# Analysable vs Unanalysable



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

Many pieces you can define the structure at multiple levels, whether it was consiously composed following a model or not. Other pieces simply don't let themselves to be taken apart so easily or there is no consensus among analysts.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Yes, I’d say. But it would be impractical to be asked to choose between them, because one would have to try to analyze both in order to know which is which... and most listeners are ill-equipped to do that unless they have a background in music.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

What is the point of music???? If you need a doctorate in music to work out what is going on then you would eliminate an awful lot of music lovers so for me if it is that complicated I just could not be bothered, the basics of melody, rhythm and form must be detectable for me to enjoy music.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Analysable but wih some unanalysable elements. You gotta keep some mystery. Otherwise, what's the point of life?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Analysis is always in terms of a specific system (a set of conventions and "rules") and utilizes the terminology of that system. Music may seem "unanalyzable" because elements of it defy the conventions and elude the terminology of the system used for analysis, or because they suggest more than one interpretation.

My suspicion is that in music composed before the last decade of the 19th century there is very little in harmonic practice that's truly unanalyzable, and that disagreements among theorists, though they can be expressions of bias or simple errors of perception, may not be incompatible despite their differences. In other words, two different analyses may both be correct, showing that the elements of music can function in more than one way simultaneously within their system. The surprising number of interpretations of the "Tristan chord" (the classic exemplar for this sort of controversy) illustrates all these possibilities, and the Wiki page lays this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tristan_chord I find it interesting that Mayrberger, whose analysis was approved by Wagner himself, makes more sense than Schoenberg, whose classification of the chord as a "vagrant ('it can come from anywhere')" is really a complete evasion and is clearly special pleading on behalf of his rationalization of atonality as a historical necessity. The "Tristan chord" most definitely does _not_ "come from [just] anywhere"! What harmony like this (late Romantic chromatic harmony) requires is not a discarding of our theoretical context but a refinement and a subtilization of it.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2018)

All music can be analysed to some extent, although it may take a while to work out some specifics.............

I can't remember who it was, but there was some music theorist or musicologist who 'cracked' _Le marteau sans maître_ over a period of three years much to Boulez's surprise.

Then there's also Ferneyhough's recent music, much of whose individual elements are formalised through OpenMusic......you can un-boil an egg but a good egg is still delicious, much like Ferneyhough's music.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Does that make an analysable piece of music the analysand?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MarkW said:


> Does that make an analysable piece of music the analysand?


One might couch it in those terms.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2018)

aleazk said:


> Analysable but wih some unanalysable elements. You gotta keep some mystery. Otherwise, what's the point of life?


I think I agree with this. The OP refers explicitly to structure (as opposed to meaning) but what is the point of analysing structure unless it sheds light on meaning - and what do we mean by musical meaning anyway?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I am not interested in analysing music or breaking it up. If it happens while I am listening (perhaps for the 100th time) then all well and good but it is not a criterion that I use to sort music. There should be an option of "it's not important to me".


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

The second category does not exist. There is no unanalyzable music. So the question becomes: Do you like music that is easy to analyze or difficult to analyze? I generally like music that is challenging, whose workings are not immediately obvious.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2018)

EdwardBast said:


> The second category does not exist. There is no unanalyzable music. So the question becomes: Do you like music that is easy to analyze or difficult to analyze? I generally like music that is challenging, whose workings are not immediately obvious.


In fairness, whilst the OP presented the option of 'unanalysable', his explanation said, "Other pieces simply don't let themselves to be taken apart so easily or there is no consensus among analysts".


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

For me, to appreciate music;

first, knowing about the composer, the piece in the line of development, what that development was

second, analyzing, reducing, maybe reworking it into more common patterns if that's helpful for my perusal 

third, memorizing it somewhat to be able to play it - to express myself

if it's not analyzable and reducible, to my liking, then it won't serve me for my expression

"The soul selects her own society, 
Then shuts the door;
On her divine majority
Obtrude no more."


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

We should say "harmonic analysis" unless the OP means some other kind of analysis. And harmonic analysis comes after the fact, and is only appropriate to certain conventional kinds of music. 

Additionally, I don't think analysis should be the basis of listening, unless the OP is referring to a very narrow area of academic music.

So much of listening is intuitive; I don't need a harmonic analysis of The Mickey Mouse Theme in order to grasp it.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

I found this interesting;


Posted on Jun 22, 2011 7:37:03 PM PDT
millionrainbows says:

'Indoctrinated'? What made us REALLY LOVE CM? What won us by our HEARTS? 
Cartoons!
Reply to this post


----------

