Funny that my ears are actually getting accustomed to listening to Babbitt’s music, or other avant-garde compositions for that matter. Why am I surprised? This is simply the result of a small attempt to immerse myself into the world of previously unfamiliar 20thC music for the last 3 months.
Out of all the different domains and aspects of 20thC music we’ve covered, Minimalism still appeals to me the most. (This has always been the case actually.) Somehow I can identify with it without much difficulty and it captures my attention. Don’t know how else to put it. argh. Really wonder if it’s the same for others or is it just my ears? Is it true for most people that in general, Minimalism is more accessible (aurally) than other forms of 20thC music?
Looking back, I’ve realized that I’ve come quite a long way in a short 3-month time frame. Reason being that previously I found 20thC pieces completely unintelligible. Also, I’m ashamed to admit that I was even mocking at such form of “music” and questioning the musical ability of their respective “composers”. (absolutely rude and obnoxious of me.) :-S This was because I was still listening to them through my tonal and biased ears! I just simply need to put on another fresh pair of listening ears.
I must say that I have been humbled by my newfound respect for the 20thC composers. (Well, it’s ‘newfound’ from my perspective – they have always been great and respectable.) Another reason is that I tried my hand at writing a piece of music in the 20thC style (quite vague, I know). And it’s really really difficult/tedious (but rewarding) despite it only being a short 1.5min piece with superficial features. Imagine the massive amount of mind-boggling compositional decisions that Babbitt had to grapple with. Respect.
So, yep.. I’m sure Babbitt would be pleased with my learning-journey. :-)
“.. in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.”
31 October 2008
Notes on Babbitt's Electronic Music
Just jotting some notes on electronic music..
Interview with Babbitt (1968)
Babbitt says that there are three ways to produce electronic music:
- the tape studio
- the synthesizer
- the computer
finding this article is very timely and i'm very thankful for it! :) especially this is directly from Babbitt describing his works.
i was just getting so confused over one other reading which makes the distinction between ‘computer music’ and ‘tape music’ in the domain of ‘electronic music’. however it does not explain it clearly. most other readings also do not make the distinction even though it is significant.
Other interesting quotations/points raised in this article but not directly relevant to this research:
- pitch is the most impt aspect of musical structure? hmm..
Babbitt says, "As a composer, I still feel that pitch is the single most important aspect of musical structure."
- Babbitt's opinion of electronic music in music education, back in 1968.
"Fowler. In your opinion, what would an eighth- or ninth-grade music teacher have to know in order to introduce electronic music to his students in an interesting way?
Babbitt. The significant issue here is how to develop a child's musicality from every conceivable point of view. The question of the particular medium would just be a question of being able to inform the child in a rudimentary way. I would think that the music educator who is competent to make decisions about a child's musical training could easily acquire the slight amount of information that would be necessary. There's no music educator who couldn't learn to do that in a very, very short time. The information is available. In fact, this issue of the Journal should provide enough such information. There's no reason in the world why the music educator should have to be a technological expert. Very few composers are. I don't have to know how to build an oboe to write for it, and I don't have to know how to build a synthesizer to write for it. The educator doesn't need this technological information either. The educator simply has to be able to describe in very general but accurate terms how these media operate, just enough to arouse the child's interest and avoid misunderstanding."
"It is entirely up to the music educator to decide the complexity of the music appropriate to the development of a child. Whether it be electronic or not, I would insist, is irrelevant."
These are excerpts taken from:
An Interview with Milton Babbitt (1968) from the Music Educators Journal, Vol. 55, No. 3
Interview with Babbitt (1968)
Babbitt says that there are three ways to produce electronic music:
- the tape studio
- the synthesizer
- the computer
finding this article is very timely and i'm very thankful for it! :) especially this is directly from Babbitt describing his works.
i was just getting so confused over one other reading which makes the distinction between ‘computer music’ and ‘tape music’ in the domain of ‘electronic music’. however it does not explain it clearly. most other readings also do not make the distinction even though it is significant.
Other interesting quotations/points raised in this article but not directly relevant to this research:
- pitch is the most impt aspect of musical structure? hmm..
Babbitt says, "As a composer, I still feel that pitch is the single most important aspect of musical structure."
- Babbitt's opinion of electronic music in music education, back in 1968.
"Fowler. In your opinion, what would an eighth- or ninth-grade music teacher have to know in order to introduce electronic music to his students in an interesting way?
Babbitt. The significant issue here is how to develop a child's musicality from every conceivable point of view. The question of the particular medium would just be a question of being able to inform the child in a rudimentary way. I would think that the music educator who is competent to make decisions about a child's musical training could easily acquire the slight amount of information that would be necessary. There's no music educator who couldn't learn to do that in a very, very short time. The information is available. In fact, this issue of the Journal should provide enough such information. There's no reason in the world why the music educator should have to be a technological expert. Very few composers are. I don't have to know how to build an oboe to write for it, and I don't have to know how to build a synthesizer to write for it. The educator doesn't need this technological information either. The educator simply has to be able to describe in very general but accurate terms how these media operate, just enough to arouse the child's interest and avoid misunderstanding."
"It is entirely up to the music educator to decide the complexity of the music appropriate to the development of a child. Whether it be electronic or not, I would insist, is irrelevant."
These are excerpts taken from:
An Interview with Milton Babbitt (1968) from the Music Educators Journal, Vol. 55, No. 3
25 October 2008
Structure/Outline of Research on Babbitt
Core focus:
- An introduction to Babbitt and his music
- How to approach Babbitt’s music
History of Babbitt
- Most known for his works in Serialism and Electronic music
- Very strong background in mathematics (has an impact on how he conceives music)
- Influenced by Schoenberg and Webern. He first encountered their works when he was studying in New York University and carried on to develop his 12-tone technique.
- He was part of the faculty at Princeton which was at the forefront of electronic music (Griffiths, 1981). This complemented Babbitt in his musical pursuit.
Serialism
- Babbitt’s development of Serialism (different from other serial composers – both his predecessors and contemporaries)
- Pieces to focus on:
Semi-Simple Variations (1956)
Minute Waltz (1977)
- Analysis by Morgan (1992), Wintle (1976), Blaustein and Brody (1986)
- Other interesting ideas identified such as its surface features
Electronic Music
- Babbitt’s purpose of exploring this medium is to achieve precision which is not possible with humans
- There is a need for the electronic medium
Examples of Relata I (1965) and Post-Partitions (1966)
- A piece to focus on:
Composition for Synthesizer (1961)
- Analysis by Morris (1997)
Listening to Babbitt
- Straus’ (1986) opinion on listening to Babbitt’s music is by appreciating the surface features: (a) contours; (b) dynamics; (c) register.
Example of String Quartet No. 2 (1954)
- However, I do have some reservations about Straus’ article.
(i) He focuses all his attention on surface features and relationships and does not agree with an in-depth exploration of Babbitt’s works. I disagree because Babbitt’s music is so much more meaningful and valuable below its surface.
(ii) Using String Quartet No. 2 as a sole example in this article is not a fair representation of all of Babbitt’s works, especially when Straus uses this to prove his point that ‘Babbitt’s music should be appreciated by listening to surface features’. This piece of music is one of Babbitt's simplest in terms of prominence of surface features.
- There is a need to understand the structure and underlying compositional strategies in order to fully appreciate Babbitt’s music.
- An introduction to Babbitt and his music
- How to approach Babbitt’s music
History of Babbitt
- Most known for his works in Serialism and Electronic music
- Very strong background in mathematics (has an impact on how he conceives music)
- Influenced by Schoenberg and Webern. He first encountered their works when he was studying in New York University and carried on to develop his 12-tone technique.
- He was part of the faculty at Princeton which was at the forefront of electronic music (Griffiths, 1981). This complemented Babbitt in his musical pursuit.
Serialism
- Babbitt’s development of Serialism (different from other serial composers – both his predecessors and contemporaries)
- Pieces to focus on:
Semi-Simple Variations (1956)
Minute Waltz (1977)
- Analysis by Morgan (1992), Wintle (1976), Blaustein and Brody (1986)
- Other interesting ideas identified such as its surface features
Electronic Music
- Babbitt’s purpose of exploring this medium is to achieve precision which is not possible with humans
- There is a need for the electronic medium
Examples of Relata I (1965) and Post-Partitions (1966)
- A piece to focus on:
Composition for Synthesizer (1961)
- Analysis by Morris (1997)
Listening to Babbitt
- Straus’ (1986) opinion on listening to Babbitt’s music is by appreciating the surface features: (a) contours; (b) dynamics; (c) register.
Example of String Quartet No. 2 (1954)
- However, I do have some reservations about Straus’ article.
(i) He focuses all his attention on surface features and relationships and does not agree with an in-depth exploration of Babbitt’s works. I disagree because Babbitt’s music is so much more meaningful and valuable below its surface.
(ii) Using String Quartet No. 2 as a sole example in this article is not a fair representation of all of Babbitt’s works, especially when Straus uses this to prove his point that ‘Babbitt’s music should be appreciated by listening to surface features’. This piece of music is one of Babbitt's simplest in terms of prominence of surface features.
- There is a need to understand the structure and underlying compositional strategies in order to fully appreciate Babbitt’s music.
24 October 2008
Reply to Jean - programmatic titles?
Hello Jeanette, :)
My response to your comment is quite long so I’ll post it here instead of the small box in the Comments page. Thanks for dropping by!
(Programmatic title – Titles which evoke a scene/image/mood in the mind.)
A few of Babbitt’s music does indeed have programmatic titles, while most have neutral sounding ones which simply describes the form or compositional technique used. Let me give you a few examples:
Programmatic titles:
An Elizabethan Sextette - 1'When I Was Fair And Young' (1979)
An Elizabethan Sextette - 3'Your Face, Your Tongue, Your Wit' (1979)
Lagniappe (1985) (meaning: a small present/gift)
The Widow’s Lament in Springtime (1950)
‘Neutral-sounding’ titles:
Duet (1956)
Partitions (1957)
Preludes, Interludes, And Postlude (1991)
Three Compositions (1947)
Just to add on if you were wondering if the music itself is programmatic, my answer would be ‘no’. This is quite tricky. Take Minute Waltz for example – analysts discovered that Babbitt exploits all possible types of ‘oom-pah’ patterns in this “waltz”. Hence by right the listener should be able to have the waltz feel and perhaps imagine a ballroom where people are waltzing. However when I listen to this piece of music, it does not even remotely resemble a conventional waltz like we know it to be. This – as I understand – is due to the nature of Serial music. Therefore Babbitt’s music is not programmatic even though the descriptions used might seem like it.
My response to your comment is quite long so I’ll post it here instead of the small box in the Comments page. Thanks for dropping by!
(Programmatic title – Titles which evoke a scene/image/mood in the mind.)
A few of Babbitt’s music does indeed have programmatic titles, while most have neutral sounding ones which simply describes the form or compositional technique used. Let me give you a few examples:
Programmatic titles:
An Elizabethan Sextette - 1'When I Was Fair And Young' (1979)
An Elizabethan Sextette - 3'Your Face, Your Tongue, Your Wit' (1979)
Lagniappe (1985) (meaning: a small present/gift)
The Widow’s Lament in Springtime (1950)
‘Neutral-sounding’ titles:
Duet (1956)
Partitions (1957)
Preludes, Interludes, And Postlude (1991)
Three Compositions (1947)
Just to add on if you were wondering if the music itself is programmatic, my answer would be ‘no’. This is quite tricky. Take Minute Waltz for example – analysts discovered that Babbitt exploits all possible types of ‘oom-pah’ patterns in this “waltz”. Hence by right the listener should be able to have the waltz feel and perhaps imagine a ballroom where people are waltzing. However when I listen to this piece of music, it does not even remotely resemble a conventional waltz like we know it to be. This – as I understand – is due to the nature of Serial music. Therefore Babbitt’s music is not programmatic even though the descriptions used might seem like it.
10 October 2008
"Listening to Babbitt" by J. Straus
Just browsed through the first few pages of Straus' article on Listening to Babbitt. :) It seems great. What a refreshing perspective - he takes a listener-oriented approach. This is as opposed to the few other articles I’ve seen that gives micro-detailed analyses of how musical notes are structured in a piece. I'm sure this reading would be useful and would yield interesting insights.
Careless of me to have put aside this article all these while and instead pore over complicated impossible-to-comprehend analyses of Babbitt's music. **Perhaps my focus should be more on what I 'hear' instead of all the detailed analyses which I feel are slightly beyond me. Then again, not sure if I'm doing justice to Babbitt if I take this superficial approach..
Careless of me to have put aside this article all these while and instead pore over complicated impossible-to-comprehend analyses of Babbitt's music. **Perhaps my focus should be more on what I 'hear' instead of all the detailed analyses which I feel are slightly beyond me. Then again, not sure if I'm doing justice to Babbitt if I take this superficial approach..
02 October 2008
Learning to appreciate Babbitt's music (or 20thC music as well)
I’ve been wondering..
All those pieces of 20thC music we’ve explored so far (eg. Babbitt, Berg, Ravel, Messiaen, Schoenberg, etc.), they seem to be crafted in such an intellectual and mathematical way and it is really quite exciting when we discover these compositional strategies. Does it mean that the way we appreciate these pieces of music should also be from an intellectual perspective as well? The reason why I say this is also because these pieces of music are not those that our ears are accustomed to listening or the conventional sit-back-relax-and-enjoy type (like FM92.4 would say it).
Referring specifically to Babbitt’s music, Andrew Mead (1994) says that we must be able to follow the music’s structure in order to fully appreciate it. This is because “the strong emotional and expressive charge of his music is deeply rooted in the ways notes and rhythms work together to create webs of association and connection over ever-larger spans of time.” I was quite pleasantly surprised that Mead or anyone else would describe these music with phrases like ‘strongly emotional’ and ‘sensuous beauty’. Previously, I only thought that music by Chopin, Liszt or their contemporaries could be described as such, but not anymore. This new perspective opened up for me another set of ears when listening to 20thC music.
All those pieces of 20thC music we’ve explored so far (eg. Babbitt, Berg, Ravel, Messiaen, Schoenberg, etc.), they seem to be crafted in such an intellectual and mathematical way and it is really quite exciting when we discover these compositional strategies. Does it mean that the way we appreciate these pieces of music should also be from an intellectual perspective as well? The reason why I say this is also because these pieces of music are not those that our ears are accustomed to listening or the conventional sit-back-relax-and-enjoy type (like FM92.4 would say it).
Referring specifically to Babbitt’s music, Andrew Mead (1994) says that we must be able to follow the music’s structure in order to fully appreciate it. This is because “the strong emotional and expressive charge of his music is deeply rooted in the ways notes and rhythms work together to create webs of association and connection over ever-larger spans of time.” I was quite pleasantly surprised that Mead or anyone else would describe these music with phrases like ‘strongly emotional’ and ‘sensuous beauty’. Previously, I only thought that music by Chopin, Liszt or their contemporaries could be described as such, but not anymore. This new perspective opened up for me another set of ears when listening to 20thC music.
06 September 2008
The Glossary
Terms used in analysing Babbitt's Semi-Simple Variations:
Aggregate
Hexachord
A collection of 6 chromatic pitches. (Hence each twelve-tone set would contain two hexachords.)
Hexachordal Combinatoriality
This refers to a specific type of tone row that is obtained from the combination of a hexachord with a transposition of its inversion.
Derived Set
This refers to a very specific type of tone row. It requires a segment - trichord, tetrachord or hexachord - to be subjected to transposition, inversion or retrograde in order to derive the entire set of twelve tones.
Aggregate
Hexachord
A collection of 6 chromatic pitches. (Hence each twelve-tone set would contain two hexachords.)
Hexachordal Combinatoriality
This refers to a specific type of tone row that is obtained from the combination of a hexachord with a transposition of its inversion.
Derived Set
This refers to a very specific type of tone row. It requires a segment - trichord, tetrachord or hexachord - to be subjected to transposition, inversion or retrograde in order to derive the entire set of twelve tones.
03 September 2008
First posting on Milton Babbitt
Milton Babbitt (b. 1916) is an American composer most known for his twelve-tone theory and works as well as his electronic music. He is very well-read and knowledgeable in other disciplines other than music, especially in mathematics. He formalized many of the most important aspects of twelve-tone compositional techniques using terms from other areas of study. One of these terms is “set” in response to Schoenberg’s use of the term “row”, where the latter has certain biasness which suggests a certain idea progressing from the left to right. Speaking of Schoenberg, Babbitt’s work and musical thinking mostly stem from the Second Viennese School (ie. Schoenberg, Webern and Berg).
His view of the twelve-tone system is that it is different in kind, not simply in degree, from the tonal system: “The tonal motive assumes functional meaning within a context, and becomes, in turn, a vehicle of movement within this context; the twelve-tone set, however, is the instigator of movement, and defines the functional context.” Babbitt is by no means rigidly confined by the rules and regulations of the twelve-tone technique. Within these constraints, he uses a wide range of expressive possibilities and structures.
Babbitt is also very well-known for his article “Who Cares If You Listen?”, unfortunately. This title was given by journalists without his knowledge or permission. This is most unfortunate because Babbitt in his own words says that “I care a great deal who listened, but above all how they listened” (Gagne & Caras, 1982). He also gets very annoyed at other professionals who would become irritated when Babbitt insists that his music be taken seriously. Most of the other people simply feel that music should only provide them with entertainment or relaxation from their more important pursuits.
Reading Babbitt’s lectures and a transcript of an interview with him, it is clear that he is very passionate about what he does. So much so that it becomes infectious and compels me to take a closer look at his works. Personally I used to question if this kind of music is really music cos it really really doesn’t seem to make any cow sense! I want to make sense of it but it’s highly annoying that I’m not able to. My aim for the next few months or so would be to immerse myself in the world of Babbitt’s music, learn to make sense of it and know how to approach it. Hopefully in time to come my attitude towards Serial practice would progress like this:
know -> understand -> appreciate -> accept -> embrace! (heh)
Having found out more about Babbitt and the twelve-tone system, I find that it can be related to what we have learnt in class about Set Theory. They both free us from having tonal hierarchy in music. This is possible in Set Theory using 4 assumptions and they are:
- Octave equivalence
- Enharmonic equivalence
- Transpositional equivalence
- Inversional equivalence
What has been researched so far:
To date, many of Babbitt’s works have been analysed by theorists. A few major ones that I have come across include Three Compositions for Piano (1947), Composition for Twelve Instruments (1948,54), Semi-Simple Variations for Piano (1956) and Partitions for Piano (1957).
I’ll most probably start with Semi-Simple Variations for Piano. :)
His view of the twelve-tone system is that it is different in kind, not simply in degree, from the tonal system: “The tonal motive assumes functional meaning within a context, and becomes, in turn, a vehicle of movement within this context; the twelve-tone set, however, is the instigator of movement, and defines the functional context.” Babbitt is by no means rigidly confined by the rules and regulations of the twelve-tone technique. Within these constraints, he uses a wide range of expressive possibilities and structures.
Babbitt is also very well-known for his article “Who Cares If You Listen?”, unfortunately. This title was given by journalists without his knowledge or permission. This is most unfortunate because Babbitt in his own words says that “I care a great deal who listened, but above all how they listened” (Gagne & Caras, 1982). He also gets very annoyed at other professionals who would become irritated when Babbitt insists that his music be taken seriously. Most of the other people simply feel that music should only provide them with entertainment or relaxation from their more important pursuits.
Reading Babbitt’s lectures and a transcript of an interview with him, it is clear that he is very passionate about what he does. So much so that it becomes infectious and compels me to take a closer look at his works. Personally I used to question if this kind of music is really music cos it really really doesn’t seem to make any cow sense! I want to make sense of it but it’s highly annoying that I’m not able to. My aim for the next few months or so would be to immerse myself in the world of Babbitt’s music, learn to make sense of it and know how to approach it. Hopefully in time to come my attitude towards Serial practice would progress like this:
know -> understand -> appreciate -> accept -> embrace! (heh)
Having found out more about Babbitt and the twelve-tone system, I find that it can be related to what we have learnt in class about Set Theory. They both free us from having tonal hierarchy in music. This is possible in Set Theory using 4 assumptions and they are:
- Octave equivalence
- Enharmonic equivalence
- Transpositional equivalence
- Inversional equivalence
What has been researched so far:
To date, many of Babbitt’s works have been analysed by theorists. A few major ones that I have come across include Three Compositions for Piano (1947), Composition for Twelve Instruments (1948,54), Semi-Simple Variations for Piano (1956) and Partitions for Piano (1957).
I’ll most probably start with Semi-Simple Variations for Piano. :)
09 August 2008
Revival!
Hello. :) Happy National Day.
ahh. Time to revive my blog!! Last post was..
20 June 2007
Gasp.
Just a few months back I was doing an analysis of the theme song from Secret. It's the one starring and directed by Jay Chou. Yeah, a bit too common, I know.. everyone's playing it especially the secondary school kids.
The most interesting finding was that as the piece progresses, it moves through different eras as reflected in the characteristics and style of the music. This coincides with the scene that is showing the player going back in time as the piece is played. cool.
i'll post the details IF i have the spare time. heh.
For now, i'm into Milton Babbitt.
Babbitt = Bad Rabbit??
We'll find out soon. :)
ahh. Time to revive my blog!! Last post was..
20 June 2007
Gasp.
Just a few months back I was doing an analysis of the theme song from Secret. It's the one starring and directed by Jay Chou. Yeah, a bit too common, I know.. everyone's playing it especially the secondary school kids.
The most interesting finding was that as the piece progresses, it moves through different eras as reflected in the characteristics and style of the music. This coincides with the scene that is showing the player going back in time as the piece is played. cool.
i'll post the details IF i have the spare time. heh.
For now, i'm into Milton Babbitt.
Babbitt = Bad Rabbit??
We'll find out soon. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
