Text 20271, 78 rader
Skriven 2014-12-09 20:03:00 av NANCY BACKUS (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av MICHAEL LOO
Ärende: Re: music 399
=====================
-=> Quoting Michael Loo to Nancy Backus on 12-05-14  01:43 <=-

 NB>> In strictly oral societies, memorization is much more precise, and
 NB>> less likely to have the changes that we expect nowadays.
 ML> The Telephone phenomenon is minimized in situations
 ML> where repetition plays a more important part, as in
 ML> earlier slower times.

Quite so.  And in those times, there was probably more focus, which also
minimizes the "telephone" phenomenon...  :)
 
 NB>> However, my point was that there were notation systems long before
 NB>> the modern eras, and music was passed along to be heard again.
 NB>> Like the earliest "books" on papyrus, not readily available to the
 NB>> masses, but certainly not lost... The printing press made things
 NB>> available to more people, from books to music to artwork...
 RH> But when/how was the notation system developed and how did it get to
 ML> Music notation was invented probably not much later than
 ML> any other kind of notation. The earliest verifiable was
 ML> from ancient Egypt but looks to my untrained eye pretty
 ML> much like any other clay tablet writing. I have ho idea
 ML> how it was determined to have depicted music.

I had that, along with other ancientnesses, in mind... :)

 RH> be the world wide standard?
 ML> There is no world standard. We are familiar with our standard,
 ML> which is our de facto world standard, but there are hundreds
 ML> of notation systems. Ours, or variations of ours, has been mostly
 ML> adopted by ethnomusicologists and thus takes over in our
 ML> consciousness.

You said it more concisely than I did... that was what I was trying to
tell her...  :)
 
 NB>> Notation in any form existed probably before the Christian era...
 ML> For sure. I'd be willing to venture a guess that
 ML> Hindi and Chinese musical notation are closer to
 ML> their BC origins than what we use.

Indeed.
 
 NB>> the system we are more familiar with was developed after that, but
 NB>> probably not that far into the Christian era.
 ML> Neumic notation, though the obvious predecessor to
 ML> ours, and actually not too difficult to read for
 ML> someone reasonably versed in modern music (though I
 ML> have to read up on the conventions every time), was
 ML> a mediaeval invention.

I've always been a little fuzzy on exactly when... especially since I've
not been called on to try to perform from those earlier systems... But I
was figuring it was at the latest in that timespan...  And I also knew
that music (not just the words, but music as well) had survived from
pre-1000 CE, but not exactly in what form...  ;)

 NB>> It still isn't exactly THE world wide
 NB>> standard, as I understand that there are other notations still
 NB>> in use, for example in the Mid and Far East...  European music
 NB>> from before the baroque era was using essentially the notation
 NB>> system we have today... there has been more standardization since,
 NB>> to be sure, but early music isn't that hard to read...
 ML> It was sometime during the renaissance that our
 ML> current system evolved. By the baroque it was
 ML> mostly as we know it now, but even at the time of
 ML> Leopold Mozart, say, many treatises were written
 ML> regarding how to write and interpret the symbols,
 ML> so it was a pretty hot topic then.

And it continues to be a hot topic today, at least in some circles... ;)

ttyl      neb

... Early bird gets the worm; but 2nd mouse gets the cheese.

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Check Out Doc's QWK Mail  Via Web BBS > DocsPlace.org  (1:123/140)