# To understand music



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

What does it mean - understand music? Not generally, of course. Single pieces and works. I mean: if music is form of expression - do you have to think all the time "oh, such a beautiful two minutes of ecstasy!" and then "these string are full of hope, but brass section brings a lot of worries!"? If piece of music is titled "Symphony no. X" or "Concerto for bla-bla-bla Y", how can you know how to take it? What does it say? Sometimes I can't really tell why I enjoy the music and what is all about. 

I liked how Hector Berlioz made descriptions to his Symphonie Fantastique. It fills music with images and gives it some kind of story to tell.


----------



## Arnold Schoenberg (Mar 1, 2009)

Aramis said:


> What does it mean - understand music? Not generally, of course. Single pieces and works. I mean: if music is form of expression - do you have to think all the time "oh, such a beautiful two minutes of ecstasy!" and then "these string are full of hope, but brass section brings a lot of worries!"? If piece of music is titled "Symphony no. X" or "Concerto for bla-bla-bla Y", how can you know how to take it? What does it say? Sometimes I can't really tell why I enjoy the music and what is all about.
> 
> I liked how Hector Berlioz made descriptions to his Symphonie Fantastique. It fills music with images and gives it some kind of story to tell.


I don't think that _understand_ is the correct word to use. Music is subjective to the listener, and to try to _understand_ it would imply that it has a definite meaning. For example, some people would listen to black metal and say _'it's just noise, how could anybody listen to that?'_ and some would be taken on a trip to the snowy landscapes of Norway, or be taken back in time. Understand that!


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Unfortunately, we don't know what the composer was feeling at that moment when they write it. That's why conductors exist and another reason why there are so many versions of a specific symphony, concerto, etc.

Sometimes, like Vaughan Williams, you can feel what the piece is about, especially with titles like "The Lark Ascending" or "English Folk Song Suite." He uses rather descriptive titles for his pieces, but not all of them of course.

Sibelius was the same way. Many of his tone poems had descriptive titles like "Finlandia," "Nightride and Sunrise," or "Pohjola's Daughter" for example.

Where the ambiguity begins is with titles like "Piano Concerto No. 2" or "Symphony in G minor." The best thing I can tell you is just feel what their playing and try and form your own interpretations of what the imagery could be, but music is about so much more than creating these mental pictures.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Arnold Schoenberg said:


> For example, some people would listen to black metal and say _'it's just noise, how could anybody listen to that?'_ and some would be taken on a trip to the snowy landscapes of Norway, or be taken back in time. Understand that!


Yes, and those who say "how could anybody listen to that?" do not understand it. They can hate it, say its noisy, but get the meaning - and this is, in my opinion, understanding.



> Unfortunately, we don't know what the composer was feeling at that moment when they write it.


But if its ment to describe something (like, for example, Beethoven's Eroica) its easiest to find the composer's mention.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Aramis said:


> But if its meant to describe something (like, for example, Beethoven's Eroica) its easiest to find the composer's mention.


Well sure, but as I said nobody knows what the composer was feeling when they wrote the piece, unless, the interpreter of the work, which would be the conductor, knew the composer and asked him what was going through his mind when he composed the piece, but even then, we still don't know.

As I said, that is why conductors exist. They are merely the translators of the music world. All they have are the notes on the page. It is up to them to do the research on the composer and read about their life and really learn as much as they can. They are, after all, the ones trying to get the notes off the sheet, so it will have some kind of meaning.

Titles are just that, they're titles. They don't really mean that much, because as Schoenberg said, it's all subjective to the listener.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

JTech82 said:


> As I said, that is why conductors exist. They are merely the translators of the music world. All they have are the notes on the page. It is up to them to do the research on the composer and read about their life and really learn as much as they can. They are, after all, the ones trying to get the notes off the sheet, so it will have some kind of meaning.


I always thought that they are more like policemen standing on the crossroads and their function is to keep it all together with totally conventional moves. The most prosaic member of orchestra.



> it's all subjective to the listener


Still, title is a good hint for a listener.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Aramis said:


> I always thought that they are more like policemen standing on the crossroads and their function is to keep it all together with totally conventional moves. The most prosaic member of orchestra.


They're more than just "policemen." They are the ones that interpret the piece of music being played.



> Still, title is a good hint for a listener.


That's your opinion. A piece of music is still subjective.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Aramis said:


> What does it mean - understand music? Not generally, of course. Single pieces and works. I mean: if music is form of expression - do you have to think all the time "oh, such a beautiful two minutes of ecstasy!" and then "these string are full of hope, but brass section brings a lot of worries!"? If piece of music is titled "Symphony no. X" or "Concerto for bla-bla-bla Y", how can you know how to take it? What does it say? Sometimes I can't really tell why I enjoy the music and what is all about.
> 
> I liked how Hector Berlioz made descriptions to his Symphonie Fantastique. It fills music with images and gives it some kind of story to tell.


Yes, but Symphonie Fantastique is program music, as are for example Vivaldi's Four Seasons or the Strauss tone poems. In such works the composer has some clearly stated extra-musical ideas. For the rest it's best not to analyse things to death and worry about 'not getting it.' Just enjoy the music. Whatever mood it sets is the right one if it works for you. Besides , it doesn't take a genius to tell the difference between happy, sad, angry or mysterious music or whatever.


----------



## Lang (Sep 30, 2008)

IMO music is _very_ specific, but about things that are not concrete.


----------



## Guest (Mar 10, 2009)

jhar26 said:


> Yes, but Symphonie Fantastique is program music, as are for example Vivaldi's Four Seasons or the Strauss tone poems. .


The work you quoted "Vivaldi's 4 seasons" is an interesting work, *is it realy program music? *It is a collection of 4 concertos which were originaly Op8_ Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'invention_, I don't mean to do a 'Yagen'  just making an observation, I suppose any one could group 3 or 4 pieces to gether and call it program music.


----------



## JTech82 (Feb 6, 2009)

Lang said:


> IMO music is _very_ specific, but about things that are not concrete.


That's very true. I can agree with this.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Andante said:


> The work you quoted "Vivaldi's 4 seasons" is an interesting work, *is it realy program music? *It is a collection of 4 concertos which were originaly Op8_ Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'invention_, I don't mean to do a 'Yagen'  just making an observation, I suppose any one could group 3 or 4 pieces to gether and call it program music.


Yes, but since they are the first four of the 12 "Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'invention" concertos they were already grouped together anyway. There was a sonnet for each of the four to go along with it also . And it was made clear which part of each sonnet was intended for which movement. Clearly program music in my opinion.


----------



## Kuhlau (Oct 1, 2008)

Andante said:


> The work you quoted "Vivaldi's 4 seasons" is an interesting work, *is it really program music? *It is a collection of 4 concertos which were originally Op8_ Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'invention_ ...


While what you say is partly true, Andante, Vivaldi _did_ head the parts of his score for The Four Seasons with texts related to specific musical pictures - images which, presumably, he intended players to paint through their playing. As these texts referred directly to happenings in each of the seasons, these concerti should therefore be heard as programmatic. And as you've indicated, the four concerti belong to a wider group of 12 known as The Contest Between Harmony & Invention.

FK


----------



## Tapkaara (Apr 18, 2006)

To paraphrase Stravinsky:

"Music is incapable of expressing anything but itself."


----------



## Guest (Mar 10, 2009)

*jhar26 and Kuhlau * You are right of course and I agree, I was thinking along different paths and put my thoughts down much too early. 
I.e. [all music could be described as program music]


----------



## Guest (Mar 10, 2009)

Here's Berlioz' own comment on his program for Symphonie Fantastique:


> The purpose of the program is not... to give a detailed account of what the composer has tried to do by means of the orchestra. It is precisely the opposite: the program is to fill the gaps inevitably left in the development of the dramatic plan by the limitations of musical utterance....
> 
> _f the composer held the... views about the expressive powers of music which are imputed to him, he would certainly not have supplied a program; for on those views he would necessarily consider the program a useless duplication of the music._


_

And here's Berlioz on the kind of music he thought he was writing:



The particular kind of music which we shall call genre instrumental expressif is most closely related to romanticism; ...in the works of Beethoven and Weber, a poetic idea is everywhere manifest, but music is wholly in command, with no help from words to give it precise expression....

Click to expand...

 (emphasis mine)_


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6 (Dec 7, 2007)

Andante said:


> *jhar26 and Kuhlau *
> I.e. [all music could be described as program music]


Definitely not. For example, no matter how much I insist, I can never find a program fitting Hummel's works.


----------



## marinermark (Aug 23, 2008)

Ideally, one could listen to the music and develop a mental picture; then read composer's notes, which would correspond with the picture. That rarely happens; I've never tried it. Even some of the best examples I can think of - Debussy's "La Mer", Smetana's "Die Moldau" Vaughan Williams' "Antarctic Symphony" are mentioned in retrospect. "Understanding the music" is something that has escaped me in over 50 years of listening to classical music. I'm not a musician; so I go with what interests me aurally and emotionally.


----------



## Margaret (Mar 16, 2009)

marinermark said:


> Ideally, one could listen to the music and develop a mental picture; then read composer's notes, which would correspond with the picture. That rarely happens; I've never tried it.


Isn't that how you're taught how to "appreciate" music? At least in the one music appreciation class I took that was what we did.

Unfortunately the piece the teacher picked for us to do this for was "Ride of the Valkyries". I was the only one in the class honest enough to say that what it made me think of was Elmer Fudd and Bugs Bunny while the phrase "kill the wabbit" kept going through my head. And I know darned well everyone else in there grew up watching that cartoon same as I did.

Hmm, I wonder how Wagner would feel about that cartoon now being the "understanding" many people have for that piece?


----------



## Kuhlau (Oct 1, 2008)

Margaret, that's hilarious!

I take your point, though - learning to appreciate music by understanding its (or attaching to it a) programme can be a useful exercise. Of course, as my own impressions of classical music show, this necessarily means a certain amount of subjectivity comes into play. But hey, if it helps people find a way in to the music, who cares?

FK


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

Margaret said:


> Unfortunately the piece the teacher picked for us to do this for was "Ride of the Valkyries". I was the only one in the class honest enough to say that what it made me think of was Elmer Fudd and Bugs Bunny while the phrase "kill the wabbit" kept going through my head.


Even for a Wagner fan of long standing like myself, it's not difficult to see how this kind of thing can happen. It becomes a risk, the moment a piece of music is extracted from its context and made to stand on its own where it was never intended to be (particularly in a case like this where the dramatic context is crucial), but also I bet the teacher played a purely orchestral version, without the voices - am I right? That would make it a double whammy.

I still remember the first time I heard 'Ride of the Valkyries' in context, integrated with the whole of _Die Walkure_, and I was amazed that something that had been so overplayed as a lollipop could become so exhilarating, so powerful, so overwhelming, in fact.


----------



## Margaret (Mar 16, 2009)

Elgarian said:


> Even for a Wagner fan of long standing like myself, it's not difficult to see how this kind of thing can happen. It becomes a risk, the moment a piece of music is extracted from its context and made to stand on its own where it was never intended to be (particularly in a case like this where the dramatic context is crucial), but also I bet the teacher played a purely orchestral version, without the voices - am I right? That would make it a double whammy.
> 
> I still remember the first time I heard 'Ride of the Valkyries' in context, integrated with the whole of _Die Walkure_, and I was amazed that something that had been so overplayed as a lollipop could become so exhilarating, so powerful, so overwhelming, in fact.


Yes, it was just the purely orchestral version. (I haven't tried Wagner's operas yet as I've read that they're probably best left for later when I've had more experience with operas. So I've never heard a version with vocals.)

Now I *like* what Warner Brothers did and what Disney did with "Fantasia." I think those cartoons were a fun way of getting kids to experience classical music without forcing it on them. And if you think about it, introducing young children to _Wagner_, who's pretty heavy weight, that's a bold move and quite the challenge which they succeeded at because generations of kids loved that cartoon. But those cartoons do have the side effect of leaving an indelible impression of what the music is about.

Not a bad thing when it comes to Disney's interpretation of "Night on Bald Mountain" or "Ave Maria". Even "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" though I doubt Dukas was picturing a mouse as the apprentice. Still those were, I think, close to what the composer had in mind.

With the Bugs Bunny cartoon, well, it actually would take something like my seeing the opera in its full glory to overwrite that initial impression. As long as I hear an orchestral version of "Ride of the Valkyries" I will always think "Kill the wabbit!"


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

Margaret said:


> As long as I hear an orchestral version of "Ride of the Valkyries" I will always think "Kill the wabbit!"


Maybe it's a good thing that he just played an orchestral version, as long as the Bugs Bunny image was so dominant. The vocals transform the music so entirely that you may find - when you finally do hear the complete version - that you don't get drawn into the 'Kill the wabbit' thinking loop!


----------



## Kuhlau (Oct 1, 2008)

Elgarian said:


> The vocals transform the music so entirely that you may find - when you finally do hear the complete version - that you don't get drawn into the 'Kill the wabbit' thinking loop!


Quite so. It's far more potent with the vocals.

FK


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

Kuhlau said:


> Quite so. It's far more potent with the vocals.


Hoyaho-oh! Hoyaho-oh! Hoyahoooooh, hoyahoooooooohhhh! ....


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Kuhlau said:


> Quite so. It's far more potent with the vocals.
> 
> FK


To me the instrumental version sounds like a John Williams tune for a science fiction movie alà Star Wars or Return of the Jedi. Still a mighty tune though.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Elgarian said:


> Hoyaho-oh! Hoyaho-oh! Hoyahoooooh, hoyahoooooooohhhh! ....


I used that once as the title for a thread at another forum and someone suggested that instead of my regular Martha avatar I should use this one instead.


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

That is one very strangely thoughtful valkyrie. (I suppose she plays a small laptop piano as she rides?)


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Elgarian said:


> I suppose she plays a small laptop as she rides?)


Yes - but could it be considered a musical instrument???


----------



## Elgarian (Jul 30, 2008)

jhar26 said:


> Yes - but could it be considered a musical instrument???


Priceless!


----------



## marinermark (Aug 23, 2008)

Fortunately I never looked beyond "Ride of the Valkyries" either to the entire opera (as I'm not really an opera fan), or any comic association. I just enjoy hearing it as an exciting piece of music.


----------

