Composing in the style of...

[gravehill]

In reference to the original post and especially the post of llatham, does such a web page exist with a collection of "Collected cliches of composer X"?

[Sixofour]

That was the point, to trivialize Western Classical Music. The things you find in classical music are not new for their time, or even original. Comparativly speaking. Western Classical music is not very old. not even a thousand years old. You have traditional Indian, Chinese, and Arabian music theory that surpasses anything western by several thousand years. If you want to see the big picture, imho, it would be better to study the roots of music. If you want to do as you say and compare classical music to better your self.

I find it disheartening that people consider classical western the be all end all of music, the epitomy even.

That's simply rubbish. Chordal harmony is a product of western classical music. And it isn't a decoration tacked on, it's a completely different dimension in music.
You might well subscribe to the somewhat fashionable view that some other ethnic musical traditions are aesthetically superior, but don't kid yourself that they're based on any kind of theory that surpasses western classical by several thousand years. There's no music so theorised as classical. The depth, breadth and scope of western musical theory is enormous.

No..

But we can agree to dissagree.

[Jafo]

That was the point, to trivialize Western Classical Music. The things you find in classical music are not new for their time, or even original. Comparativly speaking. Western Classical music is not very old. not even a thousand years old. You have traditional Indian, Chinese, and Arabian music theory that surpasses anything western by several thousand years. If you want to see the big picture, imho, it would be better to study the roots of music. If you want to do as you say and compare classical music to better your self.

Your line of argument would be more cogent with examples; please provide some. I would agree that the esthetics and game rules in these other musics are equally valid. I rather enjoy sitar music, for example. Still, it's difficult to see how "play this rhythm on the bongos, and improvise something random on the sitar with this scale that the priests handed down -- oh and do it for five hours" compares to "here are some chord substitutions in a ii-V7-I context with a reharmonization of a melody" (or something even more far out), on a theoretical basis.

[jancivil]

What does 'a theoretical basis' actually mean? A theory of music is pretty much just an analysis after the fact of a type of prevalent practice. Are you hoping it's an end in itself? It isn't, it can't be. It can be a means to an end, if you're stuck, or barren.

Your ignorance of one, 'sitar and bongos' (a sort of non-sequitur probably, though it doesn't have to be) supports your enthusiasm for the other, the glorious I got rhythym changes tricked out and painted up as if it's a new car.

I GUESS you could bullshit a lot more, even make a living, get a schoolmarm gig doing the latter, but that don't mean a thing in and of itself, and might be a little suspect.

[Sixofour]

Because classical music then was just as simple, it only got complex in the past 100 years or so because people have been studying it...its pretty presumptious to think bach or mozart put any more thought into their music than anyone from china or india or where ever at the same time. They set at a piano and pushed keys untill they found the very simplistic pattern intrinsic in music.

[nuffink]

Because classical music then was just as simple, it only got complex in the past 100 years or so because people have been studying it...its pretty presumptious to think bach or mozart put any more thought into their music than anyone from china or india or where ever at the same time. They set at a piano and pushed keys untill they found the very simplistic pattern intrinsic in music.

And that's how you think counterpoint is composed, is it?

[beboop]

That was the point, to trivialize Western Classical Music.

No, what you've done is trivialize all music.

What is it you think you know about Indian, Arabic, or Chinese music? You've actually studied one or more of these musics? How about 'Western classical music', got a pretty good handle on that? Chant to Bartok, hmmm?

or maybe you're just posturing?

[Sixofour]

And that's how you think counterpoint is composed, is it?

Pretty much. Harmony is not at all complex or hard to master, unless you just arn't musically adept, I can't see how this is really all that complex.

--

I didn't trivilize music. I simply lowered classical music to a not so laughable state. Western music is not the standard of music as a whole, its a small section that has been disperportionally enlarged and almost idolized as the end all be all of music, the best, the definitive, and its been mostly because of natinalism and arrogance of europeans that has made it so. Most people who study this have such a posh pompus attitude, and even have the audacity to assume that anyone not learned in their ways, cannot possiably be able to compose a set of pleaseing sounds. I find it offensive, and diminutive to music as a whole.

Not to mention the fact that classical music introduces nothing, invents nothing and does nothing new that no one else has done, yet gets all the credit. People actually credit harmony scale chords to what people like mozart and bach did, as if they were the pioneers or some bullshit. Its sickening.

[jancivil]

And that's how you think counterpoint is composed, is it?

Pretty much. Harmony is not at all complex or hard to master, unless you just arn't musically adept, I can't see how this is really all that complex.

I totally agree with you on harmony, an intelligent adept can get an awfully good handle on it in a couple years, with a good teacher. EG: Honors Curriculum where I was at sussed it in one. Then, however, you get counterpoint, which isn't really the study of harmony, and some curriculae would have one take it on at the same time as a harmony course. Or in tandem w. a sort of form and analysis course, where you describe all of the above in an architectonic sorta way.
Counterpoint up to the late sixteenth century, isn't the most challenging field of musical endeavor, that's for sure. But, you get to Bach's practice, it can be tough to actually pull off. Also, as far as chops, it's good to have if you're going into that other equal-tempered practice period, dodecaphony, which is purely contrapuntal, IE: you don't look for harmony there. Counterpoint can use harmonic practice, it can go outside it, it's as much horizontal as vertical or more so, and 'pure' counterpoint is about lines, not sonorities in the first place.

Western music is not the standard of music as a whole, its a small section that has been disperportionally enlarged and almost idolized as the end all be all of music, the best, the definitive, and its been mostly because of natinalism and arrogance of europeans that has made it so. Most people who study this have such a posh pompus attitude, and even have the audacity to assume that anyone not learned in their ways, cannot possiably be able to compose a set of pleaseing sounds. I find it offensive, and diminutive to music as a whole.

+1.

[Ogg Vorbis]

And that's how you think counterpoint is composed, is it?

Counterpoint up to the late sixteenth century, isn't the most challenging field of musical endeavor, that's for sure. But, you get to Bach's practice, it can be tough to actually pull off. Also, as far as chops, it's good to have if you're going into that other equal-tempered practice period, dodecaphony, which is purely contrapuntal, IE: you don't look for harmony there. Counterpoint can use harmonic practice, it can go outside it, it's as much horizontal as vertical or more so, and 'pure' counterpoint is about lines, not sonorities in the first place.

I think you mean "polyphony" (i.e. lots of independent voices). Counterpoint does not mean the same thing as polyphony.

[Sixofour]

Harmonizeing all of the elements in a track has been a endevour of mine. I don't have any training on the subject, yet id say ive pretty much mastered harmony, its only a matter of situation. And yeah, it started by pushing keys on a piano, or in this case one synth, then pushing keys on another synth with a bass sound, few minutes later i had two different melodies that could be played together and be in harmony. Few more minutes, and you can harmonize your percussion with your melodies. Something I don't hear too often in most classical peices...

@above poster: Counterpoint is several insturment playing different melodies[ie, bass, lead, second lead, background leads, pads, percussion], yes, i know what it is, its not complex. Compelxity is relative. Polyphone is pressing 5 keys on a piano at once. BTW, i didn't say what you quoted.

[Ogg Vorbis]

@above poster: Counterpoint is several insturment playing different melodies[ie, bass, lead, second lead, background leads, pads, percussion], yes, i know what it is, its not complex. Compelxity is relative. Polyphone is pressing 5 keys on a piano at once.

Incorrect on both counts, although one sense of polyphony comes to us via MIDI and electronic music...the ability to play several tones at once. That's not what it means in the context of musical textures. In that sense it is many independent voices (as opposed to homophony which is a main melodic line supported by relatively less active supporting lines.

None of that has to do with counterpoint.

I DO agree with what you're saying about Arabic and Chinese music! It is a euro-centric viewpoint to say that western classical music is the be-all-and-end-all of artistic music.

Hopefully young music students in universities are getting a much more global view of music education than I had. Everything I know about other culture's music I had to learn myself. And what I learned is eye-opening. It's certainly not simplistic...much of it puts Bach to shame in its complexity and sophistication.

[jancivil]

@ sixofour: Well then, you quoted someone, or I'm all the way round the bend. It is posted under your user name in your post. If you object to me having attributed it to you, you might cite its author.

Counterpoint can consist of two instruments. Both or all lines don't absolutely have to be valid melodies in their own right, but that is a sort of goal of the exercise. (Merely hitting your marks harmonically in a linear-based polyphony doesn't necessarily qualify.)

And, I don't think I am very wrong in reporting that to pull off JS Bach's style of counterpoint, and get it right, involves a high degree of complexity, on more than one level (pun intended).

If you've absolutely no training, asserting you've mastered harmony is the boldest of claims, btw.

[nuffink]

Hold on...

Classical music, I shit it! Harmony. Counterpoint. All bollocks. They nicked it all from a bunch of Indians or Chinese or something 7000 years ago.

...I see what you mean.

[Sixofour]

I think everyone atleast gets the jist of what counterpoint is. I basicly quoted wikipedia on it, as i said i don't have training in musical theroy, but 99.9% of what anyone who HAs been trained in it tells me, i already knew, i just didn't know the terminology.

Music theroy is fine, but i see it has in general a method to catagorize everything so that it is easyer to communicate things with others. Its not, for me atleast, a knowledge that teaches me anything new. For instance, i didn't know what a chord was, i didn't know that 2/3 was a minor and 3/2 was a major...but i did know that 2/3 was a dark sound and 3/2 was a light sound. [if that made any sense ]