ack, no, this is no good!

[fox]

Is it possible that I've been so much with the music lately, and tight harmonies, that I'm subconsciously training myself to be more spoiled than I have been previously?  Not that any choir I'm in at the moment is without blame, but here I am listening to this Chanticleer Ave Maria resonant8 sent me, and it's so beautiful that it's even more jarring when I feel like I can hear that they're very very occasionally ever so slightly a teeny tiny itsy bit flat.

[weeps]

Comments

[emila-wan.livejournal.com]

What did I say earlier about your persnickety nature, dear? *GGG*

That's the beauty of music created by human beings versus machines, you know. From a certain point of view (FACPOV!), the slight imperfections can be perceived much as flaws in homespun cloth.

I think there's actually a Star Trek episode about this, where Data is trying to introduce imperfections in his violin (?) performance, because people perceive his perfect renditions as somehow soulless, which of course they are.

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

Well -- but there are different kinds of slight imperfections, if you ask me. It doesn't make a choir better or more 'soulful' or what have you if they can't all get to the final consonant of a word at the same time, for instance. (This has been a particular point of pride for no fewer than three choirs I've been in, which is why it's the first thing I think of. Get a hundred and fifty people to say 'luceat' together and hear only one 't'. It's not easy! [g]) There are some inconsistencies that add warmth and humanity to a performance, and some that don't, and in this case there's a perfect chord in most of the voices and a climbing scale in a solo voice where on the fifth he's really -- just -- it sounds like a fraction under the pitch, and it would sound better (and not at all 'soulless') if he weren't. :-(

I may even have seen that TNG episode; but, of course, merely introducing imperfections wouldn't make Data's violin playing Not Soulless. What he lacks is not inconsistency, but passion. It's possible (I maintain) to give a meaningful performance that's also note-perfect -- so Data was trying to address the symptom rather than the cause, which, okay, what other option was available to him. :-) But you see what I mean.

[emila-wan.livejournal.com]

Yes, I do see. I'm right there with you on the pitch thing, when it comes to actually performing versus just listening. I once sung professionally, and I recall one rehearsal where I had to stop singing completely because I couldn't decide whether to harmonize with the soprano on my right or the one on my left -- one was slightly flat and one was slightly sharp. I don't have perfect pitch, but a sort of "relative" perfect pitch, if that makes sense, and it's like nails on a chalkboard to make myself come up or down to match whoever I'm with.

In the olden days, if a record player's spin was just a hair too fast or too slow, I'd know it because the pitch was off "true." I'm sure there's a technical term for it, but I'm not much for theory. *G*

About the Star Trek thing: yes, it was *passion* that was the issue, and the theme of the episode as well. Even a machine can be programmed with little variations in tempo, a slight sliding into a note, etc., which imitates human emotion, but I still say there is a certain magic to a performance which is both passionate and skilled. A moment when everything comes together and the whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. I've experienced this during performance a few times, and it is better than orgasm.

*GGG*

[juice817.livejournal.com]

I understand what you mean, completely. Gah.

Did you get the links I sent for Gloria?

[darthfox.livejournal.com]

Yes! Did I not say so? [irons hands] And the Mendelssohn "Ave Maria"! Thankee.

[juice817.livejournal.com]

Hee. You're welcome - I was afraid you'd missed them because the post was a little old.