Friday, November 30, 2007

How Cunning the Ear is to Deceive Us

This last week I was baffled by the Stuart Dempster piece in the cistern. I honestly could have lost a huge bet on what was actually sounding. Baffled. But after hearing some really loud notes hit later in the piece- I think even without the answer given to us, I could have placed the sound.

I still find it funny that two things can emulate each other so well. Or how one thing emulates another, really. It really startled me when I heard the answer too. I felt like I should have known better being that I have played trombone for the greater portion of my life. It also shows how well it worked as an example for what we talked about afterwards.

Room. Make some room in your music for room. It could be its own genre. "Room Music." It's perfect. No. Let's not go there.

In reality, what makes a room "good"? Is there an 'all purpose room'? Or is it really just to fit the situation accordingly in each individual instance? Probably the latter mentioned. I have a friend that owns a studio, and the sound of the room is one of the biggest influences on every sound. From drums, to guitar, to bass, to vocals, to keyboards... Each really needs its own different space to be captured in their own 'perfect' ways, or at least for the aesthetic they are looking for.

Thinking in this way poses a slight problem- I could be on a wrong path of thought, but- if each instrument requires a different size room to perhaps "create the most beautiful sound" of its own- why does it work out when all the instruments are put together live? Take for instance a big drum kit with a booming bass drum and wicked loud cymbals- you need a pretty hefty room to accommodate just the size of the drums let alone the sound produced. It is a big stretch when comparing it to the small sound-proofed isolation booth needed for vocals to be crisp and 'in your face'.

I understand that there are entire institutions devoted to bringing these physical limitations into our grasp, but what about the amateur musician striving to make their trumpet sound better? I have no idea what I just meant by that, but I'm sure I was going somewhere with it so I will keep it. I guess my question would be: how would someone without prior knowledge learn these precise things without analysis of music to a very fine ...lack of word... state. There we go. To a very fine state of understanding.

I guess my whole post was, in a way, without fully understanding what was meant by the post below, to bring to light some of the intricacies that are needed to create even the most simple music. Whether or not the music is created with an intrinsic knowledge of all of the complexities music has to offer- there has to be some intuition of these to make a musical decision that produces, well, good music.

Most people have it- they can recognize good music and can tell exactly what they like about it. They don't have to use very technical details- but their explanation could be worded in various ways- including anything from a lush personal story of enlightenment and experience, but also one could use mathematical formulas and theoretical statements to accurately describe the same musical situation. It really comes down to individual personality. I would go as far to purport that this is not just my opinion, but a pretty rational explanation of some differences in taste.

I don't really know how to close out this post. I guess I feel like the semester is already over- a bad feeling to have- often letting homework slip through my fingers and relinquishing that pleasant grade for a less pleasant grade. Maybe a few Redbulls later I will change my mind. But anyways.

The post I am trying to close out... If anything- it is better to know that there are other methods of understanding how music makes us feel good, then not to know of them. Bleh! I'm rambling. Time for sleep.

No comments: