General question on Music Theory

• Mar 19, 2020 - 21:11

Hello
I wanted to know what all instruments can the below music be played in?

https://musescore.com/krishna_das/scores/6018816

Basically, if I write a song using Music theory, can people read it and play in different instrument?

Thanks

Comments

• Mar 19, 2020 - 21:54

Short answer, yes.
But there is more to it than that.
Or less.
Music theory is meant to explain how music has been written. Not necessarily how to write it. It's a tool. Not a law, as such.

Reply

• Mar 19, 2020 - 22:38

To be clear: that song or any other similarly simple song (eg, one note at a time) can be played on any instrument. Music theory has nothing to do with it.

Reply

• Mar 20, 2020 - 11:55

Basically, if I write a song using Music theory, can people read it and play in different instrument?

Yes. Maybe. All analog instruments have their limitations. You can compose for the sitar, but a tabla player will not be able to play it. Actually, this is a very good question.

Reply

• Mar 20, 2020 - 15:26

I think it's a folk theory. Banjo music is played on banjos. Yes, you can try it on a guitar but it's not the same music. The music of an instrument belongs to that instrument because it's the voice of that instrument. A change of instrument effects a change of the music. This is true for analog instruments. Try playing Stravinsky's Rite of Spring on a piano. Or try playing Ravel's Bolero on one instrument, like a flute. Yes, you can go through one or two rounds of the music, but the piece would have to be greatly reduced in length. Even the piano could not handle the Bolero. The Bolero is written for the orchestra and does not translate well to many other instruments or combinations of instruments, because the piece is a simple repetition that relies on changes of timbre. You can transcribe a complete Beethoven sonata to guitar, but it's would require much abridgement, to the point that the work would be demolished, perhaps.

Reply

• Mar 20, 2020 - 15:37

Yes, classical compositions written for a specific instrument or ensemble require real knowledge and skill and creativity to arrange for a different one. But Busoni's piano transcriptions of Bach organ works, Liszt piano arrangements of Beethoven symphonies, and thousands of guitar arrangements of violin and cello works remain moving, complete, powerful, and effective. In some cases (eg. Bach's "Air for G string") the arrangement is better-known than the original, But in folk, pop, and show music, the opposite is true. That is why classical music has "scores" and pop music has "sheet" music. A "guitar arrangement" of "Somewhere over the Rainbow" is no better or worse than a competent piano or jazz ensemble arrangement. Your theorem does not hold in all genres, and only weakly holds in classical music. Indeed, there are pairs of ensembles/forces and genres where such transcriptions don't work. but I'd be surprised if there are not effective arrangements of the famed second movement (Allegretto) of Beethoven's Seventh symphony are not plentiful,

Reply

• Mar 20, 2020 - 15:49

Heinrich Wilhelm Ernst's hair-raising virtuoso solo violin arrangement of Schubert's Erlkönig (D328), a work for vocalist and very difficult piano in which the vocalist represents four different persons, simply closes the book on what a competent, imaginative arranger can do (let alone Ms. Hahn's ability to play it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWNCbpwC-PQ ) . Knowledge of the text is necessary to appreciate the magnitude of both arts ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlk%C3%B6nig_(Goethe) ). "Can't arrange a song for piano and vocalist for a single violin!" is disproven here.

Reply

• Mar 20, 2020 - 16:31

But there is no difference between Pop and Classical. This OP appears to come from India, and the music for the sitar is both classical and pop. The whole classical pop division is very new. John Lennon was the first to make note of this artificial division when he said the "Pop music is the classical music of our time." I think the division came about the time of the twelve tone row and the rise of African American artists who led the way into the classical (pop) music of the 20th century. It has racist influences. What is the classical music of the 20th century if not blues, jazz and rock & roll. That's it. I've never heard a twelve tone row on the Top 40. It's not classical, if it's not popular. I know, I know, you've got examples that specifically contradict what I just said. Those examples can not contradict the general truth of what I'm saying. Before the 20th century, what was classical was what was popular. But I'm not sure. Bach fell into obscurity immediately after his death and remained there for 100 years. Which makes me wonder whether Bach was ever popular at all in his time? There is evidence that he was considered to be mediocre.

But I think I may be straying from the main question. And I think these kinds of question require a space of their own. When people come to a general discussion regarding Musescore, they shouldn't be distracted by these kinds of questions and responses.

Reply

• Mar 20, 2020 - 16:36

I don't agree that there's no distinction, and yes, Bach was underappreciated in his own time except by a small circle of students. Like Coltrane or Charlie Parker, he was way over most people's heads (and "popularity" was not a goal for an employed church musician). But I agree, this is getting irrelevant to the OP's issues.

To me, classical music is music you have to play as written, although that is clearly not so in Hindustani music. it is definitely not so in blues and jazz, for which an original-faithful performance would be sued, not praised.

Reply

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.