Towards a definition of music – page 2 f gas logo


I think we must immediately throw pleasing to the ear out the window, even within a definition of Western music. One needn’t even look to the 20th C to see that dissonance has been an important concept in Western for centuries. Listen to Perotin and Leonin (ca. 1200) if you want to hear some really electricity physics khan academy raunchy dissonances that would make Mozart shiver.

Secondly, in terms of emotion, I would like to insert my argument against ethnocentricity once again. I would urge people who enter into this discussion to think carefully and wholistically about this emotional aspect of music, as it is not even necessarily universal in Western music. In the Baroque period, the Doctrine of Affections was introduced as an attempt to codify emotion (or affect) within music, and from this idea emerged the happy and sad arias and melodies of the classical and Romantic era. The 20th century then brought about a revolt towards emotion gas quality, Serialism, ironically started by the main exponent of the Expressionist movment.

So the history of Emotion in Western art music is a relatively short one, spanning some 200-300 years, depending on which way you look at it. Other cultures have other takes on this. In some cultures, music has gasco abu dhabi salary purely ritualistic purpose or a purely formal (intellectual) intention… one must take all these things into account when attempting a definition.

so anybody who says Cage’s 4’33 is music is simply wrong? There is no room for ambiguity? Also, are moments of implied silence not part of music? I suppose you could argue that you are manipulating sound to not exist, but in actuality I believe implied silence is nothing more than a lack of manipulation of sound for effect. If this is true, there is a discrepancy with this abridged shorter definition.Almost everyone misses the point about Cage’s music. The acoustics may or may not be music but electricity freedom system Cage is about listening. The irony of this work is there is no such thing as 4’33 silence – that’s the point. If I read Cage right, his point is that composers/performers believing that they write/play on a canvas of silence isn’t quite true.

It’s likely this discussion will lead nowhere because music is an experiential issue, so as many definitions of music exist as there are people. Some like their sound organised one way, others another way. Some like to be provoked emotionally, others like their sense of tidiness evoked, still others find it good for gas prices under a dollar visceral reaction. It’s difficult even to pin down what harmony is, let alone music!

All music depends on some chance operations – usually very small so when a traditional score is being performed it’s usually recognised as a specific work even if it sounds different from someone else’s interpretation, or a different orchestra/venue etc. A printed score is only a set of instructions so it is open to interpretation in every respect other than the pitches of the notes (with certain exceptions, obviously). Dynamics are relative and subjective, tempo natural gas jokes can be messed about…compare Klemperer’s and Karajan’s Beethoven recordings – then Kempf, then Furtwangler…

Once you take all into account, Cage has only extended the chance aspects of performance. He was one of the Darmstadt lot and apparently at loggerheads with Stockhausen who initially wanted a definitive chance-free score by using recording. They both learned from each other – Stockhausen introducing chance into his live performance works like Mantra and Kontakte, Cage committing himself to definitive recordings as in his gas law questions and answers scores for ballet (that, by the nature of the thing had to be ‘fixed’).