I've been trying to find information on these two on the internet, but had no luck whatsoever. My guitar teacher was explaining these to me a while back and I just wanted to brush up on them. Maybe they're terms he made up because I have not found anything on the internet with these terms. Apparently, additive counterpoint is when a song just keeps adding new sounds and melodies, that don't relate to anything heard previously in the song. This makes the song boring for the listener because they can't relate what they're hearing to anything they've already, because it's just random sounds. Permeative Counterpoint is when the song take an old melody and changes it up slightly throughout the song. This is interesting to the listener because they can relate what they're hearing to what they've heard previously in the song. So I basically just want to know if these are real terms, or if they're called something else.
I've never heard those two terms, but they're both valid concepts. Pieces that continually add new material are often boring and most pieces feature some sort of motivic or thematic development. Neither of those things really have to do with counterpoint though and so I don't necessarily buy into the terminology.
Neither of those things really have to do with counterpoint though and so I don't necessarily buy into the terminology.
Permeative counterpoint is certainly a misnomer, and is really just motivic development, and additive counterpoint would only really be anything to do with counterpoint if some or all of these new motivic ideas were used to create a contrapuntal (i.e. polyphonic, as opposed to some form of homophonic) texture. I suppose double and triple fugues are an example of this "additive counterpoint", and minimalist music uses similar techniques, although I think this is more a feature of post-minimal music. Either way, that's not really my field, and I can't think what it's called off the top of my head.
Both of the terms could relate to far too wide a variety of different contexts in order for either of them to be useful, so I think you'd be better off talking about motivic development, or elaborating on which kind of "additive counterpoint" is a feature in whatever you are describing. And in the case of additive counterpoint, you can only use this if there is actual counterpoint. If not, it's simply a new theme.
Thanks guys. I wasn't sure why he called it counterpoint either because there is only one melody. Motivic development sounds much better.
yeah to be honest, sounds like your guitar teacher likes to sound smart and also likes the word counterpoint, neither of them have anything really to do with it, unless as someone said, it's a contrapuntal in relation to the other theme, for instance in some sort of species, derived from it, retrograde, inversion etc.
Permeative Counterpoint is when the song take an old melody and changes it up slightly throughout the song. This is interesting to the listener because they can relate what they're hearing to what they've heard previously in the song.
I have issue with this point, because motivic development is by no means always audible
Your guitar teacher seems to be talking ****
Sounds like simple theme and motivic development to me. I don't think he's got his understanding of terms right.