The Phantom of the Opera and good company

[beowabbit]

Got to see The Phantom of the Opera tonight with a bunch of good people, preceded by spectacularly yummy pear, gorgonzola, and greens pizza at California Pizza Kitchen. Very good company: cathijosephine, mrpet, docorion, cathijosephine’s LJ-bereft friend C. who actually got us the tickets for cheap, C.’s sweetie D., and eisa and buxom_bey, which latter two met us at the theater after dinner.

I didn’t feel all that excited about the performance itself, but it was a wonderful experience all the same. The Opera House is physically, visually impressive in its ornate beauty; I’m glad places like that still exist and are still being maintained. The play also had a lot of ornate beauty and pageantry to it.

I definitely want to see more theater. And this made me want to see a more classical opera. I don’t like recorded opera music, but I think I’d enjoy it live.

I feel like I’ve got lots more to say, but I also feel like I should have been in bed hours ago. :-)

Comments

[spwebdesign.livejournal.com]

When I studied music formally in college, I found that all this theory was just confirming that my musical instinct was correct. That said, when I listen to music, I'm not thinking, "Damn, that chord progression is something else; I can't believe he managed to resolve back to the tonic after meandering over to the minor second and the augmented sixth" -- not usually, at least.

I remember several years ago seeing a book written especially for people who don't know a lot about classical music, and I remember it got very good reviews. I don't remember what it was, though, and I can't think of anything else right now. If I remember, I'll let you know.

[chienne-folle.livejournal.com]

*laugh* I wouldn't recognize an augmented sixth if it bit me on the leg! No, I was thinking of something considerably less elevated than that. :-)

When I listen to some of the classical symphonies, it's like trying to drink from Niagra Falls -- there's too much, and so I can't take ANY of it in. I'm trying to figure out how to make it into small enough streams that I can encompass it.

An example:

When I listen to a concerto, it usually seems to me as if it's a conversation between the orchestra and the soloist:

Orchestra: Hey, here's a little tune
Soloist: You like that tune? Sure, I can play that tune
O: We like it even better if we elaborate it like this
S: Sure, I'll elaborate it like that if you want
O: Let's elaborate it even more
S: How about if I elaborate it with swirls and sprinkles and whipped cream and a cherry on top?
O: Yay, whoopee! You da man.

Or something like that. I'm sure people who are NOT musical pygmies have a more complex understanding than that :-), but that's a sample of the kind of thing I hear when I listen to a concerto. I guess I'm asking how to get IN to a symphony. Who's talking to whom, and how does the conversation go? All I'm getting right now is a wall of sound. (Well, not in some symphonies -- Beethoven's 9th has a lot I can hear -- but the symphonies from the high classical period often have that "wall of sound" effect for me.)

You're very nice to educate us musically untutored folks!

Cory

[spwebdesign.livejournal.com]

You've got the gist of it. Your description of what happens is pretty much what happens in other pieces from the classical period. In essence, you are given a theme or themes, and those themes are taken through a number of statements, restatements, transormations, etc. In a concerto, as you pointed out, there is a dialogue between the soloist and the orchestra centered around these themes. With a symphony or a solo work, the separate voices aren't always as clear. You may have opposition between different instruments in the orchestra (say, something gets stated in the strings and then the horns or woodwinds chime in) or different registers in an instrument. Or this dialogue may not happen at all. But if you listen to works from the classical period, you will always here a distinct melody or theme stated at the beginning of a movement. The composition will play around with the theme(s) in the tonic, that is the base key of the piece, the do in do-re-mi. Then a series of chord progressions will move the piece into the dominant or fifth, the so of do-re-mi-fa-so. The movement will usually explore statements and transfigurations of the theme(s) in other keys as well, but the bulk of the movement hovers in and around the dominant until it reolves itself back in the tonic, giving the movement a I-V-I arc. There are different forms for accomplishing, but all "Classical" music has this basic shape.

In the Romantic period, forms became less strictly defined and harmonic progressions strayed farther and farther away from this basic I-V-I. Listening to a piece from the late 19th century, it is easy to lose track of the harmonic movement. However, the Romantic works tended to have a more organic treatment of themes. Where as the Classical works presented a complete theme and developed it, Romantic works often fleshed out a theme from a germinal idea. That's one of the reasons Romantic works tend to be longer.

In the twentieth century, some composers abandoned the idea of the tonal (I-V-I, called tonal because it's centered around a tonic) system. Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern developed a rigorous musical system around sets of 12 unique tones and subsets thereof. Debussy also played around with 12-tone scales. Debussy, Ravel, and others played with different musical sonorities outside of tonal music and independent of the strict 12-tone (aka serial) school of music. Composers like Bartok, Stravinsky, and Ives often took folk music or other sounds and music and created new textures, rhythms, etc. The twentieth century was a very exciting time for musical innovation.

Nonetheless, the key in any musical style or period, IMO, is to allow yourself to listen to the different musical ideas put forth, whether distinct themes or special sonorities, and allow these ideas to mingle in your inner ear as the composer gradually works these ideas out for you. Yes, one can super-analyze these things, but I don't want to kill the emotional power and enjoyment of music by doing so. I think you already know how to listen to music. Some textures and styles simple require more careful listening until your ear and mind become more acclimated to them.

[chienne-folle.livejournal.com]

Thank you for your explanation! I appreciate your going to all this effort (especially for someone who's just a random friend of Jay's).

Cory