Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Sunday in the Park with George - Behind the Score (Episode 6) (Patreon)

Published:
2021-10-25 01:22:42
Imported:
2023-06

Content

Vimeo Link: https://vimeo.com/638469984/8facba8b0e

Spurred by a recent conversation about music theory with John Franek, I embark on a bit of an exploration on an idea of "spatial dissonance", using Sondheim's classic score to Sunday in the Park with George as a case study. Come along for the ride!

Please do not post this link outside of this Patreon interface.

Files

Sunday in the Park with George - Behind the Score (Episode 6)

Spurred by a recent conversation about music theory with John Franek, I embark on a bit of an exploration on an idea of "spatial dissonance", using Sondheim's...

Comments

Dale S Josephs

Sondheim was one of the grandmasters of musical theater. A protege or Richard Rogers, collaborator with Leonard Bernstein, and later mentor to Lin-Manuel Miranda. I definitely hear a lot of Lenny's intricate weavings of melody and harmony, and I think the only people who did word-avalanches better than Sondheim were Gilbert-and-Sullivan prior, and Miranda after. As I think I heard you point out, one of the core characteristics of Sondheim's music that works against his general popularity is that it all tends to be integral to the play it's part of. There's rarely a song that can be taken out of context as a pop single, the way "One Day More" in Les Mis, or "Memory" in Cats did in recent memory. It also shows that Sondheim came into full stride in the 70s, when Broadway began to accept chromatic dissonance much more openly. The sharp lyrical wit, the incisive compositional pen, the creative mind and ear he had were very special gifts that he shared with audiences for decades.

Peter Tutak

I always thought the opening measures of this were Richard Strauss in the right hand and Ravel in the left. Your point about being taught 'what should work' vs 'what does work' (i.e. the sus 4) is reinforcement of the adage 'if it SOUNDS good (to you), it IS good (to you)'. It's unfortunate that in music theory, we submit to being shackled by rules about voice leading, etc. before we can be emancipated from them to discover some pretty glorious sonic landscapes. As well, I liked the observation about moving the super-auditory upper partials into the range of hearing and into close relationship with the fundamental tone for coloration and palette. I *think* it explains what I find works for me in some of Scriabin's piano works, although I'd have to find the piano music to do the analysis. Something else for you to consider: Seurat was a pointillist, and Sondheim's use of seemingly unrelated tones as 'dots of color' inside the key may (or may not) be an intentional parallel. (I don't know, it's just a thought.) Great lecture, and great music to support it. Sondheim was a treasure. Thanks, Doug !

doughelvering
>>70469768

I forgot to mention the pointillism connection...great point! I had never considered the actual note frequency for where to place a dissonance in a complicated harmony before. Before, the function and relation to the current sonority always were the only factors. I'm going to enjoy exploring this idea a bit more.