Is it true that less is more, in music?

Use this forum to have philosophical discussions about aesthetics and art. What is art? What is beauty? What makes art good? You can also use this forum to discuss philosophy in the arts, namely to discuss the philosophical points in any particular movie, TV show, book or story.
User avatar
Edo
New Trial Member
Posts: 6
Joined: March 16th, 2013, 9:45 am

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Edo »

Music is probably like literature in allowing two main approaches to form -- you can be a putter-in or you can be a taker-out. Compare, for example, John Lewis (a taker-out) with Oscar Peterson (a putter-in).

In the same way, some novelists aspire to reduction (Beckett, for example) and others aspire to fullness or amplitude (Dickens, many of the Victorians). I think the approach that you respond to first of all is pretty much just a question of your personality, though I'd guess that at different times one approach is popular with more people than the other.

Right now, for example, we seem to be in a period of drift (sometimes labeled eclecticism), and that lends itself more to amplitude. You need conviction, at least in literature, to be a taker-out. You have to be sure that the form you're creating is the right one and that you aren't leaving something important by the wayside. Hemingway was a kind of taker-out, and I'd guess that at least early in his writing career, his convictions were strong enough for him to be sure he wasn't leaving anything important out. Same with Camus, at least the Camus of The Stranger and The Plague.

Conviction, of course, can also move one to amplitude -- Dostoevsky, for example, had lots of conviction at the time he was writing his major novels, but he was still clearly a putter-in during that time. The converse raises an interesting question. If you had no particular convictions, nothing that you had a burning desire to see in print, would you write only short, attenuated works? Think of Beckett's later plays. Is it likely that someone with no particular point to make would have written work so pared down as what he produced? It seems unlikely to me, but I know enough to understand that anything is possible.
User avatar
Present awareness
Posts: 1389
Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Present awareness »

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.

What if the best way to improve the integrity, is to remove unnecessary parts?
Even though you can see me, I might not be here.
AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper
Posts: 99
Joined: May 15th, 2014, 9:01 am

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper »

Mirosurabu wrote:
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.
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".
"Bigger is always better"? Then why have mobile phones gotten smaller, instead of being the "bricks" they once were? Bigger is not always better, at all. There's such a thing as elegance, whereby simplicity is better...more efficient, less convoluted, absent of excess or that which is superfluous. Bigger is better certainly explains many computer programs for how convoluted they can be.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth." "Aw, I'm so glad the meek are getting something...they've been having such a hard time of it lately." [Life of Brian]
User avatar
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?

Post by Mirosurabu »

AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper wrote:"Bigger is always better"? Then why have mobile phones gotten smaller, instead of being the "bricks" they once were? Bigger is not always better, at all. There's such a thing as elegance, whereby simplicity is better...more efficient, less convoluted, absent of excess or that which is superfluous. Bigger is better certainly explains many computer programs for how convoluted they can be.
Mobiles certainly got bigger, but not in a physical sense. We call them "smart"phones now.

As for convoluted computer programs, their problem is not complexity -- we want them to be complex -- their problem is integrity.
What if the best way to improve the integrity, is to remove unnecessary parts?
That's what always happens. The problem is when people incapable of improving integrity (i.e. relations between elements) end up removing entire parts, not because these parts are bad or because these parts can't be integrated into the whole, but because they are incapable of coordinating them.

I think that's exactly the kind of people who use such phrases as "less is more". For them, such phrases work as ad hoc rationalization, as a way to hide the fact that they lack the ability to make highly complex music.

-- Updated May 18th, 2014, 10:23 pm to add the following --

If Lepper comes back with something like "see, the fact that we do not want our mobiles to be physically bigger than they are proves that size is not always better" my answer to that would be "but that's not because size is not better in general, but because we are relatively limited beings, and as relatively limited beings we have a relative limit as to how big things should be." The bigger we are, the higher we place our limit.

Small beings like small things, big beings like big things. If we were giants, and it's better to be a giant we all know that, the bigger we'd want our cellphones to be.
AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper
Posts: 99
Joined: May 15th, 2014, 9:01 am

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper »

Mirosurabu wrote:
AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper wrote:
Mobiles certainly got bigger, but not in a physical sense. We call them "smart"phones now.

As for convoluted computer programs, their problem is not complexity -- we want them to be complex -- their problem is integrity.
Who is "we"? As it's certainly not the end-user, who wants ease of use, not convoluted complexities.

That's what always happens. The problem is when people incapable of improving integrity (i.e. relations between elements) end up removing entire parts, not because these parts are bad or because these parts can't be integrated into the whole, but because they are incapable of coordinating them.

I think that's exactly the kind of people who use such phrases as "less is more". For them, such phrases work as ad hoc rationalization, as a way to hide the fact that they lack the ability to make highly complex music.
I agree with that sentiment if what you are talking about is computer programming. In the context of music, however, I don't agree. The fact that you understand what "less is more" means, indicates that the message is clear, if not even succinct. It appears more to offend your sense of literal use of words, rather than you appreciating industry jargon and its uses.
If Lepper comes back with something like "see, the fact that we do not want our mobiles to be physically bigger than they are proves that size is not always better" my answer to that would be "but that's not because size is not better in general, but because we are relatively limited beings, and as relatively limited beings we have a relative limit as to how big things should be." The bigger we are, the higher we place our limit.

Small beings like small things, big beings like big things. If we were giants, and it's better to be a giant we all know that, the bigger we'd want our cellphones to be.
Now you're mixing metaphors. On one hand you say that phones are physically smaller, but "bigger" internally, and then move to being a giant requiring larger sized physical items. One does not necessarily relate to the other.

True, phones are more sophisticated internally, but became smaller as the technology at their inception wasn't small enough. So "bricks" were the norm initially, and as technology improved, they became smaller and lighter. Now they're moving again into larger sizes, due to demands for larger screen size and keyboard size (to accommodate us giants with larger fingers :) ).

And sure, bigger people want higher doorways and ceilings, or items that they can firmly grasp. But that's a generalization of people of above average size, not of a general attitude that bigger is better.

"Less is more" is an expression, and like many expressions, is not meant to be literal, but to conjure a concept. "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"...how many of us have anything to do with birds, let alone would have one in our hand? It's an expression that implies that what you have is worth more than what you may want. It's not an expression confined to bird lovers, is it? "A stitch in time saves nine"...tell that to a small child, and do they know it means that you have to undo nine stitches to correct the error of one bad stitch? No. But again, it's an expression that explains that it's better to take your time to perform a task properly, rather than having to redo it. Nor does it apply to only those who sew or knit, but to all walks of life.

And say "bigger is better" to a quantum physicist. :D

I appreciate that this expression has been over-used, and pertains to our desire to have bigger homes, salaries, TV screens and maybe even cars (though it's the smaller sports cars that are more expensive, generally). But I don't believe that it's a generalization that applies to everything, or even most things.

ETA: I'm not suggesting that "less is more" is necessarily applicable to other industries either. I'm just saying that within the music industry, it has meaning and it is well understood to pertain to overproduction.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth." "Aw, I'm so glad the meek are getting something...they've been having such a hard time of it lately." [Life of Brian]
User avatar
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?

Post by Mirosurabu »

Basically, people who use "less is more" phrase do not merely want to state that one should take care of integrity, they also want to state that bigger is not better. And that's my main problem with the phrase.

Bigger is always better. Period. People who argue otherwise are people who suffer from a deep sense of inferiority and who, as a result, are in need of ad hoc rationalizations in order to escape the negative feelings.

Let's take cocks, for example.

Every girl has a size of a cock that is ideal for her: bigger than that, and it will hurt; smaller than that, and she won't feel it. Some girls prefer smaller and some prefer bigger cocks. This, of course, does not mean that bigger is not always better. What it simply means is that preferences are relative to one's capacities: one is not free to enjoy things of a higher rank. But over time, their preferred size will increase -- it will not decrease -- and girls will gradually start to prefer bigger cocks, the ones they did not enjoy before, the ones that caused them nothing but pain. Do you understand what I'm trying to tell you? Now, there is this guy who is insecure about the size of his cock and who is, thus, in need of convincing himself that SIZE DOES NOT MATTER. And of course, he will end up perverting the **** out of everything just so that he can put an end to the unbearable sense of inferiority. And that is how perversions such as "less is more" and "size does not matter" come to exist.
AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper
Posts: 99
Joined: May 15th, 2014, 9:01 am

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper »

Mirosurabu wrote:Basically, people who use "less is more" phrase do not merely want to state that one should take care of integrity, they also want to state that bigger is not better. And that's my main problem with the phrase.
What school of mind-reading did you fail at? It's an industry specific term, relating to nothing else other than overproduction. Period. If you want to read more into it than intended, that's your problem.
Bigger is always better. Period. People who argue otherwise are people who suffer from a deep sense of inferiority and who, as a result, are in need of ad hoc rationalizations in order to escape the negative feelings.
This isn't amateur hour at the Freud institute of sexual hang-ups. This is the discussion of an industry specific term. If you derive more meaning than the term intends, then that's your personal issue, no-one else's. I won't respond to the rest of your fantasy, since it's totally irrelevant.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth." "Aw, I'm so glad the meek are getting something...they've been having such a hard time of it lately." [Life of Brian]
User avatar
Present awareness
Posts: 1389
Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Present awareness »

This isn't amateur hour at the Freud institute of sexual hang-ups. This is the discussion of an industry specific term. If you derive more meaning than the term intends, then that's your personal issue, no-one else's. I won't respond to the rest of your fantasy, since it's totally irrelevant.
Well said.
Even though you can see me, I might not be here.
User avatar
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?

Post by Mirosurabu »

AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper wrote:What school of mind-reading did you fail at? It's an industry specific term, relating to nothing else other than overproduction. Period. If you want to read more into it than intended, that's your problem.
It is you who are proving my case, moron. It is you who are arguing that bigger is not always better. And not just you, but pretty much everyone else who uses this phrase.

A bunch of dishonest idiots with whom no communication is possible, that is what you are.
This isn't amateur hour at the Freud institute of sexual hang-ups. This is the discussion of an industry specific term. If you derive more meaning than the term intends, then that's your personal issue, no-one else's. I won't respond to the rest of your fantasy, since it's totally irrelevant.
Here's a challenge for you: show me a single person who knows that bigger is always better and who would gladly spout such non-sense as "less is more". You won't find one, you know? You won't, because if you know that bigger is always better, you can't at the same time claim that less is more. It's a contradiction.

Of course, you're going to come up with some lameass excuse such as "but this is not meant to be taken literally!" all the while proving my case by furiously arguing that bigger is not always better. It's hilarious, dude.
AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper
Posts: 99
Joined: May 15th, 2014, 9:01 am

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by AlmsFor-An-Ex-Lepper »

Oops, I upset Peewee. Shame on me.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth." "Aw, I'm so glad the meek are getting something...they've been having such a hard time of it lately." [Life of Brian]
User avatar
Present awareness
Posts: 1389
Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Present awareness »

You and your brother are walking down a wooded trail, when your brother bumps into a bee hive. Your brother gets strung 25 times, but you only get stung 3 times. Would you say that your brother is better off, because he got stung "more" times then you?

The question is saying " in music" not in anything else, like bees or cocks. A blues musician can say more with a single sustained note, using vibrato, then a shredder playing as many notes as humanly possible in 10 seconds. The shredder may be impressive, that is true, but to say that he is better because of more notes, is false.
Even though you can see me, I might not be here.
User avatar
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 2116
Joined: May 25th, 2013, 8:41 pm

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Present awareness wrote:
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.

What if the best way to improve the integrity, is to remove unnecessary parts?
In English, when you drop out unnecessary words not relevant to the meaning, it's referred to as removing "deadwood."
Hosshere
Posts: 12
Joined: August 16th, 2014, 11:04 pm

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Hosshere »

As a musician for the past 35 years (guitar,fiddle, bass, mandolin) who has played in every style of music but hip hop and heavy metal, the ONLY right answer to this question is that the song has to be the boss. Some songs dictate more "busy" musicianship than others. For example, John Paul Jones from Led Zeppelin was always very "busy" on his bass, but it always fit the song. And I've read interviews with Jimmy Page, Zeppelin's guitarist, where he said that music needs to be composed in the same way that a great artist knows how to use light and shadow in his paintings. (Can you tell I'm a LedZep fan by now?) But, Page's point makes good sense, an artist that used either all light or all shadow in his paintings wouldn't actually produce a portrait at all, really......And some of the great country songwriters have used very sparse musicianship in their songs, but some of them are beautiful, too..... As a songwriter myself,I see where both "busy" and "sparse" musicianship both have their proper places as long as it's done in the right context. Our ears never lie to us, if it sounds too busy, it IS........
User avatar
Present awareness
Posts: 1389
Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Present awareness »

Hosshere wrote:As a musician for the past 35 years (guitar,fiddle, bass, mandolin) who has played in every style of music but hip hop and heavy metal, the ONLY right answer to this question is that the song has to be the boss. Some songs dictate more "busy" musicianship than others. For example, John Paul Jones from Led Zeppelin was always very "busy" on his bass, but it always fit the song. And I've read interviews with Jimmy Page, Zeppelin's guitarist, where he said that music needs to be composed in the same way that a great artist knows how to use light and shadow in his paintings. (Can you tell I'm a LedZep fan by now?) But, Page's point makes good sense, an artist that used either all light or all shadow in his paintings wouldn't actually produce a portrait at all, really......And some of the great country songwriters have used very sparse musicianship in their songs, but some of them are beautiful, too..... As a songwriter myself,I see where both "busy" and "sparse" musicianship both have their proper places as long as it's done in the right context. Our ears never lie to us, if it sounds too busy, it IS........

Very well said!

Take a song like "Stairway to heaven", would it have had the same effect if the entire band came in immediately, rather then slowly building the song up the way that they did? The brilliance of Page's solo, during the crescendo of the song, is his use of silence and sustain at just the right moments.

Just as the painter needs to know when to stop applying paint, the musician needs to know when he or she is overplaying or underplaying. If you took " less is more" to an extreme, you would have an empty canvas or just silence.
Even though you can see me, I might not be here.
Hosshere
Posts: 12
Joined: August 16th, 2014, 11:04 pm

Re: Is it true that less is more, in music?

Post by Hosshere »

Amen, brother!!
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of the Arts and Philosophy in the Arts”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

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

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021