05-17-2015, 11:29 AM
"Song lyrics are tonal unless they contemplate the identity of some object."
To say lyrics are tonal is incorrect, it is the notes that are tonal. If you are trying to say that lyrics are actual tonal in a way such as colors are tonal in a painting then I don't know what you mean by that, nor does it seem to be a well supported theory. I have no clue why this tonality of lyrics would change depending on what they talked about, this makes no sense.
"Because of the recursive nature of strophic musical settings, strophic lyrics are constrained such that they may contemplate the identity of one and only one object. Said somewhat differently to clarify, the repeated musical settings of strophic music (verses and choruses, essentially) force lyrical sections to interact such that their shared aspects emerge as the principle focus. Efforts to frustrate this inherency will, ironically, demonstrate it."
Sorry but this is simply not true. There is a musical form that has a refrain, but the refrain means something different each time because of what proceeds it. If you are talking about the small area of hymns and choral music, then sure, but it is a bit like picking the fly-shit out of the pepper, where is there a need to make this rather awkward distinction?
" Efforts to frustrate this inherency will, ironically, demonstrate it.""
The reason it goes this way is because that is why people use this form, they do not want to resist the form, if they did they would use something more appropriate. The statement above is not a logical conclusion to draw. It's like saying a play will have characters no matter how much one resists them as their are always characters in any play.
Dale
To say lyrics are tonal is incorrect, it is the notes that are tonal. If you are trying to say that lyrics are actual tonal in a way such as colors are tonal in a painting then I don't know what you mean by that, nor does it seem to be a well supported theory. I have no clue why this tonality of lyrics would change depending on what they talked about, this makes no sense.
"Because of the recursive nature of strophic musical settings, strophic lyrics are constrained such that they may contemplate the identity of one and only one object. Said somewhat differently to clarify, the repeated musical settings of strophic music (verses and choruses, essentially) force lyrical sections to interact such that their shared aspects emerge as the principle focus. Efforts to frustrate this inherency will, ironically, demonstrate it."
Sorry but this is simply not true. There is a musical form that has a refrain, but the refrain means something different each time because of what proceeds it. If you are talking about the small area of hymns and choral music, then sure, but it is a bit like picking the fly-shit out of the pepper, where is there a need to make this rather awkward distinction?
" Efforts to frustrate this inherency will, ironically, demonstrate it.""
The reason it goes this way is because that is why people use this form, they do not want to resist the form, if they did they would use something more appropriate. The statement above is not a logical conclusion to draw. It's like saying a play will have characters no matter how much one resists them as their are always characters in any play.
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.