check your head

Jdl wrote (on the tuning list):
>
>For myself, I am very wary of letting the head override the ear. The
>head is, IMHO, what is wrong (to my taste) with the "classical" works
>of the 20th century. If it requires explanation before they play the
>music, I know I'm in trouble.
>

This is all just bullshit spawned by academics. That is, that any piece
"requires explanation."

All the great 20th-century "classical" works can be appreciated without
any "head"-work. I.e. on a purely visceral, physical,
oooh-that-chord-was-sexy, yeah-that-rhythm-is-funky
aaah-that-was-a-cool-sound level. No explanation necessary.

What may be necessary is listening to the music repeatedly to get into its
sound-world and rhythm-world in those physical, visceral ways.

When people say "I don't get into that music because it's 'head' music"
they are either saying "The sound of [stacked 4ths] [swing beats]
[neutral 3rds] just doesn't do it for me" (i.e.---it's a sheer taste
issue relating to basic musical building blocks) or what they are
saying is, "I haven't gotten a visceral grasp of this music's sound world,
and I don't want to take the time to try," which is fine, there's a lot
of music out there, and we all have to take that attitude on many
occasions.

But the "head" excuse is bogus. I have found it just as difficult to
learn to appreciate, in that visceral physical way, the musical
language(s) of Led Zeppelin tunes, as it was for me to learn to
appreciate, in that visceral, physical way, the musical language(s) of
Bartok's 3rd string quartet.

(Of course, another reason may be that the piece/song in question sucks,
but I am making the assumption here that we are talking about pieces
generally viewed as kick-ass music.)

[I wrote (on the tuning list):]
>>For myself, I am very wary of letting the head override the ear. The
>>head is, IMHO, what is wrong (to my taste) with the "classical" works
>>of the 20th century. If it requires explanation before they play the
>>music, I know I'm in trouble.

[Christopher Bailey wrote:]
>This is all just bullshit spawned by academics. That is, that any
>piece "requires explanation."

>All the great 20th-century "classical" works can be appreciated without
>any "head"-work. I.e. on a purely visceral, physical,
>oooh-that-chord-was-sexy, yeah-that-rhythm-is-funky
>aaah-that-was-a-cool-sound level. No explanation necessary.

>What may be necessary is listening to the music repeatedly to get into
>its sound-world and rhythm-world in those physical, visceral ways.

>When people say "I don't get into that music because it's 'head' music"
>they are either saying "The sound of [stacked 4ths] [swing beats]
>[neutral 3rds] just doesn't do it for me" (i.e.---it's a sheer taste
>issue relating to basic musical building blocks) or what they are
>saying is, "I haven't gotten a visceral grasp of this music's sound
>world, and I don't want to take the time to try," which is fine,
>there's a lot of music out there, and we all have to take that attitude
>on many occasions.

>But the "head" excuse is bogus. I have found it just as difficult to
>learn to appreciate, in that visceral physical way, the musical
>language(s) of Led Zeppelin tunes, as it was for me to learn to
>appreciate, in that visceral, physical way, the musical language(s) of
>Bartok's 3rd string quartet.

>(Of course, another reason may be that the piece/song in question
>sucks, but I am making the assumption here that we are talking about
>pieces generally viewed as kick-ass music.)

I'm sorely afraid that many world premiers of classical music pieces
really do "suck" (a word I've taken flack for using on another list,
BTW ;-> ). But I do also acknowledge that many wonderful works of music
take getting used to. How to sort them out? I don't have a good
answer, especially given the thousands of musical choices available out
there. We build walls to escape the assault of junk, and we miss
learning about something worthwhile.

I keep thinking, though, that a _really_ good piece of music both
engages on first hearing AND remains fresh and exciting after a 20th
or 50th hearing. A utopian ideal perhaps...

JdL