| Author |
 Topic  |
|
pranakasha
Silver Member
USA
406 Posts |
 Posted - 30 August 2007 : 12:40:56 PM
|
What makes a piece "good"? For example, should Henry Mancini's "The Pink Panther" be considered a "good" piece?
Matthew Charles Weiss
Pranakasha Productions
Seattle, WA USA
www.WeissConcerto.com
|
|
|
Hal Owen
Moderator
USA
1808 Posts |
Posted - 30 August 2007 : 2:47:49 PM
|
If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then musical quality is in the ear of the listener.
The question arises immediately, "Good for what?" - for emotional gratification, for intellectual stimulation, for entertainment, for banishing boredom, for selling products, for identification with a group, for spiritual uplifting, for educating, for supporting drama, for therapy, for wooing a mate, for ... (fill in the blank with a thousand words or more).
Harold Owen
mailto:hjowen@uoregon.edu
Visit my web site at:
http://uoregon.edu/~hjowen |
 |
|
|
n/a
deleted
1437 Posts |
Posted - 30 August 2007 : 2:53:30 PM
|
Ah, the old "what is art?" discussion (usually partaken of by college students around the dorms with nothing better to do -- probably less of a waste of time than drinking and playing cards, but not by much :>).
I always liked the "I don't know much about art, but I know what I like" sort of response to this (best takeoff was the two guys hanging in irons in the dungeon and one saying to the other "I don't know much about torture, but I know what I don't like").
I like Mancini.
Mike Kelley
Gotta figure out a way to keep the young ones moral after school |
|
|
|
pranakasha
Silver Member
USA
406 Posts |
Posted - 30 August 2007 : 2:59:47 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Music Man
Ah, the old "what is art?" discussion (usually partaken of by college students around the dorms with nothing better to do -- probably less of a waste of time than drinking and playing cards, but not by much :>).
I always liked the "I don't know much about art, but I know what I like" sort of response to this (best takeoff was the two guys hanging in irons in the dungeon and one saying to the other "I don't know much about torture, but I know what I don't like").
I like Mancini.
Mike Kelley
Gotta figure out a way to keep the young ones moral after school
Yes...not the most original question, but I think a good one because though it has no answer (except for maybe "42"), it can spark some very interesting discussion. I believe we all want to write "good" music yet I find it quite fascinating that none of us can really pin down what "good" music really is!
For the record, I personally like "The Pink Panther" very much on a number of levels.
---Matt
Matthew Charles Weiss
Pranakasha Productions
Seattle, WA USA
www.WeissConcerto.com
|
|
|
|
ronan
Administrator
Canada
2094 Posts |
Posted - 30 August 2007 : 4:13:01 PM
|
"Good" music is the last piece I composed. "Great" music is the next one. 
I like the Pink Panther theme, too. Primarily because it is original.
Ron
Finale 2006c, full GPO & JABB under XP/Pro SP2
|
|
|
|
qccowboy
Platinum Member
Canada
1821 Posts |
Posted - 30 August 2007 : 6:02:44 PM
|
how about asking a simpler question, like: what makes a piece of music "better" or "less so"?
I think one could come up with a fairly acceptable answer to that one.
And I'm rather fond of the original music to Rocky and Bullwinkle...
Michel R. Edward
compositeur
Ville Saint-Laurent, Québec
www.dosblanc.ca |
Edited by - qccowboy on 30 August 2007 6:03:49 PM |
|
|
|
Jean
Moderator
USA
860 Posts |
|
|
pranakasha
Silver Member
USA
406 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 04:59:30 AM
|
Mr. Mancini's development of the simple motif "da-dum, da-dum" in "The Pink Panther" is quite ingenious, in the same way that Beethoven got so much mileage out of "ba-ba-ba-bum" in his 5th Symphony. This and a number of other factors contribute to an overall quality of "goodness" that I perceive in these 2 pieces.
---Matt
Matthew Charles Weiss
Pranakasha Productions
Seattle, WA USA
www.WeissConcerto.com
|
|
|
|
qccowboy
Platinum Member
Canada
1821 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 07:14:51 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jean
Better or Worse is like good or bad. It all depends on the listener.
yes, I think it IS all partially subjective...
I think I meant that one might be able to, to a certain extent, state that "this piece has a form that is more satisfying overall than that piece" (again, satisfying is subjective).
or one might say "adding this section to my sonata made it better than it was".
the experience of the listener is paramount when establishing the impact of the judgment being rendered.
when the word "good" is bandied about for a piece of music, one first off must examine that experiential componant.
my nephew of 16 thinks X song by Def Leppard is "good" (mind you, that's not quite the words he uses, but let us translate into "common english"). if we take into consideration the extent or limit of his own musical experience, then his value judgement (ie: "rawks/suxors") can only be a reflection of that musical experience.
my nephew thinks "opera sux!". so, his opinion is an expression of the limits of his musical experience. does it validate/invalidate his experience of that music? I don't think so. but it contextualizes his opinion and how he experiences music, in this particular case "opera".
how does one differentiate between levels of experiential judgment? are all levels of experiential judgement of equal value?
thus the entire conception of "good" in relation to any sensory experience that is subjective is.... what?
being stoned on codeine is a "good" feeling.
I am allergic to codeine.
I go into violent convulsions from codein.
so, from my own subjective sensory point of view, being stoned on codeine is "bad".
*******
meh.. I was feeling philosophical this morning...
in reality, I don't give a crap about these "good/bad" discussions... their all just pointless juvenile ponderings to me.
so, Pink Panther is good for what it is. so?
Michel R. Edward
compositeur
Ville Saint-Laurent, Québec
www.dosblanc.ca |
|
|
|
ronan
Administrator
Canada
2094 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 07:44:15 AM
|
The trouble with this kind of discussion is the underlying assumption: that there is some sort of absolute aesthetic against which we can measure "good" and "bad." However, when it comes to subjective experience the only measurements that can be made are against a person's previous experience and education (as Michel argued).
I happen to love the popular music that was prevalent when I was a teenager, though I doubt that anything produced by Phil Specter would stand up to a rigorous academic analysis. Still, the music is there as part of my experience and I enjoy it, even though I would never write in that vein.
Ron
Finale 2006c, full GPO & JABB under XP/Pro SP2
|
|
|
|
qccowboy
Platinum Member
Canada
1821 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 07:58:45 AM
|
well, in the spirit of continued sharing of "guilty pleasures"...
I have a special little place in my heart for the Madonna song that was used as a theme for the James Bond film "Die Another Day"...
Do I think it's "great music"? probably not. actually, definately not.
Do I still enjoy listening to it? definately.
Likewise, the Russian pop-duo T.a.T.u (I believe they won the Eurovision contest one year?) have been virulantly trashed by pop music critics.. and still, I LOVE their first album! I think there's some very powerful and moving stuff in there.
And my sister, who thinks my own music is too dissonant and "abstract" for her, listens to Ella and Coltraine and Michael Franks... and she is the FIRST to spit and look down on music like I mentionned above. There is no room in her musical experience for anything that is not "her taste". The problem is, the VAST majority of people are like that.
"Country music sucks!"
"Pop sucks!"
"Disco sucks"
how often have we heard those comments?
honestly, how often have we MADE those comments ourselves?
Michel R. Edward
compositeur
Ville Saint-Laurent, Québec
www.dosblanc.ca |
|
|
|
pranakasha
Silver Member
USA
406 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 08:37:29 AM
|
OK...so far everyone has avoided the question to some extent by saying that the whole concept of "good music" is so subjective as to be impossible to define.
However, like it or not, we make this judgement every time we decide to listen to a piece of music, continue listening to it, or consider performing it.
Therefore, don't you think that we all might benefit from an exploration of what "good music" might be?
---Matt
Matthew Charles Weiss
Pranakasha Productions
Seattle, WA USA
www.WeissConcerto.com
|
|
|
|
Hal Owen
Moderator
USA
1808 Posts |
|
|
Barry Stronge
Silver Member
United Kingdom
163 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 11:13:54 AM
|
I think it is necessary to differentiate between what is good and what is enjoyable. There is plenty of good music which I do not enjoy and plenty of bad which I do enjoy. What I enjoy depends on my personal sensibilities and can only be subjective. The 'goodness' of a piece of music, however, can in my opinion be assessed objectively. Hal was right when he asked 'Good for what?' A funeral march is not good for a wedding. I do not suggest that all music must be utilitarian - I only say that there must be some understanding of the intention if judgment is to be sound. The second factor after intention is quality of craftsmanship. That is a broad question since craft varies with style in music just as it does in, say, making furniture.
Of these two factors craftsmanship is the easier to judge. Intention can be difficult to grasp. Nevertheless, the question was about what makes a piece of music good and I think these are the chief factors. What makes a piece of music great, as distinct from merely good, is another and far more difficult question. |
|
|
|
pranakasha
Silver Member
USA
406 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 11:45:07 AM
|
Dear Barry,
Thanks for your response!
I mentioned a few postings up that I consider "The Pink Panther" to be a good piece because I admire how well Henry Mancini was able to take a trivial motif such as "da-dum da-dum" and turn it into a hit song, similar to what Beethoveen has done in many of his own works.
I believe this is a demonstration of Mr. Mancini's mastery of craft.
Another thing that makes "The Pink Panther" a good piece: it has *** Character ***
---Matt
Matthew Charles Weiss
Pranakasha Productions
Seattle, WA USA
www.WeissConcerto.com
|
|
|
|
qccowboy
Platinum Member
Canada
1821 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 12:43:50 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by pranakasha
OK...so far everyone has avoided the question to some extent by saying that the whole concept of "good music" is so subjective as to be impossible to define.
However, like it or not, we make this judgement every time we decide to listen to a piece of music, continue listening to it, or consider performing it.
Therefore, don't you think that we all might benefit from an exploration of what "good music" might be?
as Hal so eloquently put it: "no".
You err with the assumption that "we make this judgement every time we decide to to listen to a piece of music".
We do not make ANY judgement of quality by deciding to listen to a piece. We express interest or personal bias. Neither of which equate to a qualitative judgement.
You are making exactly the same error as the people I mention in my previous post: "x music sucks <because I don't like it>" or the natural inverse statement that "x music is good <because I like it>".
Since this thread will more than likely turn into the inevitable "head senselessly banging against a brick wall" debate that every thread you've started here devolves into, I will now withdraw and cease from participation.
Good day to all.
Michel R. Edward
compositeur
Ville Saint-Laurent, Québec
www.dosblanc.ca |
|
|
|
pranakasha
Silver Member
USA
406 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 2:24:32 PM
|
Dear Michel,
Sorry that you don't want contribute any further.
I still am a bit perplexed as to why all the "heavy-weight" composers on this Forum do not want to share their opinions on what gives a particular piece merit. I could probably list 10 things that a "good" piece should contain, but I'm holding out at the moment because, believe it or not, I value what everyone has to say, whether I agree with it or not.
---Matt
Matthew Charles Weiss
Pranakasha Productions
Seattle, WA USA
www.WeissConcerto.com
|
|
|
|
DatBugler
Silver Member
USA
392 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 2:27:32 PM
|
Just because aesthetic judgments are subjective does not mean they are totally invalid. I'd like to propose the following standard:
Good music both (a) is superficially pleasing and (b) continues to reveal new interesting details after an arbitrary number of repetitions.
The assessment of a particular piece of music according to this is of course subjective, as it should be. However, I think it gets at what many of us mean by "good" music; it is supposed to be enjoyable and intellectually interesting.
I remember a thread months ago in which we made a distinction between evaluating the aesthetic value of music and evaluating its craftsmanship. The consensus said that while the aesthetic value can be assessed with equal validity by musicians and non-musicians, musicians alone can assess craftsmanship. But what good is craftsmanship if it doesn't make for better music?
Saul Tobin
USC '11 in composition
Finale 2008 on MacBook Pro, with Oxygen-8 MIDI controller |
Edited by - DatBugler on 31 August 2007 2:28:22 PM |
|
|
|
qccowboy
Platinum Member
Canada
1821 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 2:32:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by DatBugler
Just because aesthetic judgments are subjective does not mean they are totally invalid.
I hope you don't think I said this.
I didn't say anything about "validity".
Read carefuly what I DID write: subjective aesthetic judgments are not qualitative, which is what the OP of this thread was looking to get into.
Yes, there are "rules" of construction that help to evaluate whether a piece fits into a certain set of standards. You can agree with those established "standards" or not. If you do not, then it is up to you to find something else that is NON-subjective by which to make qualitative judgements.
"I like it" is a perfectly valid subjective statement.
"I like it, therefore it is good" is not.
Michel R. Edward
compositeur
Ville Saint-Laurent, Québec
www.dosblanc.ca |
Edited by - qccowboy on 31 August 2007 2:37:42 PM |
|
|
|
pranakasha
Silver Member
USA
406 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 2:51:47 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by DatBugler
Just because aesthetic judgments are subjective does not mean they are totally invalid. I'd like to propose the following standard:
Good music both (a) is superficially pleasing and (b) continues to reveal new interesting details after an arbitrary number of repetitions.
Actually I find Saul's proposed measuring-stick for determining the "goodness" of a particular piece to itself be quite "good".
---Matt
Matthew Charles Weiss
Pranakasha Productions
Seattle, WA USA
www.WeissConcerto.com
|
|
|
|
DatBugler
Silver Member
USA
392 Posts |
Posted - 31 August 2007 : 2:53:32 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by qccowboy
I hope you don't think I said this.
I didn't say anything about "validity".
Read carefuly what I DID write: subjective aesthetic judgments are not qualitative, which is what the OP of this thread was looking to get into.
Yes, there are "rules" of construction that help to evaluate whether a piece fits into a certain set of standards. You can agree with those established "standards" or not. If you do not, then it is up to you to find something else that is NON-subjective by which to make qualitative judgements.
"I like it" is a perfectly valid subjective statement.
"I like it, therefore it is good" is not.
The original question was "what makes a piece good." I agree that "I like it, therefore it is good" is invalid. The question is what criterion should be used to evaluate the quality of a piece of music. I proposed one.
Saul Tobin
USC '11 in composition
Finale 2008 on MacBook Pro, with Oxygen-8 MIDI controller |
Edited by - DatBugler on 31 August 2007 2:54:22 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
