# Beginner/''Stupid''/Quick Questions Thread



## Haabrann (Mar 30, 2019)

How about it? I've seen such continuously running threads in other special interrest forums, and they are often very useful.

I love to read about music while listening to it. Sometimes you've got a quick question about a particular piece or composer. Sometimes you've got a more general one, but it may be a very basic one compared to the discussion going on here, or it may be wildly off, and you're emebarrassed to ask or to clog up existing threads with it.

Some personal examples:

-I was reading about historically informed performance/practise, and then it struck me that top non-HIP violinists often play on centuries old violins. Can such violins accomodate steel strings and modern pitch, as in handle the tension? How do they modify them? How about the shorter neck?

-Listening to Tallis' Spem in alium, I was thinking about how the music appear to just ''be'', it just _is_, and it fills the room like a multi-dimensional tapestry. Later music appears to have much more of a direction and a goal. In an effort to figure out how and why, I was reading about modal early modal music and about modal jazz and Kind of Blue, because I seemed to find some similarities, on an intutive basis. But I couldn't find a clear answer. Am I way off, if so which direction should I go in (as a layman) to get a better understanding?

With the wealth of resources here, such a thread may be useful to a lot of people. How about it? I couldn't find an existing one from a search, so I figured I'd just start one. If it is a stupid idea it will sink, if not it will float.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Seems like a good idea but could get a bit messy with possible answers (and subsequent elaborations and disagreements on them) and new questions all mixed up together? Your second question is something that interests me. Some music has a sense of a narrative and seems to "take you somewhere", while with other music you are "already there"! For a long time I found I liked the former much more than the latter but less so now. I'm sure there will be members who can explain what is happening in each "type".


----------



## rice (Mar 23, 2017)

I think we need a thread like this.
In many other threads people go into difficult discussion very quickly because they are so knowledgeable.
It's intimidating for a beginner like me to jump into the conversation.

I have a question about how multiple movements of a composition are addressed.
Obviously "1st movement, 2nd movement" is clear and precise.
Having the tempo indication like "Allegro ma non troppo" would be helpful to identify the movements on the score I guess?
But on some CDs I saw some passages are labelled "Allegro - XXX - XXX - XXX ....." 
What is the point to list all the tempo change in a movement? Some are really, really long! If the listeners want that much information they would be reading the score, right?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

rice said:


> *I think we need a thread like this.*


As a teacher / lecturer I encourage people to ask questions no matter how 'silly' or 'trivial' they might appear on the grounds that there are probably quite a few others who wanted to ask the same question! It is the art of good teaching - no question is 'trivial' enough to be despised!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

rice said:


> I think we need a thread like this.
> In many other threads people go into difficult discussion very quickly because they are so knowledgeable.
> It's intimidating for a beginner like me to jump into the conversation.
> 
> ...


It would appear that these are the tempo divisions the composer has marked into the score. Like the movements of some of the late Beethoven quartets.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Enthusiast said:


> Seems like a good idea but could get a bit messy with possible answers (and subsequent elaborations and disagreements on them) and new questions all mixed up together? Your second question is something that interests me. Some music has a sense of a narrative and seems to "take you somewhere", while with other music you are "already there"! For a long time I found I liked the former much more than the latter but less so now. I'm sure there will be members who can explain what is happening in each "type".


I'm not OCD (afaik), but I see the messy point. For example, in the OP, it would be nice to have the latter part of the post in a thread devoted to Tallis or Spem. The obvious solution would be for someone (moderator) to provide links to other threads, but seeing as how every thread tends to wander off somewhere, probably not practical


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

"I love to read about music while listening to it."

One of the great pleasures in life. :cheers:


----------



## Haabrann (Mar 30, 2019)

Personally, I'm a fan of meandering, loosely related but ''off topic'' discussion. You often pick up stuff you didn't know you'd like to know. So the messy point wouldn't worry me at all.

From what I've seen in such threads in other forums, they often go technical and/or off-topic, but they're quickly reeled in when a new question appears. Questions are answered as a rule, then a discussion may take place. To me, a bit messiness just adds to the relaxed, ''anything goes'' athmosphere, and thus may lower the threshold to ask basic/''silly'' questions.

I fully agree with the notion that there are no such thing as ''stupid'' or ''trivial'' questions. But there's a time and place for everything. Having a thread going with a relaxed, low-threshold and supportive athmosphere could be a good place for such things.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

rice said:


> I have a question about how multiple movements of a composition are addressed.
> Obviously "1st movement, 2nd movement" is clear and precise.
> Having the tempo indication like "Allegro ma non troppo" would be helpful to identify the movements on the score I guess?
> But on some CDs I saw some passages are labelled "Allegro - XXX - XXX - XXX ....."
> What is the point to list all the tempo change in a movement? Some are really, really long! If the listeners want that much information they would be reading the score, right?


It's just the hobgoblin of consistency at work. Because most movements of instrumental works lack titles or other identifiers beyond "first movement" or "second movement," tempo marks became the default identifier. If one reads Adagio for the second movement of a symphony, one has a good idea of what to expect - it's the standard slow movement. If one reads Adagio-Allegro molto for a first movement, one is pretty sure it starts with a slow introduction followed by a sonata form structure. In most cases, the sequence of tempi contains useful information, so the practice is followed consistently, even in those relatively rare cases where it borders on the silly.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

rice said:


> Having the tempo indication like "Allegro ma non troppo" would be helpful to identify the movements on the score I guess?
> But on some CDs I saw some passages are labelled "Allegro - XXX - XXX - XXX ....."
> What is the point to list all the tempo change in a movement? Some are really, really long! If the listeners want that much information they would be reading the score, right?


Usually, it's the 'fantasie' pieces that are labelled that way, 
Mozart K475:
https://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Fantasia-Allegro-Andantino-allegro/dp/B000VIT0R0
Adagio - Allegro - Andantino - Più allegro -Tempo I

or Chopin Op.49, for example:
https://www.discogs.com/Chopin-Jörg-Demus-Piano/release/8382676
Tempo Di Marcia - Doppio Movimento - Lento Sostenuto - Tempo I

or Schubert D940:
https://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Fantasy-Op-103-Allegro-moderato/dp/B0018NGTO4
Allegro molto moderato - Largo - Allegro vivace - Tempo I

I think it's because fantasies are supposed to be improvisatory in nature, going through various mood shifts. Marking one as simply Adagio only because it starts off as Adagio isn't really a good description of the character of the piece.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Haabrann said:


> -Listening to Tallis' Spem in alium, I was thinking about how the music appear to just ''be'', it just _is_, and it fills the room like a multi-dimensional tapestry. Later music appears to have much more of a direction and a goal. In an effort to figure out how and why, I was reading about modal early modal music and about modal jazz and Kind of Blue, because I seemed to find some similarities, on an intutive basis. But I couldn't find a clear answer. Am I way off, if so which direction should I go in (as a layman) to get a better understanding?


Later music is tonal, which in the common practice period means various elaborations and variations of tonic-->dominant-->tonic. That gives a clear narrative to common practice tonal music.

16th century music doesn't work with large scale tonal areas like this. Harmony and cadences arise from the interaction of independent voices and a lot of the accidentals (sharps and flats) result from rules of counterpoint. Composers didn't think in terms of moving decisively in the sharp or flat direction away from or toward a home key, as they would later. Consequently there's less of a feeling of "going somewhere."

I like Miles Davis and John Coltrane a lot, but don't know enough to say what parallels they have to 16th century music. You're probably onto something.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Re steel strings on old violins. Don't do it! Those violins were not designed to take the higher stress and tension that steel has. Using synthetic strings or real gut (expensive) is what should be done. You could raise the height of the saddle to reduce the downward force on the bridge, but take it to highly skilled luthier for the job.


----------



## Haabrann (Mar 30, 2019)

Hey thank sisorhythm , that's exactly the kind of thing I was looking for!

Now, I won't pretend to understand that to the full extent. My theory knowledge is so rusty that it is basically non-existent at this point, and it was never more than the crude basics to begin with. But it is the clear answer I was searching for, and provides multiple directions for me to get the fuller understanding. Now I can use it as a backdrop or frame when reading further on the matter, and then go back and forth between what you said, the music, and more readings, which is great help.

Thanks, mbhaub. I don't play the violin and I'll never get my hands on a Stradivarius. But reading the usual critique of HIP coming from traditionalists, one point is often the sound from period instruments. Modern sound better. Yet non-HIP virtuosos often plays those famous, centuries old instuments. If they play them with gut strings, it is period instruments, which seems contradictory.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

All of those are silly questions? They sound high brow to me. I'll ask an ignorant Hoosier hilljack question. What the hades is an Opus? And what does the number of the opus mean?


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Oldhoosierdude said:


> All of those are silly questions? They sound high brow to me. I'll ask an ignorant Hoosier hilljack question. What the hades is an Opus? And what does the number of the opus mean?


I believe it's just a term used for categorization of a set of works. For example, the Op. 18 SQs by Beethoven.


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2019)

Yes, but 'opus' sometimes refers to more than one composition - how does that work?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piano_Trios,_Op._1_(Beethoven)


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> Yes, but 'opus' sometimes refers to more than one composition - how does that work?
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piano_Trios,_Op._1_(Beethoven)


"Opus" simply means "a work". A "work" may consist of six string quartets, or a single symphony, or whatever. I don't think there are any rules. Just to confuse matters further, the plural of "opus" is "opera".

Interesting story: After his Hammerklavier, Beethoven promised his publisher "an opus of three sonatas," recalling his Op. 31 set. But it took quite a while to write them, so they were published with separate opus numbers (Opp. 109, 110, and 111).


----------



## Guest (Oct 11, 2019)

KenOC said:


> the plural of "opus" is "opera".


or 'opuses' .


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

mbhaub said:


> Re steel strings on old violins. Don't do it! Those violins were not designed to take the higher stress and tension that steel has. Using synthetic strings or real gut (expensive) is what should be done. You could raise the height of the saddle to reduce the downward force on the bridge, but take it to highly skilled luthier for the job.


I think Heifetz used gut strings!


----------



## Haabrann (Mar 30, 2019)

Just want to say tanks (again) to mbhaub isorhythm for answers to my questions. My replies were awaiting moderation, and they just came up. Don't wanna appear to be impolite! For my part, there's going to be more embarrassing questions in the future!


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> Yes, but 'opus' sometimes refers to more than one composition - how does that work?
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piano_Trios,_Op._1_(Beethoven)


An opus number refers to a publication, regardless of how many works are involved. It's whatever is published under the one cover. In the Baroque and Classical eras it was common to publish works like sonatas, symphonies and concertos in sets of twelve (Vivaldi, L'estro armonico) or six (CPE Bach Prussian Sonatas), and eventually three, when the average length of works got longer (Beethoven Op. 31 and Op. 59).


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Young Debussy had his string quartet published as Opus 10. This was to make it seem as if he had a reasonable musical pedigree; in fact, Opp. 1 through 9 do not exist.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

KenOC said:


> Young Debussy had his string quartet published as Opus 10. This was to make it seem as if he had a reasonable musical pedigree; in fact, Opp. 1 through 9 do not exist.


I hadn't realised that Ken - I do still learn something every day.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

DavidA said:


> I think Heifetz used gut strings!


 Yes, he did. Heifetz and gut strings:
https://www.damianstrings.com/try_gut_strings.htm


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Larkenfield said:


> "I love to read about music while listening to it."
> 
> One of the great pleasures in life. :cheers:


What I meant specifically is reading about a composer's life or certain works while listening to his or her music. Not always, but sometimes, for example, reading about a Chopin Nocturne while listening to it can be particularly illuminating. One absorbs the atmosphere of it all and I find it easy to imagine most listeners doing this at one time or another in their lives. That is what I imagine as one of life's great pleasures for those who love the music.


----------



## Forsooth (Apr 17, 2018)

Larkenfield said:


> "I love to read about music while listening to it."
> 
> One of the great pleasures in life. :cheers:


 Are you referring to reading about music while listening? Or beer?


----------

