linuxaudio.org

--bcaec554dbba23a3d504d5b01f3f

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Dave Phillips wrote:
> On 02/14/2013 07:50 AM, Paul Davis wrote:

quoted text
>

>

>>

>>  Bach, like more or less everyone who is a part of the "western

>> tradition", did some incredible things with harmony, and had some modest

>> accomplishments in the melodic area (*), but did essentially nothing with

>> rhythm.

>>

>

> "Essentially nothing" ?! With all respect, I think you might change your

> mind if you played a a lot more Bach. :)

>

it would be hard to play less :)
Rhythm in Western music is not only the moment-to-moment movement of

quoted text
> durational units and aggregations, it includes a macroformal component not

> often studied or understood by most listeners. Large-scale rhythm is a

> major formal factor in the design of large-form works.

>

certainly. but then we probably need a different term for that, or some

clear qualifiers. western music rarely uses polyrhythm, and even i have

read that (even) bach rarely departs from a fairly monotonous grid, even on

those odd occasions when things are not in 4.
the fact that there can be a sweeping sense of time caused by varying tempo

and emphasizing beat structure versus not doing so is wonderful, but you

can do those things when playing polyrhythms and so forth too.
>

quoted text
> I note you refer to harmony and not counterpoint,

i always thought of counterpoint as where harmony and melody collided and

gave birth to beauty.
> yet surely Bach's genius shines most brightly in that domain. And anyone

quoted text
> who's gone through species counterpoint knows the deep importance of rhythm

> in the practice.

>

no doubt, but does the left hand ever play in a non-integral relationship

to the right hand? :)
> It's a commonplace
keeps me in touch with the common man ...
> True that. I'm spending a fair amount of these days listening to qawwali

quoted text
> by Nusrat Khan and other singers in that tradition. Extraordinary stuff. Of

> course, it can be logically argued that it does essentially nothing with

> harmony, but that's not what I'm listening for in that music.

>

precisely my point. nobody would listen to carnatic or african music for

stunning displays of harmonic invention either, and celtic folk traditions,

despite the incredible melodic ornamentation that it can display, is hardly

known for rhythmic wizardry :)
--bcaec554dbba23a3d504d5b01f3f

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Dave Ph=

illips <dlphillips@woh.rr.com> wrote:

On 02/14/2013 07:50 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
=A0Bach, like more or less everyone who is a part of the "western trad=

ition", did some incredible things with harmony, and had some modest a=

ccomplishments in the melodic area (*), but did essentially nothing with rh=

ythm.
"Essentially nothing" ?! With all respect, I think you might chan=

ge your mind if you played a a lot more Bach. :)i=

t would be hard to play less :) 
Rhythm in Western music is not only the moment-to-moment movement of durati=

onal units and aggregations, it includes a macroformal component not often =

studied or understood by most listeners. Large-scale rhythm is a major form=

al factor in the design of large-form works.

certainly. but then we probably need a different term=

 for that, or some clear qualifiers. western music rarely uses polyrhythm, =

and even i have read that (even) bach rarely departs from a fairly monotono=

us grid, even on those odd occasions when things are not in 4.

the fact that there can be a sweeping sense of time caused by varying t=

empo and emphasizing beat structure versus not doing so is wonderful, but y=

ou can do those things when playing polyrhythms and so forth too. =A0
I note you refer to harmony and not counterpoint, i a=

lways thought of counterpoint as where harmony and melody collided and gave=

 birth to beauty.=A0

yet surely Bach's genius shines most brightly in that domain. And anyon=

e who's gone through species counterpoint knows the deep importance of =

rhythm in the practice.no doubt, but does the lef=

t hand ever play in a non-integral relationship to the right hand? :)=A0

=A0

It's a commonplace keeps me in touch with the com=

mon man ...

=A0

True that. I'm spending a fair amount of these days listening to qawwal=

i by Nusrat Khan and other singers in that tradition. Extraordinary stuff. =

Of course, it can be logically argued that it does essentially nothing with=

 harmony, but that's not what I'm listening for in that music.

precisely my point. nobody would listen to carnatic o=

r african music for stunning displays of harmonic invention either, and cel=

tic folk traditions, despite the incredible melodic ornamentation that it c=

an display, is hardly known for rhythmic wizardry :)
--bcaec554dbba23a3d504d5b01f3f--