Counterpoint in Composition

A couple of years ago, somebody on the main "academic" Tuning List
pointed me in the direction of the book "Counterpoint in Composition"
by Salzer and Schachter.

I want to thank that anonomous and forgotten person, because this
work is a real find. I think it's the best exposition of
counterpoint I have yet seen. In fact, it's the best theory book I
have seen...

The first part is an explication of species counterpoint
(considerably more thorough than Fux) and then examples of "extended
counterpoint" are shown through the literature with Schenkerian
reduction (which, generally speaking, I've always found fascinating).

I actually have a student now who came to me wanting to learn species
counterpoint... he actually writes in a *very* free style, and I want
to keep it that way... but this is an important separate study for
him.

This book may be easily found on Amazon.com

It *used* to be that we could discuss composition and related issues
on the Main Tuning list, but I see now that the focus has become
quite limited, with constant "time out" reminders for anybody who
strays from the "straight and narrow..." No wonder it's such an
exciting place over there currently... :)

J. Pehrson

On Monday 06 September 2004 10:58 am, Joseph Pehrson wrote:
> A couple of years ago, somebody on the main "academic" Tuning List
> pointed me in the direction of the book "Counterpoint in Composition"
> by Salzer and Schachter.
>
> I want to thank that anonomous and forgotten person, because this
> work is a real find. I think it's the best exposition of
> counterpoint I have yet seen. In fact, it's the best theory book I
> have seen...

Joseph-

I am very familiar with this book, having been a lucky enough soul to have had
private theory lessons as a young teen with the husband of my piano teacher,
who was a strong advocate of Schenkerian thought.

Without exaggeration, I can say that Schenkerian thinking is the best, most
organic, and most historically linked theory out there. It is also of
tremendous practical musical value, and once one learns to think
'Schenkerian' about things, one's musical sensitivity/interpretation/thinking
improves greatly. More than any other way of thinking, I think this has
helped me immensely both as an interpreter, and as a composer.

What's interesting too about Schenker's ideas is that they can be successfully
extended into what I would call 'neo-Schenkrian' or 'post-Schenkerian'
thinking, i.e. they can be made to apply to musics that Schenker himself
didn't consider (anything outside of the convenient Bach to Brahms common
practice)

Salzer and Schacter, one or the other of them (or both?) taught my theory
teacher, Fred Fehleisen, when he was at Queens College in NY.

Aaron Krister Johnson
http://www.dividebypi.com
http://www.akjmusic.com

JP,

{you wrote...}
>A couple of years ago, somebody on the main "academic" Tuning List pointed >me in the direction of the book "Counterpoint in Composition" by Salzer >and Schachter.

Thanks for the reminder: I used this book in college, and lost it in the intervening years. Now, thanks to http://www.abebooks.com/ I have a copy on its way to me...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron K. Johnson"

/makemicromusic/topicId_7410.html#7411

> Joseph-
>
> I am very familiar with this book, having been a lucky enough soul
to have had
> private theory lessons as a young teen with the husband of my piano
teacher,
> who was a strong advocate of Schenkerian thought.
>
> Without exaggeration, I can say that Schenkerian thinking is the
best, most
> organic, and most historically linked theory out there. It is also
of
> tremendous practical musical value, and once one learns to think
> 'Schenkerian' about things, one's musical
sensitivity/interpretation/thinking
> improves greatly. More than any other way of thinking, I think this
has
> helped me immensely both as an interpreter, and as a composer.
>

***Hi Aaron!

Yes, this reductive analysis is really something. Of course,
the "devil (or artistry) is in the details..." It becomes almost
humorous when a great work of the literature is reduced to a first
species counterpoint exercise. I laughed out loud a couple of
times... but, on the other hand, understanding the "background"
really shows important things about the underlying structure of
music, particularly tonal music... (although I agree that I probably
is possible to extend this kind of reductive thinking into all kinds
of music, microtonal as well..)

JP

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"

/makemicromusic/topicId_7410.html#7412

<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> JP,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >A couple of years ago, somebody on the main "academic" Tuning List
pointed
> >me in the direction of the book "Counterpoint in Composition" by
Salzer
> >and Schachter.
>
> Thanks for the reminder: I used this book in college, and lost it
in the
> intervening years. Now, thanks to http://www.abebooks.com/ I have a
copy on
> its way to me...
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***I think it's well worth having in your library.

Here's the scenario: this young composer came to me and wanted to
get deeper into music. He was writing some pretty "free" stuff...
using indeterminate durations and some improvisation in the texture.
This is what he was excited about.

He thought, however, that he had to write more *conventional* pieces
in order to "authenticate" himself as a composer.

I told him I thought that was total BS, and he already *was*
authentic, just by listening as carefully as he had been (his works
were aurally quite interesting...)

So, instead, we're doing species counterpoint as a *separate* study,
and I'm encouraging him to continue composing the things that he is
most excited about...

JP

>Here's the scenario: this young composer came to me and wanted to
>get deeper into music. He was writing some pretty "free" stuff...
>using indeterminate durations and some improvisation in the texture.
>This is what he was excited about.
>
>He thought, however, that he had to write more *conventional* pieces
>in order to "authenticate" himself as a composer.
>
>I told him I thought that was total BS, and he already *was*
>authentic, just by listening as carefully as he had been (his works
>were aurally quite interesting...)
>
>So, instead, we're doing species counterpoint as a *separate* study,
>and I'm encouraging him to continue composing the things that he is
>most excited about...

Good for you, JP! This sounds like the perfect course of action.

-Carl

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_7410.html#7415

> >Here's the scenario: this young composer came to me and wanted to
> >get deeper into music. He was writing some pretty "free" stuff...
> >using indeterminate durations and some improvisation in the
texture.
> >This is what he was excited about.
> >
> >He thought, however, that he had to write more *conventional*
pieces
> >in order to "authenticate" himself as a composer.
> >
> >I told him I thought that was total BS, and he already *was*
> >authentic, just by listening as carefully as he had been (his
works
> >were aurally quite interesting...)
> >
> >So, instead, we're doing species counterpoint as a *separate*
study,
> >and I'm encouraging him to continue composing the things that he
is
> >most excited about...
>
> Good for you, JP! This sounds like the perfect course of action.
>
> -Carl

***Thanks, Carl! I really didn't want him working on stuff that,
essentially, wasn't *really* what he wanted to be doing, although, of
course, we could have done that....

JP

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
<jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> A couple of years ago, somebody on the main "academic" Tuning List
> pointed me in the direction of the book "Counterpoint in
Composition"
> by Salzer and Schachter.

Joseph,

How much previous background in the study of music composition is
required for a reader to get something out of this book?

My classical music theory background is the first year music major's
theory course series at our alma mater, plus what scraps I manage to
pick up playing in community orchestras.

Paolo

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "paolovalladolid" <phv40@h...>

/makemicromusic/topicId_7410.html#7419

wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
> <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> > A couple of years ago, somebody on the main "academic" Tuning
List
> > pointed me in the direction of the book "Counterpoint in
> Composition"
> > by Salzer and Schachter.
>
> Joseph,
>
> How much previous background in the study of music composition is
> required for a reader to get something out of this book?
>
> My classical music theory background is the first year music
major's
> theory course series at our alma mater, plus what scraps I manage
to
> pick up playing in community orchestras.
>
> Paolo

***Hello Paolo!

I would say, essentially, *none!*

It starts right at the very beginning with the construction of a
simple "cantus firmus" or a simple melodic line in whole notes and
takes it from there. That's the simplist, most rudimentary musical
element possible...

best,

Joseph

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
<jpehrson@r...> wrote:
>
> ***Hello Paolo!
>
> I would say, essentially, *none!*
>
> It starts right at the very beginning with the construction of a
> simple "cantus firmus" or a simple melodic line in whole notes and
> takes it from there. That's the simplist, most rudimentary musical
> element possible...
>
> best,
>
> Joseph

Thanks, Joseph! I'll add this book to my Amazon shopping list, along
with the Leonard Bernstein lecture DVD, which was highly recommended
on the justjazz group (for his thoughts on music in general).

Paolo

Paolo,

{you wrote...}
>Thanks, Joseph! I'll add this book to my Amazon shopping list...

Don't forget there are many resources on the net for used books. I don't know how you would be affected (with international shipping), but I didn't see a reason to purchase the counterpoint book brand new, and found one in less than 5 minutes for 1/3 of the new price. It is now in the mail to me.

Just a thought.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
<jpehrson@r...> wrote:

> It *used* to be that we could discuss composition and related issues
> on the Main Tuning list, but I see now that the focus has become
> quite limited, with constant "time out" reminders for anybody who
> strays from the "straight and narrow..."

There are constant complaints about too much math and too much jargon,
but I recall nothing about too much discussion of composition.

No wonder it's such an
> exciting place over there currently... :)

People who want to discuss scales, notation and tuning theory will
find plenty of discussion on tuning-math. Not much about composition,
though.

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

/makemicromusic/topicId_7410.html#7441

<gwsmith@s...> wrote:
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Pehrson"
> <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
>
>
> > It *used* to be that we could discuss composition and related
issues
> > on the Main Tuning list, but I see now that the focus has become
> > quite limited, with constant "time out" reminders for anybody who
> > strays from the "straight and narrow..."
>
> There are constant complaints about too much math and too much
jargon,
> but I recall nothing about too much discussion of composition.
>
> No wonder it's such an
> > exciting place over there currently... :)
>
> People who want to discuss scales, notation and tuning theory will
> find plenty of discussion on tuning-math. Not much about
composition,
> though.

***Hi Gene...

Well, we might as well keep discussion of composition over *here*
these days, since there seems to be quite a bit more posting of
*real* examples of it...

JP