In 1974, when Earthquake came to the theatres, we experienced "Sensurround" for the first time. I recall feeling the bass in the room as we watched the action unfold before us. The rumbling of the engulfing bass added to the "real" feeling of the movie and contributed to the experience of watching the movie. Although not necessarily an advanced nor refined sound, the audiences were treated to very low frequencies produced by subwoofers in a studio. Excellent acting and cool sounds did little to make up for a weak plot, and the movie has found a small cult following along with The Towering Inferno and other disaster films of the 70s. As an aside, the film included an outstanding performance by the former revivalist Marjoe Gortner, famous for his childhood role as an added enticement for more money during revivals with this father. But I have digressed from the purpose of this essay.
As a young teenager destined for a musical life, I was not aware that "Sensurround" (a goofy but effective technique) would actually change the way we hear music and thus alter the musical world perhaps forever. The subwoofer became the norm for sound enhancement and we now hear the subwoofer in most musical performances that are not naturally acoustical. Ironically, despite its frequent use and obvious benefits, the subwoofer does not really produce comprehensive, musical tones by our human definition. The sounds of a subwoofer are too low for human reproduction and aside from the occasional replicated anomalous sounds in nature, not fully understood by our ears. While one could argue that the fundamental tones of the natural harmonic series are occurring all the time in nature and in the atmosphere, our limited ability to hear all tones around us prevent us from identifying the extreme low and high frequencies. Not unlike atoms which we know exist but cannot see, fundamental tones are not always audible, but by virtue of their foundational existence, are essential to sounds we actually can hear and understand.
Subwoofers greatly enhance the bass of a musical ensemble and open up the sound to a richness not previously experienced prior to the subwoofer. It is what makes our bodies want to move, it makes us feel the music, it provides a wide range of sound that amplifies not only the sound but the entire audible experience as well. It is also what annoys us when a "loud" automobile is nearby, and it can spark fear in us when we are near a jet airplane or when a tornado is close. In short, the subwoofer has changed the way we hear and respond to music, and there is no going back. It is here to stay and music (many would argue) is better for it.
But the human experience of making music cannot replicate the subwoofer in any kind of natural way. Before explaining further, I must qualify that a large pipe organ as well as a few musical instruments such as a contrabasson, contraclarinets, and bass drums do come close to this replication although with limitations. Admittedly, having experienced pipe organs in large cathedrals, I believe I responded to the sound much in the same way I have felt the subwoofer in rock concerts and at the showing of Earthquake many years ago. These examples aside, concerts of people singing or playing instruments without sound enhancement cannot have the added benefit of the subwoofer. An acoustic environment is certainly appealing but only insofar as the human can perform well. This is not to disparage the remarkable abilities of great musical performers, but it is to say that sound enhancement has dramatically altered societal preferences for music making. With exceptions, we are no longer as enamored with the natural acoustic sound as we once were. We have been given a taste of amplification, of mixing, of effects, of new frequencies, of sound control, and of subwoofers and most people like it.
Herein lies the cultural clash: between those who prefer the natural acoustical sound made by humans without electronic enhancement, and those who prefer some kind of electronic manipulation of the sound. This tension is felt in churches, in academic circles, in concert venues, and in music education where we teach an acoustical approach to music but are subject to the joyful or, in some cases, subversives whims of sound enhancement and sound managers. Few academically trained musicians have knowledge in or even interest in electronics, amplification, woofers, subwoofers, frequencies, or really anything besides excellence in performance. In a way, however, their rejection or at least lack of consideration is their loss, for well-managed sound enhancement can certainly add to most performances. If this is a battle between natural acoustics and sound enhancement, who will win and will the cultures ever merge?
In the end, the subwoofer improves the overall quality of the experience for the listener and most people will agree that it provides depth and warmth to the music. In defense of acoustically pure music performances in an ideal space for natural music making, it sure is easier to deal with than having to worry about sound systems. Perhaps the clash we musicians feel is partly about the fear of giving up a modicum of control to sound managers who have little musical training. But that, my friends, is yet another subject for discussion.
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Tuesday, December 24, 2013
Thoughts on Frozen
Not being a big fan of animation, preferring real people over fanciful drawings and images, it was with a touch of suspicion that I and my family went to see Frozen. My fears increased as I sat through nearly 20 minutes of cartoon ads and a dull Mickey Mouse cartoon. Nearly falling asleep and dreading more animation (yes, I know I can be a grump at times), the movie began.
Not sure exactly when I got drawn in. Perhaps it was the girls building a snowman or the precision of the animation or events of the first few minutes, but I really believe it was the great music. The snowman song was terrific and after the girl got hurt, the score suddenly became ominous with rich orchestral sounds followed by rhythmic energy and complex but tonal harmonic motion. Rather than hearing sound effects from the orchestra, we heard an eclectic mix of orchestral sounds that incorporated thematic motives juxtaposed with appropriate contrasts perfectly aligned with the events on the screen.
The story proceeds rather typically in a type of allegory about power, kingdoms, love, confusion, relationships, and comic relief. In a broad sense, it was a classic "love solves all" kind of plot with some twists and turns including bad guys, good guys, and plenty of tension. But underneath the rather cliched story we find great characters, stunning visual effects, amazing and beautiful crystals, and a depth rarely found in movies today. Little Olaf was absolutely hilarious and the snow monster scenes were intense and spectacular. The hints of anti-totalitarianism, of the value of charity, the problems with isolationism, the value of family, the way human actions spawn events that have far-reaching implications, and the joy of those who are outside the mainstream of looks and behavior all came together for a movie to be enjoyed by all ages.
The images were magnificent and the energy moved forth all the way to the end where everything turned out well. But aside from the tension, the interesting dialogs, the amazing graphics, and the physical comedy, it was the songs that jumped out as outstanding. In a musical theatre style, each song contained harmonic interest, rhythmic complexity, memorable melodies, zippy texts, and goal-directed dynamic growth. In short, simply great songs all the way through the movie. If anything, I wanted more and am hoping to see this show on the stage someday. Probably worth traveling to London if it makes to the West End!
Wonderful movie for all ages. I encourage everyone to experience Frozen. As in all great art, you will be changed in some magical way.
Not sure exactly when I got drawn in. Perhaps it was the girls building a snowman or the precision of the animation or events of the first few minutes, but I really believe it was the great music. The snowman song was terrific and after the girl got hurt, the score suddenly became ominous with rich orchestral sounds followed by rhythmic energy and complex but tonal harmonic motion. Rather than hearing sound effects from the orchestra, we heard an eclectic mix of orchestral sounds that incorporated thematic motives juxtaposed with appropriate contrasts perfectly aligned with the events on the screen.
The story proceeds rather typically in a type of allegory about power, kingdoms, love, confusion, relationships, and comic relief. In a broad sense, it was a classic "love solves all" kind of plot with some twists and turns including bad guys, good guys, and plenty of tension. But underneath the rather cliched story we find great characters, stunning visual effects, amazing and beautiful crystals, and a depth rarely found in movies today. Little Olaf was absolutely hilarious and the snow monster scenes were intense and spectacular. The hints of anti-totalitarianism, of the value of charity, the problems with isolationism, the value of family, the way human actions spawn events that have far-reaching implications, and the joy of those who are outside the mainstream of looks and behavior all came together for a movie to be enjoyed by all ages.
The images were magnificent and the energy moved forth all the way to the end where everything turned out well. But aside from the tension, the interesting dialogs, the amazing graphics, and the physical comedy, it was the songs that jumped out as outstanding. In a musical theatre style, each song contained harmonic interest, rhythmic complexity, memorable melodies, zippy texts, and goal-directed dynamic growth. In short, simply great songs all the way through the movie. If anything, I wanted more and am hoping to see this show on the stage someday. Probably worth traveling to London if it makes to the West End!
Wonderful movie for all ages. I encourage everyone to experience Frozen. As in all great art, you will be changed in some magical way.
Orchestras, Operas, and Opportunities
As clichéd as it sounds, it is true that challenges can be seen as opportunities. Such is the case with the arts and music in particular. Many symphony orchestras and some opera houses continue to struggle to pay the bills. Their personnel and operating costs are greater than their revenue, forcing them to rely solely on sponsorships and donations to stay solvent. While businesses and donors have traditionally given to the arts, they are beginning to be suspicious of the inherent value and even future of the symphony orchestra. Nobody wants to support a sinking ship, and until orchestras find ways to bring in revenues through ticket sales, they will likely remain on life support.
Let us play the blame game. It is possible that poor management of many orchestras has caused some of the problems. Good managers control costs and find ways to maximize profits, recognizing the value of a strong marketing mix, segmentation, careful accounting, and appealing products. Good managers have a working knowledge of cost accounting, budgeting, human resources, leadership, the future value of money, inventory, and pricing. Granted, the challenges of dealing with symphony orchestras are excessively complicated and require skills not normally needed in the corporate world, but the essence of good management must remain true in spite of the unusual structure of an orchestra.
But management is not the whole story of where the blame lies, in fact management is probably not the real story at all. A manager is essentially an employee of the board, and the board is the controlling and responsible entity of the orchestra. The board has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the solvency of the organization, whether that is through donations, ticket sales, or sponsorships. The board, hopefully, is comprised of those who love music but also have enough business acumen to make wise decisions for the present and future of the ensemble. And herein lies the tension, the board as the responsible entity, must remain in control, at least to an extent, with the programming of the orchestra. This then means the conductor of the orchestra is an employee not an employer of the board of directors. Yikes!
A conductor of an orchestra has achieved his/her position through a combination of factors including great talent, tenacity, leadership, people skills, wisdom, and intellect. Their leadership abilities are a marriage of musical talent, confidence, and unswerving dedication to excellence in all things. Outstanding conductors, by virtue of their abilities, are often strong in opinions, relentless in effort, and goal-directed in their leadership. Asking a great conductor to bend to the will of a board is difficult at best. When all goals are the same--musical and financial--the results will be positive for all constituents, and the board will be able to pay the bills and enjoy great music. A wise board gives the conductor the latitude to make the musical decisions that are best for the orchestra, the community, and for the cause of music. But how much freedom should be allowed when revenues decline and the goals of presenting great music fly in the face of paying the bills? Conductor autonomy only works when boards, musicians, and community meet all the artistic and financial goals, and when all constituents work congruently for those same goals.
But this rarely happens in today's eclectic world of changing tastes, digital transmission, and unpredictable behavior. What kind of live music will sell tickets and how should an orchestra (a medium with a long, prosperous, and highly respected heritage) respond to the need to generate revenue? Should we abandon the old in favor of the new? Should we give up on the canon of "classical" music that has stood the test of time and been highly valued for over a century? Isn't classical or art music the best kind of music with the greatest qualities? Without classical music, are we destined to become a society of popcorn and candy cane eaters without any artistic sense, living in a quagmire of artistic mediocrity totally devoid of depth and quality?
The philosophical tug-of-war between artistic elites, lovers of classical music, and those seeking a lighter more eclectic offering, although not new, is more pronounced today than ever before, with the result being a significant drop in revenues for most orchestras and operas. For the orchestra to survive, boards and conductors must work together to program concerts that will attract and interest audiences. The art form, regardless of whether it is a string quartet, concert band, symphony orchestra, ballet, solo piano, or opera must be able to support itself and demonstrate greater revenues than expenses.
To those holding onto an unsustainable model from the past, it is time to examine the role of music in today's culture and think beyond personal preference. It is time to embrace a global music perspective that amalgamates many genres from the past as well as the present, while retaining the congruence of the collective spirit. For those who despair that the demise of operas, orchestras, and "classical" music is a sign of the hopelessness of the modern world, I recommend living in a personal cave of recordings and videos while longing for the past to return. For the others, there is now an opportunity to discover new art forms, to try new ways of making music, to embrace eclecticism, to put aside differences and find common ground, to develop new audiences, and to recognize that music is alive and well today in many forms, from many lands, and in a multitude of styles.
Let us play the blame game. It is possible that poor management of many orchestras has caused some of the problems. Good managers control costs and find ways to maximize profits, recognizing the value of a strong marketing mix, segmentation, careful accounting, and appealing products. Good managers have a working knowledge of cost accounting, budgeting, human resources, leadership, the future value of money, inventory, and pricing. Granted, the challenges of dealing with symphony orchestras are excessively complicated and require skills not normally needed in the corporate world, but the essence of good management must remain true in spite of the unusual structure of an orchestra.
But management is not the whole story of where the blame lies, in fact management is probably not the real story at all. A manager is essentially an employee of the board, and the board is the controlling and responsible entity of the orchestra. The board has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the solvency of the organization, whether that is through donations, ticket sales, or sponsorships. The board, hopefully, is comprised of those who love music but also have enough business acumen to make wise decisions for the present and future of the ensemble. And herein lies the tension, the board as the responsible entity, must remain in control, at least to an extent, with the programming of the orchestra. This then means the conductor of the orchestra is an employee not an employer of the board of directors. Yikes!
A conductor of an orchestra has achieved his/her position through a combination of factors including great talent, tenacity, leadership, people skills, wisdom, and intellect. Their leadership abilities are a marriage of musical talent, confidence, and unswerving dedication to excellence in all things. Outstanding conductors, by virtue of their abilities, are often strong in opinions, relentless in effort, and goal-directed in their leadership. Asking a great conductor to bend to the will of a board is difficult at best. When all goals are the same--musical and financial--the results will be positive for all constituents, and the board will be able to pay the bills and enjoy great music. A wise board gives the conductor the latitude to make the musical decisions that are best for the orchestra, the community, and for the cause of music. But how much freedom should be allowed when revenues decline and the goals of presenting great music fly in the face of paying the bills? Conductor autonomy only works when boards, musicians, and community meet all the artistic and financial goals, and when all constituents work congruently for those same goals.
But this rarely happens in today's eclectic world of changing tastes, digital transmission, and unpredictable behavior. What kind of live music will sell tickets and how should an orchestra (a medium with a long, prosperous, and highly respected heritage) respond to the need to generate revenue? Should we abandon the old in favor of the new? Should we give up on the canon of "classical" music that has stood the test of time and been highly valued for over a century? Isn't classical or art music the best kind of music with the greatest qualities? Without classical music, are we destined to become a society of popcorn and candy cane eaters without any artistic sense, living in a quagmire of artistic mediocrity totally devoid of depth and quality?
The philosophical tug-of-war between artistic elites, lovers of classical music, and those seeking a lighter more eclectic offering, although not new, is more pronounced today than ever before, with the result being a significant drop in revenues for most orchestras and operas. For the orchestra to survive, boards and conductors must work together to program concerts that will attract and interest audiences. The art form, regardless of whether it is a string quartet, concert band, symphony orchestra, ballet, solo piano, or opera must be able to support itself and demonstrate greater revenues than expenses.
To those holding onto an unsustainable model from the past, it is time to examine the role of music in today's culture and think beyond personal preference. It is time to embrace a global music perspective that amalgamates many genres from the past as well as the present, while retaining the congruence of the collective spirit. For those who despair that the demise of operas, orchestras, and "classical" music is a sign of the hopelessness of the modern world, I recommend living in a personal cave of recordings and videos while longing for the past to return. For the others, there is now an opportunity to discover new art forms, to try new ways of making music, to embrace eclecticism, to put aside differences and find common ground, to develop new audiences, and to recognize that music is alive and well today in many forms, from many lands, and in a multitude of styles.
Friday, December 20, 2013
Anti-Luddism or Technology Solves All, okay Most
In opposition to some acquaintances and distant colleagues, I am not a Luddite at all. This does not mean I don't often miss the old days where our lives did not intersect dramatically with technology, but it does mean that I see technology as being that which can solve most of our societal problems. Knowing this sounds unlikely, I further see technology as enhancing and compounding opportunities for greater face time and personal relationship development. As I type this entry, I text three people, read two emails, check facebook periodically, listen to a video on using Google Docs, and consider developing my Excel skills. All this while being iced in due to poor weather.
True that all the technology in the world cannot solve the problems of bad weather, but perhaps one day technology can deliver products and goods for those captured by bad weather. Technology cannot directly help those struggling with depression or illness or relationship problems or the myriad of challenges that face us everyday, but it can help us understand we are not alone and technology can also provide data and information to help prevent future problems. A quick look at Google Trends reveals a decline in lung cancer. This could be attributed to a decline in smoking or simply an effort to improve the atmosphere. Technology's ability to disseminate information quickly to a wide audience is creating a new generation of people who are aware of health issues and how to avoid the pitfalls of certain behaviors.
This goes beyond health education and into personal behavior. Regardless of the naysayers I often meet, I contend that people are generally improving their actions and recognizing that their behavior has consequences both personally and collectively. Technology has inadvertently caused social accountability through the frequent use of cameras, Facebook, Twitter, videos, mobile phones, and email. While people may still have problems with rage or theft or bullying, these type of behaviors can be captured and widely distributed. In London while it may be invasive and feel a little like "big brother," there is no doubt that the video cameras located around the city have curtailed many negative behaviors.
Without having any official data, I believe students today are better behaved than past generations. Although I remain concerned with certain educational flaws due to the prevalence of technology, in general I find students know how to access information quickly and use that information to help them. Smartphones lend themselves to tremendous opportunities for knowledge, for insights, for cognitive facts, and for crowdsourcing curiosities. Technology holds institutions, organizations, and individuals accountable for behavior, for truth of information, and for quality. A poorly made product or a poor teacher are quickly identified and expressed publicly (much to the chagrin of some!). Technological advances allow us more time and opportunities to learn new things and to apply our knowledge in a multitude of ways. Online banking, shopping, Facebook, recipes, maps, and now even digital currency have given us new and exciting ways to live our lives.
All these and more have ironically contributed to more free time and more luxuries of relationship building. While some people may choose to have an unhealthy relationship to their gadgets (and I must admit to being tied to my mobile phone), most use technology to increase the efficiency of their day to day lives. This then results in more time to spend with friends watching movies, talking, "hanging out", and having fun. Perhaps over time we will see an increase in hobbies and interests outside of an individual's chosen profession. In a way, we get concerned when it seems that no part of our lives can escape technological advances, but in other ways we benefit from technology in all its complexities.
To say technology is perfect and makes our lives complete would be false, and there are many challenges associated with gadgets and advances. Frustration often sets in when I am forced to update my computer or punch in numbers when making a service phone call or battle the self-checkout line at Walmart. And I wonder about the absurd information on Facebook. I also get weary of answering 50 emails at work each day. I question the accountability quotient at times and fear the loss of privacy due to the constant invasive properties of technological advances. I often wistfully recall the days of a world without mobile phones, computers, and ease of information. But I refuse to be a Luddite and will continue to embrace our technological world with all its glories and the occasional misgivings.
True that all the technology in the world cannot solve the problems of bad weather, but perhaps one day technology can deliver products and goods for those captured by bad weather. Technology cannot directly help those struggling with depression or illness or relationship problems or the myriad of challenges that face us everyday, but it can help us understand we are not alone and technology can also provide data and information to help prevent future problems. A quick look at Google Trends reveals a decline in lung cancer. This could be attributed to a decline in smoking or simply an effort to improve the atmosphere. Technology's ability to disseminate information quickly to a wide audience is creating a new generation of people who are aware of health issues and how to avoid the pitfalls of certain behaviors.
This goes beyond health education and into personal behavior. Regardless of the naysayers I often meet, I contend that people are generally improving their actions and recognizing that their behavior has consequences both personally and collectively. Technology has inadvertently caused social accountability through the frequent use of cameras, Facebook, Twitter, videos, mobile phones, and email. While people may still have problems with rage or theft or bullying, these type of behaviors can be captured and widely distributed. In London while it may be invasive and feel a little like "big brother," there is no doubt that the video cameras located around the city have curtailed many negative behaviors.
Without having any official data, I believe students today are better behaved than past generations. Although I remain concerned with certain educational flaws due to the prevalence of technology, in general I find students know how to access information quickly and use that information to help them. Smartphones lend themselves to tremendous opportunities for knowledge, for insights, for cognitive facts, and for crowdsourcing curiosities. Technology holds institutions, organizations, and individuals accountable for behavior, for truth of information, and for quality. A poorly made product or a poor teacher are quickly identified and expressed publicly (much to the chagrin of some!). Technological advances allow us more time and opportunities to learn new things and to apply our knowledge in a multitude of ways. Online banking, shopping, Facebook, recipes, maps, and now even digital currency have given us new and exciting ways to live our lives.
All these and more have ironically contributed to more free time and more luxuries of relationship building. While some people may choose to have an unhealthy relationship to their gadgets (and I must admit to being tied to my mobile phone), most use technology to increase the efficiency of their day to day lives. This then results in more time to spend with friends watching movies, talking, "hanging out", and having fun. Perhaps over time we will see an increase in hobbies and interests outside of an individual's chosen profession. In a way, we get concerned when it seems that no part of our lives can escape technological advances, but in other ways we benefit from technology in all its complexities.
To say technology is perfect and makes our lives complete would be false, and there are many challenges associated with gadgets and advances. Frustration often sets in when I am forced to update my computer or punch in numbers when making a service phone call or battle the self-checkout line at Walmart. And I wonder about the absurd information on Facebook. I also get weary of answering 50 emails at work each day. I question the accountability quotient at times and fear the loss of privacy due to the constant invasive properties of technological advances. I often wistfully recall the days of a world without mobile phones, computers, and ease of information. But I refuse to be a Luddite and will continue to embrace our technological world with all its glories and the occasional misgivings.
Thursday, December 19, 2013
MBA and Education
With four degrees behind me, one would think I am highly educated and knowledgeable in many areas, able to impart great wisdom with alacrity and comprehension. Yet if I could say one thing that I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, it is that I am absolutely certain of how little I really know. My education is not about completing a degree, it is about discovering new things, of revealing truths, of finding new pathways to goals, and about applying knowledge to all facets of life. But as noble as all of this sounds, in truth I remain ignorant of so much.
The more I study accounting, management, ratios, and finance, the more I discover how much I still need to learn. Not unlike music, there seems to be no end to the knowledge required to be a successful money manager. The more I know, the less I know. In a way, this is the journey of a lifelong learner, one who cannot seem to get enough knowledge in many areas. The formal education means nothing without an insatiable curiousity and without an awareness of one's own limitations. In fact, the enemy of knowledge is the unbridled arrogance that prevents further improvement; whereas, the friend of knowledge is a curious mind. That coupled with a desire for understanding are ultimately the spicy ingredients that lead to humility in its totality.
Humility and receptiveness are the keys to knowledge. My knowing that I cannot know everything and that getting an education is simply one way to acquire a modicum of knowledge and skills, are extremely humbling ideas and, at the same time, strangely amusing. Acquiring an education has little to do with intelligence and everything to do with humility, curiosity, and tenacity. Unfortunately, in my case, it simply demonstrates how little I truly know and how much more I wish to know. To that end, I continue my quest for knowledge and will now dive into books, into writing, and into trying to have greater comprehension of the arts and of the world of business.
The more I study accounting, management, ratios, and finance, the more I discover how much I still need to learn. Not unlike music, there seems to be no end to the knowledge required to be a successful money manager. The more I know, the less I know. In a way, this is the journey of a lifelong learner, one who cannot seem to get enough knowledge in many areas. The formal education means nothing without an insatiable curiousity and without an awareness of one's own limitations. In fact, the enemy of knowledge is the unbridled arrogance that prevents further improvement; whereas, the friend of knowledge is a curious mind. That coupled with a desire for understanding are ultimately the spicy ingredients that lead to humility in its totality.
Humility and receptiveness are the keys to knowledge. My knowing that I cannot know everything and that getting an education is simply one way to acquire a modicum of knowledge and skills, are extremely humbling ideas and, at the same time, strangely amusing. Acquiring an education has little to do with intelligence and everything to do with humility, curiosity, and tenacity. Unfortunately, in my case, it simply demonstrates how little I truly know and how much more I wish to know. To that end, I continue my quest for knowledge and will now dive into books, into writing, and into trying to have greater comprehension of the arts and of the world of business.
The World of Music
Having completed my Masters of Business Administration, it is now time to start blogging again. Knowing there are very few readers of my blog, mostly due to the hiatus of nearly 2 years, I feel led to express my thoughts regardless of the readership. Several lofty goals are rolling around in my head for the future including writing two books, pursuing some licenses, starting a rock band (okay, I know that is absurd), and investing in some kind of venture. But for now, let's just talk about music.
Audra McDonald is simply fantastic in the recent staged version of Sound of Music. To me, the classic song "Climb Every Mountain" has become a little bit stale over the last several years. A good song, its blocked chords and lack of rhythmic variety has prevented it from becoming a staple in the broadway repertoire. As I listen to the various songs in the recent Sound of Music, the performance of Climb Every Mountain stands out. Not unlike the stunning performance of On My Own by Samantha Barks in Les Miserables, Audra McDonald sings with great energy, intensity, and expression. A great singer does not sing at the notes and shrug off the text but, instead, applies meaning to each syllable, connecting the text and music in a bold expression of emotion. Audra McDonald does all this and more as she is both authentic and convincing in her performance. The power of her voice and her ability to turn a phrase while communicating the text made me want to jump up and conquer every mountain I find!
Recently discovering the songs of Reynaldo Hahn, I have been listening to Susan Graham sing these marvelous songs. A touch simplistic, they are still very beautiful with mesmerizing expression and moments of peaceful, serene joy. Both sublime and appealing, Hahn's music is the right recipe at the end of a stressful day. Not unlike Benjamin Britten's British folk songs, Reynaldo Hahn's songs have qualities that make them accessible to all people while retaining the qualities often associated with art music.
Speaking of sublime, I got in a discussion with an art teacher over the value of Lucien Freud's art. She made the statement that his art is sublime without being pleasant. Thinking that through, I am in full agreement with this statement. His art is disturbing and almost disgusting to me in a way, but at the same time, it seems to reach beyond the obvious and into the depth of what it means to be human. The discussion reminds me to avoid the trappings of seeing art and hearing music in its superficialities. Great art requires time to absorb and such is true of the art of Lucien Freud.
The song Roar by Katy Perry continues to be enjoyed by all (okay, most) and I find it compositionally interesting. It has some nice elision of phrases, a prevalent usage of pentatonic scales, and some rhythmic displacement of accents. Add to the music a solid performance by a fine pop singer, and you have a hit! It really is a zingy song and somehow always puts a smile on my face and provides a sense of confidence and power. In short, it is an inspiring song. Nearly as appealing but in an edgier style is Applause by Lady Gaga. Her voice is captivating and the variety within the song, including range changes and melodic leaps, gives it a lasting appeal. Probably not for everyone, Lady Gaga continues to reach audiences with her antics and pop musical depth.
But no essay on music can leave out my continued admiration for the music of Johannes Brahms. In spite of my enjoyment of rock and pop music, I always find myself listening to Brahms and admiring his craft and expression. Every time I hear the last movement of Symphony No. 2, I end up ranking it among the greatest works of the 19th century (Beethoven's Violin Concerto in the group as well). And I still enjoy the grand symphonies of Gustav Mahler and the tone poems of Richard Strauss. Who can criticize the late works of master composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart? His last few operas are among the greatest works of the classical era.
Back to rock...Chicago, Blood Sweat & Tears, Styx, Bon Jovi, Stevie Wonder along with another dozen or so remain appealing. Fooling Yourself (Angry Young Man) by the Styx is a blast and I have yet to hear a song by Stevie Wonder that I didn't like. Over in the Christian world, I am a big fan of the music of Keith Getty with his nice blend of hymns and choruses. Chris Tomlin is not necessarily my favorite performer, but he sure writes a singable song and continues to sing and write outstanding music in those circles.
Okay, enough pontificating about music. I am probably one of the most eclectic musicians in the business!
Audra McDonald is simply fantastic in the recent staged version of Sound of Music. To me, the classic song "Climb Every Mountain" has become a little bit stale over the last several years. A good song, its blocked chords and lack of rhythmic variety has prevented it from becoming a staple in the broadway repertoire. As I listen to the various songs in the recent Sound of Music, the performance of Climb Every Mountain stands out. Not unlike the stunning performance of On My Own by Samantha Barks in Les Miserables, Audra McDonald sings with great energy, intensity, and expression. A great singer does not sing at the notes and shrug off the text but, instead, applies meaning to each syllable, connecting the text and music in a bold expression of emotion. Audra McDonald does all this and more as she is both authentic and convincing in her performance. The power of her voice and her ability to turn a phrase while communicating the text made me want to jump up and conquer every mountain I find!
Recently discovering the songs of Reynaldo Hahn, I have been listening to Susan Graham sing these marvelous songs. A touch simplistic, they are still very beautiful with mesmerizing expression and moments of peaceful, serene joy. Both sublime and appealing, Hahn's music is the right recipe at the end of a stressful day. Not unlike Benjamin Britten's British folk songs, Reynaldo Hahn's songs have qualities that make them accessible to all people while retaining the qualities often associated with art music.
Speaking of sublime, I got in a discussion with an art teacher over the value of Lucien Freud's art. She made the statement that his art is sublime without being pleasant. Thinking that through, I am in full agreement with this statement. His art is disturbing and almost disgusting to me in a way, but at the same time, it seems to reach beyond the obvious and into the depth of what it means to be human. The discussion reminds me to avoid the trappings of seeing art and hearing music in its superficialities. Great art requires time to absorb and such is true of the art of Lucien Freud.
The song Roar by Katy Perry continues to be enjoyed by all (okay, most) and I find it compositionally interesting. It has some nice elision of phrases, a prevalent usage of pentatonic scales, and some rhythmic displacement of accents. Add to the music a solid performance by a fine pop singer, and you have a hit! It really is a zingy song and somehow always puts a smile on my face and provides a sense of confidence and power. In short, it is an inspiring song. Nearly as appealing but in an edgier style is Applause by Lady Gaga. Her voice is captivating and the variety within the song, including range changes and melodic leaps, gives it a lasting appeal. Probably not for everyone, Lady Gaga continues to reach audiences with her antics and pop musical depth.
But no essay on music can leave out my continued admiration for the music of Johannes Brahms. In spite of my enjoyment of rock and pop music, I always find myself listening to Brahms and admiring his craft and expression. Every time I hear the last movement of Symphony No. 2, I end up ranking it among the greatest works of the 19th century (Beethoven's Violin Concerto in the group as well). And I still enjoy the grand symphonies of Gustav Mahler and the tone poems of Richard Strauss. Who can criticize the late works of master composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart? His last few operas are among the greatest works of the classical era.
Back to rock...Chicago, Blood Sweat & Tears, Styx, Bon Jovi, Stevie Wonder along with another dozen or so remain appealing. Fooling Yourself (Angry Young Man) by the Styx is a blast and I have yet to hear a song by Stevie Wonder that I didn't like. Over in the Christian world, I am a big fan of the music of Keith Getty with his nice blend of hymns and choruses. Chris Tomlin is not necessarily my favorite performer, but he sure writes a singable song and continues to sing and write outstanding music in those circles.
Okay, enough pontificating about music. I am probably one of the most eclectic musicians in the business!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)