Regions where multi-part singing is represented by musical component only (without social component) are marked as having “elements” of vocal polyphony. Our review mostly deals with cultures where vocal polyphony is represented both by social and musical components. One of the true universal phenomena of human musical cultures – antiphonal dialogue between two parties (two soloists, two groups, or more often between a soloist and a group) is the most basic and widespread form of social polyphony. Arguably, there is no culture without traditional forms of group singing. Most of the so-called “monophonic cultures” (such as Chinese, Australian Aboriginal, or most of American Indian music cultures) have traditional forms of social polyphony (group singing). Social polyphony is distributed extremely wide across the world musical cultures.
On the other hand the unique overtone singing of some Central Asian cultures musically represents polyphony although socially it is not polyphony. For example, the phenomenon of unison (octave) singing socially represents polyphony (as group singing), although musically it is monophony (only one pitch). Social and musical aspects of polyphony do not always go together in various cultures. It is clear that traditional definition of polyphony is based on a musical component only and does not take social component into account. Musical polyphony implies having more than one pitch during performance. Social polyphony implies active musical interaction within the group of people. I believe we must distinguish two equally important components of traditional vocal polyphony: social and musical. This definition of polyphony is one-sided and does not take into account a very important social aspect of vocal polyphony.
Polyphony is usually defined as a type of music, where more than one pitchis heard at a time.
0 kommentar(er)
