Sadly, no mention of Louis and Bebe Barron, who together created the first all-electronic soundtrack for the 1956 movie "Forbidden Planet".
This was before the invention of the synthesizer a few years later: Louis created so-called "cybernetic circuits", which apparently had a life-cycle similar to living organisms, while Bebe arranged the resulting sounds into music.
And, to this day, no one knows exactly how they created their music... (Almost no one, that is - it's my PhD topic ;-)
A substantial mythology has formed around the soundtrack's creation. One of the prevailing notions is that the sounds were generated by torturing and electrically overloading the "cybernetic circuits". There's evidence that this is simply artistic misdirection.
In reality, the music was carefully crafted and performed - with an emphasis on performance, rather than random events and sounds. (The genre of "Krell music" went off at a completely wrong tangent in this regard...)
It's unfortunate that Bebe Barron downplayed her own compositional technique and creative input in order to bolster this mythology.
The research is focused on the nature of the Barrons' cybernetic circuits. Using digital equivalents of these circuits, the aim is to recreate the title track, using only the techniques that were available to the Barrons in the 1950s.
Since we're on this topic: Is Western classical music (typified by Bach) really the zenith in our human understanding of the 'universal' language of music?
Certainly, the complex and subtle tunes and harmonies of classical, in particular, give us goosebumps, provoke intense emotional responses. Do the same phenomena occur in other musical cultures? Traditional Japanese, Chinese, Javanese, Indian - their musical expression is markedly different. Try out some ancient Greek scales, from the dawn of our Western civilization: unfamiliar, yet still 'tingly'.
So are there equivalents to Bach that we're just not 'in tune' with? Alternative musical structures that are just as valid, yet wildly unfamiliar?
Indian Classical Music is perhaps the most versatile of all kinds of music I have come across. A traditional western scale has 12 notes, in the Indian system (carnatic) there are four further divisions, making it a 48 note octave. Instead of scales, there are raags and they signify different moods.
That's somewhat of an exaggeration. There are embellishments of notes that border half and quarter-notes, but they are usually centered around a point on the 12 note octave.
Also, there is a price to be paid for the melodic complexity: there is essentially no place for harmony in the Indian tradition. On the other hand, there is a lot more room for improvisation, making it more akin to Jazz than to any Western classical form.
Indian classical is for sure cool and does a lot of interesting stuff rhythmically speaking. Also lots of interesting instruments and corresponding techniques for playing them. But I don't think it's necessarily any more versatile than other musical traditions. If Western classical is less interesting rhythmically, it's more interesting harmonically. It also developed an incredible system of notation. Every kind of music has its thing that makes it stand out I guess.
> Alternative musical structures that are just as valid, yet wildly unfamiliar?
Some music taste is very culture influenced, not questioning that. But I think present some classic music tracks (and I mean not only pieces from Bach & co) to any human kind with any cultural background and it will somehow touch that person.
I don't think so. Douglas Hofstadter in GEB, also makes a similar claim. I tried listening to Bach many times and found it laborious. Same would be true for a western listener to suddenly tune to MS Subbulakshmi singing 'Nagumomomu' or Kunnakudi teeing off 'Pranamamyaham' with Valayapatti.
I may have started with the wrong tracks or may be not, but the bottom line is that I didn't find much common to relate to. At the very minimum, the tracks sounded structured and mathematical which is why I was surprised by the description of them being emotional. Until now I was under the impression that at least emotional appeal crosses cultural barriers.
Appreciating pinnacles of music in any tradition requires cultural attunement, exposure to prior works of art, familiarity with the idioms of expression etc., OTOH music that have pan-cultural appeal are often primal and simplistic. I am not entirely sure whether one is better than the other.
I agree but I also would remind you that the player plays a large role in keyed music. For example, constant velocity MIDI makes a dissonant slaughter of any harmonic music, and totally destroys the swing of rythymic music. A player with the wrong motivation or lacking passion, pretty much reduces to a souped up MIDI. Organs are especially expressive, even more so than pianos.
Try listening to the "Frankenstein music" from Bach, it is pretty easy to relate to and Hans-Andre Stamm plays it on an appropriately large church organ with the necessary emotion and "godhead" existential feeling/motivation behind it.
Aside: I'm glad to see that (so far) no one's referred to it as Krell music.
This is a reference to the 1956 science fiction movie 'Forbidden Planet' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Planet), which was the first film to use an entirely electronic score, created by husband-and-wife team Louis and Bebe Barron.
The timbres ('electronic tonalities') were generated using rather fascinating vacuum tube circuits. Bebe Barron used these as the basis for her compositions.
The soundtrack superficially appears to consist of weird, unstructured, synthetic sounds. The film's music and sound effects intermingle. But there certainly is a musical structure; it's not just randomly generated sound.
Unfortunately, some electronic musicians generate random sequences or noises and call it 'Krell' music. It's a fundamental (lazy?) misunderstanding of what the Barrons achieved without the use of synthesizers.
This was before the invention of the synthesizer a few years later: Louis created so-called "cybernetic circuits", which apparently had a life-cycle similar to living organisms, while Bebe arranged the resulting sounds into music.
And, to this day, no one knows exactly how they created their music... (Almost no one, that is - it's my PhD topic ;-)