What Makes “Good Music” Good?

September 28, 2007 on 8:09 am | In Educational

Recently I was asked to review a book by John Winsor, titled, Breaking the Sound Barrier, which I was happy to do since I think it’s a fine book with lots of interesting ideas and solid observations, and the topic – the need for a literary mainstream music – is one which interest me greatly.
Dave Matthews and Tim RaynoldsIn his book he proposed that there can be an objective basis for asserting that some music is better than other and he proposed a fascinating basis, which I won’t presume to synopsize here; buy his book and read it. But that started me thinking about this matter of evaluating music and defining some as better or wors , and that this has always been a troublesome thing. Other arts disciplines share this difficulty, of course, and while some aspects of aesthetics and criticism may apply to many art forms, others are quite specific to the uniqueness of sound occurring over time.
Elvis Presley
1. It the piece technically well executed? Regardless of the style, the performance - whether improvised, derived from notation, or electroacoustically produced - should be free of extraneous notes, sounds, effects, nuances of any kind that do not contribute to communication of the musical ideas.
2. Does it exploit a variety of elements of music, i.e. rhythm, harmony, melody, texture/timbre? Although a quality piece of music need not have all elements equally represented (in fact, many if not most fine works do not), a piece that relies solely on any one element is likely to be less than fulfilling.
3. Is the chief attraction not the music but the words? If the answer is yes, then the piece probably should be considered more as a theater piece or as poetry, than music. For music is the most abstract of arts, and although the marriage of text and music can be transcendent, the best does not need verbal associations to enhance it.
4. Are the elements of the work highly integrated so that each supports the other’s function? Melody, for example, cannot exist without at least some degree of rhythm; rhythm, however, can exist without melody, as can harmony without either rhythm or melody. But it seems that most truly satisfying music exploits the elements in ways that cause the product of them to be greater that the sum of the elements, disparately.
5. Does the piece appeal on a variety of levels – intellectual, emotional, spiritual? A piece can be strong enough in any one of these areas to justify being called good, but the best music somehow seems to appeal on many levels.
6. Is there a feeling of “musicality” about it? That is, does the piece invoke a desire for body movement that corresponds to the gestures in sound? Musicality is distinctly human and inexorably connected to physical movement in ways that are imbedded in our psyches from the first expressive sounds uttered by our ancient ancestors to experiences as recent as our last rehearsal.
7. Is there satisfying formal organization to the way the gestures are presented and developed? Since music occurs over time and for practical reasons, if for no other, music has to have a beginning and end, it seems to be our nature to expect some kind of sequence and development of the ideas that we find satisfying as anticipation and memory blend to create a mental image of form.
8. Is there a good balance between familiarity and variety, appropriate for the length of the piece? Clearly, very extended pieces will need to introduce more variety than very short ones; likewise the task of maintaining coherence within greater diversity is more difficult and expected in longer pieces.
9. After having been listened to many times, does the piece still have appeal, appeal that is based on some new revelations rather than solely on comfortable familiarity? Complexity in and of itself is not especially valuable, but exceptional music seems to have many facets, and holds up well and continues to interest even after many listenings.
10. Do you feel positively stimulated, better, richer, fuller, or improved in some way for having heard the piece? This may seem a lot to expect, but truly great pieces (which, or course most music, even very fine music, will not be) often have a beneficial effect on careful listeners. Like the nutrition axiom “we are what we eat,” (which, although obviously not literal, makes the point that our physical health is affected by our diet) in the arts we are what we consume, and what we habitually listen to affects our spirits. The best music makes us better by stimulating our minds and touching our hearts, and helps us feel better about ourselves and the world.
Franz Ferdinand
This is surely not a comprehensive list, nor is it intended to be; I wouldn’t be that presumptuous. There have been volumes published on aesthetic criticism in music and other arts, and doubtless, many dissertations too. I’m sure other authors have different criteria and many readers of this little piece will have strikingly different views also. But it’s a brief, “quick and dirty” list offered as a starting point for thought and discussion.
Download online mp3 music