Martino Math

Take an augmented chord and lower any note a half step. That lowered note is now the fifth of a major chord.

Take an augmented chord and raise any note a half step. That raised note is now the root of a minor chord.

Take a diminished chord and lower any note a half step. That lowered note is now the root of a dominant seven chord.


Interesting huh?

Practice to play/live well

I was going to post this on The Philosophic Blurb, but I thought it might be better understood here. It's not really a philosophy post either but more of a religious post.

I asked my philosphy teacher how God could have created humans out of love if there was nothing to love before he created us. The question can be answered two different ways; one that I have since supplied and one that he supplied. My rather simplistic answer is that God is outside of time so there was never a point, in God's mind, that we did not exist. God perceives all of time as the present, so He is comprehending 50 years ago, 5 minutes ago, 5 seconds from now, 50 hours from now and 500 centuries from now instantaneously, where as humans can only comprehend the exact present (which just passed).

But his answer was far more thought provoking (and alludes to my solution consequently). He explained that we were like an musical lick. You have that lick in your mind before you play it, and then you play it because you like the idea.

So I came up with a longer analogy:

Think of a medium skilled improviser. They have ideas in there head that they want to expresses, but cannot always do so. So they practice scales and patters and learn from the masters in order to be able to express there ideas. The expert improvisers are able to express all of their ideas in a perfect way. In my analogy humans are the improviser. Just as a musician can't hope to express their ideas without practicing alone and with others, the human cannot hope to be virtuous without praying for God's help, and exercising virtue alone and to others. So the musician in the woodshed is like St. Anthony.

It's such a comprehendable idea in music that you need to practice to play well, but few people would say you need to practice to live well.

Neato

Global Warming?

Since he's so close to God you'd think the pope would have gotten the message that the world is going to end in 10 years if we didn't stop driving cars. Think of the carbon dioxide emitted by the motorcycles, cars and buses!

New Look

I hope you enjoy the new look of Maria's Music. I think it needed a little change of pace.

Some of the text fonts didn't work out exactly but what would technology be without some errors.

Call It Clear #3

The first is here. In it I discussed the first 3 lines in detail. I said that they are about self struggle between a life of material goods and a life that strives for God which the character is going through.
The second is here. In that I discussed the several meanings of many of the words in the second 3 lines. The first one and this following one have far more content than this second post.
Today I will give my interpretation of those same 3 lines. They are below:

You count on your fingers
Pitches you ought to be and soon
Just let them call you

Firstly, these lines strike me as a bit ambiguous. I think they need to be understood in two different lights. This duel understanding is set up in the first line. It could mean either "you rely on your fingers" or "you keep track with your fingers".

If we consider the first meaning the character is delicate, as manual laborers normally rely on hands, not their fingers. I tend to think this line means that she is a musician, but it could really be any skilled profession. Doctors, lawyers, accountants all use their fingers, but most people would consider the mind the most important organ for those professions. Certainly though the mind is the most important organ for all professions so which profession the character is interested in is not a concrete science. I think she is a musician but unlike other lines I’m unable to pin this line exactly.

If we consider the second meaning (“you keep track with your fingers”) the main character is ambitions, but possibly to a fault. She has a set place for herself in the world 20 years before she arrives there and she will achieve it. She is the kind of person that might cares more about what others think she knows (grades) than what she actually knows. She can manipulate people into doing what she wants perfectly. And because of that this type of “success” is the only thing she knows. Not continuing the trend would be irresponsible, lazy and could derail her life.

I think these two meanings are intentional and can be seen through out the 3 lines. They are supported by the next line (“pitches you ought to be and soon”). Pitches here is the word with two meanings. Supporting our first understanding of the first line, mainly that the character is a musician, pitches is a musical word. But this understanding does not make sense in the rest of the line as a person cannot be a musical note. So, in reference to our first understanding of the first line I think “pitches” is just a little wink of the eye that we are not too far off thinking the main character is a musician.

We have already said that the character is ambitions, but almost to a fault. She has her life all planned out, and in this sense pitches would mean an elevation that she needed to reach (Pitches is not a normal word to describe this when talking about careers, which further enforces my belief that the writer intentionally put this little nod of the head in there).

The line in whole is “pitches you ought to be and soon”. The word “ought” has a connotation of guilt. In the first lines the writer was talking to the character and used imperative commands like “listen” and “hear”. So the word “ought” comes from somebody other than the writer. I think this person has said “you ought to be this or that” so many times that now the character believes they ought to do it. The sense of urgency ("ought to be and soon") only reiterates this belief that she must achieve it. Every moment wasted makes her less apt to be the best at what she ought to do. But what ought she to do? We can only guess at this point, but I will reiterate the dichotomy I raised in my first post. The character could chose between a life fueled by the desire for material goods (a rich doctor, lawyer, engineer) and a life fueled by the desire for God and his infinite goodness.

The last line “just let them call you” is the most ambiguous, in my mind, of the three. Who are “them” and what are they calling about? I haven’t been able to think of anything this line adds to the lyrics, merely what it reinforces. It may be meant to settle the character, who is anxious about what she ought to do with her life and to warn the character against planning her life out and wait until she is called to do something. Them would be her employers and they would call her about jobs. In terms of our overall understanding thus far of the decision the character is making, them could also be God. But why is it plural then? I could be that the Holy Trinity is being referred to here (Saint Catherine is a catholic saint, though other denominations also acknowledge Saint Catherines. As I have said it is a popular name for saints). It is also possible that being called to do something in the physical realm is being used as a metaphor for being called to do something in the spiritual realm.

I will flesh this idea out in a latter post. To give an enticing ending before the sequel like the movies, I will give this one, under investigated and premature, idea: The character can chose between being a musician and being a money maker. This choice is being used as a metaphor for the choice between striving for union with God and striving for lots of material possessions. I’ll have to think about that further.

Coltrane or Carey?

Musicians (especially "fringe musicians", i.e. 20th century classical, free improvised music, etc.) will commonly use the verb "to understand" when describing an audiences reception to a piece of music. The term exadurates an a quality of music that most people never look at. Most people view music as a form of entertainment for themselves. Just as an author writes a book to give pleasure to the reader, the actor puts on a play to give please the audience, and the musician supposedly writes a song to be please the listener. But when you can understand or not understand the book/play it all changes. Now the author writes the book, and the reader needs to comprehend what was written. And the playwright composes his play for more complex reasons than to please.

Since comprehending isn't a completely pleasing process these types of art are neglected or criticized. Think of the 14 year old who would read Teen Vogue instead of "To Kill a Mockingbird". Lee's classic isn't as easy to understand as Teen Vogue, so the mockingbird is mocked as "stupid and boring". Music falls victem to the same criticism. Mariah Carey's new number 1 single is easier to comprehend than late John Coltrane. And consequently many people listen to Coltrane and dismis it as stupid, boring, loud, worthless, nonsensicle, a bunch of unconnected noise, etc.

Neither of these views are wrong. Because music is all the more great when it is shared with many. I once told a nervous bassist "when two or more are gathered to hear you, you will play well". He chuckled because of the similarities to the bible verse, but it has always been true for me. So the best form of music would be pleasing to others. But who can dismiss the route Coltrane or any other mis-understood musician/composer took. The complexity of the music is something I, for one, always strive for. But if pleasurable music is neccesarily easily understood, and the best form of music would be complex, which is difficult to understand we reach a dilemma.

How can one solve this dilemma? There are complex things that are easy to understand. In other words, there are some licks that audiences think are cool. But can you just stick to that genre of music (I think it would be a Tower Of Power type sound)? And should you feel ashamed when you play something that most of the audience can not understand?

I hate blog posts that culminate in unanswered questions, but I can't resist breaking my own rule. Maybe answer it for me in a comment.

Langston Hughes

I never quite understood "musicians" who don't appreciate art and poetry as well as music. The same people that can't understand avant-garde art can't understand 20th century music. And the people that can't appreciate the intricacies of a painting can't understand a Beethoven Symphony. But those who devour all music, poetry and art, including the avant-garde, seem to me to truly be "artists". Even though that term has been corrupted by pop music.

Observation of the Day

Most people will never get the emotional experience of playing music because they won't take the time to learn their instrument or will be too shy to go all out emotionally.

The greatest pleasure I derive from music is being able to throw yourself into your instrument in a free form jazz setting (That's just me. Some get that playing Bach). And when everything is happening (your technically sound, the other musicians are technically sound, there is a lot of energy...) you get this amazing feeling. But few people want to sit around doing scales to get to that point. And even when they get there they might be to scared to put the energy in.

So on the greater public the complete joy of playing music is lost.

Drugs

Sarah Deming (wife of Ethan Iverson, pianist in the Bad Plus. She was a Golden Glove boxing champion and a yoga instructor. And who said jazzers don't get the girls?)

The Thinking Skull


Jazz musicians learned their lesson from Bird, Coltrane and the others who died way to early. I hope.