Will Two Composition Masters Ever Think the Same Way?

from the students' point of view, having unanimous opinions—that is, having teachers who all think exactly the same way—would be convenient and perhaps sometimes it would be good if it were so. but since we are not talking about mathematics (where the space for personal opinions is almost non-existent) but about music, which is a 'magmatic' subject in continuous change, from another point of view, perhaps it is good that it is this way:

it is obvious and natural that different opinions (from teachers) inevitably lead to disorientation... but I am quite convinced that in every motivated and disoriented student, at a certain point, by reaction and for survival, in an autonomous way, they try in every possible way to find their orientation again.... how? by studying, talking, discussing, comparing opinions.... around, in forums, at concerts, in reunions among friends. so, at a certain point, personal opinions consolidate, which naturally lead back to orientation.

absolutely yes, and I would be surprised if it were otherwise ... in the sense that finding more than 2 teachers with concurring opinions would make me start to worry ...

different opinions are good, and even if they disorient the student at first, looking at things in the long term, they will benefit them later; when studies are finished, they will have to start composing and, above all, finding their own style.

and then, as ScalaQuaranta rightly says ... continue studying, talking, discussing perhaps after concerts at the bar across the street over a beer or on a forum or wherever ... in plain words: engaging with others, always keeping well in mind what has been studied, which is not a limit, but a means.

More or less what we do here.

A wonderful discussion that, moreover, I hold very dear, but which I would like to expand to musical teaching in general: whether it be piano, violin, viola, viola da gamba, composition or whatever else; or even the entire spectrum of education.

The discussion, however, is so vast that it requires one of those Brainstorming and idea reorganization techniques that our literature professor used to make us use before writing an essay. Therefore, I will certainly be very prolix.

The first step, in my opinion, should be to attempt to establish the objectivity and subjectivity of certain choices made by teachers; that is, to understand whether their thinking regarding the solution to a problem is dictated by a subjective or objective reason. In this case, I must remind you that an objective solution is one that can be logically deduced, a logic which cannot be rejected by those who understand it. E.g., All phones have numbers, therefore, there is no phone that does not have numbers. This type of logic must necessarily be justified and accepted by everyone, and if even a single event were to occur where at least one phone did not have numbers, the entire theorem would collapse and thus cease to be objective. A bit like what happened with the hoax regarding neutrinos traveling faster than light (this demonstration would have destroyed all of Einstein's theories, which instead have been proven true and objective).

A subjective type of solution, on the other hand, implies that in a group of people there can be one percentage that shares that solution and another percentage that does not. Even if the percentage of those who share it is much greater than those who do not, this does not ensure at all that the solution of the majority is the right one.

Given that most choices—speaking for my own case—in the field of piano interpretation cannot be traced back to an objective type of solution since no audio evidence has reached us regarding how 19th-century authors played their compositions, we must rely on what the authors wrote in their scores; most of the time they were indeed very precise in their markings, and only a careful reading of the score can reveal the thought hidden behind the myriad of interpretations that can be heard all over the internet.

Common sense, therefore, suggests that we pay great attention to the greats, to their interpretations, so as to be able to bring our own thinking back to something that gives us the illusion of something with objective value.

By listening to more than just one person, in fact, one immediately understands how choices can undergo radical changes from one interpretation to another.

The choice of what to take and what not to take as a model, or anyway the decision to follow in a certain musical phrase, is therefore dictated by our personal taste, namely that "Platonic" form in the world of ideas that already exists within us but must be rediscovered through study and understanding.

Schumann, in his "Rules of Life for the Musician," reminds us that if we manage to interpret a phrase by becoming emotional, then we will also succeed in moving those who listen to us. An intelligent phrase which, in my opinion, should nonetheless take into account an individual's degree of sensitivity.

There are those who get emotional watching a sunset, and those who are like a stone and are not moved by anything. In music, therefore, the degree of sensitivity also plays a very important role in searching for a study path to follow.

In light of what has just been said, we can therefore say that each of us looks at the same thing with different eyes and with different intentions, thus generating different opinions. No one can look at the same mystery with the same eyes. In these cases, however, we cannot speak of objectivity or subjectivity, but it would be more correct to discuss "inobjectivity." We all notice that a color is yellow, but each of us recognizes it with a different shade.

This is how it should be in music as well. We should work to remain within the author's thought without renouncing our own taste.

Therefore, it is fine to listen to the opinions of others, to the masters who advise us; it is fine to listen to the greats, provided that they support the reasons for our "whys" and, above all, reflect our personal musical taste.

Teachers often and gladly have different points of view, first due to the difference in the paths taken.

I am very happy about this, imagine how boring it would be if there wasn't the possibility of hearing more bells!

At this point, does it not make sense to "give up" on maintaining a teacher? Which teacher can suggest something referring to their own language?

Tap wrote:

At this point, does it not make sense to "give up" on maintaining a teacher? Which teacher can suggest something referring to their own language?

Tall the great masters. From Beethoven to Donatoni.

...do we want to start from Monteverdi?...

Eagle wrote:

...do we want to start from Monteverdi ?...

even from Dufay....!

Tap wrote:

At this point, does it not make sense to "give up" on keeping a teacher?

... it might depend on "which" teacher

Feldman wrote:

an even Dufay....!

Continuing the "saga" ... I find that the contents of the Liber Usualis are a great example of mastery and aesthetics.

TheSimon wrote:

Schumann, in his "Rules of Life for the Musician," reminds us that if we manage to interpret a phrase by becoming emotional, then we will also succeed in moving those who listen to us. An intelligent phrase which, in my opinion, should nonetheless take into account an individual's degree of sensitivity.

it is just a small remark I feel compelled to make regarding this phrase: the performer must be moved, but not too much, especially if playing in a duo, trio, etc. ... if you let yourself be carried away by the music, you lose lucidity and the performance becomes theatrical or even worse, too instinctive.

This is something a master should also teach.

rstrauss wrote:

it's just a small note that I feel like making regarding this sentence: the performer must be moved by emotion, but not too much, especially if playing in a duo, trio, etc. ... if you let yourself get carried away by the music, you lose lucidity and the performance becomes theatrical or even worse, too instinctive.

Here, a master should also teach this.

Pensa che volevo scrivere anche io questa cosa del controllo sulla musica e poi mi sono dimenticato...

Frank wrote:

... it could depend on "which" maestro

... exactly