce, and Thomas Arne-among other accomplished imitators-well into the 1780s, who competed alongside Mozart and Haydn. Part of this is that the _stile antico_ of the Renaissance persisted well into the Baroque era, especially for Church music whereas the _stile moderno_ of the "true" baroque was more used for secular music.

I think what interests me is two things:

First, the intricacies of canon and fugue - ranging from the canons of Johannes Ockeghem which are both contrapuntal (setting harmonies) and mensural (running tunes in different time patterns) right through to Bach's art of Fugue. Secondly, I like the general lightness of the music, this is down to a) small(ish) consorts and b) limited harmonies - you don't get a full on Phil Spector wall of sound with Bach or Handel. This means that the melodies stand out much more clearly. The writing involves short, cadentially defined melodies, often derived from dance tunes and organised in dance suites.

As to favourite composers, the class of 1685, obviously (Bach, Handel, Scarlatti), of the rest - Corelli, Vivaldi, Teleman on and on and on. An inexhaustible feast of excellent Music. That's without going to 16th England for Byrd, Tallis, Gibbons, Dowland and yet more.


----------



## Celloman (Sep 30, 2006)

For me, Baroque seems to preoccupy itself with the horizontal melodic line. Vertical harmonies are increasingly important, but they are still subordinate to the horizontal aspect of the music score. Baroque music explores the horizontal aspect in which two or more melodic lines interact and relate to each other. Even in Bach's solo violin and cello works, where the performer is limited as to how many voices can be played at once, you can still find a polyphony which is implied rather than stated directly.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I love Baroque music because it gets right to the point. Too much waiting around sometimes for the main theme in other eras. And I get a majestic vibe to this music. Like an entrance of a king or table music. Some of it is quite beautiful and melancholic which I like. Unlike some, I'm a fan of the harpsichord. I also like the use of the trumpet and oboe as the lead instruments in concertos. Some of the Composers I like most include Bach, Handel, Vivaldi, Telemann, Corelli, and Biber.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

The thing that attracted me to baroque almost before any other type of music is its bewildering complexity. There is simply so much going on at once, and it is amazing that it all works together without creating pure cacophony. I also love LOVE the idea of taking a very small musical building block, a short motif, and combining it with itself, turning it upside down and inside out and having these pieces fit together the way molecules combine and recombine. It is like hearing DNA.

I used to study counterpoint a little and fugues especially because I wanted to try doing a visual equivalent in painting. Of course that's nothing new, but it worked for me to think of a painting in terms of music. I loved the idea of taking a simple shape and making some kind of visual fughetta by repeating it and playing it against itself. The results were often a little contrived I think, but what a fun exercise it was for me. (I won't clutter up or hijack the thread by posting artwork, but suffice to say, baroque helped me not to go broke so to speak.)


----------



## Copperears (Nov 10, 2013)

I've always loved Baroque music, simply because it is so playful, and contemplative, both. John Dowland, and Monteverdi, both; both on the edge of the development of Baroque out of Renaissance music. A sense of musical architecture inspired by the belief that the universe exists in knowable forms of rational order, that beauty is inherent, pain and ugliness merely distortion. Not quite Enlightenment yet, certainly, but the innocent, early steps towards that period.

The Enlightenment couldn't have occurred without the Baroque period preceding it, I believe.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Weston said:


> There is simply so much going on at once, and it is amazing that *it all works together without creating pure cacophony. * I also love LOVE the idea of taking a very small musical building block, a short motif, and combining it with itself, turning it upside down and inside out and having these pieces fit together the way molecules combine and recombine. It is like hearing DNA.


I agree with the sentiment in general, but not with the wording of the bold-highlighted section. Well-written music of any era, no matter how dense, never degenerates into cacophony, so there is no need to single out the Baroque in this regard.

To answer the OP:

I enjoy the music of Monteverdi, Frescobaldi, Purcell, Rameau, Handel, and Bach, but for different reasons, and the era was not so nearly homogeneous as to submit to a simple characterization like "contrapuntal" or "motor rhythmic". The Baroque era saw the development of the minor/major system of functional tonality, which proved a powerful tool in the hands of composers for centuries.


----------



## GGluek (Dec 11, 2011)

I'm really a classical man, so I have mixed feelings about the Baroque. I like its contrapuntal intricacy, the long line of some of its melody, its inventiveness (when it's being inventive), the antiphonal effects... But sometimes it bores me. A lot of Vivaldi concerti sound the same to me. Too many slow movements sound mournful or dreary and I'm usually not in a frame of mind to want to listen to that (and so you can call me an equal opportunity wet blanket, I also think the first movement of Mozart's g-minor symphony is whiney). And I've already mentioned that Handelian operas put me to sleep.

Typical favorites include the finale of the Fourth Brandenburg, the Resurrexit from the b-minor mass, Handel's Fireworks and Watermusick, Corelli concerti grossi, a lot of Bach keyboard stuff (including the Goldbergs), the French gallante stuff, Scarlatti sonatas. There's a lot of Baroque music I don't play voluntarily, because life is getting shorter and I want to spend listening time on music that means more to me. But I will let Baroque pieces come to me, and only turn them off when the music is wrong for my mood.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Celloman said:


> For me, Baroque seems to preoccupy itself with the horizontal melodic line. Vertical harmonies are increasingly important, but they are still subordinate to the horizontal aspect of the music score. Baroque music explores the horizontal aspect in which two or more melodic lines interact and relate to each other.


Celloman's statement is a good summary of why I believe I enjoy Baroque music. While I enjoy some Baroque music more than others, I'm not sure there is really any music from this era that I dislike. I especially like Bach, Handel, Vivaldi, Corelli, Albinoni, and Scarlatti.

I will admit that I have trouble telling Italian Baroque composers apart from their music - Corelli, Albinoni, Locatelli, Geminiani, Sammartini, etc. I'm not sure if there are clues that someone with my listening ability could easily discern.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I actually like Baroque music, but I can understand Moody's description as "sewing machine music". I think there was an element of improvisation that people are afraid to employ today for fear of being branded "non-HIP".


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

bigshot said:


> I actually like Baroque music, but I can understand Moody's description as "sewing machine music". I think there was an element of improvisation that people are afraid to employ today for fear of being branded "non-HIP".


That was really a joke in the context of something apart from this thread---altho' I'm not that keen I have no problem with people who are.


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

bigshot said:


> I actually like Baroque music, but I can understand Moody's description as "sewing machine music". I think there was an element of improvisation that people are afraid to employ today for fear of being branded "non-HIP".


You may mean ornamentation? Which is not "once more with feeling" but was highly informed by contemporary practice and pedagogy (although with enormous room for innovation). It's a big thing for HIPP of course - after all it is the practice that was historically used when performing music (see?). This video gives a brief and clear exposition of it (and an endorsement by Gramophone mag!): 




And improv thrived through into Mozart . Maybe watch some Bob Levin, he's good at explaining this sort of stuff - here, I'll even point you to a lengthy lecture so you can better inform your opinion on HIP (note: you don't hear Murray Perahia or Brendel or Anda or doing this, do you?): 




But, by all means, don't find out about HIPP if it would spoil your delicious identification of it as the ghastly, soulless "other" ;-)


----------



## Copperears (Nov 10, 2013)

GGluek said:


> I'm really a classical man, so I have mixed feelings about the Baroque. I like its contrapuntal intricacy, the long line of some of its melody, its inventiveness (when it's being inventive), the antiphonal effects... But sometimes it bores me. A lot of Vivaldi concerti sound the same to me. Too many slow movements sound mournful or dreary and I'm usually not in a frame of mind to want to listen to that (and so you can call me an equal opportunity wet blanket, I also think the first movement of Mozart's g-minor symphony is whiney). And I've already mentioned that Handelian operas put me to sleep.
> 
> Typical favorites include the finale of the Fourth Brandenburg, the Resurrexit from the b-minor mass, Handel's Fireworks and Watermusick, Corelli concerti grossi, a lot of Bach keyboard stuff (including the Goldbergs), the French gallante stuff, Scarlatti sonatas. There's a lot of Baroque music I don't play voluntarily, because life is getting shorter and I want to spend listening time on music that means more to me. But I will let Baroque pieces come to me, and only turn them off when the music is wrong for my mood.


I like this perception; it reminds me of the things I consider limitations in Baroque: narrow dynamic range, simplistic rhythmic structure (despite the rhythmic complexities introduced by counterpoint), and, from our point of view now, formal progression that is both inevitable and overly predictable. In that way Baroque became like serialism did later.

Otoh the lack of melodrama and the proximity to folk music forms is, again, compared with what came after, refreshing.

Oddly, I like Baroque for the same reason I like tech death metal bands such as Spawn of Posession.


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

What do I like about the baroque? Something I like about Bach in particular is his use of "Fortspinnung" (or "spinning-forth"). That is a term I occasionally hear bandied about in musicological circles, and it basically refers to Bach's tendency to craft very long and complex melodic lines out of what is initially a very small motif (I always think of the opening rising and falling figure that begins the 3rd Brandenburg Concerto). With his "spinning-forth," Bach can take us through all sorts of surprising twists and turns, in contrast to the classical period where the melodies are generally more balanced and there is always a clearer sense of direction. So basically, I like the unpredictability of baroque Music.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

dgee said:


> You may mean ornamentation? Which is not "once more with feeling" but was highly informed by contemporary practice and pedagogy (although with enormous room for innovation). It's a big thing for HIPP of course - after all it is the practice that was historically used when performing music (see?). This video gives a brief and clear exposition of it (and an endorsement by Gramophone mag!):
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If Anda comes to me I'll beat a hasty retreat as he's been dead since the 70s.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Copperears said:


> I've always loved Baroque music, simply because it is so playful, and contemplative, both. John Dowland, and Monteverdi, both; both on the edge of the development of Baroque out of Renaissance music. A sense of musical architecture inspired by the belief that the universe exists in knowable forms of rational order, that beauty is inherent, pain and ugliness merely distortion. Not quite Enlightenment yet, certainly, but the innocent, early steps towards that period.
> 
> The Enlightenment couldn't have occurred without the Baroque period preceding it, I believe.


Lovely post. He may be semper Dowland, semper dolens - but we both find him delightful.



Copperears said:


> I like this perception; it reminds me of the things I consider limitations in Baroque: narrow dynamic range, simplistic rhythmic structure (despite the rhythmic complexities introduced by counterpoint), and, from our point of view now, formal progression that is both inevitable and overly predictable. In that way Baroque became like serialism did later.
> 
> Otoh the lack of melodrama and the proximity to folk music forms is, again, compared with what came after, refreshing.
> 
> Oddly, I like Baroque for the same reason I like tech death metal bands such as Spawn of Posession.


I see where you're coming from but I don't think the "formal progression" is either "inevitable " or "overly predictable". The simplest counterexample is Bach's Inventions and Sinfonias. Since each Sinfonia is the three part development of the corresponding two part Invention, then they should be unnecessary, but they are not. That is the genius of Bach.

Interesting to see that Spawn of Posession claim both Weiss and Bach as infuences.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

moody said:


> That was really a joke in the context of something apart from this thread---altho' I'm not that keen I have no problem with people who are.


Was it really you that thought up the term 'sewing machine music', Moody? Even though I love baroque music, I think that's an inspired metaphor.  Well done!


----------



## Piwikiwi (Apr 1, 2011)

Celloman said:


> For me, Baroque seems to preoccupy itself with the horizontal melodic line. Vertical harmonies are increasingly important, but they are still subordinate to the horizontal aspect of the music score. Baroque music explores the horizontal aspect in which two or more melodic lines interact and relate to each other. Even in Bach's solo violin and cello works, where the performer is limited as to how many voices can be played at once, you can still find a polyphony which is implied rather than stated directly.


Sorry if I sound like a smart *** but the harmonic motion of baroque is actually higher in comparison to classical where it is more about the themes and the development of the themes


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Ingélou said:


> Was it really you that thought up the term 'sewing machine music', Moody? Even though I love baroque music, I think that's an inspired metaphor.  Well done!


Hmm. I thought it was all this modern stuff like Martin Messier and his chorus of singers.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Celloman said:


> For me, Baroque seems to preoccupy itself with the horizontal melodic line. Vertical harmonies are increasingly important, but they are still subordinate to the horizontal aspect of the music score. Baroque music explores the horizontal aspect in which two or more melodic lines interact and relate to each other. Even in Bach's solo violin and cello works, where the performer is limited as to how many voices can be played at once, you can still find a polyphony which is implied rather than stated directly.





Piwikiwi said:


> Sorry if I sound like a smart *** but the harmonic motion of baroque is actually higher in comparison to classical where it is more about the themes and the development of the themes


Hmm, interesting .......

My take on the matter is that, yes, the harmonic motion is higher in baroque than in classical, but that's because the bass is seen as a melody rather than as a simple harmonic support. So as the melodies interact, you can have much faster harmonic motion than if you had one melody or theme supported by a harmonic bass. The vertical harmonic motion (pattern of chord changes) is, however, secondary to the horizontal motion or counterpoint or relation between the melodies. It's that which makes Baroque so interesting.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Piwikiwi said:


> Sorry if I sound like a smart *** but the harmonic motion of baroque is actually higher in comparison to classical where it is more about the themes and the development of the themes


Depends on the Baroque you're talking about. If you're comparing JS Bach to Stamitz, the former is definitely richer in terms of tonality, but if you're comparing Vivaldi to Mozart, the latter contains more harmonic complexity.


----------



## Copperears (Nov 10, 2013)

Taggart said:


> Lovely post. He may be semper Dowland, semper dolens - but we both find him delightful.
> 
> I see where you're coming from but I don't think the "formal progression" is either "inevitable " or "overly predictable". The simplest counterexample is Bach's Inventions and Sinfonias. Since each Sinfonia is the three part development of the corresponding two part Invention, then they should be unnecessary, but they are not. That is the genius of Bach.
> 
> Interesting to see that Spawn of Posession claim both Weiss and Bach as infuences.


I suspect one of the key members of the group SoP -- Christian Muenzner -- is probably the one most focused on the contrapuntal virtuosity to be learned from such sources. Metal, like Baroque, has become a genre filled with well-defined musical conventions, but a few musicians are pushing the edge of experimenting with the fundamentals of those conventions, and pay attention to things outside them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Münzner

Excellent musicianship, in any event.

And yes, I mis-spoke/thought by using the terms inevitable and predictable; what I was meaning to say is that they seem that way to us _now_, with such a long period of familiarity with them; but of course in the structure of the music itself, just as much as with the unfolding of a leitmotif over 46 hours in a Wagner opera, there is an unfolding -- as someone else expertly mentioned in this thread -- of a core idea, phrase, element that is endlessly inventive and even improvisatory in conception (though not once written down) and exposition.

Or, something like that. I find music precise, words less so.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

This is all completely beyond me  but thanks for posting, everyone!


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Ingélou said:


> This is all completely beyond me  but thanks for posting, everyone!


You are supposed to nod knowingly and ocassionally stroke your chin in wise concurrance.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

I greatly enjoy the Baroque era, my favorite composers include: Monteverdi, Buxtehude, Vivaldi, Lully, D. Scarlatti, Couperin, Biber, Purcell and Bach. I just find the style of music from this era beautiful, tasteful, refined and near perfected culminating in the music of J.S. Bach. Earlier music up to and including the Baroque generally sounds more spiritual to me - even the secular works and I quite like this. Not to downplay the many brilliant composers of the following eras, but to my tastes there was a gradual decline in music after the Baroque coming back again to styles I really enjoy in the 20th century.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Weston said:


> You are supposed to nod knowingly and ocassionally stroke your chin in wise concurrance.


Take a lesson from sculptor August Rodin:

At exhibitions of his work, viewers would approach him and ask, _"What is your meaning in this piece?"_

Rodin would ask the viewer what they thought the work meant, and while the viewer then spoke, Rodin would look attentive, nod to encourage them to speak at length, pensively stroke his long beard.

When the viewer was done explaining what they though the piece meant, Rodin would wait a few beats, then say, _"Hmmm. You might be right."_


----------



## presto (Jun 17, 2011)

I listen to Baroque music most of the time...........I like it so much I have to make a conscious effort to seek out other eras.


----------



## GiulioCesare (Apr 9, 2013)

Pure, in-your-face counterpoint and fugue:


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I was playing some Handel in class after school this week. My colleague said it sounded very classical compared to my usual, which is Beethoven and later, which he called more dramatic and intense. In his non specialist way, he did describe Baroque well, it's an easier listen, simpler. (Not always, I know)

I own only a few Baroque CDs. But I'd like to own a few more.
My collection:
Bach solo violin, solo cello, violin concerti, Brandenburg concerti
Vivaldi Four Seasons, guitar concerto in D
Handel Water Music, Fireworks, Concerto Grossi
and on order Correli Concerto Grossi

So what else must I own? What are some more essentials? I think you can tell I'm into violins


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

ericdxx said:


> The Baroque Composers had a better understanding of counterpoint than any other composers.


:lol:.....:lol:.....:lol:.....

Other than the composers of all that purely contrapuntal choral music from the hundreds of years prior the Baroque era, from which all the Baroque composers learned... but of course.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

senza sordino said:


> I was playing some Handel in class after school this week. My colleague said it sounded very classical compared to my usual, which is Beethoven and later, which he called more dramatic and intense. In his non specialist way, he did describe Baroque well, it's an easier listen, simpler. (Not always, I know)
> 
> I own only a few Baroque CDs. But I'd like to own a few more.
> My collection:
> ...


Telemann - Tafelmusik is a big one.
Bach - Orchestral Suites
Albinoni Complete Concertos Op. 9
Biber Violin Sonatas


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

We have a cd set by Andrew Manze & Richard Egarr called 'The Art of the Violin' - it includes sonatas by Corelli, Mozart, Rebel and Vivaldi. I can't recommend it too highly. We also have Manze cds of Handel's violin sonatas and Biber's Rosary Sonatas. 
'Enjoy' is too feeble a word for what you'd experience if you listened to these. I am going to coin a new verb, '*to heaven*'. :angel:


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Um - excuse me,  but Ingélou & I have just started a group called Baroque Exchange which we could use for people suggesting new music they've discovered & commenting on it, maybe 'leading a seminar' if we have enough members. (Spot the ex-teachers.)

*Please*, if you like Baroque music :angel: & think this will interest you, will you become a member?


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

neoshredder said:


> Telemann - Tafelmusik is a big one.
> Bach - Orchestral Suites
> Albinoni Complete Concertos Op. 9
> Biber Violin Sonatas


Hello neoshredder, which Tafelmusik set do you own?


----------

