If you want dynamics listen to classical

[offki]

Originally Posted by Oh...

So if there are dynamics in a songs arrangement but not in the production where do they go?

To pasture for horse?

For......

They come here and QQ on the forum.

[tonemaker]

OP = overgeneraliser

[memristor]

Originally Posted by maisonvague

Interesting thing about dynamics... how relative they can be. I've read stories talking about listening to Chopin play the piano when he was quite ill towards the end of his life. He would play incredibly softly... as he lacked energy. He would play so softly that when he played a passage that was only say mf it would sound like fff. He just brought the whole thing down -- kind of like a master fader!

on the piano not just the loudness changes but also the timbre, even more so
it's basically like a dynamic 36db/oct lowpass that changes with velocity
but in addition there are also details in the spectrum that only appear with higher dynamics or lower dynmics respectively
also ghost partials only appear at f / ff

all this is caused by the hammer / string interaction

clavichords (and harpsichords) don't have this dynamic timbre, at least not to that extend, since they don't have a free hammer strike action.

I assume that romantic music, that has a lot of timbre dynamics, could only evolve due to the evolution of the pianoforte.
And I guess thats also the reason why the pianoforte is so well suited for composing in general.

Perceptually the timbre dynamics on the pianoforte are much more important than the loudness dynamics even though the loudness dynamics are huge.
A piano played pp vs ff is a totally different instrument, even at the same loudness.

[alexvdbroek]

Originally Posted by Systolic

I've often wondered why there aren't more composers taking advantage of synths to produce stuff other than dance music - classical music type compositions. Why there hasn't really been a Mozart or Bach of the synthesizer (yes I've heard the old album Moog Stikes Bach), at least not anyone that's been regarded as such.

The only people really doing that sort of stuff are people making movie soundtracks. Angelo Badalamanti comes to mind, but he's put out a lot of crap besides his excellent work with David Lynch.

This has been explored already by 'serious' composers. They were and usually are on the forefront of these things. 'Kontakte' by Stockhausen is an example.

Kontakte (Stockhausen) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A.

[gremlin moon]

The reason that the classical community cannot "evolve" is that it is dependent on corporate sponsorships, grant foundations and endowed-with-mandates conservatory and university departments. The second major reason is that no "tiger" parent who has their child enrolled in a Suzuki program at the age of 4 would even let their kid touch a synthesizer.

[YeggmanX]

Originally Posted by memristor

I assume that romantic music, that has a lot of timbre dynamics, could only evolve due to the evolution of the pianoforte.
And I guess thats also the reason why the pianoforte is so well suited for composing in general.

Also, music theory took a big leap in evolution when the piano came about. A lot of tonal harmony was developed on the piano (and to a lesser extent for the piano). Keys as we know them and the tempered scale as we hear it both come directly from piano practice.

[Beermaster]

Originally Posted by YeggmanX

Also, music theory took a big leap in evolution when the piano came about. A lot of tonal harmony was developed on the piano (and to a lesser extent for the piano). Keys as we know them and the tempered scale as we hear it both come directly from piano practice.

.....not quite the right way round there. Harmony and it's development came about through keyboard instruments way before the invention of the piano....the Piano was around as the newer harmony and tonalities were being found and accepted but the piano itself wasn't the sole cause.

[kilon]

Dynamics is known fact that are not used by electronic music cause electronic musicians are not that smart

I love using velocity in my sound creation, not only how loud a sound can sound but how the texture of the sound can change through velocity can create alot of expressive sounds and music.

But is completely up to the artist, there are tons of options out there and many amazing examples. Of course dynamics don't create good music.

[ootini]

I think it's down to the type of electronic music and just generally it's a horses for courses type thing.
I mean, in my opinion, Brian Eno's music has a far greater dynamic range than, let's say, M83, but then M83's music has a greater dynamic range than The Prodigy.
I know what the OP means about huge dynamic range in classical music, but then "Dance" music couldn't really have the same range as during the very quiet sections, people would stop dancing!? Also in classical music there are often shifts in tempo as well as volume, which happens very rarely in electronic music, it makes it very difficult for DJs to beat match and the dance floor would empty.
Classical music is generally "listened" to by people sitting down paying lots of attention to every detail, electronic music (on the whole) tends to be played to dance floors full of people listening to very little detail due to the volumes etc, they just need the "essentials" to dance to, bass, kick, everything else is a bonus.
£0.02

[offki]

I remove all my dynamics and keep them in a jar and watch them die from lack of oxygen. I'm sick, mommy says so.

[Reptil]

note to self: watch offki

[maisonvague]

Originally Posted by Beermaster

.....not quite the right way round there. Harmony and it's development came about through keyboard instruments way before the invention of the piano....the Piano was around as the newer harmony and tonalities were being found and accepted but the piano itself wasn't the sole cause.

One could even argue that harmony developed accidentally as a result of the earliest polyphonic compositions of the middle ages involving a monophonic cantus firmus ("fixed song") below which an additional monophonic voice was added, pre-dating all keyboard instruments (except perhaps the hydraulis or hurdy gurdy which were not really played harmonically in the modern sense AFAIK). But perhaps that's getting a bit overly pedantic.

[offki]

Originally Posted by Reptil

note to self: watch offki

If you think that's bad you should see what I do to String samples..

[YeggmanX]

Originally Posted by Beermaster

.....not quite the right way round there. Harmony and it's development came about through keyboard instruments way before the invention of the piano....the Piano was around as the newer harmony and tonalities were being found and accepted but the piano itself wasn't the sole cause.

Originally Posted by maisonvague

One could even argue that harmony developed accidentally as a result of the earliest polyphonic compositions of the middle ages involving a monophonic cantus firmus ("fixed song") below which an additional monophonic voice was added, pre-dating all keyboard instruments

This is true. And before those keyboards or those polyphonic/homophonic singers it was Guido of Arezzo and monochords. And before him the Greeks.

By "tonal harmony" I meant the entire "common-practice" musical language, not just harmony/chord development... I suppose I've been hanging out with too many "sound artists".

I don't mean to suggest that harmony comes from the piano, but I do think it took a leap with the piano... although that "leap" itself is pretty subjective, I suppose. I think the influence of the piano on the tempering of our scales is an important event. Plus a lot of what Debussy contributed comes from his relationship to the piano, or at least that's my take.

[maisonvague]

Originally Posted by YeggmanX

This is true. And before those keyboards or those polyphonic/homophonic singers it was Guido of Arezzo and monochords. And before him the Greeks.

By "tonal harmony" I meant the entire "common-practice" musical language, not just harmony/chord development... I suppose I've been hanging out with too many "sound artists".

I don't mean to suggest that harmony comes from the piano, but I do think it took a leap with the piano... although that "leap" itself is pretty subjective, I suppose. I think the influence of the piano on the tempering of our scales is an important event. Plus a lot of what Debussy contributed comes from his relationship to the piano, or at least that's my take.

Guido rocks! Gotta love those monochords!

There's no question the piano had some impact on the development of harmony due to its expressive power (subtler, more complex harmonies could be heard more clearly than on previous keyboard instruments... eventually enabling artists like McCoy Tyner and Thelonius Monk, for example, to push serious harmonic boundaries by subtle use of voicings). The piano also solidified the dominance of the well-tempered tuning system in western music.

But I would still argue the roots of harmony as we know it today developed largely independent of keyboard instruments through vocal music beginning in the middle ages and reaching a milestone in the 16th century with the works of Palestrina.

From there, it continued to develop through composers like Monteverdi... then Bach and Handel... but polyphonic counterpoint was still the driving force. It wasn't really until C.P.E. Bach that one begins to see a gradual move towards a melody + harmony style of composition away from counterpoint. His work also marked the beginning of a return to freer forms of expression and colorful experimentation with harmony - an adventurous spirit that had gotten lost - or, at least, become more rigid, less fluid - ever since the transition from Monteverdi to the High Baroque.

Debussy's writing is very "pianistic" its true (e.g. Jardin sous le pluie - a pianist's dream to play). But even more important is that Debussy began breaking the rules of 18th century counterpoint - the foundation of traditional harmony as we know it today - even while still in school (much to the frustration of some of his teachers, I would imagine). He loved parallel fifths and octaves (generally verboten in academic chorale harmonizations). He took inspiration from early music techniques (e.g. fauxbourdon). He also embraced non-western music (e.g. Javanese gamelan). All of these things had a greater influence on his music as a whole than the piano itself, I believe.

In any case... not wanting to shoot down any of your theories, of course! I'm not a musicologist. It's just that I enjoy such discussions on GS because... well, they don't come up all that often... and I feel like I have something to contribute. I have very little to contribute to deadmau5 and Skrillex threads.

[razorblade]

Originally Posted by Beermaster

.....not quite the right way round there. Harmony and it's development came about through keyboard instruments way before the invention of the piano....the Piano was around as the newer harmony and tonalities were being found and accepted but the piano itself wasn't the sole cause.

However, technological advances in piano design and construction did have an impact on compositions for the piano itself.

Interestingly, it was the industrial age that was a major force in Piano development, since it was possible to economically form the piano harp in metal vs wood, and to make wire strings - allowing for more volume, wider frequency range, and stable tunings, which prior to that were rather hit and miss. This led to compositions for piano that could take advantage of the dynamic nuances, improved tonality and extended range of the newer instruments during the romantic era.