Our resident Beatles scholar, "victoriaholt," at VH1.com just put this up for us (she's an LA based broadcast-journalist who protects her anonymity), and I thought it would be of interest to the Board:

The Webster's New World Dictionary of Music lists the Beatles as: Although American in
origin, the rhythm and blues-country music mix plied by the quartet had an indefinably
British lilt: square meter, accented primary beats, minimal syncopation, modal harmony,
lowered submediants in major keys, and a preference for plagal cadences and
consecutive triadic progressions, creating at times a curiously hymnal mood. Their lyrics
were distinguished by suggestive allusions, sensous but not flagrantly erotic, anarchistic
but not destructive, cynical but also humane.

victoria's comment: "That's quite a mouthful!"

...square meter, accented primary beats I have a whole lecture on why these two are talking about exactly the same thing... minimal syncopation to this I say "BS"... No, this ain't "jazz", but is there an assumed quantity required from specific instruments? modal harmony, lowered submediants in major keys... do they mean "modal AND modal alteration" constructs and a preference for plagal cadences now I know why they think they sound "hymnal" and consecutive triadic progressions there are no other kind in "western" music creating at times a curiously hymnal mood.

Music creates so much joy in peoples lives, I can't begin to describe how happy I am right now......cynical but also humane

... life goes on... for you, Keven

Defining music sucks. Which is why I dropped out of music school. I'd rather enjoy it than analyze it.

Beatles rule.....hey,whaddaya expect when we have a supercool homeroom teacher who lets you listen to music all day?

yes, AnnaS, somethings are better to experience than to study.. I think it should be illegal to talk about music without sound files or some other sourse to explain to us just what you mean by all those words. and there are other subjects that don't work with just jargon..

http://www.bartleby.com/142/180.html

>and there are other subjects...

thanks for that link, ot.

Great poem Helen.
I once decided I ought to read a serious book about music; it was called something like 'Appreciating Classical Form'. I got to about page eighty and realised that there were simpler ways to learn to appreciate the music. Offhand, the only areas that comes to mind where I enjoy the theoretical side more than the practical side are maths and physics :-)

Offhand, the only areas that comes to mind where I enjoy the theoretical side more than the practical side are maths and physics :-)

I think, by, that you must like the practical side of math and physics, because you are a musician, which is of course an extremely practical (and superbly enjoyable) application of math and physics!

Some people were "taught" how to count time (musical, that is) and I feel blessed that it came quite naturally for me (especially once I attempted to "teach" it), however once internalised the numbers go away... my point is... although we may apply *mathematics to music, music is not an application of mathematics.

EDIT- Helen, thanks for the link, and I agree completely with insisting on "sound bites" for references...unfortunately it will lend credence to prove points out of context.