Is it true that less is more, in music?
- Present awareness
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm
Is it true that less is more, in music?
So what do you think? Is less more, or the more musical notes, the better?
- Philosophy Explorer
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 8:41 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
Based on something Isaac Stern has said, I believe you're missing the nail with your hammer.Present awareness wrote:I've often heard the expression that less is more, when it comes to music. An example would be a bass player whom is much too busy with his notes, creating a much less solid foundation for the other harmonies to rest on. Then of course there are the shredders on lead guitar, playing notes as fast as humanly possible. Even a drummer can be guilty of too many snare and tom hits and crashes on the cymbals.
So what do you think? Is less more, or the more musical notes, the better?
PhilX
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
- Present awareness
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
I had a look at your example 4' 33" on YouTube, and it reminds me of an artist who takes an empty canvas and hangs it on the wall. Maybe give it a name like "white rabbit in a snowstorm".Steve3007 wrote:I guess John Cage certainly agreed that it is true when he wrote 4'33". As I understand it, this was essentially the point of that piece of "music".
Silence is what gives music context. Without silence, all you have is noise. However, It takes one note to give silence context, so they are dependant on each other, just as time and space are dependant on each other.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
One interesting thing, though, about 4'33": I gather that when people are subjected to a "performance"* of that piece, it may not contain any notes but it does serve very effectively to draw their attention to other sounds: coughs, breathing, the noises from outside the concert hall, the creaking of the building, and so on.
Perhaps those noises are sort of the musical equivalent of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation!
*This kind of subject seems to require the frequent use of square-quotes!
-
- Posts: 1104
- Joined: March 18th, 2011, 4:57 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Anaximander
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
However, there are always exceptions. One of my all-time favorite rock songs is Tom Sawyer by Rush. The drumming on the song is wildly over-the-top, but somehow the song just demands no less, as a fundamental ingredient in its composition. My favorite classical piece is Mahler's Symphony #8, the so-called "Symphony of a Thousand" because its initial performance reputedly required over a thousand musicians to perform (Modern performances generally use less than 300 musicians, which still required off-stage platforms to fit them all in the 2 performances I've seen). Somehow it all seems justified when you hear the finale trying to storm the gates of heaven!
- Philosophy Explorer
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 8:41 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
"Silence is what gives music context. Without silence, all you have is noise. However, It takes one note to give silence context, so they are dependant on each other, just as time and space are dependant on each other."
Pretty much what Isaac Stern said. Now you're hitting the nail on the head.
PhilX
- Luisgmarquez1985
- Posts: 79
- Joined: October 20th, 2013, 12:14 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Baruch Spinoza
- Location: Toronto, Canada
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
So long as how part of the music is being "too busy" or "too slow", it can be heard with awe, yet even this is rather subjective.
"To understand is to be free" - Baruch Spinoza
- Present awareness
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: May 8th, 2014, 1:34 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: May 15th, 2014, 9:01 am
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
Pink Floyd sung a great deal about madness and the tortured mind, at times using languishing notes ranging to a manic pace, depending on the piece. They were often described in the same way...less is more. But they were reflecting the mood of mental anguish, and effective at it.
Sometimes for a ballad, there's nothing sweeter or more emotive than just a single instrument accompanying the singer. It often has the effect of making the song more intimate, raw and vulnerable, for everything is exposed...the voice and the musicianship. But ultimately, it's up to the individual songwriter, and the performer when it is someone different than the author, to make those creative and artistic decisions.
- Mirosurabu
- Posts: 26
- Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Nietzsche
- Location: Roman Empire
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
More is more.
The problem is this: sometimes when you add new elements you destroy many more elements than you actually add.
The thing is that when we speak of elements we rarely speak of all elements.
Let me put it this way: a system is a set of interrelated elements. As such, it is defined by two parameters: its number of elements (its apparent size) and the strength of their connections (its integrity.) The real size of the system, however, is not defined by its apparent size but by the combination of its apparent size and integrity. So an apparently huge system with a poor integrity is actually smaller than an apparently small system with a good integrity.
It is impossible to think clearly by relying on such perverted notions as "less is more".
More is, by definition, more. The problem lies in the act of counting.
-
- Posts: 99
- Joined: May 15th, 2014, 9:01 am
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
Yes, and that is what the phrase attempts to describe by use of an oxymoronic coining.Mirosurabu wrote: The problem is this: sometimes when you add new elements you destroy many more elements than you actually add.
That might be the intention of using such a phrase...to jolt the thinking. I can imagine in an industry such as music the continuous demands of "more". More product, more performances, more variety, more creativity, more, more, more, that the utterance of such a phrase at a time when it is felt that a piece is being overproduced, could have a sobering effect.It is impossible to think clearly by relying on such perverted notions as "less is more".
Sure, but it's not meant to be taken literally. Though if one wanted to, could add their own impressions...less is more delicate, is more emotional, is more sensitive, is more atmospheric and so on.More is, by definition, more. The problem lies in the act of counting.
- Present awareness
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
That is a good way of expressing the concept of less is more. The word "more" is not referring to a number, but to an integrity. A small system with a good integrity, does "appear" to be bigger then a huge system with a poor integrity.So an apparently huge system with a poor integrity is actually smaller than an apparently small system with a good integrity.
- Mirosurabu
- Posts: 26
- Joined: August 8th, 2013, 8:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Nietzsche
- Location: Roman Empire
Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?
I understand that very well, but those of us who know that bigger is always better are instinctively opposed to such a phrase. We want things to be bigger so we want people to try and add as many elements as they can. And when things go wrong, we do not blame it on the number of elements that they have tried to throw into the mix, we blame it on the lack of proper coordination. Hence, you will never hear us saying "less is more".That might be the intention of using such a phrase...to jolt the thinking. I can imagine in an industry such as music the continuous demands of "more". More product, more performances, more variety, more creativity, more, more, more, that the utterance of such a phrase at a time when it is felt that a piece is being overproduced, could have a sobering effect.
Yes, but if you improve the integrity of the apparently bigger system, the apparently small one will become invisible i.e. truly small. And that's what one should do: improve the integrity, not revert back to a lower level of complexity.A small system with a good integrity, does "appear" to be bigger then a huge system with a poor integrity.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023