ChristopherSchlegel

I have started posting Music Theory Issues in my musician friend's forum: Music Theory Forum Note: this is a link to a site outside the Objectivism Forum. I will continue to add posts as time allows. Christopher Schlegel

In The Fountainhead she is describing Toohey's approach to writing his columns & has him quoted as saying: "The worst folk song is superior to the best symphony." I view that as a concretization of her concept of the enshrinement of mediocracy in order to destroy genius. This is merely extrapolation on my part but, I think the symphony (classical, baroque, romantic music in general) as a form has the potential to be objectively superior to folk music because it represents a higher form of achievement than any folk song could. Obviously, that doesn't mean any given individual should be obligated to like any symphony or dislike any folk song regardless of context. The Rand analogy I offered in another thread here on music is that an airplane could be considered an "objectively superior" mode of transportation to a car, but that doesn't mean you should use an airplane to ride down the street a couple of miles to the grocery store.

All suggestions posted thus far are excellent recommendations. It is encouraging to see such keen awareness of Rach's music. I would like to add that I have the Complete Symphonies (1-3) of Rach performed by the St. Louis Symphony Orch under Leonard Slatkin.Rach 1-3 conducted by Slatkin @ TowerRecords.com It sounds fantastic. & even though Rach's 1st sym is a bit weaker than his later, more mature work this performance of it really brings out it's strong points. A warning about the piano works: be careful! The movie "Shine" had Rach's music in great prominence. Consequently, I was curious enough to buy the disc with David Helfgott playing the Rach pieces featured. It was mediocre at best. & his performance of the C# minor Prelude was very disappointing (sloppy, yikes!). No collection of Rach's music would be complete without his glorious Preludes but please be careful about which one you buy. Unfortunately, some of the best performances are the worst recordings (old technology). The "Vespers" is a beautiful work but, strangely, many recordings I've heard do sound kind of....unpassionate, at least to me. Which is strange because the work as written just drips with the potential for a passionate, Romantic, lyrical performance. There is also an interesting set of CDs here Rach's works "Window in Time" The bottom of that page describes the whole concept. Briefly, Rach recorded piano rolls for a player piano, they were transfered to a program that was then used to reproduce them on an electronic reproducing piano. It's sounds much better than you might imagine. & in a way it is actually him performing. Very nifty idea. Finally, perhaps just as a curiosity, years ago I bought a CD of Rach himself actually performing some of his own works & other classical pieces. It is fascinating & wonderful, but the recording quality is terrible. Obviously transferred from a very old recording techonolgy medium. But it is a wonderful historical object. I will find out if it is available; don't know right now. Happy listening. Christopher Schlegel

I have also spied that book's title. I was curious until I found out it was written in the context of "God/Christianity". So I never read it. Your review/essay was excellent. Thanks for writing & posting it. It was a joy to read: organized, concise...a nifty little "demolishion" job!

That was all very easy for me having played for years. I can't sing very well, but that never stopped me. I've been singing in original & cover bands for years also. The only glich was learning Italian enough to sing it "properly". But I only had to do 1 semester of that. The only music class I got a B in. Shucks. You really need to hear Eliot Fisk, man. Really. You can go to his Eliot Fisk Homepage & hear samples of his playing or even buy one of his CDs from Eliot Fisk Paganini Caprices CD through cdbaby.com Which I was surprised to find since they are also my web vendor. I have a transcription of his arrangement of the 5th somewhere in my home office/studio. I will find it & send you a copy if you wish. The cdbaby.com page offers that piece as one of the samples. That guy is amazing. Stop reading my post & go listen to it NOW!!! Thank you for listening & responding favorably. I am glad you have enjoyed what you have heard so far. There is a thread I started HERE that is for comments & questions about my work. Christopher Schlegel

Glad you got something out of it. I could talk theory (& practice!) for days. I have just recently started a "music theory" thread (on a forum hosted by a musician friend of mine). Let me get some details straightened out & I will point you to it.

You're welcome, too. Yeah, I like the feature that allows you to import/export MIDI data. I can bounce from Cakewalk to PowerTabs to Finale in order to get notation, scores, backing tracks, audio objects, etc. Very wonderful stuff. You can sweep & such? Good stuff, I have all kinds of wild fast things I do in the context of blues & jazz. I will get around to uploading that....next week? Time is all I need...& what I don't have enough of... I was self-taught, so taking the classes was a breeze. Sometimes a bit boring, but there were a few teachers that, after I proved myself & asked for more, gave me more challenging material & went into more depth than the basic curriculum. My teacher for Music Theory 4 was great. We did the whole textbook quickly & then she launched deeply into Schenkerian theory. Incredible stuff. I learned a great deal there. The worst was having to do the "core curriculum" stuff. It was very easy, but there were only so many things I could CLEP or test out of. Some things just aren't offered in that format, so I had to "grind it out". The guitar instructor is a good friend of mine so we had a blast. Since I already know how to play we did a bunch of jazz things (his specialty & passion). Typically we would spend a couple of weeks at the beginning of the semester doing Bach & standard curriculum exercises just to get the requirements out of the way...then spend the rest of the semester doing fun, monsterously difficult things. He taught me a ton of Joe Pass things. We transcribed Ellington tunes, Art Tatum interpretations, all kinds of fun, challenging things. I don't suppose my "school experience" has been anything close to typical. You are doing Paganini's 5th? That's great. Ever heard Fisk do it? Wow, that guy is amazing. Years ago I learned a "bastardized" version of it. Mostly the arpeggios & part of the main melody. Grew up listening to Blackmore & then Malmsteen; & I've always loved classical (even though those rock guys are really more baroque). Just recently I got the score for that out again & was toying around with it. My absolute favorite is Beethoven; I have done a few transcriptions of his pieces for solo guitar. I am to do my senior recital this spring. I am doing some solo classical things: Bach (of course), Beethoven, Tarrega, etc. & then "rock" arrangements of Beethoven's 9th, William Tell Overture, "Far Beyond The Sun", maybe another Malmsteem & old Van Halen tunes. Get out the strat & marshall! I will always love & play guitar, but these days my primary musical focus is composition & arrangement. I have one of my symphonies posted on my site for free download if you are interested. Go here: Symphony 6 "The Values of Man" Christopher Schlegel

Ouch, I know the feeling. I work at a college & spring semester started TODAY. You're welcome. This could be really nifty to trade music ideas with Objectivists!

OK. Everything is up here: Music Theory on TATW First is an image that shows how to "see" the chord tones in the context of the first position minor pentatonic scale (the "box blues" shape). Next you can download the PowerTabs program & install it on your box. Next you can download a few sample 12-bar blues licks. Lemme know if this is too simple, just right, too much, etc. I will talk more about the stuff when I have time for details. Play well. Christopher Schlegel

Apparently, "Plato", who started this thread, is no longer interested? Hello? Is this thing on?

I was a professional musician/private instructor (guitar & theory) for 15 years. I am now working as an IT guy for a small private college (last 5 years); music on the side as a small biz & avocation. Much more productive situation at this point in my life as I place more value on my wife, kid & buying a home. That's right, now I am old, boring, married...& very happy! Ironically, after all these years, the college allows employee's to take class free, so I am getting a BA in music (applied & theory). Should be getting that degree this spring, in fact. No need for apologies, man. I will gladly post some things. I have a folder on my website that I use for this kind of info. I will upload some docs/files & point you all to them in future posts. Questions for both of you: 1. Can you read music? Is tab preferable? 2. Will you please go to powertabs.net & get their free program? This will aid greatly in dissemination of info in the context of music ideas for guitar. Also the site has a database of tunes other people have uploaded. You may be able to find something of value there. Christopher Schlegel

Wow, that was a beautiful review & synopsis. I didn't even know that movie existed until I read your post. Thanks Bill Bucko! & also for your other review of classic plays which I finally had time to ready tonight.

Sorry for the late reply to this post but I just found it tonight... After seeing "Brazil" I thought the same thing. Just last year a friend loaned me the DVD re-release with Gilliam's comments. It's a bit wierd because he claims that he never even read "1984". I suppose this could go to show that if you start with a certain premise (in this case, collectivism) and are logical & honest to a degree in your working out the details you are bound to wind up with certain conclusions (in this case a negative reaction toward collectivism). Of course, as has already been mentioned in this thread, Orwell was not pro-freedom, just anti some flavor of collectivism. I read his stuff years ago & remember thinking "OK so I know what you're against, but what are you for?". It struck me as cynical because he never offers any constructive alternatives to his bleak view. BTW-there is a thread on Gilliam that has some interesting comments. He is a talented film maker despite philosophical flaws.

I really enjoy Gilliam's work from a stylistic perspective. He is a bit muddled philosophically though, as some posters have mentioned. There are some amazing feats of visual/dialogue/theme integration in almost all of his works even when the themes & philosophical premises are flawed. He was also the guy responsible for the wacky animations in the Python stuff. Often very clever & irreverent humor. He was the only American in MP. His first film, "Jabberwocky", starred some of the Python group (I think Michael Palin was the lead). It has some really funny scenes & Pythonesque dialogue, situations, plot turns. But even at this early stage the "hero" is really an anti-hero that kind of unwittingly (sometimes unknowingly) stumbles into victory. It is still worth a look for fans of his; I have it & watch it once every few years. I heard he was currently working on "The Brothers Grimm" being some kind of retelling of the old fairy tales mixed with a wild fictional take on the lives of the authors. Or something like that...? Christopher Schlegel

There is definitely a "Wynand" type of mentality in the music/entertainment industry. There is much of a "let's sell swill to the lowest common denominator & make a fortune" approach by some people that should know better. I know; I've met them years ago when I was a making a meager living as a working musician. But... I also know the vast majority of people that make "pop" music are truly making music they love to the best of their ability (the artists & the record co. people). And I would never have it any other way. The only way that I can even afford a home studio full of gear & some free time (away from my day job) to make my own music is because of the glorious remnants of capitalism in our economy. Most of the people I know that buy, own, use digital audio/sequencing software & rack mounted synths don't know the difference between an augmented 6th chord & a screwdriver. But if there weren't enough of them buying equipment to make their simplistic techno/house/rave stuff I wouldn't be able to afford the equipment I use to make more "complex & difficult music" that I love. There will always be "mass produced music serving popular taste"; & there will always be a "lowest common denominator". They do not necessarily have to coincide but even when they do...who cares? What are you gonna do about it? Regulate? Limit freedom? Nobody is allowed to buy Celine Dion, Brittany Spears or "gansta rap" CDs? I am not saying that you are suggesting/implying this. I am merely taking this to an absurd extreme to make my point. Why worry about it? Just be happy there is music you love. It depends on how much skill you have & what you are trying to accomplish. Not every one is a Hank Reardon or a John Galt; some people are Eddie Willers. Meaning that even if they are only capable of creating or loving music up to a certain level of difficulty & not beyond that they can still be moral in their choice of what music to create/listen to. Sorry to simply extract comments, but, I wanted to agree with them! These are all true statements but they don't make honest, rational choices by people that don't like classical or jazz "wrong" in not valuing Beethoven more than the Beatles. It sounds like you are have a great degree of musical knowledge (& perhaps skill? are you a musician or a music student?) & you speak well of the things you value. Christopher Schlegel

Good observation. Yes, all instruments in some respect probably had their origin in mimicing the human voice &/or other "natural sounds". The human voice has of course held sway in some ways as the most captivating & valuable in music; both literally & in the sense of a reference point. I think P&tW is an excellent example/case in point. Or the birds Beethoven mimics in the 6th, etc. & of course most people immediately focus on voice over music. We're riding in the car, listening to the radio & I say, "That bass line is good, but this song has a terrible chord progression". My wife says, "There's a bass in the song? Anyway, be quiet. I can't hear the lyrics when you're talking & I like this song...even if the chords are bad." Ah, a debater... Ha! No need for apologies. I can now see that you were merely being sincere in clarifying your terms. Especially since... OK. That was well stated. I see why you defined the word "communication" previously. I was using it in quite a different sense than you. Your use of the term is much more narrow & precise. Mine is rather broad & perhaps too loose. That is very funny! & well said. I definitely get your point here. And now you have my latest reply. I thank you, also. You have provided me with an excellent, thought provoking discussion; I appreciate the time & effort you have put in to this. More later when I get time. Merry Christmas to you! And to everyone in the forum! Christopher Schlegel

Love your avatar image. I am glad to meet another passionate admirer of Beethoven. BTW his 7th symphony is actual my fave. I was just using the 9th because that was the original context. Perhaps you & Tryptonique are on to something with this issue. Perhaps it would be best to say that B's music doesn't contain specific data "about" "correct ideas", it does, however, provoke & resonate with the "correct ideas" (rational values & virtues) in my mind.

Fair enough. Thanks for clarification. Sadly you are correct about the lack of creativity in many current day students & practitioners of classical music. If you haven't yet, please check out Elliot Fisk Homepage. You can get his CDs from cdbaby.com. Also if you love jazz, are you aware of the amazing Art Tatum?

This is fascinating. I am opposite. Respect Bach as a towering genius; but don't like the results he achieves. I can go into more detail later if necessary (and probably in another thread) but a great deal of it comes down to his specific voice leading choices, thematic structuring & phrasing. I prefer Beethoven.

I forgot to agree emphatically with this earlier... That is a very good point. I am not a musical snob, valuing classical solely because it's complicated & difficult & other music is "low, simple stuff". I love a very small minority of music in many different genres; including classical. Mozart definitely "phoned in" some of his stuff. Terrible; personally, he doesn't even get interesting to me until after his 17th piano concerto & 35th symphony. & most of his operas are hardly tolerable excepting a few airas & overtures.

Thanks for the welcome. I have already found it quite a valuable place & look forward to more of the same! I didn't post anything about that. Someone else perhaps did? Most of my posting will probably be in Aesthetics; but I have already looked all around & found many interesting topics & discussions to follow. I followed the link in your signature about the Aristotle book. Man, that looks great! After the holidays I will buy & read it. Christopher Schlegel

I have just recently found, joined & started using this forum. It is a wonderful place & I would like to thank David Veksler for making it available. I recorded a Xmas classic for fun & put it here: Xmas Song Merry Christmas to everyone! I hope you all have a safe & happy holiday season. See you in the new year. Christopher Schlegel

You make some good points. Well stated, too! I still want to clarify a bit... I do not think this is accurate. I agree with a great deal of your statements (i.e. "emotions provoked by classical music are really only bringing out what is inside of you already"). But to identify them as vauge & without referents is inaccurate. I have very specfic, well organized, rational conceptual knowledge about music, my emotions & to what they refer. For purposes here I will use Beethoven's 9th as my example. First, I know/understand specifically how much extraordinary skill went into the original writing & subsequent preformance of the piece. Next, there are many specfic concepts & emotions I experience upon hearing the 9th. The intro is suspense & tension (even though I know what's coming!), the main theme is a struggling, tortured attempt to rise against seemingly insurrmountable obstacles. The second movement has that great 3/4 minor theme that makes me think of thundering determination...broken by pauses of reflective beauty in a related major key that make me think of "taking a break in the middle of a difficult task" to reflect upon work accomlished & still to be done. And we haven't even gotten to the benevolent joy of the finale. OK, I'm going on too long. Ha! My long suffering point here is the 9th makes me think of very specific concepts & emotions. They are of course related to concrete experiences in my life (or yes you are right in my imagination). For example, Justice: it is a wide concept requiring many concretes. & a large amount of concrete situations can be identified as containing justice. You are correct that the 9th does not tell me specifically how, for example, a villain in a book acts in a certain manner & the hero eventually brings him to justice. That is where I use my imagination or life experience. But it amazing (to me at least) that Beethoven can trigger these thoughts & emotions without words. As far as your defining the terms vague & communication... Was that humor, condescension...? The "data" is the auditory info that Beethoven has organized so exquisitely. I don't think there is a conflict between data & a message being conveyed. I don't think there needs to be a lyric always present "I am happy...now I am angry...& now I am feeling melancholy...". Even in songs with lyrics there are instrumental sections. & when a song has lyrics it helps if the musical data is integrated with the lyrical content. Would any song you like be the same without the musical data? That is oversimplification on your part. It can if the listeners mind is sufficiently disorganized. But as far as reflecting specfic things, that is what all art I value does: it concretizes my highest ideals & aspirations. The 9th is a concrete audio object that upon experiencing helps me to visualize wonderful concepts that I can then relate to other concretes I have previously experienced. This is starting to sound like an analogy for reading a book. Concretely, you are just sitting there, reading, thinking. There is no actual person running a steel mill, inventing amazing metals, giving heroic speeches, stopping the motor of the world. It's all in your mind (and on the paper); none of those people or events ever actually existed. You never saw them or conversed with them. A great deal of this goes back to the various categories you spoke of in a previous post (i.e. instrumental music vs. music with lyrics, etc.). So I can see your point. But, I still think in terms of only musical construction Beethoven is the best (instrumental, the music part of songs that have lyrics, etc.). OK, that was oversimplification on my part. It does however narrow the field somewhat to a more specific set of concretes being referred to sometimes. Fair enough! You have clarified your personal preferences & values in lucid, thorough manner. Thanks for the opportunity to let me do the same. Christopher Schlegel

I've been following this thread for a while & I have a few things to say. 1) The term itself "Objectivist Bands" is of little value. Years ago I put together a musical group consisting of only Objectivists. We wrote, recorded, gigged, etc. In the end, though, the overall results were not much better or worse than any other band I was in that had members not familiar with Objectivism. 2) Regardless of whether or not a musician is an explicitly self-identified, consistent Objectivist, they can still possess the skills required to write & perform music in which Objectivists can find real, objective values. Was Rachmaninoff an Objectivist? Tchaikovski? Beethoven? Of course not. BUT, some of their work is an incredibly rich source of heroic values for Objecitivsts. 3) I have written pieces explicitly dedicated to Rand by way of sincere gratitude for all she has given me. I offer them to other (& future) Objectivists as a hopefully benevolent way of realizing a rational aesthetic for the future. There will be Objectivists that simply "do not like the sound of it" anyway. Are they wrong? Of course not. 4) Rush is an excellent rock band; often projecting benevolent concepts & values. But, they are not an Objectivist band or even "fully consistent" with Objectivism. 4) Thyod Loki continues to make me LOL. "I am officially out of all loops", some modern pop outfit should be "flogged & burned in an alley", "I feel like a Viking at a tea party." Oh, man, that's good stuff... 5) Jazz IS IN FACT quite comparable to pop music. It WAS IN FACT the pop music of the early 20th century. Many jazz pieces did have lyrics (Gershwin, Berlin, Kern, Porter, Ellington, etc.). Even when jazz started becoming "instrumental" (swing, bop, fusion) it still had it's roots in the old tunes with lyrics. For example, Parker & Coltrane built their careers & techniques around interpretations of old jazz standards that originally had lyrics. The early jazz that did not have lyrics (Joplin, Jelly Roll Morton, Fats Waller, Willie Smith, etc.) finds it's roots in the Baroque Era when it was typical practice to write a theme with a figured bass pattern that could then be "interpreted/improvised" within a certain framework by the performer. 6) As a guitarist of 29 years I am authorized to say that although Vai & Malmsteen are quite good at what they do (hey I like 'em myself for what they are) they are not even close to being the "amazing guitarists" many people give them credit for being. And Page, Clapton, Hendrix? Influential & successful at what they did/do? Yes. Great guitarists? No. That identification should be reserved for individuals such as Andres Segovia, Joe Pass & the amazing Elliot Fisk. Or at least people that use the guitar to it's highest potential: that of a self-contained orchestral device. Mr. minorsevenflatfive (or half-diminished from a classical voice leading perspective), you say that classical does not require interpretation? Have you never heard Segovia interpret Bach? Or Fisk interpret Paganini's violin caprices? Have you not hear the famous tales of improvisational "head-cutting", theme & variation, done in the days of Bach, Mozart & Beethoven? 7) I listened to the Duke Green samples. It is nice stuff, well done. I don't personally like it, but I can appreciate his artistry. Thanks for the heads up. 8) I think Beethoven is the greatest musical craftsman that has yet lived. I think a case could be made that his music is in some ways "objectively, the best available to man". However... To use a Rand analogy, an airplane could be considered an "objectively superior" mode of transportation to a car, but that doesn't mean you should use an airplane to ride down the street a couple of miles to the grocery store. 9) Mr. Tryptonique, I think you are mistaken about classical music communicating only vague, rough emotional content. On the contrary, I think it is extraordinary in it's ability to reflect the widest range of thoughts & emotions all without any help from lyrical content. And in the most private, personal way possible. I think that pop songs, with lyrics, such as the ones you mention are in fact more limited in what they can express/convey/communicate. I think this is true in some ways precisely because they explicitly tell the listener what the song is "about". Please do not misunderstand me, I am sincerely happy you have found music you love & value. I can tell you precisely everything I think that Beethoven's 9th is about, but, it might have very little to nothing in common with what you (or anyone else) might think about it. 10) Finally, it should be obvious by now that music is an intensely personal & private matter. If an individual can honestly find real, objective value in some (or all) aspect(s) of a piece of music, then, this should be sanction enough for that individual. Christopher Schlegel

You are welcome. Thanks for listening & posting. As I mentioned earlier, everyone is welcome to download the music for future consumption because I might be taking it down in the near future. I have hundreds of other pieces; some stylistcally similar & many others in a wide variety of differing genres. I will probably make different pieces available in the future for free download to any interested Objectivists here on the forum. Thanks again to everyone that replied. It is satisfying to be appreciated by people that sincerely share my values. Christopher Schlegel