just curious (1 Viewer)

[dissonance]

I really like some contemporary composers such as Carl Vine, Stephen Adams, Matthew Hindson, Paul Stanhope. All that stuff I studied in 3unit, except perhaps the serialism....*shudder*. Contemp. music is very interesting.

Really? We had Paul Stanhope come into our school about three times to help us with our compositions. He's a nice guy, and helped us a lot with compo...he actually got interested in what everyone was doing, saying which parts he really liked and suggesting what could be added...sounds simple but I've never had a teacher do that for me before in composition.

What are you studying in 3unit? I'm doin an extension musicology essay as well, if I've understood you right....on Messiaen's symbolic use of percussion. ha, interestingly enough Messiaen actually employs the use of cowbells to help convey 'the truths of Catholicism', but I still wouldn't consider that very passionate...

when we talk about an instrument being 'passionate', are we really talking about the tone and harmonic range of the instrument? Or is it not that simple?

Oh, this is not simple
I guess I think the piano is passionate because it combines a large tone and harmonic range with a large range of dynamics. Almost any emotion can be communicated by a good piano player. Though the same could really be said for almost any instrument the piano just seems to have a bit more of everything. eg. a violin can be really passionate but it's restricted to playing a max of four notes and can not play bass notes. hmmm, hopefully I'm making some sort of sense here...

 

[Weisy]

sounds simple but I've never had a teacher do that for me before in composition

i understand that - it does sound simple, and in a way it makes you look at your own composition in a different way, and it seems all at once to be both more simple and more complicated at the same time.

Paul Stanhope is my composition teacher...or was, I suppose. He taught me for about two years when I did prelim and HSC music in 2000. He is a great teacher in the way that he never criticises you, but always finds ways to help you improve without splattering paint all over your landscape.

I did 3unit music under the old HSC (seems so long ago now!), and majored in performance for the 3rd unit. But my 3u teacher always made me do musicology essays for 3unit regardless because he thought that it would help prep me for 2unit. So I never really worked on a long extended essay, but many shorter ones. In a way it was very helpful and interesting because I got to study everything from medieval music to minimalism, and because I wasn't assessed on it, I could experiment!

*adopts Mr Burns pose*

I did a lengthy study on the baroque period (music's relationship to development of western culture at the time), and then I did a series of essays on early 20th century music.

Messiaen actually employs the use of cowbells to help convey 'the truths of Catholicism'

really? where?
Messiaen has got to be one of the most bizarre conceptualists - I haven't studied him but i've played a few of his piano pieces and he seems as though he's able to utilise the full 'gamut' of the piano's tone colour - in sme places i had never thought the piano could sound so bright and ecstatic.

So, as regards the cowbell, maybe it is not so surprising that he is able to extend its capabilities far beyond that which would ordinarily be expected of such a *erm* 'consistent' instrument.

Almost any emotion can be communicated by a good piano player

I agree. Now we just have to find the good piano player...

I think also that aside from the broader harmonic range and tone of the piano as an instrument, the fact that we find it 'passionate' has also something to do with our reception and appreciation of music as human beings. On a purely technical note, I suppose our ability to hear across a certain pitch range means that we appreciate the range of the piano as broad. Maybe there's also something innately inherent in us which associates the tone of the sound produced by the piano with emotion and passion, whereas with the bagpipes, it culd be a similar trigger which conjures up images of round men in kilts and rather unattractive hats

ah dear - why do I get the feeling that all of that is pure BS?

Weisy

 

[Dave]

Hallo everyone. Im a bassist and in my trials I was averaging about 17, so I was happy with that. My performances are next Wednesday and as opposed to my normal worrying and fear Im actually quite relaxed and ready for it. But then again.. maybe all that will change by Tuesday evening. My exams ARE on September 11 after all...

One thing I was wondering.. Id like to know the name of a classical piece. Well... Im not sure if its actually classical.. Its used as thinking music in tv shows.. mainly sitcoms. A good example of somewhere its used would be in the Simpsons episode where Homer is working at the bowl-o-rama and it shows the pin being made.. the score behind that is what Id like to know.. so yeah.. Any help would be nice.. Cheers all

 

[dissonance]

Well to say it rather concisely, Messiaen has cowbells (and bells) play the 'Introit to Easter' in the 4th mov. of "Et expecto". He's got three cowbell players (an instance of numeric symbolism in itself) who play three different sets of tuned cowbells so he doesn't really have 'consistant' sounding cowbells.

...I just handed in the essay today so I'm a bit over trying to think about right now It seems strange you had to do all that extra work for 3unit...though its probably some cool background knowledge for you now anyway...

I completely agree with what you said about Paul Stanhope. The little fella gets around a bit doesn't he!

and about the passionate piano stuff...I think there's just something about the percussive quality of it. The more angrey or whatever you get the more you can just bash away at the keys or vice versa for opposite emotions...

 

[Weisy]

dissonance...

I suppose it doesn't really matter if you read this tomorrow before or after, but good luck for your performance!

You deserve to do well.

(even considering you just hit things.)

Our year 12s had theirs today.

I remember when I did mine, I was on at 8:25am or something evil like that as well, and I had to literally prise my fingers apart to warm up an hour beforehand, they were so damn cold...

W.

__________________________________
"The difference between a good musician and a great musician is that a great musician does not know that he is great."

 

[dissonance]

well, its done...over with, finito.

I think my performances went well, maybe not fantastic but solid on the whole I think (ie. I didn't do anything stupid - oh, cept I left the damn snares on and they resonanted a bit though my last piece). The sight-singing was really ordinary though and I should have perpared for it more but other than that I think it was good.

ah, its so hard to tell cause the examiners were really good at maintaining neutral reactions and didn't say particularly much to anybody...

 

[Weisy]

heh yes - neutral expression examiners are so difficult for me to deal with because I'm so used to performing to people who are smiling at me whenever I dare snatch a glance at them

I suppose you too have this feeling (band?), since you're probably used to performing to people who scream and shout and have a good time.

Of course they must maintain neutral reactions in accordance with an issue of fairness, but it is discouraging to think that these people who listen to and respond to you music must actively restrain their reactions to it. I could never do that; I feel as though if I try, part of me is not paying attention and I cannot appreciate a piece of music fully.

 

[dissonance]

ha, yeah the majority of my band audiences are loud and drunk. Still, the difference between performing my pieces for parents and friends and performing in the exam was significant. Well, the only main change is the feeling you get afterwards - its like performing for no reward...if in any other situation I recieved an examiners' reaction I'd know something went horribly wrong...


When I think about it now I don't fully understand why examiners have to remain competely neutral. If they think a performance is good why does it make it unfair to other people if the candidate knows the markers think it was good?

 

[Weisy]

I cannot think of any viable reason except that perhaps since practical exams are one after the other, a person might come out and say "the examiners thought I was REALLY good, they kept smiling at me, etc.", and it might make the people who are on after them slightly apprehensive, or the people before them worry if they didn't receive a smiliar reaction.

:jaw:

I suppose perhaps it also has to do with the fact that unfortunately showing emotion in practical exam terms is always linked to partiality, and in some cases examiners would have seen or heard of particular performers before examining them. It just saves the possibility of them having to deal with messy complaints from other students, claiming some sort of infringement of partiality.

but i agree, good performances deserve smiling, screaming shouting, and (sometimes) drunkeness