Revision as of 22:19, 11 August 2011 edit Wukai (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 12,725 edits copyedit ← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:25, 11 August 2011 edit undo Wukai (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 12,725 edits →Comprehensibility and value: clarification of the importance of complexity and complicatedness Next edit →
Line 43: *''Aesthetic Claim 2'': The best music arises from an alliance of a compositional grammar with the listening grammar. To these ends he proposes the use of the terms "[[complexity]]" and "complicatedness", complexity being hierarchical structural richness, and complicatedness being "numerous non-redundant events per unit time." On Lerdahl's view complexity has aesthetic value, while complicatedness is neutral.. He writes, "All sorts of music satisfy these criteria - for example, Indian [[raga]], Japanese [[Koto (musical instrument)\|koto]], [[jazz]], and most Western [[art music]]. [[Rock music]] fails on grounds of insufficient complexity. Much [[contemporary music]] pursues complicatedness as compensation for a lack of complexity. In short, these criteria allow for infinite variety but only along certain lines." "I find this conclusion both exciting and - initially at least - alarming...the constraints are tighter than I bargained for."

Cognitive Constraints on Compositional Systems: Difference between revisions