# Understanding counterpoint



## Sonata

I was doing a little reading on counterpoint....and let me know if I am (basically) correct. It's essentially writing two melodic lines that interact through the piece, and it's the seperate lines that create the harmony. Right?


----------



## jani

I think its at least 2 melodic lines going at the same time and both of them have to sound " Independent".


----------



## millionrainbows

Sonata said:


> I was doing a little reading on counterpoint....and let me know if I am (basically) correct. It's essentially writing two melodic lines that interact through the piece, and it's the seperate lines that create the harmony. Right?


WIK: [In music, counterpoint is the relationship between voices that are *harmonically interdependent (polyphony),* but i*ndependent in rhythm and contour.*]

What does *harmonically interdependent (polyphonic)* mean here? It means 2 or more voices sounding at once, which implies or creates harmony.

What does *independent in rhythm and contour* mean here? It means that instead of being *heterophonic* _(block chords moved around as separate entities, with a separate melody on top),_ it is *independently polyphonic.*

WIK: [By definition, chords occur when multiple notes sound simultaneously; however, harmonic, "vertical" features are considered secondary and almost incidental when counterpoint is the predominant textural element. Counterpoint focuses on melodic interaction-only secondarily on the harmonies produced by that interaction.]

WIK: [There is a clear distinction between polyphony and counterpoint. Counterpoint generally refers to different *motifs* used against each other, and cycled through in each voice (of which there are at least two) of the piece, whereas polyphony means simply two or more *independent melodies* played simultaneously.]


----------



## Ramako

Who does understand counterpoint?

I think Millionrainbows' answer gives a good idea. Let me just look at the etymology:

The old musical notation, instead of the notes we know today, used _points_. Thus, I suppose you could say that counterpoint translates to counter-_note_ - that is, where there are two or more notes _against_ each other - that is, played at the same time. It is possible to look at the counterpoint of homophonic or harmonic chords, and most common practice music is conscious both of 'vertical' (harmonic) and 'horizontal' (contrapuntal) aspects.


----------



## Mahlerian

millionrainbows said:


> WIK: [There is a clear distinction between polyphony and counterpoint. Counterpoint generally refers to different *motifs* used against each other, and cycled through in each voice (of which there are at least two) of the piece, whereas polyphony means simply two or more *independent melodies* played simultaneously.]


This is why you can (sometimes) find polyphony in popular music, but rarely counterpoint. The more contrapuntal a piece is, the less likely one voice is to dominate the rest, which is why the melodically oriented music of the romantic period is generally less contrapuntal. Popular music, being melodically oriented to a degree far greater than most classical music, almost never employs counterpoint, and if it does it's usually quite simple, so as not to distract from the melody.


----------



## Sonata

I understand Bach was considered a master of counterpoint. Who else handled counterpoint well, and are there there any specific pieces that you'd recommend to listen that are examples of "basic" counterpoint where I could listen and evaluate the score for understanding?

By the way, all the responses were very helpful! Thanks


----------



## Mahlerian

The finale of Mozart's 41st Symphony in C major is a good example, because it switches between homophonic and contrapuntal textures throughout, although a lot of the counterpoint is stretto entries of the same theme. But it's very clearly scored and there's a great passage in the coda that demonstrates counterpoint very well.

The first movement of Mahler's 4th Symphony is full of clear, contrapuntal textures, with the themes darting around the orchestra. For that matter, listen to the second movement of Mahler's 2nd symphony, and note how the second time the A theme appears it takes backstage to a new theme played simultaneously.


----------



## Sonata

Thanks Mahlerian. I love Mahler myself, so those will be some examples that I'll be happy to spend some time on . His scores may be beyond me yet, but my ears can do the work.


----------



## Mahlerian

Glad to help! Don't be afraid of reading Mahler's scores. It could help you familiarize yourself with the layout, as the themes are scattered throughout the orchestra. With most earlier (and many later) scores, you can follow the whole thing looking at just the string group, but with Mahler that's very rarely the case. If you like, you can try to find a piano (2-hands) reduction instead, so you can see the relationships between the parts very clearly.

For contrast, it may also help to listen to (classical) music that has no or almost no counterpoint, such as the Nuages movement of Debussy's Nocturnes for orchestra. Impressionist music is usually resolutely non-contrapuntal, in contrast to the Germanic Late Romantic movement.


----------



## PetrB

Fundamentally and literally -- it is 'point (dot = note) against point.' 
Musically, it is a horizontal affair, line(s) of near equal importance sounding together, and each having an 'melodic' interest to the ear not dependent upon the other.

The rest, next level, is punt contra punt in ratios, 2:1 (in one line, there will be two notes against one note in the other,) 3:1, etc.

Later, textbook rules 'dictate' that opposed motion sounds better, but the direction and shape of up, down the two or more lines make -- oblique, parallel, opposed -- never was and is not an absolute requisite of counterpoint, just the independence of two or more simultaneous independent lines of near equal 'melodic' interest.

[Counterpoint abounds in other repertoire, differently applied than the 'non-18th century north European' style with which most are familiar. 
Schumann, Chopin, Debussy (not the Sirenes for Nocturnes, mentioned above) Charles Ives, and hosts of others have used it more of less, in much of their music.


----------

