Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK7riqg2mr4

Song: Agar Tum Saath Ho

Artists: Alka Yagnik and Arjit Singh

Music: AR Rahman 

Lyrics: Irshad Kamil

Music Label: T-Series

Genre: Bollywood

Relationship: I grew up watching Indian Movies and listening to Indian Music. It is a part of who I am and my culture. In my opinion, this song, instrumentally and vocally, is very breathtaking, complex, and emotional. 

Musical Element #1: Melody 

The third verse of this song is something I can’t stop singing or humming. There is so much that is happening instrumentally and vocally, that you are taken aback by what you’re listening to. The melody here follows disjunct (the melody ascends and then descends and then ascends and so forth) [You hear it in the violins especially]. This whole song in general is a combination of music that makes you feel pain/sadness but also love at the same time. Two very contrasting emotions and feelings of music. The singer’s voice, however, in this section, is performing in the conjunct method (gradually ascending and then gradually descending). For every line he sings, he starts off low, and towards the end, you hear the stress of when he’s hitting the high note. This pattern continues into the next line and so on and so forth. 

Musical Element #2: Timbre (Tone Color)

Again, I’ll reference the third verse because I feel like it is a good representation of the main elements of music. Timbre refers to the distinctive quality of a voice or an instrument. In the third verse, the male singer’s voice is overlapped. He is singing the same lines but on two different scales (a series of pitches, ordered by the interval between its notes) and pitches (a tone that is composed of an organized sound wave). In one voice, he is singing calmly and in the other, he is singing in agony, very representative of the roller coaster of emotions that the characters experience in the movie. One of which is in a high tone and the other which is in a low tone. It is significant because it portrays the emotions that the people involved in making the song want the audience to feel. They want the viewer to go through the journey with the character. 

When hearing of the Romantic Era (1820-1900), instruments such as the harp and violin would come to mind. The most interesting thing I learned is how inspiration for music was taken not only from aspects associated with dreams or love, but also from categories that are considered dark and negative. For example, according to the “Excerpt from Music: Its Language, History, and Culture,” by Douglas Cohen, Cohen writes, “… they [the romantics of the 19th century] were fascinated by subjects associated with dreams (Goya’s The Dream of Reason), oppression, injustice, and political struggle (novels of Dickens, Victor Hugo’s Les Miserable ), the macabre (stories of Edgar Allen Poe), and death (poems of Emily Dickinson)” (29). I originally thought that because this is the “romantic” era, people would look at aspects of love and happiness to compose music, but once learning about how inspiration was also taken from dark forms of society (such as oppression and death), it opened a new perspective for me.

After listening to Nicolo Paganini’s Caprice No. 24, the music sounds like how it was described in the textbook. In Paganini’s music, I felt a sense of sorrow and sometimes fear. Also, while listening, I could feel that it included aspects in the excerpt written by Cohen, such as “restlessness, longing, and unhappy love relationships” (29).

It was interesting to me how the Renaissance, being a time of rebirth, went back in time to the ideas of the ancient Greeks and Romans to influence their music and art. I had already known before jumping into the reading that instrumental music at the time wasn’t something composers were exploring with enthusiasm. The textbook describes the music of the Renaissance Era as mainly vocal, with the emergence of the four major voice parts: Soprano, Alto, Tenor, and Bass. There was a “new emphasis on harmonious sonorities” and “evolved… concepts of consonance and dissonance…” (Cohan, pg. 20)

I chose to listen to Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina because the reading said he was referred to as “The Prince of Music” (Cohen, pg. 22) and I wanted to know if that meant his music was regal-sounding. I listened to Palestrina’s “Missa Papae Marcelli” and upon hearing the words “Kyrie Eleison,” I ended up mixing it up with Josquin des Prés’ “Missa Pange Lingua,” a piece that I had already heard beforehand. So, it’s safe to say I came in expecting music that sounded like it would’ve been played during a church service.

One of the many historical periods of western art music that is widely recognized by various individuals throughout the span of time would be European Art music: Classical, which was also known as the Enlightenment Period. During this time, it consisted of “classicists” who wanted to achieve being able to express and share a vast amount of universal beauty ideas, as well as through the use of their idealized forms in their artwork with others. The 18th century was known as the age of reason solely due to a variety of individuals such as Voltaire, Diderot, and Lessing who went on to write about “the ideals of reason, objectivity, and scientific knowledge” which they would go on to spread throughout both “european society and culture”. This includes other well-known individuals such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Ben Franklin who agreed on the topic of natural rights for individuals rather than that of state rights. Thus this led up to the American Revolution and French Revolution taking place, and so forth.  Furthermore, during this classical period it resulted in composers discarding what they once knew and moving toward learning “compositional techniques such as fugal imitation, and grandeur in favor of transparent textures, a single melody supported by a subordinate accompaniment, and somewhat superficial sentiments.” It had become an important time when performers began to expand their orchestra from about “thirty or forty players”. This led to the orchestra receiving positive feedback from the public after each concert. 

When it comes to the classical historical period, what I find most interesting is that when the orchestra decided to increase the number of performers they would used to strengthen their sound. I find this interesting because compared to the smaller orchestra they possibly had before it’s compelling to see how they wanted to expand the number of instruments used and the increased amount of support they had gotten from the public. Even before having the ability to read the information within the article I was not really knowledgeable about this time period regarding the classical music era. The textbook describes the classical music from this period as switching to a new way of doing music and different styles compared to earlier classical music and mature classical music. For example, the article, states “composers of the early classical period discarded complex textures, learned compositional techniques such as fugal imitation, and grandeur in favor of transparent textures, a single melody supported by a subordinate accompaniment, and somewhat superficial sentiment”.  While “In the mature classical style of Haydn, Mozart, and early Beethoven, counterpoint, processes of rigorous development, and depth of expression reappear, but in the context of classical ideals of clarity, proportion, and refined taste.” The music did sound like what I had expected from the textbook and to my own knowledge. It sounded like a soft melody for many of them but would lead up to a more intense tune and back to a soothing sound for the three different songs. For example, Surprise by Franz Joseph Haydn, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart – Piano Concerto, and Beethoven- Moonlight Sonata. 

The Renaissance

I always thought the Renaissance to be a particularly interesting era. It always stood out as that one era of incredible whimsical arts along with new technological advancements, yet was still under the ruling of religion and divine belief. It’s sort of a weird child between the Middle Ages and the enlightenment. That’s why I think the most interesting thing about this era is how different people were and what they created. I’d imagine the people of this era to be artists, scientists, and musicians, but still under the confides of religion and the clergy. I always imagined this era to be one where everyone started to have different ideas, and just made/discover things that showed how different they are. From the paintings painted, to the new music composed, to new sciences discovered. 

From what I already know, this period is one of expression, but through work/passion rather than words. Since religion still played a really powerful role in governing people, many weren’t able to truly express themselves without consequences from the clergy. With scientists like Galileo discovering that they weren’t at the center of the universe or homosexuals being ostracized, society as a whole was going through a weird transformation, or being reborn. It’s supposed to be an era when people focused more on people, and started to turn away from the divine. 

The textbook describes the music during this era to “embody ideals of balance, clarity, and emotional restraint that characterize the classicism of the Greeks”. The textbook also describes the music of this era as secular and sacred. This era consisted mostly of vocals as the primary form of music and instrumental as secondary. The music sounds very similar to the church hymns during the Middle Ages, and the harmonizing of the singers are meant to have an angelic effect. In addition, much of the music created was still funded by royalty or the elite. 

I listened to two pieces from William Byrd (1543-1623), “O Lord turn thy Wrath” and “Teach me,O Lord”. The music definitely sounds like what I expected from this era. Like I expected there weren’t many instrumentals and most of the music was sung by a group of singers. From an untrained ear one would also definitely think this would be something played in a church, and for the most part many of this era’s music were still produced in churches. So the examples I heard from Byrd definitely fit the mold of what I thought renaissance music would sound like. 

The Medieval period was commonly referred to as the “dark ages” or the “Middle Ages”. The medieval period took place between (450 to 1450). During the Medieval period Christianity was widely spread, and therefore most of the music was heavily influenced by churches, and the monasteries. Along with musical developments, the medieval period was known for having some technological upgrades such as the creation of the printing press. Different types of art were also a main aspect in the medieval period such as sculptures, stained glass, and mosaics. In the text, an aspect I found interesting was the way of life during the Middle Ages. To add on, life during the medieval times was very harsh, and people were broken up into categories such as peasants and the noblemen. I listened to a music piece by Francesco Landini, and the music was how I expected it to sound. The music sounded very church like and seems like it’s something that would be sung in church. I expected this outcome because monasteries and churches had a major influence during the medieval period.

The classical period of music takes place between 1750 and 1820. From what I know this era is known as a time of “enlightenment” and life gravitating towards reason, science, and individual rights. New instrumental genres of symphonies and string quartets started in this era. The middle class began to grow more, which meant an increase in demand for more public concerts outside of the usual churches and courts. Some of the well-known composers of that time are Franz Joseph Haydn, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and Ludwig van Beethoven. In the textbook, they state that “In music, composers of the early classical period discarded complex textures, learned compositional techniques such as fugal imitation, and grandeur in favor of transparent textures, a single melody supported by a subordinate accompaniment, and somewhat superficial sentiments.”

What interests me the most about this historical period is the life and death of Mozart. I always found him interesting as a composer of the time. I l relistened to some of Mozart’s music since he was in the “Major Figures in Music” list. His music is what I expected to hear with the classical era. It’s easy to listen to and recognizable and holds plenty of emotion in each music piece.

The most interesting part of the 20th century for me would be what it was during the “Downtown Scene” of New York. New York was a hot pot of culture at the time and the jazz scene flourished. The 1920s and 1930s saw major changes in the way that music was listened to and it wasn’t just at orchestras and plays. Jazz made it so that an everyday person walking down the street could hear the piercing sounds of saxophones, drums, and trumpets just walking down the street. The textbook states, “Cage paved the way for the so-called “downtown” New York experimental scene that broke down barriers between music, visual art, performance, and so forth.” The textbook describes this time as “breaking down barriers” and I largely agree with the textbook’s definition; one could argue that jazz changed music forever.

Charlie Parker – Jam Session (Jam Blues). The music sounds incredibly different from my knowledge. I came from the expectation that every jazz performance is above 110 BPM, that every player has a set time for them to “jazz-it-out” or simply improvise their act. From listening to Jam Blues, it’s clear that jazz is not just about BPM and playing fast. Charlie Parker brings his own “sound” into the fray, meaning that he lets himself shine by playing non-stop, but also lets his other players shine as well. The textbook describes the jazz scene briefly as not chaotic, soul music or anything else of the like, but by saying it’s “experimental.” By describing it in this way, the reader gets the impression that the NY downtown scene wasn’t an ordinary time for music. I feel that this is a good approximation of the music itself; jazz is chaotic and experimental by nature.

Textbooks describe this period as a departure from tradition. In this period, there were so many different styles of music and genres, so there was no dominant style. For me, That is the most interest thing about this period, because in the evolution of traditional music, repertoire styles tend to evolve in isolation, they confined to their own culture, in 20 century,With modern technology and contact with people from all over the world, composers began to integrate and innovate elements from different countries. “performers study and gain mastery in Repertoires of cultures other than their own, And composers can draw on the entire world of music in creating new crossover styles”(textbook）

In this period, a harmonic system different from the past musical tradition emerged, which is atonality. Traditional music is based on smooth, natural, and regular progress, while atonality composition is contrary to traditional music, atonality has no tonal center. “That rejected Principles of a key center and the distinction between consonance and dissonance that had been Foundation of Western Music for centuries.”That’s how the textbook describes it.

I listened to Arnold Schoenberg’s piece called “Phantasy for Violin and Piano, Op. 47 (1949)”.Arnold Schoenbe is the creator of atonality. Before I heard it, I imagined it to be chaotic, in fact, it was more chaotic than I thought. It presented on violin and piano. It was very different from the traditional music I heard before. This piece was irregular, which made me feel anxious and upset. In the end, the rapid sound of the violin and piano made this mood reach its peak.