On 6 Feb 2007 at 0:57, Will Denayer wrote: > We often seem to assume that theory follows practice, because to > argue the reverse seems nonsensical, but perhaps the attitude or > even the worldview which would give rise to theoretical treatises > in the field of music as in many other fields became embedded in > the practice of writing music from a certain point onwards to begin > with and then this thesis makes no sense.
Theory *usually* follows practice, but I can think of at least one example where practice followed theory, and that's the case of modal/Garlandian notation in the Parisian Organum repertory. The fact is that the theorists wrote about the rhythmic modes and invented mode 2 (short long) to balance mode 1 (long short), but at the time of the theorizing, mode 2 really didn't exist. But after the theorizing, music started being composed that *did* use mode 2, because it had been revealed theoretically, and so was then used in actual music. I'm sure there are other such examples, though probably none so stark, since the theoretical invention of mode 2 was more a result of the medieval philosophical state of mind than it was a musical necessity. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
