tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post552409352872970747..comments2024-03-28T22:40:25.196-02:30Comments on → Music Composition Weblog ←: Playing With Expectations (Part Two)Clark Rosshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13153382609775397798noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post-58883565882116126412020-12-06T23:35:05.898-03:302020-12-06T23:35:05.898-03:30I find this to be one of the hardest things to do ...I find this to be one of the hardest things to do in my music. Ostinatos are a hardcore crutch that I use a lot so I come into this problem very often. I find the idea of how this was really good smart variations on the expectations back in the day when I feel like a fair bit of these examples would not be enough in most modern classical music. But the spirit makes of it is really interesting and something I know I need to work on so reading this definitely helps a lot.Caleb McRobbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post-64344808249482290342019-03-10T22:01:49.970-02:302019-03-10T22:01:49.970-02:30The last time I looked at the score for this piece...The last time I looked at the score for this piece was in second year theory. I remember this piece vividly because, although analyzing sonatas in general did not bring me joy, I really hated analyzing Beethoven's sonatas. I found it very frustrating that we were being taught to analyze form, but most (if not all) of the Beethoven ones we analyzed went against the expectation of the form. It felt like we were trying to learn the rules of sonata form by only looking at examples that broke those rules. Needless to say, listening to the first six seconds of the Waldstein Sonata at the beginning of the post elicited a strong emotional reaction, but luckily the anger over sonata analyses has subsided. <br /><br />I actually found it helpful comparing the original and Dr. Ross remix of the sonata. The over-simplified, predictable sonata kind of set the bar as to what to expect, so that when Beethoven veered off into the unexpected, it was easier to pinpoint what made Beethoven's opening different. The comparison of the two sonatas also made me appreciate something I didn't notice two years ago, which was the consistency that Beethoven employs in this piece. There are only three basic textures heard in the exposition (the low droning figure, the chorale-style chords, and the triplet/sixteenth arpeggios). I think that by sticking to a couple of consistent textures, which he repeats and combines throughout the exposition, it gave him leeway to play more drastically with melodic and harmonic expectations. Dr. Ross' sonata made me realize that it was the combination of having both predictable chords and predictable textures that made its opening unconvincing. <br /><br />I think that another interesting experiment would be to rewrite the opening of the sonata using the same harmonies as the original, but modifying the texture from the original. Would that make a more believable Beethoven knock-off? As previously stated, the bass line does step down chromatically, so it's not exactly completely unpredictable. To what extent do the harmonies alone play with our expectations? Overall, this kind of analysis of expectation was interesting. It's probably the first time I've enjoyed analyzing a Beethoven sonata! Pallashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07281153317762642087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post-26067093680633299372015-03-02T23:21:57.075-03:302015-03-02T23:21:57.075-03:30This has been sort of enlightening to me. I think ...This has been sort of enlightening to me. I think in my balancing of expected and unexpected I've been trying to overdo it. When I'm working with the expected it's fairly easy, so there's no need to get into it, however the unexpected. After reading this I think I try too hard to shock the ear, and in doing so create things that don't always have a great sense of unity. In reading this , Beethoven only change the quality of a sonority to throw off what we thought was coming, instead of just redirecting the whole progression perhaps, or changing the metric values. I think i composing further I can do less and achieve more with this balance. Josh Penneynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post-31938636220557584482013-12-03T01:55:26.158-03:302013-12-03T01:55:26.158-03:30A lot of these expectations are somewhat rooted in...A lot of these expectations are somewhat rooted in when they were composed. If Beethoven was a alive today and composed , say, a-tonal music would some of these methods still be used? Would shifting down a tone in a key area of the piece still hold the same effect? Probably not. Looking forward to part 3.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15754564116329560520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post-76038470272607156582013-04-13T21:26:06.032-02:302013-04-13T21:26:06.032-02:30After reading this blog post, I wonder about how e...After reading this blog post, I wonder about how expectations differ for people with varying degrees of exposure to music. Would a group of people who all have the same exposure to music react the same way to any given composition? If so, then presumably, with enough data could a computer program be used to assist, or even compose a work that caters perfectly to an individual's level of familiarity.<br /><br />To add to this point, I would like to consider how music differs from the game of chess. There are many who enjoy analyzing chess matches of the great players. One of the beauties of the game (in my opinion) is how tried and true opening sequences are manipulated and given variation to provide a twist that breaks the logic, and the other player is forced to adapt to this new situation. Presently, computers can outmatch any human being at this game, so why don't people analyze simulated computer matches with the same admiration and awe that they admire the cunning of Bobby Fischer's famous openings?<br /><br />I am aware of the important differences between music and chess. Chiefly, we don't play music to best an opponent (but maybe some do), and we also don't play chess to be expressive. Despite this, I still think it could be an interesting starting point in understanding what it is in the balance of predictability and unpredictability that makes our heads turn. In chess the goal is to be as unpredictable as possible while still maintaining a line of logic that will take the winner to their goal. Does a piece of music share an element of this even though it doesn't always have a goal? <br /><br />As listeners, do we have goals? And if so, are they more or less the same person to person, or do they change with exposure, and how much?André McEvenuenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post-68700175853380971892013-04-05T00:23:19.474-02:302013-04-05T00:23:19.474-02:30There is something about humans that makes them en...There is something about humans that makes them enjoy stories, especially when they are unpredictable. We enjoy these stories because predictability is boring. Unpredictability introduces elements which grab your attention. Examples from other creative pursuits can easily be found. Life itself needs unpredictability or else it becomes static. In painting, the eye is drawn to the little things which seem out of synch with the rest of the piece. When listening to music, the ear is drawn automatically to discordant elements. We hear what could be considered mistakes much more easily than what could be considered perfection. The less predictable elements of a composition demand attention, to be heard, and to be considered, much more so than if you are listening to something that is predictable. This unpredictability jolts your attention and is impossible to ignore. The brain tends to fill in information based on what has just happened. When something completely different appears and takes you off track your brain latches onto it and tries to make it conform. It cannot enforce this conformity once you become aware of it. Within a piece, these become the parts that stand out and are most memorable. In the same way, the people we remember most are the ones that were unusual or strikingly different in some way (like Beethoven!). Chris Morrisonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7298312567843426829.post-20689139258035468522013-03-16T12:24:00.716-02:302013-03-16T12:24:00.716-02:30I probably should have read part 2 before part 3. ...I probably should have read part 2 before part 3. You answered most of my questions that I posed to dead-Beethoven. <br /><br />What really struck me is the harmony. I'm always facinated with harmonic progressions, its one of my favorite things about music, and what you did in your re-creation was, I agree, perfectly fine. Things went where they should, and the tonicization of Am was expected but well-done. But to go to the b7 (Bb) is so... well there aren't words. I mean, it's a simple concept, just go down a tone, but I think Koska and Payne have ruined many peoples minds. <br /><br />It's a great thing about musical notation software however. You can write something and then with a click, transpose it. Perhaps the return of A will sound better down a minor third, let's try *click*. Done. <br /><br />Obviously, Beethoven did not have this luxury (and probably could just do that in his head anyway), but let's face it, none of us are Beethoven. So a little Finale or Sibelius help is much appreciated. To create something like the Waldstein by a slightly digital tranpositional accident would be okay with me. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12590508202115613255noreply@blogger.com