[brents]

One_of_us, on Oct 2 2011, 12:59 PM, said:

Please don't believe everything you read. Only singers sing. A violin, a clarinet, a trompet don't sing. They play. But they can produce sounds that have singing qualities. A vibrato is a noticeable pulsation, but it is not essential for a sound to have singing qualities. Only a continuous sound from an oscillator has constant amplitude. Other sounds have lower frequency components, just from the fact that they have a beginning and end or decay. Play and hold a tone on a good piano and you will feel it singing, not clicking.

Now you are inventing 'brent' definitions. What has crescendo and diminuendo to do with singing quality? Have you ever heard of stacatto singing? Listen to the following piece, and realize that ALL the sounds from the singer are "singing", even those without vibrato, crescendo, decrescendo:

[yo utube]ht tp://ww w.you tube.c om/watch?v=hEzVNEqRlqw[/yo utube]
.
.

For those reading, remember that one can learn also from 2 clowns (w00t)

If those are my own definitions, then I would be a music professor/director or something.

What has crescendo and diminuendo to do with singing quality? I thought you learnt violin, when it plays a long note, it doesn't stay the same. It either goes UP or DOWN but never monotone.

The piano is a percussion instrument. It doesn’t sing, at least not in the way a voice, violin or flute can sing! A pianist only has control over the brief moment of initiation of a sound, when the key releases the hammer which strikes its strings. Once that moment has passed, the sound gradually fades away at a set rate beyond the musician’s control. So the piano can only approximate the lyrical flow of a melody as it would be performed by a singer.

Singers and other instrumentalists have the option to sustain, fade or increase notes any way they wish, while pianists are stuck with playing sequences of fading notes. Well, one can sustain the notes a little by playing sympathetic resonating strings in the accompaniment, but the fact remains that pianos are not true singing instruments.

[One_of_us]

brents, on Oct 1 2011, 02:48 PM, said:

Definition of singing:

1) According to what I read, if an instrument cannot produce "vibrato", it is said not to be singing as vibrato is an essential property of singing.

Strings, woodwind, brass instruments all can produce vibrato. Piano cannot. Harpsichord cannot. Organ cannot.

Please don't believe everything you read. Only singers sing. A violin, a clarinet, a trompet don't sing. They play. But they can produce sounds that have singing qualities. A vibrato is a noticeable pulsation, but it is not essential for a sound to have singing qualities. Only a continuous sound from an oscillator has constant amplitude. Other sounds have lower frequency components, just from the fact that they have a beginning and end or decay. Play and hold a tone on a good piano and you will feel it singing, not clicking.

Quote

2) In a long semibreve, if an instrument cannot produce a crescendo and diminuendo, it is said it cannot sing. Piano cannot do that.

Now you are inventing 'brent' definitions. What has crescendo and diminuendo to do with singing quality? Have you ever heard of stacatto singing? Listen to the following piece, and realize that ALL the sounds from the singer are "singing", even those without vibrato, crescendo, decrescendo:


.
.

Quote

(For those reading, it's not 2 clowns arguing, afterall a discussion forum is for discussion and clarifying issues. While reading, you could learn something which all along you have a misconception about.)

For those reading, remember that one can learn also from 2 clowns (w00t)

[brents]

One_of_us, on Oct 2 2011, 12:41 PM, said:

Hahaha... we are still not done with singing?

If we come down to it, it's all a matter of definitions. "To sing" is what a singer does. Other musical instruments "play". A violinist, a clarinetist, a pianist, all "play". They don't "sing". Only singers have their instrument inside their bodies, haha.

The verb "to sing" is different from the adjective "singing". Many different musical sounds have "singing" quality, which we perceive in the sound.

We are supposed to be done with the discussion if you absorb what I've said. Don't keep thinking your own way.

It's not my opinion, it's widely known in classical world the piano cannot sing. I've quoted so much but you kept ignoring there's really no point.

Not to turn it into some debate because these are facts.

[One_of_us]

brents, on Oct 1 2011, 02:21 PM, said:

What I said is what is generally known in music circles, piano cannot sing a long note, though it sounded melodious when playing a nice melody legato & piano, it still cannot sing. Even piano teachers already agree. So, it's not only my opinion, it is a well-known fact. Don't feel sorry for me, it is your opinion when you want to percieve that piano figuratively can ''sing''.

Common also means, it is not rare. Why follow the common crowd?

Hahaha... we are still not done with singing?

If we come down to it, it's all a matter of definitions. "To sing" is what a singer does. Other musical instruments "play". A violinist, a clarinetist, a pianist, all "play". They don't "sing". Only singers have their instrument inside their bodies, haha.

The verb "to sing" is different from the adjective "singing". Many different musical sounds have "singing" quality, which we perceive in the sound.

[brents]

Definition of singing:

1) According to what I read, if an instrument cannot produce "vibrato", it is said not to be singing as vibrato is an essential property of singing.

Strings, woodwind, brass instruments all can produce vibrato. Piano cannot. Harpsichord cannot. Organ cannot.

2) In a long semibreve, if an instrument cannot produce a crescendo and diminuendo, it is said it cannot sing. Piano cannot do that.

*See image attached. If a "king of instrument" (alleged to be piano, by one_of_us) cannot play such simple passage properly, is it still worthy as king?


(For those reading, it's not 2 clowns arguing, afterall a discussion forum is for discussion and clarifying issues. While reading, you could learn something which all along you have a misconception about.)

Attached File(s)

•  simplepassage.jpg (27.5K)
  Number of downloads: 12

This post has been edited by brents: 01 October 2011 - 02:49 PM

[brents]

One_of_us, on Oct 1 2011, 03:17 AM, said:

Like I said previously, there is no rigorous physical definition of "singing". A musical sound some may perceive it as singing, others not. So "singing" it is a perception in a musical sound, subjective to the person. I often find singing quality in the sound of a piano. If you don't, I can only feel sorry for you.

Keyboard is "most common" because the largest quantity of musical instruments in this world have a keyboard. And for the last two centuries, the most common keyboard instrument has been the piano. I have many acquaintances who have a piano at home, but none who have a harpsichord, clavichord, spinet or organ.

What I said is what is generally known in music circles, piano cannot sing a long note, though it sounded melodious when playing a nice melody legato & piano, it still cannot sing. Even piano teachers already agree. So, it's not only my opinion, it is a well-known fact. Don't feel sorry for me, it is your opinion when you want to percieve that piano figuratively can ''sing''.

Common also means, it is not rare. Why follow the common crowd?

[One_of_us]

brents, on Sep 30 2011, 03:46 PM, said:

Like I said previously, melodious, light, legato hammering is not singing.

Keyboard is "most common" because it compasses a wide variety of instruments - harpsichord, piano, clavichord, organ, spinet...etc. "Most common" doesn't mean AOF is for keyboard.

Like I said previously, there is no rigorous physical definition of "singing". A musical sound some may perceive it as singing, others not. So "singing" it is a perception in a musical sound, subjective to the person. I often find singing quality in the sound of a piano. If you don't, I can only feel sorry for you.

Keyboard is "most common" because the largest quantity of musical instruments in this world have a keyboard. And for the last two centuries, the most common keyboard instrument has been the piano. I have many acquaintances who have a piano at home, but none who have a harpsichord, clavichord, spinet or organ.

This post has been edited by One_of_us: 01 October 2011 - 12:23 PM

[brents]

Bach's music used in a handheld game, and it still sounds good like it always have!!!!: (w00t)
.
.
.


This is the original piece (Menuet from French Suite No.3):
.
.
.

[brents]

One_of_us, on Sep 30 2011, 04:46 AM, said:

Not really. To begin with, sounds from piano have singing quality. That you don't perceive it is another story. The andante from Mozart's concerto #21 is a good example of a piano singing.

Yes, Art of Fugue is open score, but only Bach could tell if it was NOT intended for keyboard, hahaha. In reality, keyboard is the most common instrument it is performed on.

I'm sure if harpsichords were alive they would feel glad that you forgive them, but I find much nicer the sound from a concert grand.

Like I said previously, melodious, light, legato hammering is not singing.

Keyboard is "most common" because it compasses a wide variety of instruments - harpsichord, piano, clavichord, organ, spinet...etc. "Most common" doesn't mean AOF is for keyboard.

[One_of_us]

brents, on Sep 29 2011, 12:35 PM, said:

Do you realise, the character of the piece also has a part to play? Of course fast-tempo pieces like Presto from Moonlight Sonata are better suited for piano while piano pieces with cantabile quality are better suited for instruments that can sing.

Not really. To begin with, sounds from piano have singing quality. That you don't perceive it is another story. The andante from Mozart's concerto #21 is a good example of a piano singing.

Quote

No, only Well-Tempered Clavier is intended for keyboard but Bach never specify it's only for piano. Keyboard instruments in Bach's days were harpsichord (which is the only instrument I can forgive for not having singing quality because the tone is really nice), clavichord, organ. Art of Fugue is not intended for keyboard, it's open score.

Yes, Art of Fugue is open score, but only Bach could tell if it was NOT intended for keyboard, hahaha. In reality, keyboard is the most common instrument it is performed on.

I'm sure if harpsichords were alive they would feel glad that you forgive them, but I find much nicer the sound from a concert grand.

This post has been edited by One_of_us: 30 September 2011 - 04:47 AM

[brents]

One_of_us, on Sep 29 2011, 11:26 AM, said:

I ONCE found that the swingle singers sounded better than the piano. But I don't think this is the norm. In general, there is little need for tones to be sustained very long. The piano makes beautiful music without long sustaining, and other instruments like the pipes can make horrible sustained sounds. Sustaining is not a virtue per se.

I don't understand how you can say that the piano tones are NOT sustained. This is like saying that some people have NO height, instead of saying that some are shorter and others taller. Is taller better? Not necessarily. Tall is a handicap when sleeping in Asian beds, for example.

When you wrote this, did you think about the Art of the Fugue and the Well Tempered Clavier, some of the highest exponents of Bach's contrapunctual works... written for the keyboard, with shortly sustained tones? (w00t) (w00t)

This is the piece (RddFTiCFQwA) which you ONCE found singing vocals to be better than piano. Sample the same piece by piano (x2Q-Gliypvw). The crux is about singing quality, sustainability of tone is part of singing quality.

Do you realise, the character of the piece also has a part to play? Of course fast-tempo pieces like Presto from Moonlight Sonata are better suited for piano while piano pieces with cantabile quality are better suited for instruments that can sing.

No, only Well-Tempered Clavier is intended for keyboard but Bach never specify it's only for piano. Keyboard instruments in Bach's days were harpsichord (which is the only instrument I can forgive for not having singing quality because the tone is really nice), clavichord, organ. Art of Fugue is not intended for keyboard, it's open score.

[One_of_us]

brents, on Sep 26 2011, 03:57 PM, said:

Recall the piano transcription of the choral double fugue I had posted some time ago, it was clear but the voices (SATB) cannot sustain a singing tone and you even agreed that piano was not doing the work any justice as notes faded away too soon, leaving incomplete harmony.

I ONCE found that the swingle singers sounded better than the piano. But I don't think this is the norm. In general, there is little need for tones to be sustained very long. The piano makes beautiful music without long sustaining, and other instruments like the pipes can make horrible sustained sounds. Sustaining is not a virtue per se.

Quote

I remembered, you agreed with me that the organ is too noisy & loud that often the inner voices (tenor, alto) cannot be heard clearly, though the voices are sustained; whereas on the piano, all the voices (SATB or SAB) are heard clearly but the voices are not sustained, resulting in incomplete harmony.

I don't understand how you can say that the piano tones are NOT sustained. This is like saying that some people have NO height, instead of saying that some are shorter and others taller. Is taller better? Not necessarily. Tall is a handicap when sleeping in Asian beds, for example.

Quote

That's why only strings, vocals, woodwind (the instruments that can really sing) that really do justice to Bach's complex contrapuntal textures of his pieces.

When you wrote this, did you think about the Art of the Fugue and the Well Tempered Clavier, some of the highest exponents of Bach's contrapunctual works... written for the keyboard, with shortly sustained tones? (w00t) (w00t)

[brents]

One_of_us, on Sep 26 2011, 08:01 AM, said:

This video clearly shows the amazing power of the king of instruments, the piano, being able to tame the one hundred or so independent amateur voices into singing in tune. :blow:

Recall the piano transcription of the choral double fugue I had posted some time ago, it was clear but the voices (SATB) cannot sustain a singing tone and you even agreed that piano was not doing the work any justice as notes faded away too soon, leaving incomplete harmony.

One_of_us, on Sep 26 2011, 08:11 AM, said:

I'm so sorry to feel this way, but I think that this orchestral concoction has washed away most of Bach's spirit. Except for some contrapunctual moments, one would hardly distinguish the German composer, whose unadulterated works have so much character! I would gladly replace all that pompous orchestra crowd with a single instrumentalist playing autenthic Bach. You guessed it! Maybe Perahia playing a partita :music:

I remembered, you agreed with me that the organ is too noisy & loud that often the inner voices (tenor, alto) cannot be heard clearly, though the voices are sustained; whereas on the piano, all the voices (SATB or SAB) are heard clearly but the voices are not sustained, resulting in incomplete harmony.

That's why only strings, vocals, woodwind (the instruments that can really sing) that really do justice to Bach's complex contrapuntal textures of his pieces.

[One_of_us]

brents, on Sep 23 2011, 09:28 PM, said:

Live performance of the same fantasia I just posted, with the poignant story behind why Elgar orchestrated this great Bach masterpiece:

I'm so sorry to feel this way, but I think that this orchestral concoction has washed away most of Bach's spirit. Except for some contrapunctual moments, one would hardly distinguish the German composer, whose unadulterated works have so much character! I would gladly replace all that pompous orchestra crowd with a single instrumentalist playing autenthic Bach. You guessed it! Maybe Perahia playing a partita :music:

[One_of_us]

brents, on Sep 25 2011, 11:22 PM, said:

This is the best amateur performance of this choral double fugue from Bach's Mass in B minor:

(When I first heard it, it almost bring tears to my eyes to hear the voices of so many people of different races united in perfect harmony. Very in-line with the title of the choral fugue, "Grant us peace". Peace, is what our world urgently need right now.)

This video clearly shows the amazing power of the king of instruments, the piano, being able to tame the one hundred or so independent amateur voices into singing in tune. :blow:

[brents]

This is the best amateur performance of this choral double fugue from Bach's Mass in B minor:

(When I first heard it, it almost bring tears to my eyes to hear the voices of so many people of different races united in perfect harmony. Very in-line with the title of the choral fugue, "Grant us peace". Peace, is what our world urgently need right now.)
.
.
.
.

[brents]

Live performance of the same fantasia I just posted, with the poignant story behind why Elgar orchestrated this great Bach masterpiece:
.
.
.
.

[brents]

One of Bach's well-known organ fantasias, transcribed for full orchestra:
.
.
.
.

[brents]

One_of_us, on Sep 23 2011, 06:36 AM, said:

1. People only disagree with you when "it's said incorrectly by brents". We usually agree when "it's said correctly by brents".

Interchangeability of parts is a consequence of STANDARDIZATION, a simple concept known by people who have not a clue of what is a fugue.

2. I've never been "blown away" by an organ. I've experienced quite strong winds in Texas though.
Sublimation: change of state from solid to gas without passing through a liquid state.

You're mixing science with music theory. Sigh. Whatever.

[One_of_us]

brents, on Sep 22 2011, 03:37 PM, said:

1. No, it is polyphony and I'm stating facts from the book and it has nothing to do with me & my opinions. I've a feeling that people are disagreeing with me just because "it's said by brents". No, don't do that. Interchangeability of parts (SATB) is a characteristics of polyphonic and fugal writing. Just like in a fugue (a polyphonic composition) where the melody (red) can become bass and counter-subjects (green & blue) becomes the top melodies and the music still make senses:

http://en.wikipedia....ue-analysis.jpg

2. Didn't you said recently that you prefer to be "blown away" by the organ?

1. People only disagree with you when "it's said incorrectly by brents". We usually agree when "it's said correctly by brents".

Interchangeability of parts is a consequence of STANDARDIZATION, a simple concept known by people who have not a clue of what is a fugue.

2. I've never been "blown away" by an organ. I've experienced quite strong winds in Texas though.

brents, on Sep 22 2011, 09:35 PM, said:

One of Bach's sublime solo sonatas, with score:
[color=#FFFFFF].

Sublimation: change of state from solid to gas without passing through a liquid state.