# Beginner friendly options for learning counterpoint



## G.E. (Feb 7, 2014)

I think it's time I dive into counterpoint because I'm tired of my music being so simplistic.I can write some basic counter melodies but I don't really know what the hell I'm doing.How do you recommend I should start?

Should I just start with one of these books which I've seen recommended on this forum? 

http://www.amazon.com/Counterpoint-Walter-Piston/dp/0393097285/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391797574&sr=8-1&keywords=counterpoint+walter+piston (http://www.amazon.com/Counterpoint-Walt ... ter+piston)

or 

http://www.amazon.com/Counterpoint-4th-Edition-Kent-Kennan/dp/013080746X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391797466&sr=8-1&keywords=counterpoint (http://www.amazon.com/Counterpoint-4th- ... unterpoint)

Or do you have any other suggestions/advice ?


----------



## Darthmorphling (Feb 7, 2014)

https://class.coursera.org/classicalcomp-001

This class is now in its last week, but you can still download all of the videos/materials. It covers voice leading, and 4 part harmony quite well.
And it's free.


----------



## korgscrew (Feb 7, 2014)

G.E. @ Sat Feb 08 said:


> I can write some basic counter melodies but I don't really know what the hell I'm doing.



+1 brother... +1


----------



## Daryl (Feb 7, 2014)

I started with Lovelock. Not sure if it's still in print though.

D


----------



## G.E. (Feb 7, 2014)

Darthmorphling @ Fri Feb 07 said:


> https://class.coursera.org/classicalcomp-001
> 
> This class is now in its last week, but you can still download all of the videos/materials. It covers voice leading, and 4 part harmony quite well.
> And it's free.



Damn,I signed up for this course since summer and I forgot about it.I don't think I would've had time for it anyway.I should hurry up and download it if it's the last week.

Does everyone else agree that I should start with this? I suspect that the information is condensed but as long as it gets me started on writing counterpoint I would be happy with it.


----------



## Darthmorphling (Feb 7, 2014)

I think it would be good to start with this, speaking as someone who is learning as well. It lays out the basics very well and will probably make those books easier to comprehend.


----------



## scarred bunny (Feb 7, 2014)

I am a relative newbie also struggling to get a clue of what the hell I'm doing. I started with the Kennan book and thought it was great; if you're looking for a text on counterpoint, I'd recommend it. Working with it got me from totally clueless to slightly less clueless at any rate, and had me writing actual two- and three-voice pieces after a few weeks that actually sounded like music (and not half-bad). Which I had never really managed before.

Also, look at actual works. In particular JS Bach. In order: the two-part inventions, the three-part sinfonias, the well-tempered clavier (and everything else). Kennan includes some analysis of these, among others, and exercises for writing in a similar style.

This is baroque-style counterpoint, of course, which may have limited applicability today. Unless you're writing actual period pieces. Although personally I think it's worth internalizing the so-called "rules" of counterpoint anyway, because they help you create a certain effect; at that point, you have an idea of how and when to deviate and create the opposite effect as well. 

I'm signed up for the Coursera course as well, but haven't had time to look at the material yet :(


----------



## G.E. (Feb 7, 2014)

> This is baroque-style counterpoint, of course, which may have limited applicability today. Unless you're writing actual period pieces.



Can someone please elaborate on this ?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 7, 2014)

Traditional counterpoint is a springing-off point. It's useful, just as traditional harmony is.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 7, 2014)

G.E. @ Fri Feb 07 said:


> > This is baroque-style counterpoint, of course, which may have limited applicability today. Unless you're writing actual period pieces.
> 
> 
> 
> Can someone please elaborate on this ?



Do you ever listen to say, Bach or Handel?


----------



## G.E. (Feb 7, 2014)

adriancook @ Fri Feb 07 said:


> G.E. @ Fri Feb 07 said:
> 
> 
> > > This is baroque-style counterpoint, of course, which may have limited applicability today. Unless you're writing actual period pieces.
> ...



Can't say that I do.But I am familiar with some of their work.


----------



## korgscrew (Feb 7, 2014)

They were a great band. Shame about the spilt.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 7, 2014)

That would be traditional counterpoint.

We had this issue on counterpoint come up recently and you're talking about counter melodies. The more appropriate word would be contrapuntal. That's the movement of two or more melodic lines if you like.

Walter Piston books are good but generally quite dry. You may be hard pressed to retain interest in reading.

What you hear sometimes in the compositions area here, are comps that can occasionally sound and be described as static. All you need to do is work on moving parts that enhance in some way the main thematic statements. In other words, by adding interest and keeping the listener interested. It's very difficult to keep things interesting, although not impossible depending on what effect is required, when things start to go blocky.

A good practice is to get into what was suggested earlier with the 2 part inventions. That'll make your eyes water for a while.


----------



## Johnny42 (Feb 7, 2014)

You might want to check out "Counterpoint In Composition" by Felix Salzer & Carl Shachter.


----------



## muk (Feb 7, 2014)

In my opinion the only way to really learn it is taking classes. With counterpoint you need to make mistakes - and somebody to correct it - to learn it. Books are great and you definitely should read them. But there's only so much you can learn from them alone.
Most of the people (probably 99%) can't learn to play the piano from books (eventhough there are great books about it). I certainly couldn't have. And it's the same with so many things. If you want to learn something properly, you really need to take lections.


----------



## G.E. (Feb 7, 2014)

muk @ Fri Feb 07 said:


> In my opinion the only way to really learn it is taking classes. With counterpoint you need to make mistakes - and somebody to correct it - to learn it. Books are great and you definitely should read them. But there's only so much you can learn from them alone.
> Most of the people (probably 99%) can't learn to play the piano from books (eventhough there are great books about it). I certainly couldn't have. And it's the same with so many things. If you want to learn something properly, you really need to take lections.



Well,taking classes is not an option for me.Unless it's online...
I disagree about the piano though.


----------



## ModalRealist (Feb 7, 2014)

http://youtu.be/U85-4EYgZk4

'nuff said.

Seriously though, two observations:

1. A book you enjoy reading and learning from is more valuable than any given text.

2. Nothing improves counterpoint like trying to write it. The best counterpoint books will have you constantly writing, implicitly or explicitly.

P.S. I enjoyed working through "Counterpoint in Composition" by Salzer and Scachter.


----------



## G.E. (Feb 7, 2014)

ModalRealist @ Sat Feb 08 said:


> http://youtu.be/U85-4EYgZk4
> 
> 'nuff said.
> 
> ...



So do you recommend Counterpoint in composition over the two books mentioned by me? Is it more enjoyable and has me constantly writing ?


----------



## ModalRealist (Feb 7, 2014)

Hi G.E.,

I haven't used the books in your original post so cannot truly say. I can tell you why I like CiC though. It is a thorough text, perhaps a little overly thorough sometimes, but ordered such that I never went "what are trey talking about?" All rather sequential. It also is full of examples and exercises which always culminate in: now write a complete school piece using what we just learnt. I liked building up a little collection of gradually more complex works. It goes from teaching how to make cantus firmi (basically subjects) for species counterpoint, all the way through species and well beyond into other musical forms where counterpoint is found. It tends to take fare to explain every last detail, which is why it sometimes feels dense, but when it's dealing with something you happen to find harder, or covering a basic point (e.g. WTF is species counterpoint and why do it?) which you happen not to know, it is rather handy.

While practically-oriented with all the exercises, the text has a quite "academic" tone to it (or that might be because I read it in the Bodleian...). If you want something very "light" to read, get something else probably.

Basically, your mileage may vary, but that's the book as it worked for me. If you think a different book would suit you better, have that one instead. Ideally trial several from a library, if you have a suitably stocked library. In any case, hope this is some insight into CiC.

P.S. Gonna disagree with muk. Classes of course useful when learning anything but counterpoint doesn't need classes. As a non-real-time skill of analysis and imagination, it's just the conjunction of learning a bunch of principles and then applying them all correctly and with musical imagination. A sufficiently good book can give that, even if a teacher/class would make the process faster and less prone to error. By contrast, the real-time practical skill of playing an instrument almost certainly requires at least some live human instruction for all but the most talented (whom will still benefit immensely from the teaching of a master).


----------



## muk (Feb 8, 2014)

To learn counterpoint you need to write a great many exercises, and they have to be corrected. No book can do that for you. At very least you need somebody knowledgeable to look over what you have written. And then there's the question of motivation. If you're learning on your own from a book, will you REALLY sit down and make every single exercise as suggested? It's possible that you will, but it takes much more discipline than when you have scheduled lessons.

It's obvious that others disagree, but in my opinion, if you want to learn counterpoint thoroughly you need tuition. You can learn some by yourself - from books and from analyzing compositions - but it will only get you so far. If that's how far you want to go that's perfectly fine. But if you seriously wanna learn it there wouldn't be much to stop you from booking a course, or would there?
Seriously, I have met quite a number of people who can write a fugue, and not a single one of them has learned it from books alone.

Don't want to sound harsh and I have no intention to breaking your spirit to learn counterpoint (quite the contrary, in fact). But these are my experiences with the subject. Maybe you can start with some books and see how far it gets you. If you want to learn more after that you can still book a course then.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 8, 2014)

i'm curious as to why you would want to learn it. Counterpoint as a separate discipline taught in the "FUX" manner is in today's world a tad esoteric. Do you really want to write music that sounds 300 years old ?...Yes the techniques can be adapted to modern usage but why would you want to ? Most harmony found in modern media music, has very little to do with "FUX"....counterpoint. The bulk of the chord progressions that make up traditional harmony will sound old fashioned . 

If you wanted to learn something that would help you write better music for todays market I would put counterpoint fairly low down the list.



e


----------



## ModalRealist (Feb 8, 2014)

To give a balanced view, muk's view on tuition may have more mileage in some people' supposition than others. I'm an early career researcher here in Oxford and "going solo" on learning stuff is more or less my day job - including the skill of being my own critic and marker. It's not difficult, in my own case, to transfer these methods to my hobby studies. Furthermore, I'm surrounded by a community rich in musicians - organ scholars, music undergrads, and many talented semi-pro performers etc. - in which I am lucky to know some great people; so I have a rich pool of people to talk to and ask questions of when I do get bamboozled.

So, in a sense, I agree with muk that tuition would be of great benefit to anyone studying counterpoint, and that this comes not least through having other eyes on your exercises, correcting them. However, YMMV, dependent on how able you are at self-study and self-correction, you may well find you can get a long way on your own. Muk is just wrong to imply, when he says "no book can [do corrections for you" that one cannot self-correct; but you must work most methodically and be certain of your theoretical knowledge acquisition, in order that you are capable of effectively cross-checking your work against all of the rules. I also object to muk's comments about motivation! If you cannot motivate yourself to learn from a book, and maintain discipline, then that's pretty bad. A tutor's job is to teach, not motivate you into doing your homework.

Anyway. Short version: choose a book you like the look of, read it, start practising; if time/money/inclination allows, consider tuition. But don't get hung up over it - especially not the tutor part - just start learning. The worst outcome here is if you now feel unable to start or find it more difficult to do so because of worrying about muk's insistence on tutoring. You can start learning just fine from a book. Even if you eventually ended up having tuition, the tutor would almost certainly be happier that you had started with some independent study. That's certainly how the faculties here would view it; including the music faculty.

Edit: also, Ed's comments have some merit, but in my opinion, learning old-style counterpoint is great for improving your musical imagination, as it were. What I mean by that, is that it that - for me, at least - is rather good at helping you to write music of increased textural complexity. Being able to write within the rules also helps you to break them, even when the break is very radical. However, this raises another good point in the matter of how to learn: if you're just looking to write better modern music, any self-study of counterpoint will help greatly. If you really need to write proper school counterpoint for some reason, a tutor would look a little more sensible.


----------



## muk (Feb 8, 2014)

ModalRealist @ Sat Feb 08 said:


> if you're just looking to write better modern music, any self-study of counterpoint will help greatly. If you really need to write proper school counterpoint for some reason, a tutor would look a little more sensible.



Good point here. Maybe it depends on where you're coming from. If it is to increase your technical palette as a modern composer, reading books and self correct your exercises will do much good. If you want to master "school"-counterpoint tuition AND reading books would be the way to go for most people.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 8, 2014)

Stick to intervals of 3rds and 6ths to start off with and see how that goes. o-[][]-o


----------



## bbunker (Feb 8, 2014)

Why's everyone only talking about Bach as being counterpoint? I think Palestrina-style counterpoint has huge applications in today's "neo-modal" music. I think the counterpoint of the 20th-century has huge implications in modern writing, whether it be the barbarism of Stravinsky, the pandiatonicism of Ravel or Faure, or any number of ways that the roots of Contrapuntal thought from the 16th-18th century have been recycled in modern times.

And I do actually think that studying 18th century counterpoint would also be a huge benefit to the modern composer, so...there's that.

Just for the record, I think studies like Harmony and Counterpoint are much harder to really benefit from without a teacher to correct errors. It's easy to think that what you've done sounds fine, until you are shown what a 'better solution' to your problem is.

I'd personally recommend Knud Jeppesen's "Counterpoint: The Polyphonic Vocal Style of the Sixteenth Century." Sounds like a dry, inaccessible text about music that nobody cares about any more, but once you dig in, you'll find that the music you write is immediately appealing, takes you places you wouldn't necessarily come to from most post-rock composer backgrounds, and reaps greater dividends. And, it's Public Domain now. Here's a link to a site with the PDF:

https://archive.org/download/counterpointpoly00jepp/counterpointpoly00jepp.pdf

Would anyone ever suggest it wouldn't be a benefit to be able to write music like this??:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k3bfqQ1SpU


----------



## bbunker (Feb 8, 2014)

Also, for anybody who doesn't have access to more formalized classes, I'll be happy to look over any species counterpoint examples you might work up...I'll be going back for my doctorate this next year, and going over some counterpoint wouldn't hurt for me either!


----------



## muk (Feb 8, 2014)

bbunker @ Sat Feb 08 said:


> And I do actually think that studying 18th century counterpoint would also be a huge benefit to the modern composer



This!

And Jeppesen is a great recommendation, great book.


----------



## leafInTheWind (Feb 8, 2014)

bbunker @ Sat Feb 08 said:


> Just for the record, I think studies like Harmony and Counterpoint are much harder to really benefit from without a teacher to correct errors. It's easy to think that what you've done sounds fine, until you are shown what a 'better solution' to your problem is.



+1


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 8, 2014)

bbunker @ Sat Feb 08 said:


> Just for the record, I think studies like Harmony and Counterpoint are much harder to really benefit from without a teacher to correct errors. It's easy to think that what you've done sounds fine, until you are shown what a 'better solution' to your problem is.


This is very true. I had four years of counterpoint (post grad) from one of the best teachers Hal Johnson. I now teach it out of his books which are exceptional. The books are not designed for self study. A large aspect of counterpoint is ear training and the beginning student just won't have those kind of ears until the discipline of monotonic writing and other principles are learned. 

Counterpoint is not easy or friendly to the student but eventually becomes the composers very best friend and faithful companion.


----------



## ModalRealist (Feb 8, 2014)

Just want to point out, to those continuously recommending tutoring and slapping the credentials of their student experience down in advertisement, that the OP has already stated that classes are not an option for him. So all the doom and gloom about self-study is liable to be only discouragement. Congratulations on having such a wonderful music education; perhaps don't rub it in the face of those less fortunate than yourselves?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 8, 2014)

> discipline of monotonic writing



I'm working on the discipline of monotonous writing.


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 8, 2014)

Come now Nick. We both know you perfected that years ago. Sure I've outstripped you considerably by now but still we are both expert there can be no doubt.

Lunch next week?


----------



## bbunker (Feb 8, 2014)

I don't get it, ModalRealist. I recommended two books that are quite good, and helpful, and that anyone, self-taught or not, would get a lot of mileage out. I recommended that after going through species exercises in those books, that he or she send them to someone who can go over them and make corrections. I have offered to help make those corrections, without fee.

What in that do you see to be self-advertisement, and what would you prefer for said self-advertisement besides credentials? Because it seems to me that the qualifications for being able to correct someone's species counterpoint would in fact be having studied species counterpoint.

I apologize if I've offended you by offering advice and counsel.

I also don't see where I've suggested that the OP *not* engage in self-study. I've simply acknowledged the fact that exercises like these are difficult to judge on one's own, and that bringing in help, however that's done, would help. If someone is so ready to be discouraged by this kind of 'doom and gloom' then I don't see how that can be avoided at all.

Finally, I don't see how someone not having the same education I do means that they are any more or less fortunate than myself. For one thing, I don't think that it was luck, fortune or other happen-stance that brought me the education that I've gotten, but a lot of hard graft, dismal financial outlooks, and dogged determination. I've spent a chunk of my life in near-eastern deserts playing music for friend and foe alike to help finance this next segment of my education. So, you'll have to forgive me if I accept your congratulations, but don't consider it at all to be rubbing it in anyone's face for their having chosen a different path, and don't consider my current position to have been the result of fortune.

And I also apologize to you, Mr. Realist...I've been overly harsh with you. But, I do hope you see where I'm coming from. Any advice I offer based on my education comes from the true and honest belief that that education is to be shared with anyone that I can help out.


----------



## ModalRealist (Feb 8, 2014)

@bbunker: I apologise. My comment wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, and certainly not at you; doubly not so given your generous offer of looking over others' exercises. It just seemed that the thread taken as a whole was veering towards "can't do this without classes" which could readily be deflating and/or counterproductive - given the OP's statement qua classes. I certainly wasn't trying to pick you or anyone else out as a villain or wrong. Apologies if I have offended you, and I am sure that everyone here with any degree of music training has that through hard work and not at all through fortuitous circumstance; your good fortune is to have made good choices and put in hard work, that's what I meant by that.

Of course, it may also be completely fair to give what I am calling somewhat discouraging advice: maybe you just really do need classes, and it'll ultimately not work out so well unless or until you do. In that case it's just a fact and any massaging of the matter is just misleading.


----------



## G.E. (Feb 8, 2014)

It's not even worth thinking about teachers in my case.It's not that I don't want or can't afford classes, but I really have nothing of the sorts available to me where I currently live.I would have to move to another city if I want to find something like that.

So yeah...Either learn on my own or not learn at all.


----------



## bbunker (Feb 8, 2014)

@GE: Easy choice then: learn on your own!

Really, though. Grab Jeppesen, print out some music paper, and go to town on it. What's the worst that could possibly happen?!?

@ModalRealist: I did indeed take offense too readily! My apologies again...


----------



## G.E. (Feb 8, 2014)

> What's the worst that could possibly happen?!?



That's exactly what I was thinking. :D


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 8, 2014)

ModalRealist @ Sat Feb 08 said:


> ... Congratulations on having such a wonderful music education; perhaps don't rub it in the face of those less fortunate than yourselves?



By that logic, every time someone hears the music of an educated person (i.e. watches and admires Star Wars) the composer is slapping them in the face by demonstrating just how educated he is. People here including myself are just trying to be helpful. The people in my life who insisted I would be deficient in certain areas of my passion without study weren't condescending. They were showing a type of love if you think about it. 

Those who have studied and understand counterpoint, know the pitfalls of going it alone. It is a difficult science. If the only thing I and others do here is to instill a determination to study with a teacher _at some point_ we will have been very helpful indeed.


----------



## muk (Feb 9, 2014)

An exercise that can be fun to do: write a melody you like. Don't think about a harmony to go with it, just focus on horizontal movement of the line. After you have one, write a second melody to go with the first one. Still, no thinking about harmony yet. Try if you can imitate some parts of the first melody in the second voice. Make the second one move where the first has a rest, and vice versa. If the first melody is moving upwards, lead the second one downwards. Play around and test what complements the first melody nicely, while still being an interesting melodic line in itself.
When you're happy with the result, check for parallels, be they hidden, or worse, open. Adjust one of the lines in those places where parallels occur.
Congratulations, you have now written a counterpoint to the first melody! Now you can fill out the harmony to those two lines, add a pad or whatever you like.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Feb 9, 2014)

ed buller @ Sat 08 Feb said:


> i'm curious as to why you would want to learn it. Counterpoint as a separate discipline taught in the "FUX" manner is in today's world a tad esoteric. Do you really want to write music that sounds 300 years old ?...Yes the techniques can be adapted to modern usage but why would you want to ? Most harmony found in modern media music, has very little to do with "FUX"....counterpoint. The bulk of the chord progressions that make up traditional harmony will sound old fashioned .
> 
> If you wanted to learn something that would help you write better music for todays market I would put counterpoint fairly low down the list.
> 
> ...



................ Really?.......


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

fur schizzel

x


----------



## Daryl (Feb 9, 2014)

I would agree that learning traditional; counterpoint can seem a little odd in today's market, but free counterpoint certainly isn't. That's why I recommend the Lovelock Free Counterpoint (which I think may even be available as a free download, depending on where you live). For me, it gives a basic overview of some of the principles and then study of scores can fill in a lot of the rest.

D


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

yes i really mean traditional ( 1st species onwards )........you might well find a use for it...but at the moment with what people are wanting in music for picture i'd think very, very rarely . 

e


----------



## bbunker (Feb 9, 2014)

Not to get metaphysical, but...

how do you write music that isn't counterpoint?

Because if you have two notes playing at the same time, it's counterpoint.

So, are you implying that modern music is completely monophonic, with no chords, just literally one note?

I don't really think that that is the case.

Or is it that you're saying that you aren't going to write counterpoint exercises for prospective clients?

I guess I would have to say "well, duh."

I also wouldn't write harmony exercises, or guitar exercises, or drum exercises for a client, but that doesn't mean that I shouldn't learn harmony, or how to play guitar, or how to drum, does it?

And, for the record, "Fux" style counterpoint isn't music that's 300 years old. He was describing how composers wrote 200 years before he died, so "Fux"-style species counterpoint is actually about 500 years old.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

you seem to be leaping to the wrong conclusions again. I was just sharing my view that as a discipline it is not as vital in this day and age ( and I am assuming the original poster was writing media music ) as it was back in the 17th century. The study of polyphony and voice leading has it's roots in many things. One of them being, not offending the church !!!

In my humble opinion i think it's best learned with a teacher as it does involve lot's of practice and ultimately the end result does sound like old music. If you are writing to picture or for a library to earn a living I really think there are more important things to master. I understand that those who have mastered it feel that it has surprisingly positive effects on their music . Ligeti often said that he couldn't have written "atmospheres" without it. And that doesn't sound anything like Palestrina . Still I expect he was being funny.

e


----------



## bbunker (Feb 9, 2014)

I think I have made just the right conclusions here, in this case.

Ligeti was absolutely right, as well, and I very much do not believe that he meant to be funny. I'd refer you to my post immediately before this one, Ed. I assert that the desired result of a course of study like 16th century counterpoint is not to be able to write a mass in the style of Palestrina, although that would be quite a feat indeed. The goal is to understand how notes work together, to be able to conceive of the interplay between two things in various forms of imitation and interlocking, to have control over the way that lines react to each other.

Is the goal of studying Calculus to make you write treatises in the style of Leibniz? Is the goal of studying English Literature to make you write in the style of Chaucer? Or do these studies bring you closer to your own ends by exploring the paths forged by others?

I know for a fact that Schoenberg was a master of polyphony. He indeed 'wrote the book' (or *a* book, anyway) on the topic. Yet Schoenberg sounds nothing like Palestrina, does he? But we can hear the result of that study in his craft.

So, to sum up: your contention that the 'end result' sounds like 'old music', I profoundly disagree with. The studies sound like 'old music.' The (actual) end result, your developed craft, sounds like the most modern of musics, because it has yet to be written.

As an aside of very little importance, you are quite opposite the truth on your line about 'not offending the church.' That 'old music', and the study of its polyphony and voice leading had brought nothing but consternation from the church. If anything, the council of Trent would have been far happier if all that florid interplay were done away with. So, while I wouldn't say that one of the roots of polyphony is in offending the church, it definitely had that result.


----------



## JohnG (Feb 9, 2014)

I normally favour any kind of musical learning; harmony, voice leading, orchestration, rhythmic variety, ear training -- all of these are helpful.

However, although I studied species counterpoint before and during college, and sing in a choir where we often perform that kind of music, I think there are other priorities for a media composer that rank higher, especially if one is a beginner.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it a waste of time or anything like that. Practically any form of learning, from visual arts to poetry, can have some bearing on one's composing.

My own experience is that, for quite some time now, anything that smacks of academic music or "old" stuff is unwelcome, and if you are using tonic / dominant good old baroque counterpoint it is most likely going to come over as old-timey to an uniformed listener.

There are some interesting exceptions to the "nothing old fashioned please" trend. Arvo Part, some of Max Richter's work, and arguably Johnny Greenwood and in some cases Thomas Newman (and maybe Alexandre Desplat and Dario Marianelli, and probably lots of others I don't know about or am not thinking of) use vocabulary from the past and are nevertheless embraced by some directors and producers. But even among them, strict counterpoint doesn't seem to form much / any of the main meal, at least as far as I've heard. 

Arvo Part does use some serial techniques, which bear some resemblance to counterpoint, but I'd say only intellectually; the experience doesn't sound or feel the same musically, at least to me.

So, on balance, I'd spend my time on something else.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

Bbunker

You continue to use rather trite reductio ad absurdum arguments when your not correcting my history...my word what a wease you are !....we must go camping together. whilst we practice our latin .

e


----------



## bbunker (Feb 9, 2014)

Ah, ed...you seem to know me quite well!!!

I'll bring the marshmallows.

Ipsum Lorem ad marshmallowium.


----------



## bbunker (Feb 9, 2014)

I'll bring a practical example in defense of counterpoint, crassly taken from my own not-so-illustrious catalogue:

https://soundcloud.com/brian-bunker/8-bit-action-platformathon

Starting at 4:40 is the loop I was thinking of. It's full of imitation, and pretty straight-ahead, pretty specious counterpoint. Complete with Baroque Trills. And it's a chiptune. And, the game-maker liked it right off the bat. So...does it sound old? I don't think there's a simple answer to that question, and I think that the fact that there isn't a simple answer shouls suggest to us that maybe all of the answers to these questions are somewhat more complicated than they might otherwise seem.

Or, maybe they aren't. I don't know. Turn those marshmallows over, they're burning.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 9, 2014)

I agree with JohnG more or less. I tried to make it plain in saying keep it to 3rds and 6ths. :lol: 

If you can't play or have even never heard of, or hardly listened to Bach or Handel, you have no chance of getting anywhere with counterpoint, whether it is modern or baroque.
I doubt you understand the question you asked in the first place.

To understand the kind of movement required, you need to be able to play it, unless you are some kind of paper based composer genius. You'll never get it. Sorry, but there it is.

Like a lot do people here, I spent years from the age of 9 in my case studying to play instruments mostly through counterpoint and obviously contrapuntal music. I had probably forgotten more than the OP knows about this by the time I was 21. To think you can just pick up any book and get to grips with this without one on one tutoring and years of playing actually makes me sick.


----------



## re-peat (Feb 9, 2014)

ed buller @ Sun Feb 09 said:


> Still I expect he was being funny


I don’t think he was.
One of the great things about counterpoint is that it renders music absolute, it forces (and/or learns) you to deal with composition _on strictly musical terms_. (Which, in my book of music, are the best terms there are.) Not saying that the outcome, if successful, is invariably cold musical abstractness and devoid of any emotional or dramatic power — absolutely not —, but the thinking and reasoning behind it is always an almost 100% pure musical process and/or challenge. (In other words: counterpoint is much, much, much, much more than just an outdated musical style and/or technique.)

Melody, harmony, rhythm and orchestration all too often tend to cloud the mind with pseudo-emotional self-delusion, burdened as they are with centuries of established semantic convention. Counterpoint doesn’t do that, it is of such musical purity that you can’t fumble your way through it with facile clichés or cheap effects.

Even if practiced clumsily, amateuristically, incorrectly and/or freely, counterpoint will always make you focus more on the music itself, its problems and the solutions they require. It'll help you to better analyze and explore the musical potential and possibilities of melodies and phrases, it helps in creating structure and development of musical material, and it’s also a massive help in writing much better orchestrations and arrangements.

So, even if counterpoint — the text-book version, or a more loose derivative of it — might result in music which, stylistically speaking, doesn’t stand the best chance of impressing the average client of today, every second spent on it, every hour experimenting with it, trains the mind to approach music and music composition in a more abstract and therefore more profoundly musical way. That’s a good thing, isn’t it?

_


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 9, 2014)

I've marked two distinct sections with contrapuntal textures if only to illustrate the total relevance to today's musical language.

https://soundcloud.com/dave-connor-comp ... urneys-end

2 to 4 voices counterpoint at :39

2 voice counterpoint over an obstinate at 1:15

I've added a very classical section with counterpoint between the bass and melody followed by counterpoint agains a variation of that melody. I don't think it sounds dated or stodgy at all in or out of context i.e. within the piece in it's entirety.

at 2:15

https://soundcloud.com/dave-connor-comp ... and-shadow


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

re-peat @ Sun Feb 09 said:


> That’s a good thing, isn’t it?
> 
> _



yes...it IS a good thing. But as I have said before in the context of a list of things to learn to improve your skills to make money i feel there are more important things to acquire. That said if you have the luxury of time it would, i'm sure in some aspect prove useful. But in my experience with it ( which is slight to say the least ) i found that many of the intervalic choices i preferred, where forbidden. 

This is why I suspect Ligeti was being a little humorous. Atmospheres relies on multiple strands ( the entire orchestra at several points ) of interlocking chromatic scales. All offset at varying amounts. I think ligeti was speaking to the "no compromise" approach of species counterpoint as installing in him the discipline necessary to go to the trouble of making sure that all 90 members of the orchestra played a different note at the required time. Not in anyway resembling the rules of counterpoint. I always though it was a bit tongue in cheek....like him forgetting to set aside enough time to wind up one hundred metronomes before his piece...and that become part of the effect.

my other concern was that it really does require ( again in my humble opinion ) some sort of oversight to pursue. This seemed to be somewhat at odds of the original posters requirements: 


so if :

A. He is happy to have a teacher ( of some description )
B. He is aware of the somewhat tedious and at times pedantic approach to sonorities, many of which will sound spectacularly out of place in modern film music .
C. He is already fully converse with the rather more pressing aspects of media music.

then he should do it .

e


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

Dave Connor @ Sun Feb 09 said:


> I've marked two distinct sections with contrapuntal textures if only to illustrate to total relevance to today's musical language.
> 
> https://soundcloud.com/dave-connor-comp ... urneys-end
> 
> ...



well...great music BTW...the first one to my ears sounds like something that could really be figured out by ear....the second is certainly more complex. But is that again something that really an afternoon looking at a couple of fugues wouldn't crack ?

It really seems an awful lot of bother studying counterpoint at length for a couple of small sections. Do it by ear I say.....

e

top track...i'm going to listen again


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 9, 2014)

ed buller @ Sun Feb 09 said:


> ..the first one to my ears sounds like something that could really be figured out by ear....the second is certainly more complex. But is that again something that really an afternoon looking at a couple of fugues wouldn't crack ?
> 
> It really seems an awful lot of bother studying counterpoint at length for a couple of small sections. Do it by ear I say.....



It depends. There are hugely successful composers who attempt contrapuntal textures and they are unmitigated disasters - right and left.

The point is to have this stuff not only at your fingertips but for the ideas to suggest themselves to the composer who has real facility in this area.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

no i hear you......still think it's a question of priorities, but that was a wicked piece of music.....bit john barry in places.....very dark , but sweet.........

e


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 9, 2014)

I'm not sure which piece your talking about actually but thank you. 

My point is that I personally use contrapuntal technique practically every time I sit down to write. It's not something you use only when you are overtly writing polyphony but it also helps to to look into chordal textures and add fluidity and character to them. So I'm always using it even when I'm not using it so-to-speak. The value of that would be hard to quantify and when ones is pressed as to it's value then you advocate for it strongly.

There's lots of guys who do very well without this type of background. I'm a huge fan of many and do not look down at their writing at all but rather look up to it. The fellow that started this thread inquired specifically in the area of counterpoint and some seemed to dismiss it's relevance or usefulness so I took up the case.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 9, 2014)

https://soundcloud.com/dave-connor-comp ... urneys-end


----------



## MikeH (Feb 9, 2014)

Dave Connor @ Sun Feb 09 said:


> It depends. There are hugely successful composers who attempt contrapuntal textures and they are unmitigated disasters - right and left.



Not being flippant or anything, but could you point to some examples? Just for the sake of learning.


----------



## G.E. (Feb 9, 2014)

Well congratulations ! You convinced me to spend my time on something else and give up on counterpoint (at least for now)
If it's not needed in today's music then I don't need it either.I will look into it some day though.I still think it's a cool skill to have in your arsenal.


----------



## bbunker (Feb 9, 2014)

G.E.:

*No.*

Stop right There.

The "study of counterpoint" has nothing to do with outdated music. It is about being better at writing music.

Saying that you won't look at counterpoint because it isn't needed in modern music...by that logic, orchestration is an unnecessary skill, because libraries have pre-cooked orchestrations, and those are used in modern music.

Counterpoint is the horizontal flipside of Harmony. If you've learned chords, you owe it to yourself to look at counterpoint.

_Re-peat_ is sometimes so spot on that it hurts. This is one of those times. Re-read his posts several times and then Re-consider your Re-thinking of learning counterpoint.


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 9, 2014)

MikeH @ Sun Feb 09 said:


> Dave Connor @ Sun Feb 09 said:
> 
> 
> > It depends. There are hugely successful composers who attempt contrapuntal textures and they are unmitigated disasters - right and left.
> ...


Heavens no I wouldn't do that. I'm not out to tear anyone down. I'm just saying that even very talented people who have studied music in one way or another display weaknesses in areas where they didn't study such as counterpoint. Guys like John Williams, Jerry Goldsmith, and numerous other old school composers (and many current composers) don't have a single bar of music where there are errors you would expect from a novice.

It really depends on what a composer wants to say musically. Some things cannot be said any other way than with a working knowledge of counterpoint.


----------



## Per Lichtman (Feb 10, 2014)

About 6 years ago I tried doing exercises in a program called Counterpointer. If you prefer working on a computer to pen and paper and you're mainly looking for exercises, that might be an option.

http://www.ars-nova.com/cp/

I seem to remember there were some limitations/issues with the program back then, but they may have been corrected by now.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Feb 10, 2014)

Consider these:
http://alexanderpublishing.com/Departme ... poser.aspx

http://alexanderpublishing.com/Products/1-Elementary-18th-19th-Century-Counterpoint---PDF__978-0-939067-27-5-PDF.aspx (http://alexanderpublishing.com/Products ... 5-PDF.aspx)


----------



## AC986 (Feb 10, 2014)

G.E. @ Sun Feb 09 said:


> Well congratulations ! You convinced me to spend my time on something else and give up on counterpoint (at least for now)
> If it's not needed in today's music then I don't need it either.I will look into it some day though.I still think it's a cool skill to have in your arsenal.



I'm sorry but I get the feeling that you're not really a musician in the strictest sense of the term. You make it sound like it's some kind of supermarket that you can just go into and pick up at low cost every other 5 minutes.

You're not going get this because you just don't have the background and getting that background will take a little longer than 5 minutes. Stick to block chords. I'm sorry but you are becoming annoying. I would like sit you down next to me and a keyboard just so that I could intimate you for 5 minutes and actually get you to think.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 10, 2014)

Jerry Goldsmith. No one is better than Jerry Goldsmith. For filmscore contrapuntal writing, he and John Williams are unbeatable.


----------



## Jetzer (Feb 11, 2014)

Thanks for the book suggestions and general advice. What I always wondered. Is counterpoint only counterpoint when following a strict rule? Or is it more 'free' than that. 

For example: I have a (main) melody/phrase in the 1st violins, harmony in the 2nd violins, violas and basses. Cellos play also a melody, with similar moments as the 1st violins but still going in a different direction. Is this always counterpoint? Or is it just a nice line that sounds and works great. What makes it counterpoint (or contrapuntal) or what not.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Feb 11, 2014)

re-peat @ Mon 10 Feb said:


> ed buller @ Sun Feb 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Still I expect he was being funny
> ...



Standing ovation for that one!

Once again stated what I couldn't put into words.


----------



## muk (Feb 11, 2014)

The word 'counterpoint' comes from 'punctus contra punctum', meaning 'note against note'. In a free sense, everytime two ore more *individual* melodic lines are heard together, it is some form of counterpoint. In this understanding there are basically three rough categories: monophony, chordal writing, and counterpoint.

An Alberti-bass, for example, wouldn't count as individual melodic line as it is merely a form of a broken chord. But a choral with four voices would count as counterpoint, as it comprises four individual voices. It is not easy to draw strict borders, and there may be cases where it is dubious whether something has to be counted as individual voice or as accompaniment. On top of that, the interplay of individual melodic lines is closely intertwined with the field of harmony.

Counterpoint is *so much more* than strict rules for writing seriously outdated music. It teaches the art of voice-leading, and everytime you want to write something else than simple melody plus chordal accompaniment, it comes into play. And that is why in my opinion any serious composer should learn it. In the music of each and any classical composer who has written tonal music (and probably most of the free-tonal composers too) there are *countless* examples of counterpoint. Beethoven? Counterpoint. Schumann? Counterpoint. Wagner? Counterpoint. So, saying that counterpoint is just a set of rules on how to write in the style of Palestrina shows a profound ignorance of the subject.


----------



## G.E. (Feb 11, 2014)

adriancook @ Mon Feb 10 said:


> G.E. @ Sun Feb 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Well congratulations ! You convinced me to spend my time on something else and give up on counterpoint (at least for now)
> ...



I don't know what your problem is, but okay... :lol:
I don't think it's like that at all.That's the reason I've decided to put off doing this.Because I have other things to learn which would be more helpful for me right now than counterpoint.And learning takes a lot of time.This is the conclusion I came to after hearing some of what others had to say on this thread.


----------



## AC986 (Feb 11, 2014)

G.E. @ Tue Feb 11 said:


> adriancook @ Mon Feb 10 said:
> 
> 
> > G.E. @ Sun Feb 09 said:
> ...



My problem is people who think that this kind of deal is like a video game. Something you can learn by texting a friend. It's not. You will not learn it the same way you learn to play video games.

Sorry but there it is. You are light years away from any of this unless you learn to play.

You are better off, and will make a better fist of what you currently do if you stay away from stuff like this. If you sat down next to a real musician you would be intimidated by your lack of knowledge and your lack of knowledge has become all to irritatingly obvious by the original question.


----------



## bbunker (Feb 11, 2014)

Just wondering, G.E.:

What are you learning that's more important?

Just curious.


----------



## G.E. (Feb 11, 2014)

I think my lack of knowledge was obvious,otherwise I wouldn't be asking questions,right?



> your lack of knowledge has become all to irritatingly obvious by the original question.



I'm sorry,were you born already knowing everything there is to know about music ? By that logic,nobody should aspire to learn anything so that they don't irritate you.
I have no reason to be intimidated if I sat next to a "real musician".But I am capable of acknowledging the fact that he is lightyears ahead of me just because he has been doing it for much longer than me.


----------



## G.E. (Feb 11, 2014)

bbunker @ Tue Feb 11 said:


> Just wondering, G.E.:
> 
> What are you learning that's more important?
> 
> Just curious.



Let's just say that I was getting ahead o myself with counterpoint.There's much of the "basic" stuff I still need to learn and master first.


----------



## muk (Feb 11, 2014)

G.E. @ Tue Feb 11 said:


> Let's just say that I was getting ahead o myself with counterpoint.



While there may be other things you can learn first, counterpoint is one of the basic principles of music. Of course it's up to you to choose where to lay your attention first, but counterpoint and harmony are good starting points. Takes a year to learn, but a lifetime to master :D In fact, counterpoint/voice leading is one of those things you can always improve on, so the sooner you start the better


----------



## AC986 (Feb 11, 2014)

G.E. @ Fri Feb 07 said:


> I think it's time I dive into counterpoint because I'm tired of my music being so simplistic.I can write some basic counter melodies but I don't really know what the hell I'm doing
> Should I just start with one of these books which I've seen recommended on this forum?
> 
> 
> Or do you have any other suggestions/advice ?



START BY LEARNING TO PLAY. 

I'm studying a Rachmaninoff piano work at the moment. What are you studying?


----------



## G.E. (Feb 11, 2014)

> What are you studying?



Orchestration,Ear training and transcribing my favorite music.That's what I'm currently doing.


----------



## bbunker (Feb 11, 2014)

G.E.: Ear training and transcription...essential skills for anyone to have. 

Orchestration usually would come after Counterpoint and Harmony at most conservatories, for one basic reason: it's hard to really conceive of the different layers going on in an orchestration if you're not aware of how different layers interact. Usually the work of pulling apart pieces of music helps you to later glue them back together in an 'Orchestral Layer Cake'. Just a thought for you to consider.

adrianCook: You can tone it down a bit, friend. This is G.E.'s thread, and he obviously deserves to be treated with a bit more respect. Good on you for studying Rachmaninov. But keep in mind the motto of the website, "Musicians helping Musicians", and post accordingly?


----------



## jleckie (Feb 11, 2014)

Man, Adrian you sure come off hard man...

Hey but this thread is interesting how so many of yous talk the guy out of Counterpoint. Interesting to see where priorities are.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 11, 2014)

Question for the fans of the pedagogical approach to counterpoint.

How what the use of counterpoint help in the construction of a series of chromatic mediant chords ? or chords a semitone apart.....

in Hedwig's theme JW uses many parallel minor chords. How would counterpoint help in their construction.

I am generally curious...not picking a fight...I would like to learn more 

e


to G.E.

you might find :http://www.amazon.co.uk/Counterpoint-How-Use-Your-Music-ebook/dp/B0081V1BWG/ref=sr_1_7?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1392153720&sr=1-7&keywords=counterpoint

usefull.

also


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcqrGLvs95M

although it's bleeding quiet.


Ed


----------



## muk (Feb 11, 2014)

How do you score two chords a semitone apart? Simply place all notes a semitone higher for the second chord? If you do, well, you shouldn't. Because it sounds bad (paralles between the outer voices, no contrary motion etc.). You learn that in: counterpoint.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 11, 2014)

Nonsense....it sounds awesome

E


----------



## bbunker (Feb 11, 2014)

Ed,

I'll give you a few specific examples. From at about 1:20 or so to the mid-1:30's in, there's a mid-low string line in 16th notes against the main melody in the mid-brass. Those violas churning that counter-melody are working with the horn line, are not subordinate to it, and help to signal the harmony and to make a more interesting texture by the independence of their line.

That is Counterpoint 101, right?

The celeste at about 2:00 plays a sequence of 8th notes that is neither entirely melodic or harmonic. It spells out effectively two moving lines that are implied by the notes that the Celeste plays. Those two lines are independent, even though the Celeste plays both. It's taken straight out of pieces like the Bach Violin Sonatas and Partitas.

Again, two or more lines working together while maintaining their independent ideas: Counterpoint.

At about 2:35 or so, there's a descending running figure where one voice answers the others, but the other lines don't end before the next one comes in. Basically, it's a technique used in the Fugue called "Stretto."

Stretto is one of the techniques discussed and manipulated in Counterpoint.

And later, at about 2:50 or so? It's so obviously a multi-voice texture that I probably needn't say more.

So, to sum up I would probably say: JW uses a lot of Counterpoint throughout the score, so...I'd look to him to see how they helped in constructing the piece.


----------



## muk (Feb 11, 2014)

ed buller @ Tue Feb 11 said:


> Nonsense....it sounds awesome
> 
> E



Does it, to you? Well, then I'd say it's high time to learn some counterpoint


----------



## bbunker (Feb 11, 2014)

Ed,

Here's a thought for you:

I can't think of a single piece in the symphonic repertoire that doesn't evidence some kind of contrapuntal thinking.

And, here's an example to prove how essential contrapuntal thinking is:

Beethoven's Symphony no. 7, Movement 2.

Clearly derived from Contrapuntal technique, almost throughout. Yet, as "modern" sounding and dynamic a piece as you'll find. And considering how often it gets used in Film and Advertising, I think the layperson would agree.


----------



## ed buller (Feb 11, 2014)

Thank you. You've answered my question

E


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Feb 11, 2014)

Most of the masters of this craft started with Counterpoint before anything else.

I cannot fathom someone working on orchestration without knowing a thing about counterpoint. 

It's like a surgeon working on a body with no understanding of how all the parts function with each other. EDIT: Actually that analogy sounds more like orchestration or harmony....But you get what I mean.


----------

