#1
Musical Proportionalism is a state of mind. In music, when slight alterations occur in the sound there is a drop off feeling. This is because the ear was used to the previous sections density. A composer that is aware of musical proportionalism is one who considers the dropoff feeling, and approaches it in a dynamic perspective. Since there are no rules in musical proportionalism, a composer with this knowledge can manipulate the transition/section, by either sustaining the drop off, or resolving it to the previous sections density. This concept can apply to any part of a song. In rhythm, a drop off can be felt if the hi hat’s time is cut in half. To sustain the drop of, repeat it. To resolve it, destabilize the rhythm (i.e: swing it) and then hit the downbeat of the next measure hard, then continue with a constant rhythm. In melody, if the melody goes into a dark passage, you can sustain the unstable feeling by delaying the resolve to the tonic. The band setting has its own sense of propositional dynamic as well. When improvising, if someone lands on the wrong chord, how can you stabilize that scenario? You could utilize chromaticism, or even chop up the rhythm to make it seem like a hectic transition. These are just grains of sand on the beach in musical proportionalism.

I have created this concept because in music theory, they teach us devices, but not how to use them. Musical proportionalism is one mode of thought as a musician/composer, and can be taught to people without influencing their styles too much, allowing them to be free, yet powerful in their own music.

©Jahkadimension
#3
You're simply describing a basic effect we all know, which is a combination of various musical factors (dynamics, intensity, timbre, beat, harmonic rhythm, etc).

What you're calling "musical proportionalism" is really just, er, "music" . It's what music does, all the time.
I.e., all the factors that make up "proportionalism" can work together, but are essentially independent of each other. It doesn't seem very revealing or instructive to consider them as one thing.
#4
Quote by jongtr
You're simply describing a basic effect we all know, which is a combination of various musical factors (dynamics, intensity, timbre, beat, harmonic rhythm, etc).

What you're calling "musical proportionalism" is really just, er, "music" . It's what music does, all the time.
I.e., all the factors that make up "proportionalism" can work together, but are essentially independent of each other. It doesn't seem very revealing or instructive to consider them as one thing.


Yup. Berklee instructor Pat Pattison calls this prosody- definitely worth it to check out the discussion on YouTube.
#5
Quote by GoldenGuitar
Two words come to mind: Subjective experience.


Hence the last paragraph
#6
Quote by jongtr
You're simply describing a basic effect we all know, which is a combination of various musical factors (dynamics, intensity, timbre, beat, harmonic rhythm, etc).

What you're calling "musical proportionalism" is really just, er, "music" . It's what music does, all the time.
I.e., all the factors that make up "proportionalism" can work together, but are essentially independent of each other. It doesn't seem very revealing or instructive to consider them as one thing.


I would be hesitant to claim that this is "just music". This concept allows the composer to create counterpoint-esque dynamics without following its rules (wide to close spacings, rather than saying no to parallel octaves), therefore allowing you to alter a musical device without thinking about it too much. It is a more visualized perspective of the devices.

I wouldn't say it's what music does all the time either. The novice player might not know how to fix the drop off effect after their friend loses his place in the piece. Therefore, it would be a good idea on how to educate people how to fix those scenarios with proportionalism. This can be done by listing examples, which is a far better strategy to teach people with, rather than just education them on the devices and not how you could string them together.

I have been thinking about this a lot lately. Please challenge me more! I don't want flaws in it.
#7
Quote by Jake P
Yup. Berklee instructor Pat Pattison calls this prosody- definitely worth it to check out the discussion on YouTube.

Although you're right in saying that they are heavily related, I would say that proportionalism is more so related to the dropoff. It's more like a perspective to solve a problem, rather than the general outside view of a song. That guy's great though!
Last edited by ja3k3l at Mar 17, 2016,
#8
it's copyrighted guys it has to be hella sick 720 kickflip legit it even has a big 9th grade word in it look at the big man i'm gonna put this thread on the fridge so everybody can see it you big winner
Quote by Kevätuhri
Hail isn't too edgy for posts, posts are not edgy enough for Hail.


Quote by UseYourThumb
You win. I'm done here.
#9
Could you provide some examples of what you mean by this specific examples so we all can hear exactly what you're referring to?
#10
Quote by Hail
it's copyrighted guys it has to be hella sick 720 kickflip legit it even has a big 9th grade word in it look at the big man i'm gonna put this thread on the fridge so everybody can see it you big winner


LOL, funny guy over here. Ever have somebody try to steal your shit?

Sorry, but this thread is for people who are able to use their brains. It's not for people who regurgitate jokes from tumblr.
Last edited by ja3k3l at Mar 17, 2016,
#11
Quote by Jeremy.R5544998
Could you provide some examples of what you mean by this specific examples so we all can hear exactly what you're referring to?


Surley.

In this song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCtrJX3eKgA

at 0:43 , the bass comes in with an 1/8th note arpeggio. In the next section(when the lyrics come in) the bass part gets chopped up. To make the section proportional (or sustain the previous sections flow) the tremolo picking on the guitar comes in. Without the guitar part to compensate, there would be a feeling of emptiness. Again this is not a bad thing, it just means that the song is not proportional to the previous section.

In this song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY-MZ0bL1Gc

the section at 1:10 is a build, composed of chopped (syncopated), and constant rhythms. In the next section 1:16 the piano is dropped, as well as most of the frantic rhythmic elements, but in order to sustain the flow (or sustain the proportion) the bass and drums take on a groove based form. If these instruments were to not evolve then there would be a drop off feeling.
#12
Quote by ja3k3l


the section at 1:10 is a build, composed of chopped (syncopated), and constant rhythms. In the next section 1:16 the piano is dropped, as well as most of the frantic rhythmic elements, but in order to sustain the flow (or sustain the proportion) the bass and drums take on a groove based form. If these instruments were to not evolve then there would be a drop off feeling.


you mean...dynamics?
Quote by Kevätuhri
Hail isn't too edgy for posts, posts are not edgy enough for Hail.


Quote by UseYourThumb
You win. I'm done here.
#13
Quote by Hail
it's copyrighted guys it has to be hella sick 720 kickflip legit it even has a big 9th grade word in it look at the big man i'm gonna put this thread on the fridge so everybody can see it you big winner

Quote by Hail
you mean...dynamics?


Instructions unclear, put my dynamics in the fridge.

Quote by ja3k3l
LOL, funny guy over here. Ever have somebody try to steal your shit?

Sorry, but this thread is for people who are able to use their brains. It's not for people who regurgitate jokes from tumblr.


You made a thread that's about basic composition and use of dynamics and you gave it a flashy buzzword name. I don't really see much room for discussion here.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#14
Quote by Kevätuhri
Instructions unclear, put my dynamics in the fridge.


You made a thread that's about basic composition and use of dynamics and you gave it a flashy buzzword name. I don't really see much room for discussion here.


You're right in saying that its a kind of dynamic. But like I said. It's a perspective. A composer has the ability to change mode of thought you know. This is just an addition to the concept of dynamics. And so what if its basic? The pros have mastered fundamentals, unlike most people who overlook it.
#15
Quote by ja3k3l
You're right in saying that its a kind of dynamic. But like I said. It's a perspective. A composer has the ability to change mode of thought you know. This is just an addition to the concept of dynamics. And so what if its basic? The pros have mastered fundamentals, unlike most people who overlook it.


I just don't see the point of promoting a simple concept with a new name as a whole new way of thinking.

But yeah, we can discuss composition, why not. Do you have any other examples to showcase this? To get a clearer idea of what you're after.
Quote by Jet Penguin
Theory: Not rules, just tools.

Quote by Hail
*note that by fan i mean that guy who wants his friends to know he knows this totally obscure hip band that only he knows about with 236 views on youtube. lookin' at Kev here
#16
Sounds like a new word for dynamics to me. Ed Norton on the Honeymooners once desecribed his job title as "Sub-supervisor in the Sub-division of the Department of Subterranean Sanitation". It still means he was a sewer worker.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.