by Christopher Schlegel

I started promising myself (and several hundred other people) years ago I would get around to writing a piece about Good Music, Bad Music and the difference between the two. This is the short version of that long awaited essay. It is not my foremost intention to antagonize anyone with this critical analysis. However, I am not naïve enough to suppose I will get through it without doing so at some point. So, if in the course of reading this you wind up disagreeing with something I have written, you might take comfort in the fact that I was not intentionally trying to hurt your feelings, piss you off or make fun of your tastes. On the other hand, I am not necessarily going to try to avoid doing these things either.

Good Music has a number of defining characteristics to differentiate it from Bad Music. It is even possible for a single piece of music to have good and bad sections. To mention a few of these crucial elements: thematic construction, logical harmonic and melodic structure, conformity to human hearing physiology and integration of all parts.

Thematic construction is the strongest and most notable element in a piece of music. Clear, concise lines that have a convincing beginning and end are crucial. It’s also important in all themes present to have a purpose and convey some conceptual and emotional component.

Logical harmonic, melodic and rhythmic structure is perhaps one of the most difficult elements to contemplate. It’s not necessary to use perfect triads harmonically and only chord tones melodically. The historically “accepted” rules for this category are rife with strange and obtuse dogma. The piece must have an internal logic, though. Every melodic point must work with and not against the underlying harmony. And the harmonic/melodic flow must work towards some unified goal. Interesting rhythmic components are frequently an overlooked area in sub par music. While it is useful to provide some repetition to establish an identifiable pattern (not to mention general order) too much variation can create confusion and work against the piece. There is no concrete answer that applies to all pieces of music. Like every other component, rhythmic content must be interconnected with the other materials present. Voice leading is also a very important component. It is the technique by which a melody helps lead the mind and ear from one chord or section to the next. Good music not only anchors the melody to the harmonies through voice leading, it does so without wasted notes, seemingly effortlessly and in a manner that is not forced.

Although many modern psychologists (and other Academic Goofball Blockheads) have preached for many years that the composition and appreciation of certain styles and pieces of music is a culturally induced and reinforced phenomenon, the facts of reality are aligned against them. The two most important issues they miss are the nature of the human mind and the nature of human hearing physiology. It is a fact that the musical systems and structures that have been developed by humans are not arbitrary social conventions but rather due to the nature and requirements of human existence. For example, the reason humans are able to perceive the division of an octave is due to the circular curvature of the cochlea. There is also a limit to the amount of information happening at the same time on which the human mind can focus and make sense. The brilliant 19th century scientist Hermann Helmholtz conducted vast amounts of research into the nature of music that you can read up on if you are more interested in this topic. Philosopher and novelist Ayn Rand, in “The Romantic Manifesto”, also has many interesting and useful things to say about music. Although much more work needs to be done in this area, it is clear that the human mind and ear are not infinitely malleable, culturally conditioned blobs without firm identities and natures.