Music composition related to prime and Fibonacci numbers, and geometry.

Musicinventor

Musicinventor

Jedi
After reading this portion of a session where Ark and the C’s were discussing prime numbers, Beethoven 9th symphony, and the resonance of primes with music, I began to ponder…


"Session 7 November 1998

Q: Okay, let’s move on.
(A) You mentioned the term ‘pyramidal’ and I thought about putting prime numbers along a pyramid, around, higher and higher, but then, today, we discovered that Ulam was putting prime numbers along a spiral and there were funny patterns arising. So, I thought that maybe we should do something similar, but three dimensional rather than two. Is this the right track?
A: In prime numbers, you will find resonance.

Q: Resonance in prime numbers? Can you please elaborate a little bit on that?
A: Elaboration is not needed because the answers are there for you already in the texts, as with so much else. One needs only listen to the “music to your ears.”

Q: Why didn’t you answer my question about putting prime numbers around a pyramid?
A: Mathematics converts to sound in geometric measurements. Why do you think the pyramid became a pyramid?

Q: (A) It became a pyramid because it is a simple shape to build.

(L) Did it become a pyramid because a sound shaped it? Determined its shape?
A: Closer.

Q: (L) And, what was the origin of this sound?
A: Those who heard it knew.

Q: (L) Who were those who heard it?
A: Those who knew how to convert math to sound. Why would the mystics reside there? Yahoo!

Q: (A) Somehow I have problems with following your clues, and I really don’t know what is my problem...
A: The problem is impatience with the digestion phase.

Q: (A) How long can a digestion phase last? We don’t have much time!
A: However long it takes. And who says you do not have much “time?” Answer, mi Arkady, answer!!

Q: (A) Well, I agree that I am impatient. But, the point is that I feel that if I would have a little bit more of a clue, I could do much more, and for now...
A: Our words sing to you. Let them ring.

Q: (A) What is the difference between singing and ringing?
(L) I don’t think that’s the point.
(A) Ring is to awake? Probably. You mean I am not taking your words seriously enough?
A: No. We meant to let it sink in rejoice. Exult!

Q: (L) Would it help...
A: Listen to Ludwig’s 9th. Combine with the prime numbers, and what do you have?

Q: (L) Hmmm... musical notation that relates to prime numbers?
A: Why not bring the ninth in here now for inspiration?!? [We put the ninth on and crank up the volume so that it can be heard.]

Q: (L) Okay, now we can hear it, but not too loudly.
A: That is good.

Q: (L) Now my question is: if you translate numbers into musical sequence or notation, does this accomplish the deed?
A: You are certainly on your way!

Q: (A) What can I do as a mathematician, or what SHOULD I do?
A: Let the pathway lead you. It has not yet failed Lolly. [Laughter at the use of Laura’s nickname.] So you insinuate failure for yourself? Tsk tsk, my boy. Faith in this enterprise takes one places. Look where it has taken you so far!!"

My question; Will the combined material from the books, The Schillinger System of Musical Composition by Joseph Schillinger, and, A Geometry of Music by Dimitri Tymoczko, create a means of music composition that has the potential/possibility for affecting/altering frv, consciousness, and/or DNA in an STO way? Is my thinking correct that there is a path to explore here? Is there any advice on how to continue?

Thank you!
 
Musicinventor said:
My question; Will the combined material from the books, The Schillinger System of Musical Composition by Joseph Schillinger, and, A Geometry of Music by Dimitri Tymoczko, create a means of music composition that has the potential/possibility for affecting/altering frv, consciousness, and/or DNA in an STO way? Is my thinking correct that there is a path to explore here? Is there any advice on how to continue?
Click to expand...
I think an impeccable recitation of all the perfectly placed notes according to the esoteric and mathematical formulas of Pythagorus with a dash of new age jargon tuned to A432 or whatever would still fall short if it lacks the secret sauce of a performer who knows and is aware of what is being transmitted.

We’ve all heard Pavarotti or Horowitz or Hendrix and when someone else performs the same riffs, it just ain’t the same thing. So I think the element of the truly aware and sensitive human interface would be necessary to pull it off and truly make that DNA thing happen. (Rightly so since otherwise it’s just so much more mechanicity which violates free will, yet again. IOW, if I play “x” you WILL experience “Y” effect because the notes determine it.

LOL. It’s like tuning a piano! There’s a gap between physical reality and theoretical note frequencies. There is an art to it. There is the aspect of tricking the brain. If it’s perfect, it sounds flat, right? So they sharpen the upper registers just a skootch (very technical term!) as they go up the scale. Same when tuning a guitar which also brings in the construction difficulties and compromises required by straight linear frets and a fixed bridge. Real world mechanics vs theoretical values. A tuner isn’t looking for perfection, just the sweet spot of a particular instrument which is subjective. (And there is nothing wrong with being subjective in this case. It’s where art can occur)

As for composition, constructing a piece according to theory is dandy, but again, the interplay between the brain and the music is a part of the landscape and where the real magic can occur. If you know the theory and are expecting the next shoe to drop, already anticipating where it’s going to fall and the composer pulls the rug and does something novel, well, that’s equal to one of the shocks Gurdjieff speaks of, yes? It certainly eliminates boredom from a predictable piece. There is plenty of great music that becomes “meh” unless it has some twists and turns that startle or amaze the brain out of its rut.

There are times I’ll hear the opening bars of something and my reaction is “Gawd, not this again”. The piece plays through my mind in a matter of seconds; it’s memorized; it’s no longer novel; and it may have even been cranked out according to some divine theory by a 33rd degree Masonic ascended master… but, again, meh.

Now, it could be said, oh, bhelmet you’re just insensitive and lacking in development of your soul to appreciate this or that divinely inspired rambling homily of perfect musical precision. But, the Moonlight Sonata never fails to keep me listening intently on the edge of my seat holding my breath, whereas some other so-called magnificently perfect pieces just bore the hell out of me.

And to sum up: there are dozens of great recordings of the Moonlight Sonata… and they are all different. This would apply to any composition. Horowitz would modify more DNA than a hack novice or even many seasoned pros. And so, theres the rub.
 
BHelmet said:
As for composition, constructing a piece according to theory is dandy, but again, the interplay between the brain and the music is a part of the landscape and where the real magic can occur. If you know the theory and are expecting the next shoe to drop, already anticipating where it’s going to fall and the composer pulls the rug and does something novel, well, that’s equal to one of the shocks Gurdjieff speaks of, yes? It certainly eliminates boredom from a predictable piece. There is plenty of great music that becomes “meh” unless it has some twists and turns that startle or amaze the brain out of its rut.
Click to expand...
After almost 50 years of studying, teaching, composing, and preforming I find that theory is indispensable! Ask any competent improviser what they would do without a knowledge of music theory. Far too many composers do nothing more than imitate what they are familiar with. In my experience, the music that people are most attracted to is based on familiarity, especially what was played by parents and what was popular with their friends. The radio, and especially television, have done a great disservice to the further education of music in our society. The removal of music education in our schools is most appalling.

Theory requires the use of the brain. The music is far more than a landscape; it becomes a landscape of expression and magic only through the composers knowledge of the science and art of music. The talent, or magic of the composer comes through in his/her choices. The more choices the more interesting the piece; with less choices we get "more of the same" Aaron Copland was once asked during an interview; Do you wait for inspiration when writing music? He replied; everyday! I can say that I do not wait for inspiration. I plan out details long before the first notes are put down on the staff. Along the way inspiration steps in and something presents itself that gives new meaning to what was planned. When the "shoe drops" in a piece of music, written by a studied composer, you can bet it was intentional. The rug isn’t pulled out as there will most likely be a hint of what’s to come in the opening of the piece. It may be a shock to some listeners but not to all and certainly not a novelty. When I listen to a new piece of music I am expecting, and hoping for something different, something new, something that makes me want to listen to that piece of music a second, third, fourth time…

Through an understanding of music, through theory, listening to music takes on a completely different dimension. Theory allows for an understanding of the language, and gives definition to those twists and turns. In my opinion, listening to music from a non-theoretical perspective is like reading a book without understanding the meaning of the words; it’s read simply because the words sound and make us feel good.

Why did Beethoven start the first movement of Symphony No. 1 with V7/IV before proceeding to I? What is the meaning of the first chord in Piano Sonata No. 18 Op. 31 #3; is it ii6/5 or is IV6? The meaning becomes apparent later on in the piece. We know why from analysis of the music through theory. We also have his notes and sketches of the development of all his works. He spent months working out his themes for Symphony No. 5 and how the second theme in Mvt. 1 is derived from the first them. In fact, the entire 5th symphony is based on the 1st mvt. Themes. Beethoven may have been inspired but worked his compositions from a theoretical perspective. Same with Bach. When analyze, one finds that there is nothing superfluous in any of his music. His theoretical knowledge allowed him to also be able to improvise fugues from themes given on the spot.

As for Gurdjieff, at composers forum, while working on my Masters, I talked about the effects of music on us and our surroundings. I read aloud a portion of ISOTM where he discussed music and how music can be written that could freeze water. It caused, to say the least, quite the ruckus that day! I also recall his discussion of objective and subjective music, but thats another thread.

In closing I’ll also add that, when one reads a book, more meaning is grasped than when the book is listened to. I feel that when listening to a piece of music a score is akin to reading that "book". I might not listen with a score until several times later. Also, the consideration of other disciplines such as architecture, physics, mathematics, philosophy, and psychology must be considered. But, in the end it’s all subjective in our world…Osit.
 
तत्परिवर्तनं भव said:
What about :

Bach - Passacaglia in C minor BWV 582​

Is there something special about this piece of music, "they" say it is perfect.
Click to expand...
This will give a better explanation than I can as I’m by no means a keyboard player! If you can read I highly recommend the score while listening.


www.ethanhein.com

Bach’s Passacaglia and Fugue in C Minor

A passacaglia is a Baroque dance that is a lot like the chaconne. One of Bach’s greatest hits is his Passacaglia and Fugue in C minor. Like the Chaconne, the Passacaglia is a long series of v…
www.ethanhein.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom