Playing with emotion

[Alan Day]

When learning words for a play it is in two main parts ,learning the words and secondly delivering them correctly, clearly and with emotion. It sets apart a poor actor that just learns the words parrot fashion and then delivers it in the same manner.

The same goes for music it is not just a question of learning the tune it is how it is delivered and that sets apart one recording from another. I have received many recordings over six years work and many artists cannot explain why suddenly they come up with a recording that is fantastic to what has been sent before. It sometimes comes with relaxation ,other times by slowing the tune down, others by imagining dancers dancing to the music.The same of course happens in a performance that people talk about for years afterwards, a blend of a number of players playing emotionally, certain timing. It is difficult to explain in words it just happens.

Al

[Will Fly]

I know just what you mean, Al - I experience a fantastic flow of emotion every time you add your humble accompaniment to my superb guitar playing and singing...

 

But seriously, I think the whole thing boils down, in the end, to knowing your material so thoroughly that, no matter what the performance circumstances, you can concentrate on presentation and interpretation. If the performing environment is difficult or not of the best, at least you'll still give a decent performance. If the performing environment is supportive and good, then your performance will be at its best.

 

But you have to know your material so well that basic performance of it is second nature.

[Randy Stein]

"What is best in music is not to be found in the notes" - Gustav Mahler

 

 

and

 

"We hide ourselves in our music to reveal ourselves" -Jim Morrison

 

rss

[catty]

A piece of music is a drama.

[L'Albatroce]

In my other musical life I play Turkish music, and I had a great teacher who gave me this advice for approaching a new piece of music: To divide it into pieces and give all these pieces "names", memories or feelings that the passage evokes for me. This helps think through the emotional content of the piece, examine the more formal structure, and memorize it faster. It's a process I've found really useful for all my musical endeavors.

[m3838]

In my other musical life I play Turkish music, and I had a great teacher who gave me this advice for approaching a new piece of music: To divide it into pieces and give all these pieces "names", memories or feelings that the passage evokes for me. This helps think through the emotional content of the piece, examine the more formal structure, and memorize it faster. It's a process I've found really useful for all my musical endeavors.

 

Superb advice.

[Anglo-Irishman]

To divide it into pieces and give all these pieces "names", memories or feelings that the passage evokes for me.

 

Absolutely!

The thing is to get away from the idea of a tune being a sequence of notes. It is really built up of larger pieces. I call the pieces "phrases".

 

I've heard the idea of thinking of these phrases as a conversation between two people. If we think of the first as "Hello, lovely day today!" and the second phrase as "Yes, but it might rain later on!" we'll play each with a different feeling. Above all, each phrase will almost automatically get a start and a finish and a middle bit, rather than becoming part of a continuous, featureless stream of notes.

 

A lot of my instrumental pieces are actually arrangements of song tunes. I find that silently singing along gives each iteration of the tune a different feel, even slight rhythmic variations, which adds variety.

 

For some purely instrumental numbers, I have a little story with "chapters" each consisting of several "phrases". The story may, for example, begin merrily, have a sad event in the middle, and a happy end. If I have this story running in my mental cinema while I'm playing, the emotions influence my playing.

 

But, as the bass-man in our group always says when we're working up a new number: "Right lads, we've all got the notes - now let's start to learn the piece!"

 

Cheers,

John

[Mikefule]

I'm not sure you can "put emotion in" in the sense of, "Right, I know all the notes, so let's add some emotion."

 

I think the "emotion" comes from the musician being carried along by the music, rather than the music being driven by the musician.

 

If so, then a good starting point has to be learning the tune so well that you don't have to think about the fingering, and liking the tune so much that you sometimes wake up humming it to yourself.

 

As with acting, if you try too hard, it becomes too obvious.

[catty]

 

I think the "emotion" comes from the musician being carried along by the music, rather than the music being driven by the musician.

 

 

 

I relate more to this view. I tend to free-associate most of the day anyway--maybe why I have aptitude for music--so I tend to let the music take me where it will, anyway. I listen to a lot of abstract music--and tend to experience sound in pretty fundamental ways.

 

But L'albatroce was speaking about this programmatic approach (associating passages with states of mind) with regards to LEARNING a piece.

Edited May 3, 2010 by catty

[Anglo-Irishman]

I think the "emotion" comes from the musician being carried along by the music, rather than the music being driven by the musician.

I relate more to this view.

 

Catty,

I find this view a bit too simplistic. Music doesn't ever work one way. Does a singer let himself be carried by the accompaniment, or does the accompanist let himself be carried by the singer? Neither way is satisfactory. Singer and accompanist walk hand in hand, supporting each other, guiding each other.

 

Same with musician and music. The musician must understand what the notes are trying to "say", and try to emphasise this in the performance. I may understand the notes differently from you, and perform the music with a different enphasis - but one lesson that we can learn from music is that there are almost always several different right answers!

 

But L'albatroce was speaking about this programmatic approach (associating passages with states of mind) with regards to LEARNING a piece.

 

Can you separate learning from performing? Learning also involves getting the right notes in the right place at the right time, but this is also an essential part of performance. The programmatic approach that helps you to analyse the piece for easier learning also helps to structure your performance. The whole point of associative learning is to use these associations to recall what you've learnt when it comes to putting it into action.

 

Cheers,

John

[catty]

I find this view a bit too simplistic. Music doesn't ever work one way...The musician must understand what the notes are trying to "say", and try to emphasise this in the performance. I may understand the notes differently from you, and perform the music with a different enphasis - but one lesson that we can learn from music is that there are almost always several different right answers!

I think that, in fact, you and I will "understand" the NOTES in quite similar fashion, but possibly interpret the MUSIC quite differently. As you say, there is wide diversity in interpretation. I tend to enjoy art that is more "abstract" in general, which typically leaves more opportunity for interpretation.

 

 

Can you separate learning from performing? Learning also involves getting the right notes in the right place at the right time, but this is also an essential part of performance. The programmatic approach that helps you to analyse the piece for easier learning also helps to structure your performance. The whole point of associative learning is to use these associations to recall what you've learnt when it comes to putting it into action.

 

Cheers,

John

Regarding this question--absolutely. By the time I have a piece "performance ready," I could be relating to it in a totally different way than I did when learning the piece. Sometimes, a piece can take on "a life of its own" (albeit, a simplistic way of describing this phenomena).

 

While the approach articulated by L'albatroce may be effective, it's not how I approach learning nor performance. I approach music more fluidly -- more intuitively and less consciously. The way I'm wired, I'm more interested in improvizational music than rehearsed repertoire. Maybe that's why I'm a failed classical guitarist, and these days find more work as a sideman.

Edited May 8, 2010 by catty

[Dirge]

... I call the pieces "phrases".

 

I've heard the idea of thinking of these phrases as a conversation between two people. If we think of the first as "Hello, lovely day today!" and the second phrase as "Yes, but it might rain later on!" we'll play each with a different feeling. Above all, each phrase will almost automatically get a start and a finish and a middle bit, rather than becoming part of a continuous, featureless stream of notes.

 

 

Cheers,

John

 

 

I think I was told this back at the dawn of time; but I'd forgotten it and am finding the idea instantly useful, so thanks for that. 'Phrases' eh? Good name. I wonder if it'll catch on?

[Alan Day]

I am certainly guilty of releasing or performing music before I have investigated it's possibilities. The early performances of Stream to River Flow is nothing like how Mike and I perform it now. I wonder how many times you have been to a Folk Club to hear a performer say that "This is something I learnt this afternoon" and make a hash of it.Tunes and songs evolve as you get more into them as has been said certain phrases need to be played differently , softer, or with more emphasis (light and shade). Investigating faster or slower versions of the tune to see if it sounds better etc.

Nice discussion

Al

[Mikefule]

Maybe it's like wine tasting. You don't learn to add flavour to the wine; you learn to find the subtle flavours that are in it.

[catty]

Nice analogy. Let the music color you...

 

But looking at it from a brain/neurologial perspective, I presume the idea (L'albatroce's iteration) is to disperse the neuro functions involved in executing music throughout the brain and to as many neuro pathways as possible. This makes sense: engaging as much of the brain and body (and other aspects) as possible in the activity will likely produce very good results as far as recall and command.

 

Some of this could be helpful with respect to "playing with emotion," as well. Engaging "emotional pathways"-- connecting cerebral executive functions with visceral and subtle aspects--could assist in producing an evocative sound in several ways. I'm less likely to engage a piece of music by consciously imposing a sort of analogous schematic of its movement. It's difficult for me to conceptualize transmogriphying an abstract musical "language" into a codified symbolic system (vis-a-vis, methods described above); music is potent enough to stand alone, evoke sensations, and stimulate the imagination beyond rational conventions. Rather than associating, say, a dialogue, or image of a seaside landscape, for example, I'd be more likely to become the wave, current, or tidal movement...color, frequency of light, or sensation...but, much more viscerally and less cognitively. I experience it much more like painting or sculpting with sound. I also like abstract visual art very much: when I look at a painting, for example, I typically don't associate or interpret elements or aspects of the painting in concrete, narrative, or other "rational" terms. An interesting exercise, for example, would be to analyze a "romantic" element of a work without using such cliches as gender, love, loyalty, or other cultural conventions.

 

As a session bassist and drummer, I dwell a lot in the realm of kinesis, motion, and physicality of music. Pretty easy to get primal with it when you're immersed on this level. We are also attuned to communicating musically with our mates (or we'd be out of work )... it's interesting to note the differences: when performing with solo instruments, I'm going deeply inside, striving to bring the inner experience forth and to animate the subtle senses through musical expression (sort of easily done, in some respects, which is why music is such a powerful emotional medium) -- an eminently interesting process of organization on so many levels.

Edited May 8, 2010 by catty

[Ransom]

'Phrases' eh? Good name. I wonder if it'll catch on?

 

Since you might not be joking, I'll point out that the name has, in fact, caught on.

[Dirge]

'Phrases' eh? Good name. I wonder if it'll catch on?

 

Since you might not be joking, I'll point out that the name has, in fact, caught on.

 

John? Look at this. Some sod's stolen your idea...

[Mikefule]

Phrasing is so fundamental that I am surprised that anyone should forget about it - although sometimes when I hear the Hohner wall of sound* in a Morris session all I hear is the driving beat with no phrasing at all.

 

Playing solo, or playing "nicely" in a session (rather than the vulgar gallop of a box and fiddle race) the phrase is the basic unit. Think in terms of individual bars and the music becomes jerky and disconnected. Ignore the phrases and it becomes a monotonous meaningless musical mush.

 

Much of the music I play is either dance music or closely connected to dance music, and the surge and flow of the dancers is reflected in the surge and flow of the phrases. I think of my hands dancing on the concertina.

 

 

*These days, it is often the Castagnari wall of sound - it sounds exactly the same, but it's more expensive.