|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.10.112.38
In Reply to: You are at where I was posted by Neil E. on April 23, 2007 at 20:45:31:
Thanks for the links and advice, I have already bookmarked both pages.Fortunately, I do play trumpet and know a few musical terms...but not many.
Like I think andante means fast. But as for part of an opera or symphony...no clue. Maybe the fast part. I don't know.
Follow Ups:
I think it helps to get at least a little background bio on the composers, and even some of the conductors at some point. Also the liner notes on many recordings often give a little insight into the music or the "programme" such as Beethoven's 6th (Pastoral) describing a walk in the country, the thunderstorm, etc. or Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique (sp?) with the acid trip, meeting the girl at the ball, killing her, the death sentence and the dance of the witches. (some of this stuff can be pretty cool). Sometimes it does get a little technical, but I try to get what I can from it.It will take a little time and *a lot* of listening. You will have to learn to listen differently than you may be used to. I've read, and believe, that people listen to music on three levels. Physical, emotional, and analytical. Physical is sort of like just groovin' to the rhythm, tapping your feet and bobbing your head, etc. Listening at the emotional level, you start to form mental pictures, remember past events, feel happy or sad or whatever. Much easier to do with songs that have lyrics than just with music alone. Programme music, such as tone poems, try to make the listener think of a particular subject or story with just musical notes. At the analytical level, you listen to the structure of the music, notice the differences in performances and such. Sort of getting into the nuts and bolts of the music. It us supposedly the highest level, but it does not mean the other two are less valid or valuable. Most people do not spend their whole time at one level and often go back and forth. Me, not being a trained musician, I spend a lot of time at the emotional level, with only brief excursions into the analytical. Hell, sometimes I just like to hear a nice melody and wave my hands around like a conductor (when no one is around).
Listen to a lot of opinions, then decide what you like, for whatever reasons you want, and enjoy the music. There have been some here (I am thinking of one in particular, whom many will remember by various monikers, but am afraid to name for fear he may return if he isn't banned for life) who ridicule those who don't match their knowledge (and they will let you know they are very knowledgeable)or mirror their opinions. Then again, there are those (again, I am thinking of one in particular, who sadly will not be returning) who will argue with a passion, bordering on fury, for or against a conductor or composer, or performance, but will not attack you for liking what you do. (Well come to think of it, if bitten, he would bite back.:-))
Neil
Ahh Robbie my friend, I do sometimes miss the the... umm...spice, you used to add to the discussions here.
What an interesting theory...I think I myself tend to delve into the emotional level quite a bit more...and Adagio for Strings and "Symphony of Sorrowful Songs" both seem to be tone poems, because I always think back to some sort of memory...or imagine something that fits the music...It also explains why those two pieces are always played on war movies or something like that.
I couldn't put my hands on it right now, but the idea was expressed in Aaron Copland's book "What to Listen for in Music." I did a quick search at Amazon.com and saw that he refers to it as the sensuous plane, the expressive plane, and the sheerly musical plane. The terminology I used was a little different, but is also referred to in a book titled "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (don't ask me to pronounce it, it was all I could do to spell it correctly). He calls it the sensory stage, the analogic stage, and analytic stage, but the concept is basically the same. He goes on to talk about how as we get more "into" the music we experience what he calls "flow", similar to athletes who are in the "zone". Also, while listening to music may help us achieve "flow" it is even better if we create music by playing it. That's where I come up short. I don't play an instrument and I can't carry a tune in a bucket.In a nutshell, I am a classic case of "I don't know much, but I know what I like."
That's what music is for, right? For people to like it?
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: