Live data from Hacker News

Can any composer equal Bach?

bbc.com

101–110 of 171 posts

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#101
post #61

HN types think they're the smartest of the smart, yet judging from these comments and from other music-related posts I've seen here, most of you listen to popular music (including rock and rap) near exclusively. The comments seriously offering up pop stars as equals of Bach are just sad. Go on a pop diet. Cut back on it the way you might sugar or processed foods. Try to spend a year listening to classical music only.…

Pop music might be compositionally simple, but the exquisite rhythms, melodies, and timbral experimentation will indeed live on for centuries. Beethoven would have killed to write something as catchy as "Yesterday". Cutting off paths of emotional resonance from your life will only damage you as a music listener and a musician.

I was raised to dislike The Beatles, since they "just wrote stupid love songs". I really changed my opinion at a later age. I think most songwriters and composers would die for having written three Lennon-Mccartney compositions. And Lennon-Mccartney wrote at least two dozens of stunningly great compositions.

I think it is pointless to debate who was the best composer, or whether any composer can equal Bach, since it is largely a matter of taste and unclear what criteria apply (complexity? emotion?). But in terms of impact, music history is partitioned in 'before The Beatles' and 'after The Beatles', just as it is partitioned 'before Bach' and 'after Bach'.

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#102

Bach is the 'ultimate composer' in the same sense that Pleistocene Ogg is the ultimate tool-maker, Robert Goddard the ultimate rocket-maker. Bach did many wondrous things, added a lot to the vocabulary, staked a viable claim on a couple of mother lodes. But this sort of argument (though eternally engaged in) is futile. While classical is a favorite of many (including me), music has moved far, far onward.

Onward, but not forward. Counterpoint is still depressingly underused in modern music (save for the occasional duet), and it can say so much with so little material. (Heck, the majority modern music barely even changes chords , let let alone key or anything beyond.) These tools are not antiquated; they are not buried in the sediment. They are still perfectly useful and there for our taking, if only we would dust them…

If by counterpoint you mean having melody on a different track (rather than just "beat" or added harmony) I'd say it's used way more than just in duets/canons. Most jazz (or accompaniment in general) would apply for example.

https://youtu.be/GhCXAiNz9Jo?t=1m22s Does this apply? (Franz Ferdinand - Take Me Out)

I think counterpoint is used more than people think.

Saying that we haven't moved "forward" from Bach is disingenuous, when Bach didn't even have straight 7th chords.

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#103
post #61

HN types think they're the smartest of the smart, yet judging from these comments and from other music-related posts I've seen here, most of you listen to popular music (including rock and rap) near exclusively. The comments seriously offering up pop stars as equals of Bach are just sad. Go on a pop diet. Cut back on it the way you might sugar or processed foods. Try to spend a year listening to classical music only.…

I did that and it seriously changes your perspective of music. It is very hard to go back to listen to pop music after you get the taste of classical.

Good for you!

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#104

The Chaconne [1] is the most moving piece of music I've ever heard. (hard stop) The story behind it makes it even more so. When you grok it at full volume you'll understand what Douglas Adams was talking about. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaconne

If he’d never written anything else, the Chaconne alone would be enough to make him one of the greats.

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Onward, but not forward. Counterpoint is still depressingly underused in modern music (save for the occasional duet), and it can say so much with so little material. (Heck, the majority modern music barely even changes chords , let let alone key or anything beyond.) These tools are not antiquated; they are not buried in the sediment. They are still perfectly useful and there for our taking, if only we would dust them…

If by counterpoint you mean having melody on a different track (rather than just "beat" or added harmony) I'd say it's used way more than just in duets/canons. Most jazz (or accompaniment in general) would apply for example. https://youtu.be/GhCXAiNz9Jo?t=1m22s Does this apply? (Franz Ferdinand - Take Me Out) I think counterpoint is used more than people think. Saying that we haven't moved "forward" from Bach is disi…

I'd say counterpoint requires the melodies to be on more-or-less equal footing, which doesn't really happen in this clip. (I'm sure it happens way more often in jazz, but I'm not an avid listener.) In any case, you definitely won't be hearing the kinds of crazy thematic transformations that Bach uses in his fugues.

I didn't mean to imply that our music is unequivocally less advanced than Bach's — we've certainly acquired musical tools over the years that Bach would never have dreamed of! — but I also don't believe that his music should be viewed as a mere archeological layer in music history. It's still alive, it still resonates with modern audiences, and it still uses techniques that are rarely seen even today. We can still profit tremendously from it.

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#106
The music of Bach is pretty unique to listen to while coding. The parallel structure of the music lines goes very well for a developer that must coordinate multiple tasks. I discovered bach by myself, and it was a pretty downing task. For curious minds, I would recommend the Goldberg variation, the cello suite and the violin concerto in E major (BWV 1042) as a starting point. At first most of his work may seem like a wall because so much is happening ... but with time you see the light. I remember at first the well-tempered keyboard was like that, but now it just flows so nicely. It's also a delight to listen to his music on original instruments such as the harpsichord. The music is so much clearer when played on a harpsichord. From the same epoch there are so many more to discover, one of my favorite is Domenico Scarlatti and his 555 sonatas to be listened on harpsicord played by Scott Ross!

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#108

I first should admit that I'm a 100% self taught appreciator of classical music. I don't have any formal musical education. Nor any formal history of music education. I'm the only person of my family and friends that seeks out and listens to classical music. So, my knowledge is very uneven and I'm a total pedestrian in this realm. Over the years, I've found music by references from fiction, films and criticism. I've…

Those pieces you mention aren't exactly the things I would categorize as "moving", though. What about the pieces for solo cello (BWV 1007-1008)? The Goldberg Variations? The solo violin sonatas (BWV 1001-1006)? His motets (e.g. BWV 227) and cantatas (too many to mention)? Or the Matthäus Passion (BWV 244)? Most people would also mention the Orchestral Suite No. 3 in D major (BWV 1068, more famously known as "Air on t…

The Goldberg Variations is a good starting point because it evolves gradually to builds in complexity. And it was designed to relax, so it's a perfect companion for a long session of coding.

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#109
If you can name a short (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cVSgEdT4KI . Love, loss, despair, grievance, new hope, closure - it's all in there in this single, short, compassionate-but-not-sentimental, solemn-but-not-sad, perfectly balanced, ethereal piece.

Re: Can any composer equal Bach?

#110

I first should admit that I'm a 100% self taught appreciator of classical music. I don't have any formal musical education. Nor any formal history of music education. I'm the only person of my family and friends that seeks out and listens to classical music. So, my knowledge is very uneven and I'm a total pedestrian in this realm. Over the years, I've found music by references from fiction, films and criticism. I've…

Okay, I'll try to help!

My background: At about 14, one night with the radio on, on the way to sleep, I heard some music and thought "WOW!". It was Beethoven's 7th Symphony. It can be a lot of fun -- at least one part is great dance music.

Then I kept listening, buying records, seeing what I liked and didn't. I found a lot to like.

As a math grad student at Indiana University, my dorm was next to the excellent music school they had (have?) there with a lot of orchestra and soloist quality music students. One, a Stern protege, put his old Italian violin under my left chin and gave me a first lesson. Soon I took a "course" in violin, got a loan of a not very valuable violin from the school, started at the beginning tuning the violin. The teaching was a good start; my teacher was terrific, played the Brahms concerto in Toronto!! I continued and eventually made it through parts of my favorite music. I wasn't any good, but as far as I got was fun beyond belief -- could scream out to the heavens with the full passion of the human spirit!! The violin gave me a much better voice for such screaming out!

So, for Bach, right, for the prelude to the third partita for solo violin, e.g.,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KYRdRnnBYw

So, it's super famous and a favorite of violinists. It starts with a haralding call, rushes through lots of running around gymnastics, and ends with a nice calm resolution.

I did well enough on the first two pages and the fourth one -- still need work on the third page! And I got through about half of the Chaconne.

So, let's start with a standard favorite, easy enough to like that it is close "pop" music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf_ADv_Fnlo

So, right, this is the prelude to one of the Bach pieces for solo cello. There's an obvious way to play it on violin, and I got through that.

So, what is going on here? Well, opinions will vary, but here's my view: The piece is about some guy thinking about something. He cares; he's passionate. Maybe he is thinking about some problem in his relationship with his girlfriend. He starts out confused. He things of X, interrupts thinking of Y, keeps charging on considering this and that, with some thoughts interrupting others, some thoughts with some momentum of their own. Finally he begins to understand and get to a solution. Then he gets really happy! He rises with victory, joy! It's like he just won the 100 meters at the Olympics, takes a victory lap with his arms above his head, and sees his girl in the stands really happy with him and cheering!!!

Or, the piece is a short drama as in formula fiction: He's a nice guy, the protagonist, has a problem he keeps struggling with, and finally gets a great solution and wins the girl.

Imagine that the guy is explaining all this to you, from the problem though his struggles, to his solution and victory. He's passionate, really wants a solution. BUT!!!!! He is explaining this to you in a language you don't know even one word of! So, you can't understand his words, but you can hear his passion. To me, that is what Bach is doing in that music.

And to me that is mostly what Bach does: So, there is some speech in a natural language, maybe English, French, Russian, whatever, fervent, emotional, maybe passionate, speech, and, since we don't understand the language or the words, all we get is just the emotion.

The speech can be, as from that cello piece, by just one person. Or the speech can be several people, an orchestra or choir, all saying much the same thing. Or the speech can be a dialog between two persons or groups of persons.

Sure, my favorite piece of music is the Bach Chaconne. So, it's the last part, sort of tacked on, to one of his six solo pieces for violin. It's written in the keys of D minor and D major.

Keys? Okay, take a sound wave that repeats, say, 440 times a second. It will have a pitch like the A above middle C on a piano. You can buy a tuning fork for 440 Hz A -- it's a standard. Well, 880 Hz is also an A but an octave higher. Okay, 880 / 440 = 2, so in going up an octave we have gone up a factor of 2 in frequency. Well, we can consider 2^(1/12), that is, the 12th root of 2. So, multiply that by itself 12 times and will get 2. So, take A at 440 and multiply the frequency by this 2^(1/12) thingy, and will get, A#, that is, one half step or one semi-tone up from A. Multiply again and get two half steps up or a full step or B. Or B is two half steps above A, two half tones, two semi-tones, one whole tone. So to go up a semi-tone, multiply the frequency by 2^(1/12). To go up a whole tone, multiply that by 2^(1/12) twice.

So, start on A at 440 Hz and go up tone, tone, semi-tone, tone, tone, tone, semi-tone, will have gone up 12 semi-tones, and will be at A at 880 Hz. You now have the notes of the A major scale, the notes of the key of A major! The notes are A, B, C#, D, E, F#, G#, A. Can do these steps starting with any note on the piano, say, C, and get the C major scale, the notes of the key of C major, and get the notes C, D, E, F, G, A, B, C, which are all the white keys on a piano.

Or, for D major, get D, E, F#, G, A, B, C#, D.

An interval of a fifth is seven semi-tones. So, if start with C and go up a fifth, get G. So the notes of G major are G, A, B, C, D, E, F#, G. So, we have one sharp! If we go up a fifth from G we get D, and as we have seen the notes of D major are D, E, F#, G, A, B, C#, D. So, we have two sharps, the one we had from G major plus one more. If we go up from D a fifth we get to A with notes, as we saw, A, B, C#, D, E, F#, G#, A, or three sharps, the two we had with D major plus one more, G#. We can continue this and get the "circle of fifth". Cute.

But if we start on D and go up tone, semi-tone, tone, tone, tone, tone, semi-tone, then again we have gone up 12 semi-tones and get notes D, E, F, G, A, B, C#, D, the D minor scale.

This use of 2^(1/12) to define the notes of, say, a piano keyboard is good, called tempered tuning, but not the only way. Here's the core of the main other way called perfect tuning: We can observe that

2^(7/12) = 1.49830707688... ~ 1.5 = 3/2

So, going up 7 semi-tones, a fifth, multiplies frequency by right at 1.5 = 3/2. Well, a violin has four strings. The one on the far left for the violinist (as the instrument is held) is the first G below middle C. The next string to the right is D, then A and E. So, each adjacent pair of strings is separated by a fifth and will have a frequency ratio right at 3/2. But with 3/2, three times the frequency of the string with the lower frequency has the same frequency as two times the frequency of the higher string. So, the second overtone (think Fourier series for periodic waves) of the lower string will have the same frequency as the first overtone of the higher frequency. Well, if bow the two strings at the same time, then can hear this common frequency or, if the two frequencies are not quite equal, the beats in the two frequencies. So a violinist tunes his instrument by adjusting to make the beats go away. He starts with the A string at 440 Hz then plays the A and E strings and adjusts the frequency of the E string. Then the same for the A and D and then for the D and G.

So, we now have four notes -- G, D, A, E -- tuned to have ratios of 3/2. So, we have a ratio of small whole numbers. Continuing in this way, we can work to get nearly all the notes on a violin by working with ratios of small whole numbers. Those ratios of small whole numbers are close to whole number powers of our 2^(1/12).

In the history of music, violins, flutes, trumpets were tuned with ratios of small whole numbers. But, if want to build a piano or organ that can play the major and minor scales with any key, then get a big mess -- need too many close but significantly different frequencies. So, if just use 2^(1/12) or approximately that, then can get "tempered" tuning as on current pianos, and each octave needs only 12 frequencies. Bach helped make tempered tuning accepted.

Simple recipe for music: Pick a note, say, D, and pick either D major or D minor. Play D. Then play all the other notes in that scale except D. Then return to D. As long as you don't return to D, the music will seem to have no end. As soon as you do return to D, the music will seem ended. First cut, the D major version will sound glad, and the D minor version, sad. Same for all the other major and minor keys. In the key of D, the note D is called the tonic and is roughly the beginning and end of a piece in D.

Okay, the Bach Chaconne starts in D minor, has a center section in D major, and continues in D minor to the end. Yes, it starts and ends on D.

My favorite part of it is at the end of the center D major section. Here are a few seconds starting at the end of that section and continuing in last D minor section:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RATaKVXsjgQ

After the climax part, the music gets confused: An artistic interpretation is that the confusion is release or catharsis from the climax. Not all violinists try for such!

Here is a Heifetz performance of the Chaconne:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJvYYBGYW50

So, what is an interpretation? Well, that is made a little easier by the fact that a chaconne is dance rhythm. So, the piece keeps repeating this rhythm or close to it for the full 13 minutes or so. So an effect is that the music is insistent. Then, in the sense of speech, the music is like someone saying much the same thing over and over but in somewhat different ways, with different emotions, over and over. So, the guy is thinking about heavy, passionate stuff, and trying and trying to get to some resolution.

The whole first D minor section does this, over and over, versions of being insistent, using the chaconne dance rhythm.

Then at the start of the center D major section, at about 6:35 in the link above, the music becomes calm, "glad", happier, like the guy is finally getting some happy memories (no doubt about his girl!). But the calm feelings don't last and, instead, build and build, with some very insistent notes played three times. After these triplets, the music returns to some of the beginning and builds, with astounding use of just the four strings on a violin to the climax, at about 9:20, to the end of the D major section at about 9:45, the catharsis, if believe that, and the final D minor section.

There are also good versions for piano, one by Brahms for left hand alone, full orchestra, etc.

Post reply on HN