QUESTION ?

Hi ....................Whats the difference between "Counter-point vs TwinMelody" ?

The Track below was submitted for a Counterpoint Evaluation, and came back as Negative, stating: not counterpoint.

A Double brass Section

1: panned left

2: panned right

If its not counterpoint is it classed as a Counter-Melody ?

Edited 14 hours ago14 hr by interlect

49 minutes ago, interlect said:

TwinMelody

Never heard of Twinmelody!

Henry

i dont know i cant read music ?

Hallo @interlect ,

that is a good question. Honestly, I also never heard about „Counter-Melody“ or „Twin Melody“. However, since I’ve always use counterpoint when composing, possibly I can explain something about.

First of all, the “reviewers” who have concluded that this piece is not counterpoint may be somewhat surprised, since the piece has a “jazz” or “big band” feel that one doesn’t necessarily expect when looking forward to a piece performed on an organ, a piano, or perhaps by a chamber orchestra.

But that kind of „style“ is not the issue. Counterpoint is not a style of music or related only with a certain era, namely the Baroque time. There is, for example, a Russian composer, Nikolai Kapustin, who wrote always in Jazz „style“, including 24 preludes and fugues in Jazz style, which – of cause – apply counterpoint.

So, counterpoint is a composing technique, rather than a style:

Counterpoint, or polyphonic music is all about voices that form rhythmically and melodically independent (horizontal) musical lines. When two or more such voices occur in a piece of music, they interact with each other, following certain contrapuntal rules and thus creating harmony.

Since all voices are equally carriers of the melodic and rhythmic material, there is no specific melody voice and no subordinate accompaniment, for example through (vertical) chords.

While singing independently, the voices do not have to be completely unrelated. Often, one voice repeats or imitates what another voice has sung before, as is the case in a canon, for example.

Counterpuntal compositional technique fascinates with its efficiency in the use of thematic material. Once started with the (fugue) subject and the „accompaniment“ in the other voices (which is, in fact, no accompaniment but material being developed in interaction with the subject), there is enough material with which to compose without having to stop and reflect.

To come back to your example: To me, it’s inherently a typical jazz piece based on a chord progression over which the band begins to improvise. In a chord progression, the vertical approach—that is, the chords themselves with their harmonies—is the fundamental compositional or improvisational technique. The melodic material follows these harmonies and generates the horizontal lines as a result of them, rather than as their original idea. And even though your two brass sections interact with each other in a kind of melodic dialogue, I get the impression that they are engaged in a “playful competition” to see who can deliver the better improvisation over the underlying jazz harmonies, rather than developing a “subject” or thematic material.

There’s nothing wrong with that, and I really liked the piece, but it is also for me no counterpoint, and the other classifications like “Twin melody” or “Counter-Melody” (which, as far as I know, aren’t clearly defined terms) seem to be an attempt to express in a single word what I’ve tried to explain in more detail.