/lit/ - Literature

>>16311687
idk prolly

>>16311687
yes but more importantly, who cares?

>>16311695
I do.

>>16311687
There is in music. Also yes, but obviously in a different way.

>>16311687
What's so profound about pretty sound

>>16311687
Weird synchronicity, just saw this on /mu/ and listened to it.

>>16311687
Unless you explain why with the the tools of harmony your are just meming.

>>16311746
No you do not. I'm sick and tired of people like you. Musical notation is a language, and is thus about as much literature as contemporary shitpost dramas like, fucking, Waiting for Godot. The sentence or paragraph that is as profound as that moment in Beethoven's op. 110 IS THAT VERY MOMENT IN BEETHOVEN'S OP 110.
>Uhh /lit/fags do you even LISTEN to muh Beethoven?
No faggot I ONLY listen to Moлчaт Дoмa which is the musical equivalent of the death of Ivan Ilyich and I pretend, save for Dostoevsky, that nothing else exists. Fuck you

>>16311842
I asked you to demonstrate why it is great using the the language of music, and nothing. You just go for the low hanging fruit that does not require you to show any real knowledge of the language of music. I agree that harmony and theory is every bit as much of literature as Beckett, but I suspect you lack both the knowledge of English and of harmony to demonstrate it.
>I could but no one here would understand it because they don't know theory
Bullshit, if you can not explain it in plain English than you don't know music theory in the slightest.

>>16311955
>I suspect you lack both the knowledge of English and of harmony to demonstrate it.
I can try, but my argument really has nothing to do with music theory, but rather a theory of music.
It is the same relation between things, rather than entities in isolation. The notes alone, mean nothing: the tension between them, and the silence with which they live in reciprocal indebtedness, are everything. Maybe Walter Pater is right, and all art aspires towards the condition of music. Indeed musical phrases can act like the crudest of metaphors, as in generalized rising, falling, tension and release. Expectations and either the subverting or the confirming of them. Thus it can ONLY be subjectively processed. If there is a sentence or paragraph that evokes a feeling similar to OP's beethoven fragment, then it is something different for each individual. And the only correct way to answer the question of what truly is the only thing that evokes the same response in everyone, of this particular moment, is to say that it is itself and only that.

My subjective answer though, is my second reread of Stoner, when William sees Edith for the first time. I refuse to explain it any further.

>>16311687
film>literature> music

>>16312081
You argue that the language of music is lit and then you demonstrate you have zero understanding of the language of music. This is basic harmony, not even that complex, most theory books will give you enough in their first quarter to give a reasonable analysis in plain English, not complete analysis from a technical standpoint, but not that ignorance you just spewed.

It is completely fine to enjoy music without knowing theory, but this is just straight dilettantism. Know your limits anon, ignorance + arrogance = stupid.

>>16311842
>No faggot I ONLY listen to Moлчaт Дoмa
kek

When bach proclaimed his ree.

>>16312327
(He said ree ree, no bs)

>>16311842
lmao imagine listening to this synth- or cold- or new- or whateverwave bullshit
there are only two genres of music: metal and classical
everything else is garbage

>>16312241
You imply that you possess a deeper understanding than my own, that you have yet to demonstrate. Enlighten me anon, for I lack the most "basic" framework to even understand your plain and uninspired take on what music can mean. You are proving my point with this shit. Go back to /mu/

>>16312388
I asked you three times to demonstrate the knowledge you implied you have, you have yet to do so and now you try and act like I am the one larping and throw out a meme.

You are stating to move from stupid towards pathetic.

music is too noisy.

>>16311842
holy based

>>16311687
Only one enemy remained; two if you counted God.

>>16311687
won't somebody just post a timestamped link so i can listen to this?

>>16312794
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3S8slvoHoU&feature=youtu.be&t=2209

>>16312860
thanks

>>16312423
Molchat Doma anon (if it's the same guy) did explain what he meant 2 posts earlier. You came in claiming he's somehow missing the point, while completely disregarding (or simply misunderstanding) it. Notation, of course can be read and understood as any weird text. The inner voice is now simply singing instead of speaking, but it's the same process. He told you any meaning that came from such abstract text is subjective. This is more pronounced since nothing is overtly said in this piece save for dynamics (no choir, no lyrics). Even though I can't sight-read sheet music with enough consistency to play even beginner sax pieces, I'm able to understand and read them in my head. It has nothing to do with music theory itself. It's how you perceive the music in front of you. He still might be a pseud, and he's wrong, but his idea is not a hard thing to grasp, anon

>>16311687
nope

>>16311687
If this was written during his middle period it would have led to a bombastic finale, but here, in his lonely and desolate late period, he proposes not a triumph of the human will, but rather perseverance through suffering, leading to Divine Transcendence. The arpeggiated rise of the spirit to the heights of complete order, to Logos, in the form of fugue.

>>16312191
>japanese shit
lmao

>>16314378
>A brighter summer day
>japanese
that was a quick way of showing your pleb status

>>16311687
>tfw know absolutely nothing about music
>it's completely indistinguishable from magic to me
>musically-inclined friends have tried to explain it to me and it just doesn't make any goddamn sense on any level
>I will never be able to look at this and understand why it's so beautiful with any level of depth beyond "hehe sound pretty"
It's not fair
What the FUCK is a chord, why do octaves work, what is a key, why do different time signatures get treated like objectively distinct schemas when nothing changes but how you count, why did God hide the most beautiful part of His creation from me forever

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guKdhAlp-Kc

>>16314542
>Chord
Grouping of 3+ individual notes played simultaneously.
>Why do octaves work
Has to do with the physics of sound mostly. In terms of composition or orchestration, octaves just emphasize whatever octave is being doubled - bass, melody or otherwise.
>what is a key
The tonal basis of the music in question.
>why do different time signatures get treated like objectively distinct schemas when nothing changes but how you count
Different emphasis placed on different counts - it's how you know a waltz when you hear one.
>why did God hide the most beautiful part of His creation from me forever
YouTube piano tutorials desu

>>16314638
Wagner partitures seem like a fucking nightmare. I can't imagine how many trees had to die for a full copy of Trista. 5-10 seconds per page, 4 hours of music.

>>16311687

>>16314542
if you want to know why and how octaves work, its physics related. but bassicly the (middle) A note vibrates at 440 hz. to go an octave up you multiply 440*2, to go an octave down you divide by 2. the reason they have a unique sound, and for that matter any combination of notes, is the way the sound waves interact with each other. playing two notes that are an octave apart has a more full and complete sound due to them being constructive to each other.
Now alot of the other stuff you asked about is kinda different based on culture, but since western style music is so prevolent, ill just explain that.
To start, a key is kind of related to an octave, you could describe it as, how you go from middle A to the next octave, up or down, A. for this you might want to look at circle of fifths picture to understand how keys relate to each other, and for that matter, how chords relate to each other. but for the most part, if your just listening to music, its not too important to understand all the different keys. but bassicly major keys are normie tier, minor keys are creepy, 7th keys are for jazz and blues. now onto chords.

>>16315079
chords and keys are related obviously, a if your playing in the key of A, your root chord is an A chord obviously. now in most western songs, your chord progression goes 1 -> 4 -> 5 -> 1. 1 = A since it is your root chord. 4 = D chord since the d key is the 4th note in the A scale. the 4th chord is an intresting one because it gives a feeling of uncertantity, Best way I can think to describe it is like a huming bird franticly beating its wings but staying still in place. the 4th chord usually resolves to either 1 or 5, and since it can be unclear which one it goes to, it gives a sense of anxiousness, but it is by no means the only, or the best way to create this feeling, just more used to enhance it. so if your song starts on the root, 1, or A in this instance, then goes to D, you now have the choice to either go to E or go back to A. the fifth chord is almost always used to go back to the root, however some little detours can be thrown in before going back to 1. for example in the key of A if you are playing the 5th chord, E instead of going right to A you might go back down to D or throw in an E7 chord to spice things up. 7th chords, are really dissonant and almost beg to be resolved wich is why , if they are used at all, they usually dont last long, maybe for half a measure. also when i say 7th chord, im talking in about the augmentation of a chord, not the seventh chord in a key.
a major chord is comprised of your basic tritones. lets move to the C chord, the C chord consists of 3 basic nots, C obviously, E, and G. so a major is made up of the root, C, the major 3rd of the C scale, E, and the perfect fifth of the Cscale G. you play all those and you got your most basic bitch chord. but shit would never get done without it.if you want to make a minor chord, drop that major third to a minor thrid. bassiclly the E goes down a half step, so it become E flat.
7th chords are fucked. but basically you just add a note that is a little too close to the root of the chord that makes it sound funky. usually its a half whole step down from the root. so with a C chord, a whole step down is Bflat. so a C7 is cegbflat

>>16315096
>>16315079
and to recap, the reason chords are made like this and why they sound what gives them their flavor is due to the way the notes interfere with each others sound waves. so if you slap down 2 notes that are way to close together, like C and C#, since the difference is minute, the sound clashes together to almost sound out of tune. now if you pla a C and E, like in a C chord, the sound waves sometimes overlap wich create a stable sound. its WHY YOU NEED TO KEEP YOUR INSTRUMENTS IN TUNE GOD DAMN IT.
now time signature is pretty much unrealted to everything I've talked about so far, excapet for the 7th chord on lasting half a measure. Standard songs are usually 3/4, 4/4, or 6/8. this is wear, IMO, things get a little more abstract. but in order to keep it simple, the bottom number of the fraction is not that important. 3/4 is usually used for waltzes, so if you listen to something like https://youtu.be/Cfg4SYjc9cg?t=127
you'll actually hear a waltz rythm at 2:10
if you count out 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 to the beat you feel it. if you hit 1 with you left hand, then 2 3 with right. you can get the feel of the waltz rythm. usually in 3/4 time the first beat is emphasized. so ONE two three ONE two three. whats fun about the song I posted is that there are multiple time signature switches.the song starts in 4/4 goes to 3/4 then back to 4/4 and switches up tempo.. now 6/8 just means there are 6 beats per measure, and usually the rythm goes, One two three Four five six. now the clever students might say, but wait thats the same as 3/4 just with more numbers, and to quote an old meme, yes but no. the way that the ONE and the FOUR beat are emphazised are different.so with ONE two three ONE two three, both ONES are EXCACTLY* the same. now you might be like, "can i just put any number over 4 and play in a wonky time signature?" yes you can but you better know what your doing. so if you do 56/4 i mean good luck finding a rythm for that. depending on what your playing and in what time signature, you emphasize different parts of the beat and demphasize others.

sorry for rambling wall of text and bad spelling /lit/

>>16313169
>You came in claiming he's somehow missing the point
No, I just simply stated, explain or fuck off, which he ignored, I challenged him to explain with the tools of harmony and he said he would try but then went off on pop sci style bullshit instead and ended with, hey, everything is subjective. Combine this with the contradictory OP post, his previous post regarding musical notation being a language (it is an alphabet and punctuation marks, not a language), and we have some fairly damning evidence.

While there are things in music which are difficult to quantify and fairly subjective, they are a nebulous sort of subjective with opinions almost universal, as though the objective is just out of focus, everyone knows roughly where it is and has a decent idea of what it is but we just can not quite resolve it. This is what composition and theory are all about and why we can do so much with so little, we have the fairly concrete getting its context from the vague points of nearly universal subjective agreement.

>It has nothing to do with music theory itself
It really does, this is why Schoenberg was able to fill 400 pages on what most theory and harmony books spend only 50 or 100 pages on, the complex usage which most never bother to learn, understanding and exploiting those points of subjective agreement, to set a path on well trod ground, to setup and play with the audiences expectations before jumping into one of those grey areas.

As I said, know your limits, OP does not.

I was fairly drunk at the time as well, but I am completely OK with what I said, I avoid all theory/music threads on 4chan when sober, too aggravating.

>>16311687
dumb pseud

>>16311687
i am a retard

Itt: pseudfest

>>16311769
That's because it was me James, the author of all your pain.

>>16311687
Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether."

>>16311687
>Thad stumbled out of bed and headed towards the bathroom. He brushed his teeth then washed his face with a hot rag. When he was finished Thad walked back into his room and sat on his bed. “She never makes my eggs,” he mumbled to himself.

>>16311687
>Voorhees threw the sheets off himself and stumbled out of bed, fumbling to the door and out into the hall. “Nurse!”he barked. “Nurse!” He was getting the hell out ofhere. A hand grabbed his elbow. “What are you doing?” Halstead exclaimed.

>>16311687
tfwywn madly embrace your 10/10 tradwife in the alps while the fourth movement of mahlers fifth plays from the heavens

>>16311687
I am terrible at reading bass clef because Im a jazz guitarist but it looks like he is using diminished (Adim with the bass doing a basic dim triad and the sixth in the melody) and dominant 7chords(D7 with 5th in melody which is a harmonic minor borrowed chord-dominant Phrygian) at the beginning to create tension(along with the crazy syncopated crazy sixteenth triplet like strange accents), rises up with intense octaves in 4ths from A after a semitone step down from Bb then starts blasting a huge G chord until a legato G arpeggio lifts to the the highest melodic point. G major is a pretty weird chord in this context so I imagine its more about following a downward root movement and resolving the dominant D7 down a fifth but in a surprising major chord to modulate to G. Yeah you can see the the next measure would be in G so it's a false harmonic minor cadence with a really syncopated ryhthym. What do I win since I was the first one to actually analyse this? I still haven't heard it but you see this in almost every jazz song so I have an idea what it sounds like.

>>16315378
>>16320012
I did it. It took an embarrassingly long time to read the bass clef but yeah it's a false harmonic minor cadence modulating to G major instead of the suspected G minor.

>>16320026
So I just listened to it and I didn't realize how slow that part was. The dominant part is so quiet it almost doesn't matter but it's still a proper modulation. It's almost more like the piece trails off and slowly starts again in a new key; disappearing and coming back in with a disturbingly constant and foreign chord. Because the dominant part of the cadence is so quiet-and again setting up a minor resolution- the G major doesn't feel like it belongs to a functional purpose. Ofcourse it's a new tonic, but it feels more disconnected from a resolution. It doesn't sound like a cadence. It's more like a statement of a new tonality.

>>16314542
Stop trying to fit music into the left-brain logical/piecemeal mentality. It's the product and stimulant of emotion and connection and spirituality, not of reason and study. "Hehe sound pretty" is enough, feel what you feel and introspect your emotion and the gestaly not the specific devices used. Language and books are the realm of syntactical/structural understanding, not music

>>16320285
I disagree. Music is both. Everytime I've learned more about music it has deepened my appreciation for it. I remember joining jazz band and thinking all the chords must be wrong because they were so dissonant. Then after a while all I wanted to hear was extended harmony, parallel minor chords and tritons substitution. Then I got more into apreciating phrasing and now I listen to old country and bluegrass, which use the simplest chord progressions possible but has great phrasing and melodic ornaments, as much as anything. I've always pushed myself to appreciate and understand music in all forms. I can listen to Heifets, Bill Evans, SRV, minor threat, Hank Williams, Lou reed, joy division, mgmt, Stevie wonder, death grips, Chopin, My Bloody Vakentine ,Charlie Parker, and the Beatles and enjoy all of it so so much. I love the sound of it and I have developed my ear to understand what's happening. It allows me to focus much deeper and appeciate everything on a much more nuanced level. Music knowledge opens your ears and it definitely doesn't close your soul.

>>16312191
Literally the opposite.

>the rest is dust and stardust
there