You will hear musicians say "music is art, there are no rules in art".electrictears wrote: So, is there such a thing as wrong phrasing
What's your view?
i've been thinking about this a bit, and i don't really think it's so easy to generalize. sometimes the highest note should be quieter, sometimes not.electrictears wrote:I stumbled upon this video and he suggests making a decrescendo towards a top note and a crescendo back down to make the phrasing longer.
But the example he gives with Lagrima by Tarrega seems unnatural to do. (at 2:16)
The phrasing for Lagrima seems to be pretty obvious and it sounds strange when he changes it. Playing the Fsharp in the second measure as an upbeat instead of the end of the phrase? It seems more natural to put an accent on the low B note before the 3rd measure to accent the cadens instead of accenting the high F that lasts a whole measure.
So, is there such a thing as wrong phrasing or am I not feeling it because I'm used to it in the 'normal' way?
What's your view?
yes, it's bizarre to do a video without playing. Internet self-publishing seems to me it's starting to implode. So many expert looking productions with amateur content, it's hard to wade through.stevel wrote:You will hear musicians say "music is art, there are no rules in art".electrictears wrote: So, is there such a thing as wrong phrasing
What's your view?
However, MY opinion, FWIW, is that when you're dealing with an established tradition, there IS a correct way - and wrong way. IOW, the tradition defines the rules for us.
Everyone wants to be famous. Everyone is a bit narcissistic (especially pro performers) and they want to put their stamp on something. They want to be the "I"m the guy who came up with that interpretation" guy - right or wrong.
That said, there can be something very artistic in exploring anti-traditional interpretations that can put an entirely new perspective on a work.
However, IMHO there's a big difference between someone who interprets something "their way" based on lack of knowledge, versus someone who is truly seeking a new perspective (and it's clear that's what they're doing).
I wouldn't trust anything this guy says because he didn't play (and if he did later - I didn't watch the whole video - then it's too late).
I believe it might have been Frank Zappa: "Shut up and play yer guitar!".
I have to question the motives here.
+1Ramon Amira wrote:I would like to say that this guy is absolutely right. I would LIKE to say that, but unfortunately I can't. His Lagrima suggestion is preposterous. He turns the opening phrase into a yo-yo. It's outlandish.
He claims that continuing the crescendo to the B and softening the F# "creates a stop - BOOM - a complete statement, and then "this other stuff" (the fill) "which doesn't mean anything" . . . " Good grief.
It's the very fill itself that shows that the opening phrase is not a "complete statement," but even without that it in no way sounds like a "complete statement." You only have to "play" it in your head his way to see how ridiculous it sounds, but for a good laugh play it on the guitar.
maybe he was trying to tear the musically right out of it, and in so doing, make our eyes swell up.Polifemo de Oro wrote:The Spanish word, Lágrima, means tear, or tear drop. The overriding sense of the phrase should be one, therefore, of tenderness. To do as this person suggests would be to turn the phrase into a grotesque kind of declamation. If you want to exercise a more passionate response to the music you have ample opportunity to do so in the B section of the piece. Here, you may get as maudlin as you wish (but don't).
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 3 guests