It's all about the harmony

Please excuse the limited inclusiveness of this blog as I pontificate on harmony in music. Most musicians are drawn to some particular element of music be it rhythm, sound, melody, bass, instrument timbre, text, volume, or tempo. As musicians become more trained in these elements, they inevitably become more selective and more knowledgeable about how the elements operate congruently in a piece of music. Yet, it seems that knowledge, education, and training do not necessarily alter one's preference for music, or one's attraction to a specific element. Since preference rarely is fastidious, it is probably stretching to say one's attraction to a single element is solely responsible for one's judgment or criterion for excellence. But for the sake of clarity, I am merely explaining how I hear music.

I am always curious as to what element is most fascinating or preferred in people's attraction to music. I have a friend who tends to judge music, at least initially, based on the vocal quality of the singer. When the singer has a harsh, strained quality regardless of the style of the music, whether country, rock, Christian, art, or folk, my friend simply rejects it outright. His initial reaction is negative due to the painful vocal quality being presented. Another friend is a text guru. He seeks out quality poetry and relates the internal qualities of the text to the performance of the music, being emotionally and musically satisfied when the music matches the text, and being less sanguine when the music is not well matched with the text.

I know people who are attracted to slower music with smooth, non-percussive timbres, still others who prefer a clean presentation such as found in cultivated chamber music or solo sonatas. Melody is always an attraction and many are drawn to how a melody is shaped and what it means. Rhythm and/or the beat is yet another element that elicits strong reactions and in fact tends to govern the popular world of rock and country/western music. Of course this discussion of preference and musical responses is unending with the parameters being limited to the number of people on the planet. It is further complicated by the setting in which particular music resides. At a formal church service, some people prefer certain elements over others that may be found at an athletic event or a dance. Yes, this is a complex issue, that's for sure!

But for me, given my personality, learning style, priorities, and training, I am comfortable assessing music through its harmony. This is not to say that I reject melody, for melody is what I remember more than anything else; and this is not to say that I think rhythm is not important, for rhythm is what pushes music forward, giving it the energy, drive, and passion we seek for an emotional experience. But at the end of the day (I can't believe I just used this worn-out cliche'. I won't ever use it again, promise!), I love the harmony of the music. I am thrilled by the music that goes beyond three or four chords, music that shifts in and out of the key, music that has chromatic alterations, and music that experiments with new land, explores, examines, and teases, but then returns to the origins of the piece.

Because of my interest in harmony, I find myself fascinated with certain composers over others, and certain genres over others, and certain sounds over others. This makes my musical world of preferences a little elite at times but also fairly accepting of variety within the parameters of my harmonic world. In this world, I tend to compare the music of Vivaldi with its limited harmonic interest to the music often found in modern praise choruses. I also tend to reject the less innovative composers in favor of those who tried new and creative harmonic alterations.

So by my oddly narrow definition of excellence based on harmony and its creative application, in the area of art music, I am less interested in the music of Vivaldi, Haydn, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Dvorak, and Verdi than I am in Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schumann, Wagner, and Brahms. In jazz, I prefer Duke Ellington over Count Basie and Chick Corea over Dave Brubeck. I like show tunes more than rock music, but in rock music I prefer Stevie Wonder and Chicago over Paul McCartney and the Bee Gees. Using my evaluative system of examining harmony, Lead On, O King Eternal is a stronger hymn that Leaning on the Everlasting Arms. Of course, I tend to like whatever I am hearing or studying at the time, so it is difficult to remain consistent, but in general I prefer music with harmonic interest over music that is simplistic. This makes for a rocky musical existence in that I have to know something about the harmony before passing judgment, but one which is fun and different. Ah, to be different, perhaps that is the preference!