Re: [LAU] Some new Bach

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Dave Phillips <dlphillips@...>
Cc: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Thursday, February 14, 2013 - 2:32 pm

--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:

it would be hard to play less :)

Rhythm in Western music is not only the moment-to-moment movement of

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.

>

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

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

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--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] Some new Bach, Julien Claassen, (Tue Feb 12, 10:14 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Rustom Mody, (Thu Feb 14, 12:40 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Julien Claassen, (Thu Feb 14, 1:03 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Ralf Mardorf, (Thu Feb 14, 1:57 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Ralf Mardorf, (Thu Feb 14, 1:01 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Chris Bannister, (Sat Feb 16, 12:33 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Julien Claassen, (Sat Feb 16, 12:39 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Rustom Mody, (Sat Feb 16, 4:24 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Paul Davis, (Thu Feb 14, 12:50 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Lorenzo Sutton, (Thu Feb 14, 3:32 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Fons Adriaensen, (Thu Feb 14, 3:52 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Folderol, (Thu Feb 14, 4:45 pm)
[LAU] OT: do you like this kind of looseness?, drew Roberts, (Thu Feb 14, 6:44 pm)
Re: [LAU] OT: do you like this kind of looseness?, Folderol, (Thu Feb 14, 8:35 pm)
Re: [LAU] OT: do you like this kind of looseness?, drew Roberts, (Fri Feb 15, 2:07 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Rustom Mody, (Thu Feb 14, 5:47 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Tim Goetze, (Thu Feb 14, 9:40 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Julien Claassen, (Thu Feb 14, 9:43 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Fons Adriaensen, (Thu Feb 14, 6:37 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Lorenzo Sutton, (Fri Feb 15, 9:19 am)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Dave Phillips, (Thu Feb 14, 2:20 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Paul Davis, (Thu Feb 14, 2:32 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Jörn Nettingsmeier, (Thu Feb 14, 9:41 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Dave Phillips, (Thu Feb 14, 3:20 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Paul Davis, (Thu Feb 14, 3:31 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Dave Phillips, (Thu Feb 14, 3:39 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Ralf Mardorf, (Thu Feb 14, 4:20 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Paul Davis, (Thu Feb 14, 3:42 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Folderol, (Thu Feb 14, 3:12 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Ralf Mardorf, (Thu Feb 14, 4:14 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Dave Phillips, (Thu Feb 14, 3:31 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Folderol, (Thu Feb 14, 4:44 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Julien Claassen, (Thu Feb 14, 2:42 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Folderol, (Wed Feb 13, 11:41 am)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Carlos sanchiavedraz, (Wed Apr 10, 2:52 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Julien Claassen, (Wed Apr 10, 4:18 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Daniel Worth, (Wed Feb 13, 12:55 am)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Julien Claassen, (Wed Feb 13, 8:09 am)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Al Thompson, (Wed Feb 13, 4:35 pm)
Re: [LAU] Some new Bach, Ralf Mardorf, (Wed Feb 13, 6:23 pm)