# A question about spacing



## Guest (Jul 23, 2013)

This is something that has always puzzled me.

And the recent rash of modern/dissonance threads has made me wonder even more.

How is it that dissonance (whatever it means) got to be the defining quality of modernism in music?

Why is it that the space between one note and another, vertically, is virtually the only thing that people talk about when they talk about "modern" music? And not just any people, people who listen to classical music, frequently if not exclusively.

Modern music does have other qualities than the distance between one pitch and another. Why is that that one is the only one that seems to matter whenever anyone is talking about it, for good or for ill? So much so, that music that is not noticably discordant is nonetheless called "dissonant" by its detractors. So much so that "dissonant" is practically code for "I don't like it," regardless of how much dissonance there is in any particular piece.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

People often let a little stand for a lot when they're talking about something they don't especially care for. Nevertheless, people come by an interest in "dissonance" honestly, sometimes. When one of the most famous living composers describes his own work as facilitating "the emancipation of dissonance," people are going to talk about it. Charles Rosen, who was hardly unsympathetic to modernism, makes a great deal about the subject near the outset of his book on Schoenberg:



> The primary means of musical expression is dissonance. This is true at least for Western music since the Renaissance. There are secondary factors, of course--rhythm, tone color, accent--but they are all subordinate to dissonance and to some extent dependent on it.


It's not just in modern music that dissonance looms large! (Incidentally, Rosen goes on to clear up some common misconceptions about the subject, and to make some helpful distinctions between vertical and horizontal dissonance with respect to Schoenberg.)

I don't mention Rosen as a final word on the subject, of course--just as an explanation of the interest/obsession. And I'm interested in other subjects as well!


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I was a pioneer in this critique: 

http://www.talkclassical.com/22157-thread-people-who-think.html


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2013)

some guy said:


> Why is it that the space between one note and another, vertically


Genuine question this...so no snorting at the back there...

What is the significance of the word 'vertical'? Can there be 'horizontal' spaces?


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2013)

Mac, Vertical refers to harmony, horizontal to time. Any rests between notes are horizontal spaces.

I'm only puzzled by attention paid to the vertical ones. And by the apparent dislike of smaller spaces.

aleazk, you are indeed a pioneer. If only I had noticed that thread when it first came out, I too could have been aggravated by all the stupid remarks you got. And I could have cheered you on. Well, consider yourself cheered.:cheers:


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

some guy said:


> This is something that has always puzzled me.
> 
> And the recent rash of modern/dissonance threads has made me wonder even more.
> 
> ...


What about noise music that you love, do they have any of these features in writing?


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2013)

Not sure I understand your question.

But I'll give it a shot anyway.

Noise has timbre and volume and (sometimes) pitch. Relative pitch. Often the (vertical) distance between any two pitches is fairly small.

Some of it is drone. Some of it is rhythmical.

The sounds are mostly pretty complex, though sometimes some of them are simple.


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

I think listeners are more tolerant to dissonant chords than to dissonant tone sequences.

I think atonal melodies are more off-putting because melodies examplify the kind of linear, coherent and meaningful process we associate with speech or language in general. There seems to be a great dependence of each tone of a melody to fit in with all the others so as to create the impression of a coherent whole. Perhaps like a person is only able to speak within the limits of their individual voice range, or key, so to speak (with which the listener is familiar).

Pitches that are too distant from the present key are as irritating and discomforting as if your mother suddenly utter a word in your father's voice or vice versa.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I guess it's because keys (and chords) are probably the easiest thing for most people to talk about. We can go on all day long. Issues like timbre, instrumentation, structure, and probably even meter are harder for most people to talk about.


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2013)

Andreas, you're talking about two different things as if they were the same thing--"atonal melodies" and "pitches... too distant from the present key."

A melody in a piece that has no key cannot have _any_ pitches that are distant from a key.

And (it is so tiring to have to make this point over and over again) "off-putting" TO WHOM?

Really peeps, no music is off-putting. Any particular piece can be off-putting to any particular listener, sure.

"We" are really not a uniform, monolithic body of listeners who react the same way to everything, truly "we" are not.

Does this point really have to keep being made? Jeepers!!:scold:


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2013)

some guy said:


> "We" are really not a uniform, monolithic body of listeners who react the same way to everything, truly "we" are not.


"Resistance is futile!"


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2013)

Hahaha, it's true.

I should just shut up and get in line, huh?


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2013)

Well, I've found my cell in the hive quite comfortable...but that [email protected] buzzing!


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

some guy said:


> How is it that dissonance (whatever it means) got to be the defining quality of modernism in music?


I'll use this definition of dissonance: tones played concurrently having relatively close frequencies that result in beating (amplitude variations). I'm not sure dissonance is the _defining_ quality for those who dislike modern music, but I can imagine how it could become an very important quality.

Unlike many modern works with less dissonance (e.g. by Berg or Schoenberg) a highly dissonant work like Ligeti's _Atmospheres_ can create a very unpleasant feeling to some people. Schoenberg's 3rd string quartet may sound "odd" in that it may lack aspects of music that some people have grown familiar with, but Ligeti's _Atmospheres_ can sound severely unpleasant. After I listen, I feel as though my ears _actually_ hurt. Others may not have an unpleasant physical sensation, but dissonance is often described as unpleasant in some way. While people may not like unfamiliar works, they likely will react more strongly to unpleasant works than merely unfamiliar works. So perhaps people who dislike modern music call out dissonance because it is the feature they most understand that they also find the most unpleasant.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

some guy said:


> And (it is so tiring to have to make this point over and over again) "off-putting" TO WHOM?
> 
> Really peeps, no music is off-putting. Any particular piece can be off-putting to any particular listener, sure.


I think the answer to your question is in the last sentence above - the particular listener who is saying the music is off-putting. The question then becomes, "Is that listener's experience shared by many others?" If so, it may be an interesting thing to discuss. I think it's reasonable for people to believe their own beliefs are shared by many others. Of course, that belief could be false.


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2013)

mmsbls said:


> I think the answer to your question is in the last sentence above - the particular listener who is saying the music is off-putting. The question then becomes, "Is that listener's experience shared by many others?" If so, it may be an interesting thing to discuss. I think it's reasonable for people to believe their own beliefs are shared by many others. Of course, that belief could be false.


Your belief that the belief that others share your beliefs is shared by at least one other person here. That is demonstrably true: thank god for some certainty here!


----------



## Andreas (Apr 27, 2012)

some guy said:


> Andreas, you're talking about two different things as if they were the same thing--"atonal melodies" and "pitches... too distant from the present key."
> 
> A melody in a piece that has no key cannot have _any_ pitches that are distant from a key.
> 
> ...


You're right, two different things. Punctual dissonance in an otherwise consonant environment. Like the tics of someone with Tourette's. And (near) absolute dissonance as in a twelve-tone row. But the latter is, in a sense, the most extreme case of the former.

Off-putting to whom? To those who are put off by it. There might not be a non-tautological way of putting it.

But more to the point of you initial post: instrumentation, staging, structure/form etc. can also be characteristic elements of modern music. However, dissonance does stand out as the most defining element.

Why? I think the lion share of the listership is simply clinging to tonality. For what reason, I'm not sure. I think they'd be willing to put up with avantgarde/experimental techniques easily as long as the music stays predominantly tonal.

Perhaps dissonances cause some physiological stress on the hearing apparatus. Like a bitter/toxic taste, if you like. Maybe it's just a matter of developing the taste - or of being able to develop it. Every first ever glass of liquor tastes like nail polish remover. But some turn out to like it.


----------

