MMM and Tuning - How to tell the difference

Kyle Gann has a weblog where he posts interesting ideas about modern
music, composers, musicians, and other topics of interest to a working
critic, composer, microtonalist, and educator. Today's entry is on
point to the difference between MakeMicroMusic mailing list, and the
Alternate Tuning List. He says:

"Don't Try This at Home

Composer and loyal correspondent Lawrence Dillon has a formulation for
the true relationship of composition and theory that is too admirable
to keep to myself:

You can drive the car; you can look under the hood; but don't try to
do both at the same time."

See his web log at http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic
for more insight.

For those who like theory but take the effort to put it to work in
composition, this is the place.

Prent Rodgers

P,

Ah, I can see that MMM is in good hands.

{you wrote...}
>Kyle Gann has a weblog where he posts interesting ideas ...

He sure does - recommended reading.

>You can drive the car; you can look under the hood; but don't try to do >both at the same time.

Excellent. I've always thought the distinction very well encapsulated in the following:

"One spring when I studied cooking with Simone Beck at her house in Provence, she said some things I never forgot. Another student, a caterer and cooking teacher, kept asking Simca for the technique for everything. She had a notebook and furiously wrote down every word Simca said. The other four of us were mainly interested in eating what we'd prepared. When she asked one time too many, Simca said crisply, "There *is* no technique, there is just the way to do it. Now, are we going to measure or are we going to cook?"

Let's cook!

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
<prentrodgers@c...> wrote:

> Kyle Gann has a weblog where he posts interesting ideas about modern
> music, composers, musicians, and other topics of interest to a working
> critic, composer, microtonalist, and educator.

I think he misses the point about Brahm's jackass comment, since he
recalls it as being in response to a claim that his first sonanta
sounds like the Hammerklavier. Any jackass cannot see that, it would
take a special sort of jackass to root it out. However, any jackass
can easily see that the chorale in the first symphony is like the
chorale in Beethoven's ninth, just as any jackass can see that the
scherzo in the Dvorak ninth is like the scherzo in Beethoven's ninth.
The point of these resemblences is not to lie hidden, but to be
obvious--you are *supposed* to recall Beethoven when hearing them.

What Brahms said when someone pointed out that the chorale in his
symphony recalled Beethoven: "Yes indeed, and what's really remarkable
is that every jackass notices it at once." ("Brahms: The four
symphonies", Walter Frisch.) It's not the anxiety of inflence; rather
he's telling the world he is influenced by Beethoven in a way any
jackass is supposed to see.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
<prentrodgers@c...> wrote:

> Composer and loyal correspondent Lawrence Dillon has a formulation for
> the true relationship of composition and theory that is too admirable
> to keep to myself:
>
> You can drive the car; you can look under the hood; but don't try to
> do both at the same time."

One difference between music and cars or cooking is that you can do
both at the same time.

> For those who like theory but take the effort to put it to work in
> composition, this is the place.

But should they simply forget about theory when they compose? You don't!

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
<prentrodgers@c...> wrote:

> For those who like theory but take the effort to put it to work in
> composition, this is the place.

I would count myself as such a person. However, it will probably
surprise you to hear that I felt tense, miserable and distictly
unwelcomed by your posting. I was and am hoping for an end of the
poisonous atmosphere around here, and I think a moritorium on implict
criticisms of any kind on tuning theorists who dare to compose would
help a great deal. If we attempt to drive the car with our head under
the hood, that's our business. We are not going to kill any pedestrians.
If we are dabblers, who around here is not?

Thanks Prent. As someone who's been involved in both theory and music-
making for many years, I found this a very welcoming post. Thanks
again! You guys will be hearing more from me once I get my computer
up and running -- probably within the next few months.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
<prentrodgers@c...> wrote:
> Kyle Gann has a weblog where he posts interesting ideas about modern
> music, composers, musicians, and other topics of interest to a
working
> critic, composer, microtonalist, and educator. Today's entry is on
> point to the difference between MakeMicroMusic mailing list, and the
> Alternate Tuning List. He says:
>
> "Don't Try This at Home
>
> Composer and loyal correspondent Lawrence Dillon has a formulation
for
> the true relationship of composition and theory that is too
admirable
> to keep to myself:
>
> You can drive the car; you can look under the hood; but don't try to
> do both at the same time."
>
> See his web log at http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic
> for more insight.
>
> For those who like theory but take the effort to put it to work in
> composition, this is the place.
>
> Prent Rodgers

I've very excited seeing you posting here and saying this, Jon.

The future looks bright indeed.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"
<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> P,
>
> Ah, I can see that MMM is in good hands.
>
> {you wrote...}
> >Kyle Gann has a weblog where he posts interesting ideas ...
>
> He sure does - recommended reading.
>
> >You can drive the car; you can look under the hood; but don't try
to do
> >both at the same time.
>
> Excellent.

I've found this to be the most profound lesson I've learned after
about 15 years of both "auto engineering" and "race-car driving". I
certainly might not have believed you before I started, but over time
the truth of this statement has become as real to me as the very
force of gravity pushing my tires against the road.

To anyone else reading: Your mileage may vary.

>But should they simply forget about theory when they compose? You don't!

To a man with a hammer, the world looks like a nail.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"
<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
>
> >But should they simply forget about theory when they compose? You
don't!
>
> To a man with a hammer, the world looks like a nail.

To a man who's been hammered, the world looks less welcoming.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
<prentrodgers@c...> wrote:
> Kyle Gann has a weblog where he posts interesting ideas about modern
> music, composers, musicians, and other topics of interest to a
working
> critic, composer, microtonalist, and educator. Today's entry is on
> point to the difference between MakeMicroMusic mailing list, and the
> Alternate Tuning List. He says:
>
> "Don't Try This at Home
>
> Composer and loyal correspondent Lawrence Dillon has a formulation
for
> the true relationship of composition and theory that is too
admirable
> to keep to myself:
>
> You can drive the car; you can look under the hood; but don't try to
> do both at the same time."
>
> See his web log at http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic
> for more insight.
>
> For those who like theory but take the effort to put it to work in
> composition, this is the place.
>
> Prent Rodgers

My advice to anyone who aspires to write great music:

1) Prerequisities are:
a) A certain amount of talent, and
b) The willingness to spend time on meticulous attention to detail.
2) Listen to a lot of great music in many styles.
3) Study the theory behind it.
4) Then do as you please!

In other words, once you know what's under the hood, forget about it
and enjoy your driving experience!

--George

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "George D. Secor"
<gdsecor@y...> wrote:

> My advice to anyone who aspires to write great music:
>
> 1) Prerequisities are:
> a) A certain amount of talent, and
> b) The willingness to spend time on meticulous attention to detail.
> 2) Listen to a lot of great music in many styles.
> 3) Study the theory behind it.
> 4) Then do as you please!

Great advice, George.

> > My advice to anyone who aspires to write great music:
//
> > 2) Listen to a lot of great music in many styles.
> > 3) Study the theory behind it.
> > 4) Then do as you please!
>
> Great advice, George.

According to Keyboard Magazine, Charlie Parker once
said, "You have to learn all this stuff and then throw it
out the window!" Or something to that effect.

-Carl

> I think he misses the point about Brahm's jackass comment, since he
> recalls it as being in response to a claim that his first sonanta
> sounds like the Hammerklavier. Any jackass cannot see that, it would
> take a special sort of jackass to root it out. However, any jackass
> can easily see that the chorale in the first symphony is like the
> chorale in Beethoven's ninth, just as any jackass can see that the
> scherzo in the Dvorak ninth is like the scherzo in Beethoven's ninth.
> The point of these resemblences is not to lie hidden, but to be
> obvious--you are *supposed* to recall Beethoven when hearing them.
>
> What Brahms said when someone pointed out that the chorale in his
> symphony recalled Beethoven: "Yes indeed, and what's really remarkable
> is that every jackass notices it at once." ("Brahms: The four
> symphonies", Walter Frisch.) It's not the anxiety of inflence; rather
> he's telling the world he is influenced by Beethoven in a way any
> jackass is supposed to see.

Actually, Brahms' First Sonata begins with the same rhythm as
Beethoven's Hammerklavier, and Walter Frisch refers to this as well.
That was the source of the comment.

Cheers,

Kyle

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "kylegann1955" <kgann@e...> wrote:

> Actually, Brahms' First Sonata begins with the same rhythm as
> Beethoven's Hammerklavier, and Walter Frisch refers to this as well.
> That was the source of the comment.

Clearly Frisch is no ordinary jackass.

> According to Keyboard Magazine, Charlie Parker once
> said, "You have to learn all this stuff and then throw it
> out the window!" Or something to that effect.
>
> -Carl

Which, in his case, meant "first, practice 14 hours a day, then play your
ass off and do smack until you die." He was the actual "Einstein of music",
far more so than Bbaabbiitt and other pseudos.

Dante

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"

/makemicromusic/topicId_7268.html#7268

<prentrodgers@c...> wrote:
> Kyle Gann has a weblog where he posts interesting ideas about modern
> music, composers, musicians, and other topics of interest to a
working
> critic, composer, microtonalist, and educator. Today's entry is on
> point to the difference between MakeMicroMusic mailing list, and the
> Alternate Tuning List. He says:
>
> "Don't Try This at Home
>
> Composer and loyal correspondent Lawrence Dillon has a formulation
for
> the true relationship of composition and theory that is too
admirable
> to keep to myself:
>
> You can drive the car; you can look under the hood; but don't try to
> do both at the same time."
>
> See his web log at http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic
> for more insight.
>
> For those who like theory but take the effort to put it to work in
> composition, this is the place.
>
> Prent Rodgers

***Not only that, but Kyle now has a radio website where he plays
music he finds that few people know about:

http://www.live365.com/stations/kylegann

J. Pehrson

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith"

/makemicromusic/topicId_7268.html#7274

<gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Prent Rodgers"
> <prentrodgers@c...> wrote:
>
> > For those who like theory but take the effort to put it to work in
> > composition, this is the place.
>
> I would count myself as such a person. However, it will probably
> surprise you to hear that I felt tense, miserable and distictly
> unwelcomed by your posting. I was and am hoping for an end of the
> poisonous atmosphere around here, and I think a moritorium on
implict
> criticisms of any kind on tuning theorists who dare to compose would
> help a great deal. If we attempt to drive the car with our head
under
> the hood, that's our business. We are not going to kill any
pedestrians.
> If we are dabblers, who around here is not?

***Actually, Gene, I didn't see Prent's post in that spirit at all.
It's more like my *own* observations about composing in Blackjack.
At first I was slavishly following common note progressions on the
lattice. The music turned out OK. However, I found it even *more*
inspiring to let my *ear* decide more matters, and only use the
theoretical lattice as a reference. The music was better. I think
that is more what Prent was talking about... not a screed against
theorists...

J. Pehrson