Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I'm not sure there is any textbook definition of this. It's something I invented in my head as a way of thinking about music, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
You're understanding seems fairly common:
quote:
It seems that many computer music composers have a problem with developing songs[1]. There is a tendency to create elaborate multilayered loops of two or four or eight bars, but a resistence to being able to put together a whole song. At risk of oversimplification, this is caused by vertical thinking, where a section of music is developed by adding additional layers (and also getting lost in mixing – balancing and processing). What is needed is horizontal thinking – where a section of music is developed by adding and developing sections.[2]
What part of your self-validating, psychologically-assuring, personal narrative is served by being thought of as an imbecile?
SYSTEM-J
I've seen someone else on this forum use this vertical/horizontal terminology. I'm not claiming to have pioneered it by any means.
EddieZilker
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I've seen someone else on this forum use this vertical/horizontal terminology. I'm not claiming to have pioneered it by any means.
I was actually just posting the link in support of your using them, in the first place, since it seems that they are fairly common vocabulary regarding their concepts and ones being used by people familiar with music theory.
nefardec
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I think the point nefardec is making is that horizontally orientated music works across the passage of the time, and so has that feeling of a narrative unfolding. When you listen to a progressive house record with a big sweeping chord progression it feels "cinematic" because cinematic music tends to use drawn-out strings and progressions to sonically accentuate that feeling of narrative. And yet progressive house still has elements of vertically stacked groove operating underneath, which is what nefardec means by a "dilution". The groove is still there, but it is not the focus of the track's attention, and the epic, cinematic stretched-out qualities of prog are also reigned in compared to, say, epic trance which has no groove whatsoever and is obsessed with ultra-drawn out melodies.
Well to clarify: I think the narrative unfolding is not necessarily a result of the structure music itself but rather an inevitable result of one's own perception and memory of it as he listens to it in time. So it's possible that a vertically composed track appears to have a narrative unfolding because you might be able to say, after listening, it started like this, did this, then ended like this.
So you might ask - well what does it matter how it's composed if it's going to be perceived a similar way? This is a much larger can of worms involving philosophical concepts of dualism, mind versus matter, etc. I don't particularly want to get into that.
The difference is that the vertically layered track has the power to psychologically stop time, as it were, by locking the listener into a groove or sonic space which fluctuates seemingly spontaneously. The composition is instantaneously understood as a whole. It's more like a painting. Harmony/polypohny is the vertical compositional technique par excellence.
The horizontally composed 'scored' track (melody is the horizontal compositional technique par excellence) (and i use these terms in their ideal manifestations for the sake of argument) can only be understood as a sequential semantic system. middle requires beginning. end requires both middle and beginning, etc. this is more like a sentence or a story. because this way of understanding requires time, its perception is limited to this narrative unfolding, whereas with the vertical track, it can be understood as a sonic object with the potential to be read or unfold in many different ways.
That happens to also be why I prefer the vertical compositional technique. I like permutation, improvisation, and for me music is more affective as a form of mantra than as a storytelling device. that's my personal preference.
now, as i've said, i think realistically every track uses both techniques, horizontal and vertical - but the specific balance shifts from track to track.
as far as 'dilution' goes - I think sometimes people overcompensate when trying to proggify techno tracks and shift the balance too much to the point where the dominant vertical reading is lost, yet the sound world of techno remains and begins to act as more of a sign for techno rather than be techno itself. this is frustrating to listen to for me. it's reductionist, like taking individual characters of a carravaggio painting in a composition and setting them in separate frames displayed next to one another.
i also think that because people are comfortable with (and adept at) the song format, especially in britain where prog developed, the horizontal method became the preference for most, and it then became codified and commercialized because it was a formula that just worked well in clubs.
and now people take the same formula and just use different samples to change the 'flavor', and so we have things that pretend to call themselves minimal techno, or deep house, or detroit techno today that are really based on the prog formula and simply use these names because they are perceived to add coolness vis a vis authenticity, or importance, to the work.
also side note: i started using the vertical/horizontal binary after i heard moritz von oswald describe his music as vertical in a red bull music academy interview. everything kind of 'clicked'.
heres the quote
quote:
Participant: »Your music is quite hypnotic and you almost get lost in the beats and the layers, it’s almost standing still, like a picture. I find it really hard to get records like Domina and Quadrant these days. And you said yourself, you got quite tired of the density. Do you think it’s a dying art, this kind of techno music, that people aren’t producing them anymore?«
Moritz von Oswald: »I don’t think so. If you find the right way to do it, then do it. If you find the right angle, where the elements are working together, then go for it. I’d rather do this than come up with elements… I like the horizontal view more than the vertical, where events are happening and you’re looking forward to events. I prefer the other one, maybe you do too.«
system-j's metaphor of the DAW is great, and really also illustrates how this is a very natural and sensible binary.
Trance-MB
Creating such lines must take a lot of energy as the shift button for capitals seems to stop working at some point ;)
Not the thread to start reading after a long day of work for me I guess, although it's interesting.
nefardec
quote:
Originally posted by Trance-MB
Creating such lines must take a lot of energy as the shift button for capitals seems to stop working at some point ;)
yep
PhilBxR
I think you boys need to go away and have a right good wank!
nefardec
quote:
Originally posted by PhilBxR
I think you boys need to go away and have a right good wank!
Kismet7
quote:
Originally posted by EddieZilker
You're understanding seems fairly common:
Kismet7,
What part of your self-validating, psychologically-assuring, personal narrative is served by being thought of as an imbecile?
Whats your point, I havent touched on this yet? The DAW platform creates a habit of using loops, which often leads to vertical layering. This reaction is not defining of an artists ability to construct or structure songs. It is more a construct of the DAW environment, in which even great song writers and arrangers will fall prey to, because of the allure and hypnotism of a fine loop, and its fitting relations with other loops.
EddieZilker
quote:
Originally posted by Kismet7
Whats your point, I havent touched on this yet? The DAW platform creates a habit of using loops, which often leads to vertical layering. This reaction is not defining of an artists ability to construct or structure songs. It is more a construct of the DAW environment, in which even great song writers and arrangers will fall prey to, because of the allure and hypnotism of a fine loop, and its fitting relations with other loops.
What's your point? You can only progress each track so many times before it looses coherence within any song in EDM. Personally, with a few exceptions, I have a rule of threes - that each track, excepting the primary snare drum, in every song is subject to at least three different incarnations towards and/or on the climax and usually those have to then be drawn down for the outro. I'll frequently, with simple parts, like primary kick drums, just record a contiguous track without looping it but that doesn't mean repetition doesn't occur.
Regardless, you failed to put up any examples to support what I can only consider the level of conjecture that has earned you your reputation. Simply replying with snarky undertones to someone else you believe is wrong certainly doesn't make you right.
Kismet7
quote:
Originally posted by nefardec
Well to clarify: I think the narrative unfolding is not necessarily a result of the structure music itself but rather an inevitable result of one's own perception and memory of it as he listens to it in time. So it's possible that a vertically composed track appears to have a narrative unfolding because you might be able to say, after listening, it started like this, did this, then ended like this.
So you might ask - well what does it matter how it's composed if it's going to be perceived a similar way? This is a much larger can of worms involving philosophical concepts of dualism, mind versus matter, etc. I don't particularly want to get into that.
The difference is that the vertically layered track has the power to psychologically stop time, as it were, by locking the listener into a groove or sonic space which fluctuates seemingly spontaneously. The composition is instantaneously understood as a whole. It's more like a painting. Harmony/polypohny is the vertical compositional technique par excellence.
The horizontally composed 'scored' track (melody is the horizontal compositional technique par excellence) (and i use these terms in their ideal manifestations for the sake of argument) can only be understood as a sequential semantic system. middle requires beginning. end requires both middle and beginning, etc. this is more like a sentence or a story. because this way of understanding requires time, its perception is limited to this narrative unfolding, whereas with the vertical track, it can be understood as a sonic object with the potential to be read or unfold in many different ways.
That happens to also be why I prefer the vertical compositional technique. I like permutation, improvisation, and for me music is more affective as a form of mantra than as a storytelling device. that's my personal preference.
now, as i've said, i think realistically every track uses both techniques, horizontal and vertical - but the specific balance shifts from track to track.
as far as 'dilution' goes - I think sometimes people overcompensate when trying to proggify techno tracks and shift the balance too much to the point where the dominant vertical reading is lost, yet the sound world of techno remains and begins to act as more of a sign for techno rather than be techno itself. this is frustrating to listen to for me. it's reductionist, like taking individual characters of a carravaggio painting in a composition and setting them in separate frames displayed next to one another.
i also think that because people are comfortable with (and adept at) the song format, especially in britain where prog developed, the horizontal method became the preference for most, and it then became codified and commercialized because it was a formula that just worked well in clubs.
and now people take the same formula and just use different samples to change the 'flavor', and so we have things that pretend to call themselves minimal techno, or deep house, or detroit techno today that are really based on the prog formula and simply use these names because they are perceived to add coolness vis a vis authenticity, or importance, to the work.
also side note: i started using the vertical/horizontal binary after i heard moritz von oswald describe his music as vertical in a red bull music academy interview. everything kind of 'clicked'.
heres the quote
system-j's metaphor of the DAW is great, and really also illustrates how this is a very natural and sensible binary.
Basically what Nef is saying folks, when it comes to music and art, he prefers paintings...something more static, over stories or cinematic films...something more dynamic. He just took a long route to say it. Thanks nef for the input of your taste.
One thing I will agree with is that most songs are both vertical and horizontal, some are more tilted to one side than the other. That said, much of this discussion is just based on tastes, yet its pointless to actually choose a side or method to create/express. Both ways of forming music can be used to make great music. Why choose a painting over a film? Or a film over a painting? Enjoy or dislike the individual tracks or artists if you have to. It is pointless to favor structures in electronic music, which are equally used to make great music.
And i'll leave you guys with something beautiful. Structurally Progressive, Horizontally Composed and Arranged, 'Cinematic'
Listen with Headphones (recommended) or in a Club...it will move things.
Beanfield - Tides (Carl Craig Remix)
TaurusNYY
quote:
Originally posted by PhilBxR
I think you boys need to go away and have a right good wank!
I agree-
anyone going to see Joris tomorrow night in NYC- Love?
