Fugue in D Minor for Sting Trio

[Fredrick zinos]

Fugue in D Minor for String Trio is now on my page. Sooner or later every pretender to the art of music desires to write something in the style of Bach. Here is my feeble attempt. 

[Simon Godden]

Do you wanna hear my fugue, or not? I was only winding Jeff up about false relations anyway. He seems to have reacted as I thought. Denying the use of them rather than defending it.

Kristofer Emerig said:

I'd liken it more to concerto grosso in which all of the soloists have been given continuous simultaneous solo parts such that none can hear what the rest of the ensemble's playing over their own din. Even a duet offers some natural sequence of pause and response in order to achieve a sense of dialogue.
This is why I detest politics. Once the opposing sides have been delineated, each and every matter of substance is polarized to the point of hyperbole, and any semblance of intellectual honesty and even handedness is quickly abandoned. One's opponent must be completely in error on every single talking point, his every thought irrational, his breath stinky and his children ugly.
I won't garner any favour here by observing that all of the participants in this fray, in my opinion, have posted competent musical work here, because I believe the fever pitch of hostility has escalated to the point where my praising the one will outweigh in the mind of the other that part of the praise which goes to them. Need every difference in musical practice be automatically attributed in the opposing view to incompetence or ignorance? Is it not conceivable that another can be just as competent and knowledgeable, and arrive at different opinions and techniques by sheer choice and diversity of person?

Two very different methods of philosophical debate abound, and I personally much favour the latter. They are the rhetorical, and the dialectic. To sum up briefly, rhetoric is about winning, and dialectic is about arriving at truth. Most of the contributions to this thread are vigorously rhetorical in approach.

For instance, Simon promulgates "bimodality", yet attacks Jeff's use of false relations. Jeff attacks Simon on grounds of modal ambiguity. The truth is, the most obvious application for the intentional use of false relations is bimodality (or multi-modality). Is it not the close juxtaposition of contrasting chromatic inflections to invoke very temporary modal variations? They are, rather than antithetically opposed, integrally related. Such semantic arguments, rhetoric, and personal insult are precisely the hazards of "dancing about architecture". Sure I dance too, but it's crucial to keep things in perspective and understand you're just dancing, and hopefully arrive at some constructive insight or understanding for all of the two-stepping.

Karen E. Peace said:

ever heard Menotti's "Duet for Two Cats" ? LOL!

"of those who feel ignorance is bliss" -- guilty as charged!

and I am feeling, astoundingly provocative and instructive this "duet" it is proving , a strong urge to go write some music instead of arguing about it -- dull as I am LOL!

[Simon Godden]

My fugue is now loading up in the Music Dissection forum.

[Kristofer Emerig]

Good catch. I should have worded that "attacks Jeff's alleged use of false relations." It's no accusation coming from me, as I, rather than avoid "false relations", employ and exploit them at every available opportunity, being deeply intriqued by the seemingly endless nuance and colour they lend. The term false relation is really a loaded one, and a vestige of a contrapuntal protocol which evolved in a modal setting, and not in our full fledged major/minor tonal system. The origin of its proscription lies in the avoidance of the tritone relationship, the justification of which itself is highly dubious to many, including myself. Because chromatic alteration of the mode beyond the raising of the leading tone is generally strongly discouraged, if not forbidden, in Fux's method, the most probable occurrence of the false relation would be found embedded in consecutive parallel major thirds, a configuration not allowed in species counterpoint. That proscription, more rooted in dogma than solid musical aesthetic reasoning, did not survive into Bach's time as did the more rational principles of Fux's method, such as parallel perfect intervals and leaps form dissonance. It was simply no longer tenable in the new tonal system.

My greater point in this though is that false relations, bimodality, chromatic alteration and embellishment, pivotal harmonic tones, etc are largely semantic differentiations of the same musical devices, and a quite natural phenomenon in the widening vocabulary of the major/minor tonal system.

Aside from that, there was a more abstract philosophical point to my post above, not about the content of the debate, but the methods we use to communicate, or fail to communicate, with eachother.

Jeff Cattie said:

Kris - I'll say it again... there are no false relations in the fugue I posted. I don't USE them, I avoid them as they should be avoided in period music. When I'm not writing period music, I don't care... Simon seems to think that when you use chromatic alterations in the melodic minor mode, you AUTOMATICALLY encounter false relations. The reality is, you can have a G and a G# within a beat of each other... if they're in the same voice, and there are a slew of other exceptions.

Also, I (at least) was talking about 18th century counterpoint - which DID already happen, you know? It's not up for interpretation the way Bach wrote fugues and didn't.

Kristofer Emerig said:

I'd liken it more to concerto grosso in which all of the soloists have been given continuous simultaneous solo parts such that none can hear what the rest of the ensemble's playing over their own din. Even a duet offers some natural sequence of pause and response in order to achieve a sense of dialogue.
This is why I detest politics. Once the opposing sides have been delineated, each and every matter of substance is polarized to the point of hyperbole, and any semblance of intellectual honesty and even handedness is quickly abandoned. One's opponent must be completely in error on every single talking point, his every thought irrational, his breath stinky and his children ugly. I won't garner any favour here by observing that all of the participants in this fray, in my opinion, have posted competent musical work here, because I believe the fever pitch of hostility has escalated to the point where my praising the one will outweigh in the mind of the other that part of the praise which goes to them. Need every difference in musical practice be automatically attributed in the opposing view to incompetence or ignorance? Is it not conceivable that another can be just as competent and knowledgeable, and arrive at different opinions and techniques by sheer choice and diversity of person? Two very different methods of philosophical debate abound, and I personally much favour the latter. They are the rhetorical, and the dialectic. To sum up briefly, rhetoric is about winning, and dialectic is about arriving at truth. Most of the contributions to this thread are vigorously rhetorical in approach.
For instance, Simon promulgates "bimodality", yet attacks Jeff's use of false relations. Jeff attacks Simon on grounds of modal ambiguity. The truth is, the most obvious application for the intentional use of false relations is bimodality (or multi-modality). Is it not the close juxtaposition of contrasting chromatic inflections to invoke very temporary modal variations? They are, rather than antithetically opposed, integrally related. Such semantic arguments, rhetoric, and personal insult are precisely the hazards of "dancing about architecture". Sure I dance too, but it's crucial to keep things in perspective and understand you're just dancing, and hopefully arrive at some constructive insight or understanding for all of the two-stepping.

Karen E. Peace said:

ever heard Menotti's "Duet for Two Cats" ? LOL!

"of those who feel ignorance is bliss" -- guilty as charged!

and I am feeling, astoundingly provocative and instructive this "duet" it is proving , a strong urge to go write some music instead of arguing about it -- dull as I am LOL!

[Russell Jalland]

Kristofer
I agree with you wholeheartedly on all that you have concluded, apart from that to which I too must plead blissful ignorance. I imagine that to the scholars of this subject, your words come as a welcome respite from the simple ‘tit for tat’ that has come to be the norm here.

If I might also just add that I believe that much of the heat has been generated by an abject lack of decorum on the part of Mr Cattie, to whom I do not apologise for my frankness. In particular, with respect to venom directed towards the thought and great effort that his peers (or opponents?) have put into their explorations and their work.

I’m of the opinion that that Simon has also been defending the dignity of his friends here, and for that I hold him in great esteem.

I personally have always found wisdom from believing that I am fallible, and that I am merely fumbling my way through this beautiful life. But even so, I do not wish to be re-educated by a supercilious youth half my age, who has neither the insight nor the accrued wisdom of my experience and my years.

And particularly by such a fool who ‘seemingly’ has so little basic respect for the good company that can be found here.

And my fugue is better than your fugue is really so tedious… and will go on forever; you’re a young man, go get laid or something?


Kristofer Emerig said:

I'd liken it more to concerto grosso in which all of the soloists have been given continuous simultaneous solo parts such that none can hear what the rest of the ensemble's playing over their own din. Even a duet offers some natural sequence of pause and response in order to achieve a sense of dialogue.

This is why I detest politics. Once the opposing sides have been delineated, each and every matter of substance is polarized to the point of hyperbole, and any semblance of intellectual honesty and even handedness is quickly abandoned. One's opponent must be completely in error on every single talking point, his every thought irrational, his breath stinky and his children ugly.

I won't garner any favour here by observing that all of the participants in this fray, in my opinion, have posted competent musical work here, because I believe the fever pitch of hostility has escalated to the point where my praising the one will outweigh in the mind of the other that part of the praise which goes to them. Need every difference in musical practice be automatically attributed in the opposing view to incompetence or ignorance? Is it not conceivable that another can be just as competent and knowledgeable, and arrive at different opinions and techniques by sheer choice and diversity of person?

Two very different methods of philosophical debate abound, and I personally much favour the latter. They are the rhetorical, and the dialectic. To sum up briefly, rhetoric is about winning, and dialectic is about arriving at truth. Most of the contributions to this thread are vigorously rhetorical in approach.

For instance, Simon promulgates "bimodality", yet attacks Jeff's use of false relations. Jeff attacks Simon on grounds of modal ambiguity. The truth is, the most obvious application for the intentional use of false relations is bimodality (or multi-modality). Is it not the close juxtaposition of contrasting chromatic inflections to invoke very temporary modal variations? They are, rather than antithetically opposed, integrally related. Such semantic arguments, rhetoric, and personal insult are precisely the hazards of "dancing about architecture". Sure I dance too, but it's crucial to keep things in perspective and understand you're just dancing, and hopefully arrive at some constructive insight or understanding for all of the two-stepping.

Karen E. Peace said:

ever heard Menotti's "Duet for Two Cats" ? LOL!

"of those who feel ignorance is bliss" -- guilty as charged!

and I am feeling, astoundingly provocative and instructive this "duet" it is proving , a strong urge to go write some music instead of arguing about it -- dull as I am LOL!

[Fredrick zinos]

Karen, dullness is not part of you or your music.. go for it.. give is a wonderful fugue.

Karen E. Peace said:

ever heard Menotti's "Duet for Two Cats" ? LOL!

"of those who feel ignorance is bliss" -- guilty as charged!

and I am feeling, astoundingly provocative and instructive this "duet" it is proving , a strong urge to go write some music instead of arguing about it -- dull as I am LOL!

[Karen E. Peace]

:-) LOL! Meoooooww Hssssssssssssssss! :-D

Ray Kemp said:

Karen,
As a child I remember my father using an air rifle loaded with potato pellets. No real harm done to the cats but we did get some peace (unintended) to sleep at night. :-)



Karen E. Peace said:

ever heard Menotti's "Duet for Two Cats" ? LOL!

"of those who feel ignorance is bliss" -- guilty as charged!

and I am feeling, astoundingly provocative and instructive this "duet" it is proving , a strong urge to go write some music instead of arguing about it -- dull as I am LOL!

[Kristofer Emerig]

"And my fugue is better than your fugue is really so tedious… and will go on forever; you’re a young man, go get laid or something?"

And depending on one's pronunciation of "fugue", this might be the most valuable fugin' thought contributed to this thread so far.

[Karen E. Peace]

LOL!

But I suggest its time now to study "fuque" in all its variations! ROTL!

Break out the tequila and start roll around in your basso continuo until your fuque is quite finished.... :-D

Kristofer Emerig said:

"And my fugue is better than your fugue is really so tedious… and will go on forever; you’re a young man, go get laid or something?"

And depending on one's pronunciation of "fugue", this might be the most valuable fugin' thought contributed to this thread so far.

[Fredrick zinos]

Simon,

Thank you very much for your work and valuable contribution to this little fugue. I think, overall, you have made the string parts more playable. While such changes are sometimes dismissed as "mere editing," I think we both know that in the real world idiomatic writing is frequently the difference between getting a performance and not. You have also made a few changes to melodic line and to harmony if my ear doesn't deceive me. These changes too, while not what exactly I had what I originally had in mind, certainly do not detract from the overall idea of the piece and probably improve it. I say "probably" because I am not a good objective listener at this point.

At any rate, I want you to know that I very much appreciate your time, energy, significant talent and technical skill in helping to make this fugue a better piece.

[Simon Godden]

Thank you very much Fred. It was a pleasure. As I said, it really was a very impressive work to begin with.

Fredrick zinos said:

Simon,

Thank you very much for your work and valuable contribution to this little fugue. I think, overall, you have made the string parts more playable. While such changes are sometimes dismissed as "mere editing," I think we both know that in the real world idiomatic writing is frequently the difference between getting a performance and not. You have also made a few changes to melodic line and to harmony if my ear doesn't deceive me. These changes too, while not what exactly I had what I originally had in mind, certainly do not detract from the overall idea of the piece and probably improve it. I say "probably" because I am not a good objective listener at this point.

At any rate, I want you to know that I very much appreciate your time, energy, significant talent and technical skill in helping to make this fugue a better piece.