Xref: utzoo comp.music:1766 rec.music.classical:15504
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!fernwood!oracle!news
From: rjenkins@.com (Robert Jenkins)
Newsgroups: comp.music,rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Categories of Musicological Analysis
Summary: random idea
Message-ID: <1990Aug19.001007.6827@oracle.com>
Date: 19 Aug 90 00:10:07 GMT
References: <9931@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu>
Reply-To: rjenkins@oracle.UUCP (Robert Jenkins)
Distribution: na
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Belmont, CA
Lines: 54

A random idea:

I had an idea for analyzing music which I've been trying to develop
into something concrete.  Music has melodies, countermelodies,
rhythms, et cetera.  What I am thinking of I will call a motif.  I
think songs are defined by their motif, this motif is repeated over
and over again, but in many different ways.

A motif is usually about two seconds long -- that is, if you
listen to a song for four seconds, you can probably pick out its
motif.  It is like the mood, but it is more definite.  It is a rhythm
of notes, their times and their emphasis.  It is how the notes rise
and fall, but not the exact intervals.  It is how the notes are
executed.  When you hear a motif, you identify it with its song.

In barbershop, the fact that voices are voices, are a capella,
in close harmony, and moving together is part of the motif.  If you do
barbershop, note for note, slur for slur, with a string quartet, you
don't have barbershop.

In The Pink Panther, it is t-T-t-T, as if sneaking around, and a
tendency to run through the chromatic scale.  Brass helps.  It doesn't
matter if the notes are rising or falling, although they should be one
or the other.  The motif is repeated many times throughout the melody,
but differently every time.  

In Beethoven's 5th, d-d-d-Da is the motif.  d-d-d is the
approach, Da is the arrival.  Da is different from d-d-d.  How? it
varies.  The motif applies to sequences of phrases as well as notes,
with many held-back phrases building up to a blatent one.

Bach uses motifs everywhere; he needs to.  His motifs includes
a recognizable rhythm of notes, but the intervals are flexible
depending on the harmony he is matching.  Jumps still occur at the
same places, but whether the jumps are up or down or big or small
varies.  His chord progressions are virtually independent of his
melodies because he doesn't use melodies, he uses motifs.

I like the idea of motifs because it explains why some
musicians consistently produce good work, and why musicians need to be
cool.  The motif is an abstraction which unifies a song.  The whole
song should be true to its pattern, but the actual notes that form
that pattern can and should vary wildly.  Making a flexible motif
takes creativity, finding different ways to display its pattern takes
imagination. 

What is this concept really called?  Are these assertions
true?  If they are, there is a problem with writing down music.
Motifs often contain elements which cannot be written down.  This may
not be true for Bach Inventions, but it certainly is for the blues.
Given the notes, you can only make guesses at what the song really is.

                          - Bob Jenkins
                            rjenkins@oracle.oracle.com