1 files changed, 73 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/src/blog/why-is-all-music-in-4-4.html b/src/blog/why-is-all-music-in-4-4.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0f59560
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/blog/why-is-all-music-in-4-4.html
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+title: Why is all music in 4/4?
+date: December 12, 2021 10:49
+---
+<p>
+It is a favorite pastime for music aficionados (where music aficionado =
+someone who listens to something other than Top 40 and knows two things about
+music theory) to bemoan the tragic state of modern music, specifically the fact
+that everything sounds the same. Same chord progressions, rhythms, song
+structure. The reason why this happened is fairly obvious: the genesis of a
+music industry created an optimization problem, and we're living in a time where
+this is a mostly solved problem. It's cheaper to produce a thousand items from a
+plastic injection mould than carve each piece by hand. It's more scalable to
+sell the same music globally than cultivate local traditions.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But there is a second, more technical <i>why</i> question we could ask: why did
+modern music arrive at the specific qualities it arrived at? I want to posit a
+potential, partial reason for why all songs on the radio are in a 4/4 time
+signature.  The idea to write this came to while thinking about whether Polish
+traditional music could have evolved into something popular with the modern
+masses, the way Negro spirituals evolved into blues, evolved into rock.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Much of Polish music, before it became replaced by Western influences, was based
+on 3/4 rhythms. The wild, trance-like spinning of the <i>mazurek</i> and
+<i>oberek</i>, or the slower, more waltz-like <i>kujawiak</i> are all counted in
+3. Why could these rhythms not survive the musical revolutions of the mid 20th
+century?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is not for a lack of energy and liveliness in the music. Just look at the
+sort of a musical fire an old man from a small village can spark up with a
+fiddle: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io-RC6USnyk">
+www.youtube.com/watch?v=io-RC6USnyk</a>. It's not even necessarily the crazy,
+non uniform rhythms of the music that would have been a problem. Should the
+mazurek have been destined to influence modern popular music, the industry would
+have watered down and simplified its complexities for the shopping center
+visitor's ears. That of course would have been a great disservice to the music
+and I'm glad it didn't happen, but it was possible.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The problem I see is technical, and comes down to the fundamental design of the
+mazurek, its purpose being contrary to what is necessary for modern popular
+success. So let's first talk about the technical requirements of modern music.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+During the 20th century music became an entertainment product for individuals.
+It is a music you listen to on the radio while cleaning the house, in headphones
+on a commute. You don't go to a concert just to spend time with friends, but in
+large part to have an individual experience of the music. To say "<i>I</i> was
+there, <i>I</i> heard them, <i>I</i> saw them". Of course there is still a
+social aspect to concert-going, but in centuries past, it was the primary aspect
+of music making. It was a social glue and lubricant in the same way as alcohol.
+These days when you go to a concert, you sit or stand in your own spot, facing
+the stage, and experiencing the music on your own, inside your own mind, inside
+your own body. Maybe jumping up and down with the rest of the crowd, but you're
+doing the jumping by yourself.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You can't jump to an oberek in a mosh pit under the stage. It simply won't work.
+If you jump on every beat, it will be too fast. If once a measure, it's going to
+be awkward and too slow. Either way, it's just not going to feel right. The
+oberek is a dance fundamentally designed to be danced spinning with a partner.
+That's what the accents guide you towards. There is a flywheel effect of one
+partner leading in one measure, the other in the other measure. It simply is not
+a music for individuals. And that's a good thing.
+</p>