Orpheus Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 All I can say is that I essentially agree with everything he wrote. Tritones, dissonance clusters, syncopated staccato fff stabs...all are difficult to play and worthy of credit when performed well. And they can be quite effective. (Ask Messrs. Berlioz, Stravinsky...etc.) They can also be annoying and painfully boring when they are the only tricks your pony knows.When someone asks, "How does the song go?", you sing the melody. But what if there isn't one? ("Beep-beep, Boop-boop music", as George Bonfiglio so succinctly put it.) Melody is the one ingredient most likely to connect an audience to the music, through the medium of the performer. ^OO^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Bari Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 You don't hear much Mozart, Brahms or Stravinsky on those places either...it's not the purpose of those outlets.I am sure that when a compser writes a piece for band he or she knows the market, as you say. I totally disagree with the assertion that they are writing educational exercises, however. That to me is denigrating a lot of creative work by talented people. Yes, VH1 didn't exist in 1791 or 1842 or 1912. However, the tunes by those men ARE the equivalent of our Top-40 nowadays. Those guys made music that the masses loved and begged to have played again at the end of the concert (the true Encore). That music has stood the test of time. The vast majority of music by composers as such discussed on this forum will not live for long even in the minds and hearts of the kids who performed the stuff. No, these talented people (whether the original composers or the ones who arrange them for the field) don't believe they are writing educational exercises. But, whatever their original intentions for writing this "creative work", most of it is destined to become bird cage liner. It has the staying power of the 8-track tape player. Forgettable. Ephemeral as the breeze. Songs like "Achy Breaky Heart" hit it big for fleeting seconds on the nation's stage, but 10 years later we all struggle to remember why it enamored us so. Now, this music here has more substance than "Achy Breaky" but its staying power is virtually as limited. Although, 10 years later I can remember how to hum "Achy Breaky". I struggle to even remember the tune names from any corps' show I saw two weeks ago on the ESPN2 broadcast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Bari Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Something that I thought was a glaring ommision on his part, however, is that he neglects to mention that the driving force behind the lack of melody is the nature of the presentations on the field, where going for an impact point every sixty seconds is what's really driving the program design. Well, most heavily melodic music ISN'T gonna look for an impact point that often, so what ends up happening is corps presenting a lot of truncated phrases that seem to be arranged with both eyes on the stopwatch rather than the staff. Using Sprit as an example this year (not picking on them, but...), the arrangements were, in a word. aggravating. Someone tried to stuff 60 minutes worth of material into 11 minutes of field time, and as a result, you had the drum corps equivalent of musical ADD, with disjointed snippets rather than whole musical thoughts. Presenting a melodic line and not allowing the time to develop the phrases into a satisfying whole has been a problem for a number of years, and it's only getting worse, not better. It's funny though, contrasting what you said with looking at the playlists from corps in the 60's and 70's. Back then, they tended to play lots of snippets of popular songs. You couldn't distill their shows down to a few titles. They were from a mish-mash of genres, even in the same show. Yet, those on both sides of this divide would use those as example of what drum corps is NOT like today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Yes, VH1 didn't exist in 1791 or 1842 or 1912. However, the tunes by those men ARE the equivalent of our Top-40 nowadays. Those guys made music that the masses loved and begged to have played again at the end of the concert (the true Encore). That music has stood the test of time. The vast majority of music by composers as such discussed on this forum will not live for long even in the minds and hearts of the kids who performed the stuff. Actually, those people created serious music...even for their day. Music halls and drinking tunes were more along the lines of today's pop music in Mozart's day. By Stravinsky's, vaudeville and pop music from the likes of Irving Berlin, George M. Cohan, and other Tin Pan Alley folks who have disappeared into history...plus music such as Ragtime tunes by Joplin, et al...were more akin to pop music than Igor's. Stravinsky's music often generated heated and raucous results when performed. You are right...their music has stood the test of time...and there were lots of composers whose music has faded into obscurity as they did NOT stand the test of time. If one in a hundred of today's composers are still heard a century from now that will be a lot...but no different than ever. It's totally irrelevent, of course. Does the music suit it's purpose for today should be the question...not whether it will still be around in 2106. Some say no and others say yes. Bottom line...you like what you like...as do those charged with selecting music for corps shows. If people keep on going to shows in large numbers...and keep on trying out for corps...then that alone is enough of an answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 I kind of take issue with this. I don't like my vocation (composition) being summarily dismissed as simply me writing exercises to teach students to play their instruments correctly. You really shouldn't take issue with this at all. The reality is that if you want to write wind literature and want your work to be published, widely-distributed and frequently performed... it needs to be targeted to the abilities of a high school level performer and the common issues of these ensembles (a lot of doubling or alternate parts - ex. bassoon solo could be substituted by bass clarinet, some simplified parts in woodwinds or down octave brass). Another reality is there is a pretty small audience for wind music and an even smaller audience that will actually PAY to hear it. The largest audiences for most wind music, and the greatest actual demand, is for pep bands at school sporting events. So, if you actually want to make some cash with the skills... crank out arrangements of Gwen Stefani or other cheez-pop tunes for pep band... or write catchy jingles for cat food commercials (which is the sort of thing that quite a lot of the crew that I studied with ended up doing). Anyway, if you get upset simply by criticism of a genre that you enjoy to write in... not even a criticism of your own work, you're in for a rough ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoFan Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 (edited) It seems to me that a handful of people are going to a great deal of trouble to defend their affinity for modern wind band music and other contemporary works in similar veins. I don't think anyone here is denigrating your tastes or your penchant to enjoy such music; rather, they are simply pointing out that many people (I would venture to say the greater percentage of the mass listening audience) do not find this music to be particularly enjoyable or engaging. Consequently, they therefore applaud the article by Mr. Dorritie as giving voice to the "common man," if you will, whose unsophisticated musical ear may not allow him to appreciate the more complex, esoteric compositions that seem to be fashionable among today's directors, arrangers and programmers. If you enjoy the type of music referrenced by the original poster, great! More power to you! And you're certainly free to indulge your tastes and personal preferences. But, be aware that not everyone feels the same way as, I think, is evidenced by the large number of readers who have voiced their approval of and or agreement with the article. Edited September 25, 2006 by ChicagoFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_S Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Hmm.... If you don't enjoy the type of music referrenced by the original poster, great! More power to you! And you're certainly free to indulge your tastes and personal preferences. But, be aware that not everyone feels the same way as, I think, is evidenced by the large number of readers who have voiced their disapproval of and or disagreement with the article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoFan Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 Case in point.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Forte Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 (edited) I'd like to suggest that you take a moment to visit the inaugural issue from our newest columnist on DCP - Frank Dorritie. In this thought provoking column - Frank discusses "Why You Hate the Music" ......You'll find the article on the front page of DCP After reading it - feel free to discuss here. Enjoy! -john I really enjoyed the article and feel it is "Spot on" for the most part. It summerizes what has been discussed out here in great length regarding corps staffs musical choices/arrangements. Triple Forte Edited September 26, 2006 by Triple Forte Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geluf Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 You really shouldn't take issue with this at all.The reality is that if you want to write wind literature and want your work to be published, widely-distributed and frequently performed... it needs to be targeted to the abilities of a high school level performer and the common issues of these ensembles (a lot of doubling or alternate parts - ex. bassoon solo could be substituted by bass clarinet, some simplified parts in woodwinds or down octave brass). Another reality is there is a pretty small audience for wind music and an even smaller audience that will actually PAY to hear it. The largest audiences for most wind music, and the greatest actual demand, is for pep bands at school sporting events. So, if you actually want to make some cash with the skills... crank out arrangements of Gwen Stefani or other cheez-pop tunes for pep band... or write catchy jingles for cat food commercials (which is the sort of thing that quite a lot of the crew that I studied with ended up doing). Anyway, if you get upset simply by criticism of a genre that you enjoy to write in... not even a criticism of your own work, you're in for a rough ride. I'm guessing this makes it official that we don't agree on *anything* Daniel. :P Anyway, if you get upset simply by criticism of a genre that you enjoy to write in... not even a criticism of your own work, you're in for a rough ride. I am ALWAYS open to criticism of my own work. Always. Its the only way you get better. However, the article seems to simply dismiss the entire genre as not being worth anyone's time. That doesn't mean I don't know what's popular. I *can* lament the public's lack of music education and sophistication though...even if they label me a music snob for it. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.