Advancements since the 20th century?

I'm having trouble finding much (maybe a visit to the library is in order?) on this. What new compositional techniques (broad term) have been utilized since Stravinsky? A discussion on this would be nice, as it would surely bring out some interesting bits on composition itself.

So? What has technically changed since?

Quote Mining's FUN!

Better question is: what hasn't changed since?

Eh. I mean part of me wants to make the argument that nothing's changed since 1890.

Many composers developed different systems of establishing tonality.

Uh... Nah no one did that before 1950. *kaff* the entire history of western music *kaff*

Minimalism and incidental music is pretty notable.

Look at the Bolero for earlier than 1970 minimalism. Incidental music goes back as far as Shakespeare and Greek Tragedy.

Electronic music caused a great stir.

Futurists. (1920-ish)

Then we have timbre music.

Because timbre wasn't a big deal for say, opera writers in Italy. (Why a castrati instead of a female?)

Many composers began experimenting with composing for microtonal instruments.

You mean like the well-tempered clavier?

This is only scratching the surface. Decades from now: we will truly see who provided the most momentum for the 20th century, as the results of these innovations are still brewing.

See, I hate that mentality. Why is it hard to tell what's good music? It's not like classical's been the momentum for music for at least 100 years, and to make the argument that it was before might be more a classist revisionism than historical fact.

Now, of course I'm being more than a little pithy/flippant about it, but love of modern stuff is a two-sided coin: there's precedent for everything.

...

There's a precedent for everything if you're picky enough about it. That doesn't change the fact that minimalism in its modern form is something quite different than Bolero, or that composers widely working with microtonal inflections of single notes is something different than Bach working with different tuning systems. Sure people have done similar things, long before 1890. But they can still be considered "advancements," totally revolutionary or not. The Coliseum was kind of like the WWE, amirite?

I'd say the biggest advancement is computer technology being incorporated into music. Back in 1950, they didn't have Finale, Sibelius, DP, ProTools, or GarageBand.

Futurists. (1920-ish)

You mean like the well-tempered clavier?

The well-tempered clavier wasn't microtonal... Although, to be fair, the word "microtonal" is kind of vague, in a way, the WTC was microtonal... But the point is, it wasn't xenharmonic, and definitely wasn't microtonal. (in a different sense of the word)

I think acceptance has changed quite a bit. There was a huge riot at performance no. 1 of the rite of spring, but now it's common. There are pieces FAR more dissonant than this, and people will sit and listen to them.

100 years ago, I can't imagine what people would have thought of rock and roll....(how do people tolerate it now even? lol) I think now people ENJOY listening to some guy screaming.

David Cope has written a book on this subject called Techniques of the Contemporary Composer. Another good one is New Directions in Music. Both of these books are pretty good books to go through. If you are looking for techniques, than the first one touches briefly on many of the new techniques that were developed after Stravinsky. The second is pretty much a history book of composers and such after 1950, the different style genre's and new developments (focusing less on the technique and more on the history) in music. My music library had both of these books, i'm sure you could find them at your school (if you are in a college with a music school), if not you could probably by them online for a relatively decent price.

Micropolyphony, Dissonant Counterpoint, Expanded use of extended techniques.....

It is definitely hard to think about what else can be done, now that we have atonality, now that we've gone as avant-garde as 4'33'', now that we have electronic instruments to exceed the playing capacity of humans, what else is there to do? What more advancements can be made? Sometimes I feel like declaring that we have everything available to us now, that there are no new frontiers. But even if that were the case, it's foolish to think it.

When there is a peak in technology, the only option is to move backward.

I don't think there can be a limit to art or technology though -- knowledge isn't matter. Innovation always happens. Everything created is unique in some way. The corollary to "nothing changes" is "everything changes." The fact that the theory and practice of older musics have changed simply shows that.

Electronic music has progressed a crap load since then. I feel sorry that I even have to make that point.

It has and hasn't. Samples are just tape loops. Distortion is Russulo incarnate. Theramins aren't much less than simple synths.

But of course you're right -- wouldn't it be boring otherwise?

The well-tempered clavier wasn't microtonal... Although, to be fair, the word "microtonal" is kind of vague, in a way, the WTC was microtonal... But the point is, it wasn't xenharmonic, and definitely wasn't microtonal. (in a different sense of the word)

Yeah but Partch was as early as late Stravinsky....

The Coliseum was kind of like the WWE, amirite?

shot through the heart and you're to blame....

Dude go to the library. Yeah, read Cope's book too

It is definitely hard to think about what else can be done, now that we have atonality, now that we've gone as avant-garde as 4'33'', now that we have electronic instruments to exceed the playing capacity of humans, what else is there to do? What more advancements can be made? Sometimes I feel like declaring that we have everything available to us now, that there are no new frontiers. But even if that were the case, it's foolish to think it.

Think outside the box! The 12 tone scale should be little more than training wheels for the modern composer. Infinity lies in between these equal tempered tones. Surely, we have had enough 'atonal' piano music to last a lifetime? The piano is a vehicle for the tonal system. Until microtonal (not quartertone, but new scales) music begins to be half-accepted among professors, all new music will remain in the cul-de-sac of beating their heads against the piano keyboard while writing a treatise about the event. Jesus, we have had a century of it already, yet still academics only cultivate the same same same music from people. Horrendous! If the human race survives, the last 100 years will be a dark age of music in a time when music technology is better than ever! Dammit, the electronic music guys have managed to get going but the orchestral stuff is same same same.

I think acceptance has changed quite a bit. There was a huge riot at performance no. 1 of the rite of spring, but now it's common. There are pieces FAR more dissonant than this, and people will sit and listen to them.

100 years ago, I can't imagine what people would have thought of rock and roll....(how do people tolerate it now even? lol) I think now people ENJOY listening to some guy screaming.

No idea, but what I want to know is what people would think of jazz in the 1600s.

If you have not mastered these 12 tones yet why bother writing for more?

Think outside the box! The 12 tone scale should be little more than training wheels for the modern composer. Infinity lies in between these equal tempered tones. Surely, we have had enough 'atonal' piano music to last a lifetime? The piano is a vehicle for the tonal system. Until microtonal (not quartertone, but new scales) music begins to be half-accepted among professors, all new music will remain in the cul-de-sac of beating their heads against the piano keyboard while writing a treatise about the event. Jesus, we have had a century of it already, yet still academics only cultivate the same same same music from people. Horrendous! If the human race survives, the last 100 years will be a dark age of music in a time when music technology is better than ever! Dammit, the electronic music guys have managed to get going but the orchestral stuff is same same same.

Some thoughts;

As much as I love microtonal music, there really is a limit as to how much new material one can derive from it. I mean, if you play rock and roll in 19-tet, it is still rock and roll. Maybe it wouldn't be if you played it in... oh... pelogic temperament, but my point is that while the divisions of the octave might be theoretically infinite, the differences in pitch that humans can readily perceive is not infinite, and many of those differences that we can perceive are very subtle. There are also new music resources waiting to be found even in 12-tone equal temperament. (although a well temperament would sound much better!) I mean seriously, now a days there is no reason to play in equal temperament (except if you have a fretted instrument and can't afford those funny wavy frets) because let's face it; it sounds like crap in comparison to the different shadings of key color that well temperaments offer, and NO, it doesn't impede modulation into far out keys, but I digress.

Quarter tone metal is awesome, but it is still metal.

If you have not mastered these 12 tones yet why bother writing for more?

Avoiding the microtonal love -- if it don't speak to you, why write it?

No idea, but what I want to know is what people would think of jazz in the 1600s.

Probably wouldn't find it that different to most improvised folk music. Klezmer provides a european cognate to jazz, though both styles are obvi now heavily cross-cultural.

Avoiding the microtonal love -- if it don't speak to you, why write it?

Agreed. But what if you only like it when others write it? (I have had this issue, but I'm becoming less like this :P)