Modern Music

Hi, what are your views on 20-21st century music, regarding the ever increasing dissonance?

Personally, I feel that melody and harmony are the two most important aspects of music. 20-21st century music has almost no melody, while its harmony, although interesting, is a little extreme in the dissonance aspect.

(Note, I am referring to the majority of 20-21st century music, I know there are some exceptions)

Now that the novelty of such compositions has worn off, how long do you think such music can last?

My personal view is that, contrary to common sense, it will actually last forever, despite its relative unpopularity. The main reason is, those people who love music with nice melodies, have already switched to listening to pop music, or older classical music. Hence, those remaining are those who like avant-garde music.

The scary part is, if current music is already so dissonant, what about music a few centuries down the road? I think I would rather hear a dentist's drill than that...

Just some thoughts.

Heheh, I agree with you!

My favorite 20th century composers are Stravinsky (I love some of his works yet hate others), Debussy, Poulenc, Shostakovich, Ravel, a few things by Rachmaninov and Prokofiev, and... I think those are all. I might have forgotten some.

But as you see, mainly melody-based and of pleasant harmony too... I can't stand atonal music. So all atonal works that these composers might have done are in my non-listenable list... :)

Well the whole concept of atonalism is about conveying the message or feeling to the listener more through the raw sound aspect of music than the form.

In most cases, dissonance can be used much more effectively than a structured melodic piece to create feelings of fear, for example. Scratchy, semi-coherent sounds arranged into a piece can make the listener uncomfortable or edgy; which conveys the intended message (in this case) perfectly and more effectively than one could do with a melodic piece.

Remember that art isn't necessarily about making something pretty, it can be just about getting a reaction or conveying the intended feeling by any means necessary.

Think of it this way, if I (as a game music composer) was asked to make a theme for a scary scene in a forest and I came up with a tonal piece and a partly-atonal one, they would choose the partly-atonal one almost certainly. They might tell me that the tonal one is pretty, but then I would consider it a failed effort.

I love my genre because it allows me the freedom to combine the two in any way necessary to produce what I need.

I guess my point is that you shouldn't judge atonal music the same way you do tonal music because it's not the same thing and doesn't pretend to be. Try to keep an open mind and ear, guys, and imagine what the composer is trying to put forth with his/her piece; tonal or atonal. Whether you enjoy listening to it or not is frankly irrelevant; it's an art form, not an acid trip.

:)

Marius, it's all well and good to say that your genre (which is basically incidental music) allows for such mixing. You're not going to be consistently atonal though, you'd only be doing it to elicit a specific emotional response from a general public audience for the purposes of a specific scene.

But what about the avant-garde art music scene? The more I look at it, the more it seems to me like, to put it in less than polite terms, an intellectual circle jerk. Everyone talks about how innovative some element of the composition was - and no one talks about how the music actually sounds. My belief is that music should have an emotional purpose, and that composition is not for the sake of waxing eloquent about how mathematically elegant a piece of music is...

Seems to me that music is reverting to tonality. The remote consonances have had their day.

Caltechviolist...

the more it seems to me like, to put it in less than polite terms, an intellectual circle jerk. Everyone talks about how innovative some element of the composition was - and no one talks about how the music actually sounds.

Well, thanks largely to critics who, poor things, are always torn between being fashionable and being made to look more foolish than they actually are. I'm reminded of Berg whose work had been pretty dormant until well into my teens whereon Glyndbourne (I think) staged Lulu. Berg became all the rage and it was more than one dared, in the dilettante music circles, to say "What's that noise supposed to mean?" I've heard nice ladies sipping Martinis (which probably helps) proclaiming "How wonderful, there really is that...'je ne sais quoi' about it..." as they force their smiles through the first bit of the Chamber Concerto...after which they could go on talking about Ladies' Night down at the Club.

For all that, Wozzeck and Lulu have always gripped me...from the start. I can't say I was as struck with the Violin and Chamber Concertos.

Depending on whether a composer wishes to communicate, they should use what they think fit to express their inner worlds. If it doesn't communicate then let's hope it was a catharsis at least.

Atonal moments only get their bite in contrast with tonal moments.

I definately agree with you Andrew, yes. I was simply implying that using elements of atonalism can often be very useful in eliciting said emotional responses and so one shouldn't bash atonal music entirely.

I, personally, look at atonal music as something of an accessory to my work. I have very little respect for most Avant-garde art music.

And we have those of us that find ''Avant-garde art music'' emotionally evolving...

I think that some people only try to make sense out of stuff like this painting, only to sound smart.

It's been my expirience that most people who say that modern music like Ligeti is so deep, thick, and whatnot, really don't know a thing about it. They are only saying that because they don't want to Not know.

But that is only my small expience

Well, that's cubism, and I can explain it, I studied that. :glare:

But I agree that we are sick of avant-garde. :)

*Stands alone in the corner, clutching his copy of Cobra*

...

*Joins robin in the corner*

Well, that's cubism, and I can explain it, I studied that. :glare:

no real attack intended Berli, I'm just saying that's the thing with the people I have met.

no real attack intended Berli, I'm just saying that's the thing with the people I have met.

Poor example anyway. Cubism isn't abstract at all.

Poor example anyway. Cubism isn't abstract at all.

Enlighten me

It's basically a picture of, what seems to me to be a chair, broken up and re-assembled randomly. (or in some mathematical pattern, I wouldn't know)

It's pollocks

no?

:)

You're saying POLLOCK WAS A CUBIST???

*dies*

That's like saying Schöenberg was neo-classical!!

Pollock was into Abstract Expressionism, my friend...

And drugs too... :wub:

Oh. Right...

Ta.

(It was something I borrowed from the Fosters ad.)

:wub:

Getting back to atonality... I like alot of modern music. There was a Elliot Carter festival near where I live and we attended a number of them and I found them pretty spectacular... I tend to think people who claim to love music should like all forms of it... Or at least try. I know some people who say it isn't music. I think it's quite cool... We were listening to a quarter-tone piano duet a little while I go, and though I only heard parts of it I still thought it was great.

By the way, in case you were also talking about early 20th century, I love most Debussy, Ravel, and those fellas... Shostakovich, etc. All greats.

My two nickels... Er- dimes... Er-... Elliot Carters?

I'm not denying that there's great modern music, even great avant-garde music... but really, when a composer chooses to always write dissonantly, I start feeling a sense that something's missing. It's also hard to stomach discussion over how a piece is somehow "innovative" when the difference between it and the last piece is just some mathematical subtlety that can only be identified by reading the score...

Agrees with previous post.;)

Using fashion as an analogy for music, I would predict that tonal works will become popular again one day.

In the past, fashion models were all very thin. Only recently, after a case in Madrid, did they ban overly thin models from fashion shows. Perhaps, this is a sign to show that the "fashion" is now changing from thin, to less thin. After all, how thin can a person get? (without dying from malnutrition, of course)

Similarly, perhaps one day, avant-garde music will die off, and the "fashion" reverse back to tonal music again.

(This analogy is not really a good one, since there is a limit to how thin a person get, but there is no limit to the amount of dissonance in a music, from the Law of Thermodynamics which states that entropy (related to dissonance) always increases.)

Hold on, tonal music has never been out of fashion no matter what. Sure, atonal composers exist but America and England (at least) preserved tonal music right through the 20 century. Perhaps a few atonal moments crept in but most great names of this era wrote music that was essentially tonal.

this is the price of a few atonalists/avant-gardists attaining infamy/cult status - names are known....but do you know their music? Have you listened to the alternative mainstream neo-classical/tonal music.

As for composer forums, internet or otherwise, you're bound to encounter a few "atonalists" (among the many who write diatonically), because that's they way they want to explore.

:cool: (And I for one will be a lot happier when fashion models have more fullness of body!)

Caltech... I think that kind of music is more for interesting and for study than alot of other music. Those are the pieces that you try to figure out what's goin' on in them... Probably not the most popular for performance. And, just like music of the come and gone centuries, there have been bad composers, and positively are still in the 20-21st centuries... Just not all. ^_^

- Leon

Yoyodog........ Just listen.