Music question

[icepixie]

Music theorists, I have a question for you. I recently heard Dar Williams's "And a God Descended" for the first time, and I found that there was something really, really musically satisfying about the first line of the chorus, or rather the first two lines, since the melody and arrangement repeats itself. (Here's a clip of the relevant part, with a bit of the preceding verse for context.) It's not necessarily that I think it's pretty, though I do, but rather that it feels very, very right that these notes/chords follow each other in this order. Is there some objective reason why I find it so satisfying, such a particularly strong resolution of the chords involved, or something like that? Or is it pure idiosyncrasy?

Also, in case anyone missed it, the Small Fandoms/Rarepairs/Rarely-written Characters Promote-a-Thon and Request Line is still going on! Come share your rare fanworks and see if other people have written things you never knew you needed!

Comments

[sleepingcbw.livejournal.com]

Hey! I'm failing so badly at prompt replies this year. My apologies.

Anyway:

If what we're reacting to is the smallness of the natural numbers in the ratios that make up musical intervals, then why can't the average listener tell the difference between equal temperament and just intonation? We can't really argue that the listener ought to prefer JI, since recordings are built to suit the instruments available, and the instruments available are must more likely to be in ET, so listeners are more accustomed to ET -- but if the numerical intervals really make that big of an aural difference to us, then just intonation ought to sound better instinctively, or at least vaguely more correct somehow. And it doesn't, since most non-musicians can't tell the difference; it's something one has to be trained to hear.

For that matter, if this is true, why isn't extended just intonation a much bigger deal? I've never conducted this kind of experiment myself, but I'm guessing the average person couldn't tell the difference between Partch or Johnston and a more aribitrarily-microtonal composer. Logically, if the ratios themselves matter, Johnston should sound more "correct" than Ligeti, but I doubt we'd find that in practice.

Also, if the exact intervals matter, why do they only matter for pitch, not for rhythm or any other facet of the musical experience? Cowell's Quartet Romatic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUgCure2uKo) organizes its rhythms by the overtone series (e.g., one instrument on half notes, one instrument on half-note triplets --> 3/2 ratio --> rhythmic "perfect fifth"), and it's... absolutely an acquired taste.

There's no evidence that we're hard-wired this way. It's a pretty idea -- like the doctrine of affects or the music of the spheres or the undertone series -- but just because it's pretty doesn't make it true.