Music and Piping

Originally Posted by OnfocusNtuned

There are composers, especially mid 20th century modern composers, that intentionally use discord for supposed musical expression and to create a certain mood;

well what happened with the post 2nd vienna school serialists & later experimentalists was that;

composers began composing only to impress other composers;

"Oh, look at this series , see ive applied it in mensural retrograde inversion to the rhythm, etc". Stuff like thats very impressive to another composer. It took a very long time for sheer emotional appeal to surpass intellectualism; meanwhile, the rise of the media brought instant musical gratification.

Pipers & pipebands have been creating mostly for each other, for a long time. I think these days, theres a lot more good, dedicated pipers with a wide enough lens to realize fully the implications of insular creativity, and act accordingly for the core and its fringes to thrive.

[Heatherbelle]

Originally Posted by OnfocusNtuned

To keep the pipes a living instrument it should be able to continue exploring different forms of music, but if discord is created it stops being musical.

Really? I wonder how people define discord? I suspect people would think of intervals of a second, seventh, semitone, augmented intervals, diminished etc as being discordant. It's a real surprise that such a high percentage of pipers need/want the music to be pleasurable as a main requirement. To me that would be like being an artist but only having half a palette--or only bright colours. Or like smiling and getting on with people all the time and never having an argument.

[MelodyPipes]

Originally Posted by Heatherbelle

Really? I wonder how people define discord?

Hi Heatherbelle -- I had the same question.....

What one person would call music and another might regard as discord -- perhaps a matter of personal taste. But....does "discordant" mean unacceptable as music?

[Heatherbelle]

Originally Posted by Melody

But....does "discordant" mean unacceptable as music?

I hope not. It would be like painting a picture of thunder and storm clouds with only bright happy colours in the palette!
On the one hand it has really surprised me how many pipers want to hear 'nice happy sunny' music that they find primarily pleasureable. But on the other hand we're living in an age where often we're told it's good to smile and bad to cry. Even in schools they give out stickers to smilers.

[pancelticpiper]

Sorry but the poll doesn't make much sense to me.

Trying to define music is like trying to define visual art. Even harder is to define what is "good art".

The definition that I like best is the one proposed by a drawing teacher I had in college, which could be applied to the visual arts, music, or literature:

"Art is the recording of human experience. The more profound the experience, and the more clear the recording of it, the better the art."

Then there's the blunt definition of music I heard once:

"Any sound you want to hear is music. Any sound you don't want to hear is noise."

I thought this thread, from the title, might be about the concept of being a "piper" v being a "musician". My old dear friend the late PM Kevin Blandford was always careful in his use of these words. Of some pipers he would say "he's a very good piper" but of other pipers he would say "he's a very good musician". The distinction was due to him continually encountering good pipers who were utterly ignorant of the wider world of music.

One example might well illustrate this:

(to an Open piper, the PM of a Grade Two band, back in the 1980s when some bands were still playing at 466, and some were considerably sharper)

"where is your band tuned?"

"we're in tune."

"I mean where are you pitched at?"

"we're in tune."

"well for example if you were to play a church gig and have to play with the organ, would you be in tune with the organ or would you be sharp of the organ?"

"the organ would tune to me."

Which left Kevin somewhat speechless. Yes, a pipe organ is going to tune several hundred pipes to tune to your bagpipes.

[johnsog]

What a delightful question to ponder!! It's very interesting and educational reading the answers.
I know a lot of musicians who are great technical players of whatever instrument but don't have a strong interpretive sense. I'd much rather listen to someone with a talent for creating images and it's their CDs I'll purchase.
The winter 2011 issue of Common Stock, published by the Lowland and Border Pipers Society, contains an article discussing "dird", which, I gather, is that something in the music that makes one desire to dance. That, personally, is what makes a piece "music". It's really all in the ear of the listener, however. Everyone is listening for something different.