the composer's intent

Really!!! gentlemen and ladies! Variations on the themes of others in
music, art, and mathematics are as old as these arts themselves. A poorly
intoned but well intentioned (I did it just like her wrote it!)
performance is a variation on a theme, and you don't have to like
it. You might even say it sucks. But to inveigh against experimentation,
especially well executed and well thought out experimentation, is contrary
to the spirit of the whole endeavor. One or another of us may dislike a
particular approach, and say that it misses this or that point of the
intention of the composer, or betrays the structural integrity in one
way or another, and that of course is our right. I really
dislike Chopin transcribed for orchestra, but Eugene Ormandy is free to
conduct what he likes and I am free not to buy the CD. It is one thing to
write a review and criticize what one wants. That is the nature of a
review. However, the dicussion here seems to be taking a repressive tone.
Am I missing something, or are some of you actually saying that it is
wrong to experiment with tuning?

John Starrett
http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html

JOHNS!
You don't need to tinker with anothers work to experiment, if fact I
suggest it will get in your way. Historically, composers used to write for
ensembles and/or piano because they were activities that even non
professionals took part in. In other words, they wrote music for others to
play as much as listen to. The interchangeably of themes and movements were
common when music functioned to fulfill this need. this is no longer the case
and a composer would be out of his mind if he wrote for such a market to
survive. There were patrons in those days too where these performances adorned
the parlors of the elite. Also composers have become more and more specific
about what they want to the point you have works that cannot be reproduced.
This isn't limited to a Partch but even a subotnick. The composer is more
important than the performer and the need of interpreters of newer works will
become less and less as the composer fulfills his rightful role. We don't want
or need our works tinkered with!
You don't need to parasite others works to experiment. so go
experiment!!!!

John Starrett wrote:

> From: John Starrett <jstarret@math.cudenver.edu>
>
> Really!!! gentlemen and ladies! Variations on the themes of others in
> music, art, and mathematics are as old as these arts themselves. A poorly
> intoned but well intentioned (I did it just like her wrote it!)
> performance is a variation on a theme, and you don't have to like
> it. You might even say it sucks. But to inveigh against experimentation,
> especially well executed and well thought out experimentation, is contrary
> to the spirit of the whole endeavor. One or another of us may dislike a
> particular approach, and say that it misses this or that point of the
> intention of the composer, or betrays the structural integrity in one
> way or another, and that of course is our right. I really
> dislike Chopin transcribed for orchestra, but Eugene Ormandy is free to
> conduct what he likes and I am free not to buy the CD. It is one thing to
> write a review and criticize what one wants. That is the nature of a
> review. However, the dicussion here seems to be taking a repressive tone.
> Am I missing something, or are some of you actually saying that it is
> wrong to experiment with tuning?
>
> John Starrett
> http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~jstarret/microtone.html
>
> John Link wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> When we talk about following the composer's intention we must remember
>> that
>> any notation system is inherently incomplete, so a composer always relies
>> on the intelligence and musicality of his performers. At least that's what
>>
>> I do. (If you're writing for a sequencer I guess you'd better count on its
>>
>> lack of intelligence, lack of musicality, and completely literal
>> interpretation of your instructions.) For my singers I find that it is
>> often better to not try to be so complete in my instructions. For example,
>>
>> when arranging Bydlo (Ox Cart) from Mussorgsky's Pictures at an
>> Exhibition,
>> I carefully copied all of Mussorgsky's eighth-note rests, many of which
>> simply indicate phrasing. Well, my singers were so careful not to sing
>> through the rests that they ruined the phrasing! So I rewrote the
>> arrangement without the rests, forcing my singers to find the phrasing. Of
>>
>> course I wished that my singers had exercised more intelligence in their
>> interpretation of the rests, but in any case I think my example shows how
>> a
>> less complete set of instructions can lead to better results.
>>
>> We must also remember that the composer himself might not fully know his
>> intention. (Is this dangerous ground? Let me go further: A composer, if he
>>
>> is any good, simply does his best to give instructions to others to
>> recreate sounds that he has imagined, and might make mistakes in
>> transcribing his imagination or might be misunderstood.) On several
>> occasions I've had the extremely satisfying experience of hearing one of
>> my
>> singers, even in an audition, sing something I wrote in such a way that I
>> felt as if I had been shown something about my music. What a pleasure that
>>
>> was. I wish that all of you could have performances like that.
>>
>> John Link
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com

Kraig Grady wrote:

> From: Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@anaphoria.com>
>
> JOHNS!
> You don't need to tinker with anothers work to experiment, if fact I
> suggest it will get in your way. Historically, composers used to write for
> ensembles and/or piano because they were activities that even non
> professionals took part in. In other words, they wrote music for others to
> play as much as listen to. The interchangeably of themes and movements were
> common when music functioned to fulfill this need. this is no longer the case
> and a composer would be out of his mind if he wrote for such a market to
> survive. There were patrons in those days too where these performances adorned
> the parlors of the elite. Also composers have become more and more specific
> about what they want to the point you have works that cannot be reproduced.
> This isn't limited to a Partch but even a subotnick. The composer is more
> important than the performer and the need of interpreters of newer works will
> become less and less as the composer fulfills his rightful role. We don't want
> or need our works tinkered with!
> You don't need to parasite others works to experiment. so go
> experiment!!!!

I've got to agree with KG here: do something new folks!

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* xouoxno@virtulink.com
*
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* M E L A v i r t u a l d r e a m house monitor
*
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm