# Does music need a premise?



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

So I was just thinking, is the best music "about" something (whether it be the composer's state of mind, a story, a landscape, etc.), or is absolute music the best? Or what about musical drama?


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

Hmmm.

I'm thinking of a composer, like Jean Cras whom I've been listening to thanks to this forum, and reading his liner notes. 

Being a marine sailor, he says that there isn't a single verse of music, which wasn't inspired by his experience of the natural elements. 

Does that form a premise? 

Or is Cras saying that his music is inspired, in a pre-critical; pre-contemplative state?

Then again, the best music can always be construed as rich enough to be 'about something'. 

Do you know any examples of music, which is not about anything? 

Lutoslawski excluded of course


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

It doesn't really matter. A good piece with extra-musical content is better than a mediocre piece of absolute music and vice versa. I voted for "musical drama" for no other reason than that I'm passionate about opera, but I listen to lots of other stuff as well.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

I still don't understand the question so I can't vote!


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I voted other though I probably should have voted "It doesn't matter.". For me, even absolute music is about something: form, setting up an expectation but then going off in the unexpected direction, expanding traditions while more or less following them, or whatever. These may be abstract concepts but they are still what the music is about.

In classical I like formal music (by that I mean music that explores form) but I also enjoy program music. In the same way, I can enjoy a complex progressive rock epic with lyrics that make no sense at all, while equally enjoying a good singer / songwriter story telling ballad.

I would say about the only aspect of music I don't enjoy is virtuosity. Sure I admire a complicated piece, but music is not a sporting event and conquering difficulty in and of itself is not a goal. Virtuosity is only admirable when it aides in accomplishing expression. It often does, but sometimes I think people confuse really fast playing with good music.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

This is actually pretty hard for me. I'd go with "It doesn't matter" because I love both abstract and programmatic, but then again, it _does _matter for me. Each are good in their own way.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Doesn't really matter to me. It's just the sounds that I like, whether there is a story or something else attached, I don't really care. Often, we non-expert listeners have a sketchy knowledge of the story anyway. I mean, who has actually read the _Kalevala_ so they could better appreciate Sibelius' music? Often I'm more interested in what was going on in the life of the composer at the time than the actual narrative or whatever of the music...


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Kopachris said:


> So I was just thinking, is the best music "about" something (whether it be the composer's state of mind, a story, a landscape, etc.), or is absolute music the best? Or what about musical drama?


John Cage's _4'33"_. Music about silence. :lol:


----------



## danae (Jan 7, 2009)

Weston said:


> I would say about the only aspect of music I don't enjoy is virtuosity. Sure I admire a complicated piece, but music is not a sporting event and conquering difficulty in and of itself is not a goal. Virtuosity is only admirable when it aides in accomplishing expression. It often does, but sometimes I think people confuse really fast playing with good music.


I totally agree.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

How could it possibly matter? There is great music in every one of these genres.


----------



## danae (Jan 7, 2009)

Although I would also vote "it doesn't really matter", my personal preferences lie within the realm of "absolute" music. However, this distinction (absolutists vs. referentialists, as Leonard B. Meyer calls them) can no longer stand.


----------



## Comus (Sep 20, 2010)

I also have to vote that it doesn't matter, but I will still view the music as absolute if it's a tone poem or an opera.


----------



## Edward Elgar (Mar 22, 2006)

If I had to pick, I'd chose absolute music. In the great scheme of things what really matters is the quality of the music, but if music can stand alone without lyrics or standard associations, it has reached the pinnacle of human expression through sound.


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

Edward Elgar said:


> If I had to pick, I'd chose absolute music. In the great scheme of things what really matters is the quality of the music, but if music can stand alone without lyrics or standard associations, it has reached the pinnacle of human expression through sound.


Hmm... kinda ironic.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

Kopachris said:


> Hmm... kinda ironic.


Not particularly, if you think about it as being human expression by human means. Symbolically, at any rate, I imagine it would be a triumph to have something that is exclusively human, because, let's face it, the human voice is a product of nature, not humanity. The external musical instrument was, however, a product of humanity.


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

World Violist said:


> Not particularly, if you think about it as being human expression by human means. Symbolically, at any rate, I imagine it would be a triumph to have something that is exclusively human, because, let's face it, the human voice is a product of nature, not humanity. The external musical instrument was, however, a product of humanity.


I just thought it was kind of funny that Elgar's most well-known composition is his Enigma Variations. Since each variation is representative of someone he knew (and because of the potential "hidden meaning"), the piece falls into the category of tone poems, rather than absolute music. 

I get what you mean, though. :tiphat:


----------



## janealex (Apr 7, 2010)

I think you should go for musical drama, through this you can better explain your music, best of luck.


----------



## Edward Elgar (Mar 22, 2006)

janealex said:


> I think you should go for musical drama, through this you can better explain your music, best of luck.


But if music can stand on its own without having to be spoon-fed information about why it sounds the way it does, doesn't it reach a higher level of expression?


----------



## Dulcamara (Sep 22, 2010)

In a way, perhaps the fact that people's opinions have varied considerably (as seen in the poll results) ultimately may mean that it truly matters not. But in a way, I don't know if it's possible to compose music that is not about anything, even if, as you say, it is only about the composer's state of mind. Even if the composer never explicitly discusses their state of mind (or is even consciously aware of it), that doesn't mean a premise isn't there. Of course... That would be a bit hard to prove either way... Perhaps what matters is whether or not the listener perceives a premise.

Anyway, I'm all for being inclusive, so I voted that it doesn't matter either way.


----------



## drth15 (Dec 12, 2007)

*Musical Meaning*

I voted 'It doesn't matter' because, as several have stated, great examples occur in all categories. But a few thoughts on the underdog;

'Tone poems' received no votes, but consider 'Ma Vlast', 'Don Quixote', 'Tapiola.' All truly great works. Also, there are symphonic masterworks at least clearly inspired by extra-musical thought, like Beethoven's 'Pastorale', Dvorak's 'New World', Mendelssohn's 'Scottish.'

Listened to Ormandy's 'Grand Canyon Suite' earlier this summer. Tone poems definitely rank first in guilty pleasures!


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

_not "about" anything _for me


----------

