mannaggia

Fred Lerdahl.
Uno che dice praticamente le stesse cose che penso io...

Non vincerò mai il premio Nobel per aver inventato cose rivoluzionarie hahahahaha



http://www.bussigel.com/lerdahl/pdf/Genesis%20and%20Architecture%20of%20the%20GTTM%20Project.pdf

http://www.bussigel.com/lerdahl/pdf/The%20Capacity%20for%20Music.pdf

Purtroppo questi scienziati non hanno il dono della sintesi...
e per capire quello che pensa questo Fred Lerdahl bisogna spulciare in dozzine di papers e pubblicazioni varie.

Sembra "buono" dai due link che ho postato. Addirittura un articolo intero si basa su analisi di pezzi dei Beatles (che comunque nel mio modello sono insieme ad Hendrix il punto più alto della musica leggera, ad esclusione di Zappa che lo consideriamo uno dei "nostri" e quindi lo escludiamo).

Invece non va tanto sul sottile.

Come cita lo studioso Allen Forte (mi tocca fidarmi di Wikipedia e di una citazione di rimando):

Western classical music is the apodigm of the extensional form of musical construction. Theme and variations, counterpoint, tonality (as used in classical composition) are all devices that build diachronically and synchronically outwards from basic musical atoms. The complex is created by combination of the simple, which remains discrete and unchanged in the complex unity...If those critics who maintain the greater complexity of classical music specified that they had in mind this extensional development, they would be quite correct...Rock however follows, like many non-European musics, the path of intensional development. In this mode of construction, the basic musical units (played/sung notes) are not combined through space and time as simple elements into complex structures. The simple entity is that constituted by the parameters of melody, harmony, and beat, while the complex is built up by modulation of the basic notes, and by inflexion of the basic beat. All existing genres and sub-types of the Afro-American tradition show various forms of combined intensional and extensional development.

—Chester 1970, p.78-9

 Cito poi un blog di uno studente di composizione americano:

Complexities
Classical and popular music can both be very complex. There are different types of complexities due to way each type is disseminated. Classical music is disseminated via notation. We can compose a sketch of an orchestra piece on a grand staff and then transfer the music to the orchestra… you can then scale it down to a string quartet, or a wind quintet… all versions would have the same complexities of pitch and rhythm material and still be totally recognizable. This type of complexity is extensional. Popular music has intentional complexity. Pop music is disseminated via recordings, so the timbre, style, mixing, and recording is what makes a lot of the music. Now this is probably why there are so many god awful marching band arrangements of pop music… it simply doesn’t transfer well due to the different complexities.
I personally like thinking about these two types of complexities. There are a lot of composers that have tried to write music with both extensional and intentional complexities. Take Scelsi for example… many of his orchestral works are entirely focused on timbre and texture and he is able to create wonderful new sounds with the orchestra. However, these sounds are achieved using notation… but, the sounds are NOT transferable to any other ensemble. I personally have been on the same path of considering timbre and texture just as important as pitch/rhythm. This becomes an issue when I am trying to sketch out ideas for larger ensembles. When I am composing with timbre shifts/effects, and different textural densities, it is difficult to sketch out what I want without drawing lines and jotting down things in text form… since this type of complexity is not notationally driven. Often my goal is to produce music that is idiomatic to whatever I’m writing for… music that isn’t transferable. I thought this discussion about complexities brought up an interesting parallel in what I try to do as a composer and what I hear other composers doing. Varese brought this up…. how do we deal with our notation system that restricts us in so many ways? How can we keep our tradition of writing for acoustic instruments, while infusing more intentional complexities in our music? This is something I’m personally interested in, but I think it is something for all composers to think about.

Fred Lerdahl, secondo abstracts e riassunti vari che ho trovato sparsi per la rete, fra cui google books, parla di ascoltatore intensivo che ascolta relazioni fra i suoni a breve termine ed ascoltatore estensivo che riesce a relazionare ogni suono con tutti i suoni della composizione.
E parla di western music come musica estensiva in cui comprende la musica europea e una parte della black music (il jazz migliore).
Mentre parla di musica extraeuropea per la musica etnica, per la musica black intensiva e per la musica pop e rock bianca che comunque chiama "black music", seguendo una convenzione anni 60.

Da una prima scorsa ai suoi articoli l'ascoltatore "estensivo" è proprio quel 3.0 di cui parlo.
Anche lui punta sull'educazione tramite exposure e training progressivo, però arriva a delle conclusioni molto crude e dure. Parla di attitudine ereditaria, mentre io sono convinto che quasi tutti con l'allenamento e la disciplina ci possano arrivare.