June Lee's famous interview mentions George Russell as they discuss Jacob's idea of Lydian. Who is he though? Personal Harmony and Music Theory Lessons: www.leonwaves.... Instagram/Twitter: @leon_waves
@@leonwaves I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
Then let's stack all the notes from the C major scale in 3rds on a music staff (CEGBDFA), and illustrate that sound by playing a C Lydian arpeggio of sorts, replacing the A with a B, and we're off to having some hifalutin, esoteric fun in the comments section!
@@BlakeLeonardMusic I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
It's nice to see that the millennia-old tradition of struggling to create a logically coherent theory that jibes with both natural acoustics and practical musical experience is alive and well
I never understood why Russel bothered accommodating Western European Harmony based on the Maj scale Like... you literally have the opportunity to answer the question "what would happen if i didn't bothered with known chord structures, and imagined the world where the base scale is Lydian" but no :l Also John Colplane
As someone who studied with Ben Schwendener who worked closely with George, the justification to move the C# to the end had to do more with: 1. The concept wasn’t meant to be cyclical, and 2: The argument that the b9 is the most dissonant interval, according to George. The G# would be next in the ladder of the 5th after C#, so he just moved that to the end to get a more accurate representation of the consonant to dissonant spectrum of intervals. The tonal order is in place to rank intervals from most consonant to dissonant, so when composing you had a clear structure of what melody notes against certain chords would be evocative of certain emotions. At the end of the day, George worked on this concept so he could have musical concepts in a concrete way, and use certain concepts like a construction worker would use a toolbox when building something, in order to avoid repetition and have all his compositions sound unique. Thought I’d put that out there, and George is unfortunately not with us to answer to Jacob. Good video regardless, thanks for sharing!!
@@henrygodfreymusic Hahahah good to encounter another student of Ben! Yeah that sounds like a George response, Ben told me when asked why they were the "Official Lydian Chromatic Scales" George responded with "Because I said so!"
But what if it's #15 and not b9 at all? While it's subjective, many would agree that C# will sound more consonant compared to G# against C lydian chord. It's pretty apparent if you superimpose F# minor pentatonic in higher register. And all other extensions sound much more harsh and outside in comparison. Actually shifting pentatonic on a circle of fifths is a really good way to test this stuff. In C major you start with A minor pentatonic as most inside sound. E gives you 7th. B gives you #11, first lydian sound. F# will yield #15. C# will add #12(#5) and so on. You can get all those extensions in order from most inside to most outside sounding.
I’ve been using George Russell’s theory for decades. It made way more sense to me than modal theory. The augmented fourth is extremely important in jazz, classical, and quite a bit of western contemporary music. George Russell was no dummy and doesn’t have to be wrong for Jacob to be right.
George Russel the kind of guy to try to adjust the Lydian scale to accommodate centuries of Western European classical music and not continue the chain of stacked fifths to create the most harmonious scale
I took George Russell's class at NEC in the mid 90s. Point 1: George Russell's music is fascinating, challenging, and UNIQUE, he has a voice. That is to me the most important part of ANY music theory: does it yield interesting and fresh music? Point 2: Jacob Collier's music is also....(see point 1). I respect that Mr. Collier feels passionately about his music, we need more people like that. I have not watched enough of JC's videos to determine if he genuinely dislikes GR's music (...which is his right of course, though I disagree), or if he merely disagrees with GR's rather dogmatic theorizing. Point 3: As much as I love GR's music, and therefore I love the theory he created which yielded that music, the idea that it therefore the best way to analyze Bach (e.g. Prelude in C from WTC book 1) is completely bonkers. It was an interesting way to learn about how he was thinking, but using Occam's razor, it is not the best analysis BY FAR. Why he felt the need to turn a perfectly good Concept (with a capital C) into a Hegelian all-encompassing explanation of all of life is beyond me. He kept talking about thinking logically without your ego interfering, and he could not see that he was the most extreme example of exactly what he was railing against. Point 4: He claimed that no one before had ever come up with a music theory based on scales such as he was discussing, then a member of the class raised his hand and said he had done his doctoral dissertation on a composer who had done just that (was it Rimsky-Korsakov? Scriabin? Someone Russian, I can't remember). Russell just looked stunned and said he was wrong, even though GR had clearly never studied the music the student was referencing. As a music historian of European classical music, GR got an F. Point 5: Just a quick shout-out to Bud Powell, and his frequent use of what JC seems to be calling "hyper Lydian" - such as the CMaj13(#11)(b9) chord in "Un Poco Loco," essentially Dmaj7 layered on top of Cmaj7.
I took that class too, at NEC, late 80s, with Russell. A very arrogant man. Disdain for half the class. His vibe was so negative. And that class was boring as hell, and I did not get half of it. I was pissed I had to pay so much money for his spiral-bound “textbook”. All that said, I did write a couple cool compositions for that class, even though I really had no idea *back then* what the hell he was talking about.
I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
@@natigrinkrug I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
When I saw the title, I genuinely thought Jacob Collier was, for some reason, disagreeing with the Formula One driver George Russel. That was a little weird for a few moments.
Russell's order of sharps actually makes sense if you look at the scales brighter than Lydian. First you augment the 5th, then the 2nd, then the 6th and finally the 3rd. Given that Lydian is essentially Locrian with a flattened root (Locrian b1), going in this order gives you Phrygian b1, Aeolian b1, Dorian b1 and finally Mixolydian b1.
He did get some points in a Williams car so I reckon nothing is completely out of his grasp. Maybe being a genius music theorist is not that far off for him haha
I think it all has to do with octaves. George Russel is exploring concepts within an octave (7 note scales repeating every octave) while Jacob Collier is exploring the modality and sound of stacking fifths without being limited to just the range of an octave
George Russell's ideas were totally inclusive. Not exclusive. Read his 2nd book. Tonal gravity is about 'horizontal', teleological, resolving music represented by the major/minor tonal system that has hundreds of years of use in Western music. 'Vertical' or blending music is part of the Lydian (also Dorian and Phrygian modes) mode/scale. It opens the door to music that does not necessarily have to resolve to a tonic. These two ideas, horizontal and vertical, can work together in music, opening up many possibilities for a composer. LCC is a door opening to possibilities. "Disagreeing" only closes creative possibilities. It is a useful way of thinking about music - inclusive, open, and full of potential. For a little fun about George and some of my experiences with him: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-T2wyXL36PDQ.htmlsi=8fnEbX6OZa6khALd By the way, I'm a big fan of Jacob Collier!
Thank you so much! That really cleared things up for me. I followed the book pretty well up to the justification and derivation of the altered scales. Awesome vid!
I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
Mister Waves I aspire to, as you, have such a deep understanding of such meticulous concepts that I can explain them so lightly and get my point across
On the one hand, I like the idea of F Lydian being the most natural and fundamental scale of all scales, from which all scales are thus derived. That said, I part from Russel here. And with Western Music Theory in terms of what modes are what. F Lydian is the basis of all. The Second mode is F Ionian, which flattens the 4 (B). The Third mode is F Mixolydian, which flattens the 4 and the 7 (E). The Fourth mode is Dorian, which flattens the 4 , the 7 , and the 3 (A). The Fifth mode is Aeolian, which flattens the 4, the 7, the 3, and the 6 (D). The Sixth mode is Phrygian, which flattens the 4, the 7, the 3, the 6, and the 2 (G). Finally, the Seventh mode is Locrian, which flattens the 4, the 7, the 3, the 6, the 2, and the 5 (C). The parallel modes, are thus, C Ionian, G-Mixolydian, D-Dorian, A-Aeolian, E-Phrygian, and B-Locrian. This model gets rid of WMT's idea that Lydian is Ionian with a #4, whilst all the rest of the modes involve flattening all the subsequent modes. No, Lydian isn't Ionian with a #4, Ionian is Lydian with a b4. Next, it gets rid of the pesky problem of putting the 4th degree of the scale on the opposite side of the Tonic as the rest of the degrees on the basic circle of fifths. It shows why you need 6 flats, rather than 6 sharps. But why might we need 6 sharps? Well, if we go around the circle of 5ths, we start with F-lydian (0), C-Lydian (1 #), G Lydian (2 #s) D Lydian (3 #s), A Lydian (4 #s), E Lydian (5 #s) and B Lydian (6 #s). "But we write mostly in Major or Minor!" Yes, and you just defeated your own argument with your own argument. Most Western music is written using Ionian or Aeolian. Much of the stereotypical "Arabian" sound is Phrygian Dominant. So what? This isn't a problem. Just because we don't use the most naturally fundamental scale, F-Lydian, for very much music at all, doesn't mean it's not the most natural and fundamental scale. The Fundamental note on a piano, A440 isn't nicely at the beginning of the series of white-and-black keys the way C is. But no one has a problem with that. the First key is C, not A, thus making A the 6th key of any set of 12 keys. Guess what? We can simply set 3 blacks as the start, and what's at the beginning of those three black keys? That's right! F. Rather than Middle C, we should be talking about Middle F.
“Most western music is written using Ionian or Aeolian”. That’s not right: first of all, we have many many centuries of music before the tonal system (the transition from the modal systems and the 8 psalm tones through the church keys to the tonal system occurred mainly between the end of the 16th century and the 17th century) and a lot of music after the disintegration of the tonal system. Secondly, tonal music is not written using Ionian or Aeolian, but major and minor keys. You can argue that Ionian and major is more or less the same (I would disagree with this), but that’s not so with Aeolian and minor
Lyle “Spud” Murphy’s Equal Interval System resolved these problems using the overtone series as the basis of organization, and NOT the fifth and its related cycle. He proved mathematically that the fifth does not have any prominence over the other intervals. The end result is a completely original theory that uses a single set of terms that can encompass previous theories, but it’s not bound by them.
I remember getting very excited about EIS until I realized that Spud basically turned his entire theory into something only accessible for those willing to fork out major sums of money to learn it. I even did an interview with a teacher. It seems really interesting though and I wish he would have just shared his findings in the form of easily accessible texts that you could buy for a fair price rather than being forced to take costly lessons in order to learn it. I understand that it's complex but I feel like keeping everything under lock and key is just a recipe for the knowledge gradually being lost over time.
@@aaronmetz8707 I imagine at some point someone will record their sessions and anonymously put it in writing for the masses. Although he has the right to do as he pleases, they're his theories but after he's gone then what? Or will he be passing on the torch to a student or family member?
There's a really nice George Russell album, Jazz in the Space Age. Great record, highly recommended. The Lydiot, Waltz from Outer Space... good songs, and to me much more compelling than Mr. Collier's music.
I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
So many people don't even know who George Russell is. That page at the end actually makes a lot of sense, and he spends time explaining what he means by all of it. Still got my Lydian Chromatic Concept book from music school. But I concur that Russell was primarily interested in what goes on within the octave. Likewise with the rest of the alt-ish permutations. Ultimately, it's just about tools for improvisation.
I actually find that common criticism about the Lydian Chromatic concept being confined to one octave odd, since a Lydian Chromatic scale contains all 12 notes of equal temperament. Maybe this comes more from the teacher I learned the concept from (who himself was a student/assistant to Russell), but I see all those "alterations" more as the upper extensions of one chord/scale. There's no avoid notes! Just more and less dissonant notes relative to the tonic.
The book is actually much deeper than “how to create music.” It’s about how music (and non-performing art) is the fundamental language of the cosmos. He (this the book) was influenced to a large degree by Gurdjief’s 4th Way to understand Consciousness. I found that out after reading George’s biography (not well written btw) & then reading the things George read for his inspiration & lessons w/Andy Wasserman. Jacob has gone on to create his own music theory & bravo for that btw. Love his talks about theory. But he has yet to explain Unity & it’s role in the Universe & consciousness.
This always reminds me of my very first times playing around with chords, alternating major with minor 3rds seemed like the most ''basic'' pattern to me, and to my surprise, our basic major scale didn't agree.
This was absolutely brilliant! Thoroughly entertaining, and the ending was comedy perfection. Quite literally made me say "holy sh%#" out loud after a second or two lol. Look forward to digging into more of your videos!
I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
Using the ‘white keys’ only on a modern piano preferably tun’d to A=432 Hz beginning from F to F (F, G, A, B, C, D, E) to establish the interval-parametres of the so-call’d Lydian mode which can be transpos’d by retaining the same intervals in ev’ry key
I don't even know why but the way you paused between George and Russell just sent me every single time. Thanks I really needed a good laugh! Also interesting music stuff! Way above my head, but very interesting!
Nerdy video deserves a nerdy comment, I’m so sorry. But…it always seemed to me that what comes after C Lydian should be C# Locrian. If the stack of fifths tells you which notes to raise to progressively make the scale brighter/darker, then raising the C in a C lydian gives you C# locrian, followed by G# giving you C# phrygian, then C# aeolian, dorian, mixolydian, ionian, etc. There’s a yin and yang elegance to this, in that the brightest mode in one key wraps around to become the darkest mode in the key a semitone higher. But Jacob is saying, why do you have to change keys or modes, just add the them together to make one big polytonal scale. So then Cmaj13#11#15 is just a Dmaj7/Cmaj7 polychord (or G lyd/C lyd or what have you). George Russell is saying… well tbh I could never figure out what the flip GR is saying.
This is how I would think of this too. You can stack the fifths, and then reorder them, forming scales or chords as desired. I think these are variations of similar ideas, but how you wrote it out is how I would naturally think of it, although GR’s idea leads to some pretty cool scales in a different way. For example, Lydian Augmented and Lydian Dominant are very well known scales, but the way I would think of it would be stacking fifths to make a major scale, and then flatting the third from the root.
Being a fan of both, I can see where the disagreement would emerge. Jacob would probably try to tackle all corners in a half sharp fashion, while Russel would focus more on apexing... ... ... I’ll see myself out.
I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
I think you are putting way too much emphasis on the chain of fifths. Russell wasn't interested in stacking fifths so much as he was proving that lydian was a better candidate for a tonic function scale than an ionian and he used the overtone series as a way to justify it (much like HIS influence Hindemith did in justifying the chromatic scale and for finding acoustic roots of intervals). He didn't shy away from C#, he just didn't need it to prove the tonal gravity of a lydian sound. In fact why stop at C#? He could have gone on stacking 5ths until he created a chromatic scale. He chose instead to create THAT with the super-imposition of parallel modes with sharpened 4ths (a chromatic poly-modalism). Russell was a jazz guy who was concerned about chord scale relationships and finding more outside scales based around a sharpened 11th
George Russell didn't "create" these scales as you stated in the video. He gave *some* of them different names. All of them were in use by the early 20th century. Then again, I didn't have high expectation for accuracy when you use terms like "whatever" and "thingy".
Tonic gravity comes from Schoenberg's theory of harmony. Or at least the analogy of gravity. Though in his theory Schoenberg claims that the fith above whatever note you choose exerts a gravity up on the lower note. Maybe a balance between Russell and Collier?
Brilliant research thanks so much This is such an important subject within music theory Edit: I don’t get it at the end there, do you have a beef with Coltrane? You wouldn’t be the first You’ve animated the scales really well, it’s a pleasure to watch
I make better music than this overrated Jacob who just shows off his sub par musishian skills and gets free Grammy I don't get why he's more famous that whatever any normal musician does Well anyway I think I just proved my point and my videos further backs it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TaiYl__0VqE.html
I realize that this post is from a year ago, but for some comic reason RU-vid has decided to put this video in my feed. I say cosmic because I studied with George Russel at New england Conservatory in the 80's and played drums in both his student and professional ensembles. What is problematic with this post, and I think Ben Schwendener would agree (he was a classmate at NEC) is context. What's missing is that George Russel was an incredibly important composer in the NYC jazz scene in the 1950's and 60's, recorded seminal albums, was a gifted pianist and was deeply imbedded with the preeminent artists from the time, Coltrane etc. It's easy to cherry pick out of context some of George's theory and stage a hypothetical argument with a young contemporary artist like Jacob Collier. Btw, LOVE Jacob Collier. This is in no way meant to shed negative light on this true genius. But, Mr, Waves is positing an analytical argument that does not take into account the full impact of George Russel's contribution to jazz history. i'm sure one could create a similar argument between Duke Ellington and Snarky Puppy. The point is, CONTEXT. Please know, or acknowledge the full extent of what you're writing about. It does a disservice to viewers to merely single out a small slice of a composer's history for the sake of using the name Jacob Collier and some RU-vid views.
Tbh I've been trying to get into the Lydian chromatic stuff for years but it seems like a weird and flawed system. I organize all of those other Lydian scales as modes of their parent scale like Harmonic minor (Lydian #9) or Melodic minor (Lydian Augmented, Lydian dominant) etc. Jacobs "Super lydian" is a much less restricted system that basically just connects the circle of 5ths ascending. I also call that idea "super extended harmony"
Less restricted maybe, but it is restrictions and conventions that give rise to styles of music. Collier's music and ideas are awe-inspiring and informative but also in my experience at least can be extremely difficult to navigate independently. Russell's theories are maybe more accessible because of their restriction, its thorough definitions and justifications make it more of a coherent system, with a distinct musical result. Russell's work's connection to western harmony also gave it the accessibility to actually be used by people in whatever music they were making, which is rare for such a grand idea in the field of music theory.
I'm curious if someone can authoritatively answer this question: If one uses the perfect harmonic fifth (pitch ratio 1.5) and stacks in fifths from a given C all the way up to the C#, is the resulting interval between that high "C#" and the C next to it (four octaves above the initial C) in any way more pleasant than an equal tempered minor second? I know that this new interval will be considerably wider than the modern garden variety half step. I ask because it seems to me that if one stacks with harmonic fifths, one wouldn't expect to find a particular "cutoff point" where the notes start to sound considerably more dissonant (e.g. after the F#). Rather, I would expect that each new note added would sound gradually more dissonant than the last, in a smooth and continuous way, rather than with a stark change after a particular pitch.
Maybe I misunderstood the introduction to the book, but it seems to me that the fundamental concept behind the LC had to do less with the desire to stack fifths and avoid a tritone, and more to do with the notion that lydian is a more natural mode than is ionian. If I remember correctly, according to the book this is because in the overtone series, the pitch that would be the fourth degree of a scale first appears as the 11th harmonic in the series, as a very out of tune flat fifth (a flat flat fifth, if you will 🙄) ... (as described here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_series_(music) ) or as a very sharp fourth degree, which IMHO makes more sense here, since overtones 3, 6, and 12 are the 5th degree and overtones 5 and 10 are the 3 degree, hence we are dealing with the 4th degree of the scale here. In the example found in the link with a C as fundamental, in other words, I would've labeled that 11th harmonic an F#, not a Gb, as we are dealing with the pitch between the E and the G, both of which we already have. As the example describes, the Gb (F#) of the 11th harmonic is 49 cents under a properly tuned F# (Gb). The second example on that same page (notation by Ben Johnson) describes that same 11th harmonic as an out of tune F (too sharp), but it's more of an out of tune F# (too flat): Considering that this pitch is 49 cents away from F# (Gb) it means it is 51 cents away from the F natural, and therefore, by 1 cent (!) the natural (in the sense of "organic") fourth scale degree according to the overtone series is closer to an F# that it is to F. It's a tough call if one is establishing the scale for posterity, but by one cent, it's an F#!
YES! This is what I want to see! I am working with 4ths alone. Any tertial chords are just the result of compressing the chords, rather than extending them.
4:07: Russell is correct on this point. Any time you play a note and then another note a perfect fifth above that first note, the second note functions as a support component of the first. Specifically due to its existence as the second harmonic of that first note. Virtually everyone on the planet hears it in that fashion. Interestingly, most folks also hear a perfect fourth NOT as a fourth, but instead as an inverted fifth. That’s how strong is the pull of that harmonic relationship.
Never heard of this Jacob guy, but George Russell was responsible for John Coltrane and Miles Davis, studying The Lydian, chromatic concept and coming up with the best jazz record of all times… Kind of blue.
Hey, i didn't understand shit, i don't have a music background, but i loved every second anyway. Pretty sounds, pretty animation, funny funny George, I LOVE IT
One might continue the stacking of "5ths" through the rest of the chromatic scale to extensions beyond the 13th to include C# (#15), eb (b17), G# (#21) and Bb (b23). I wouldn't say that there is an "upward gravity" to this construction, nor does it help to understand the modes, but it adds a new world of color to one's chordal palette. The process could be applied to all chord types.
I am a master music theorist myself ... I can tell you this conversation is akin to semantics. You are simply layering colors and labeling them, then fighting over the labels by giving your own creed or power to a specific note or group of notes. Modes are modes, who cares what they are called or what is in them so long as we hear and feel the coloration of sound. Truth is each note is just a frequency vibration, and when mixed with other vibrations, it makes a coloration you either like or dislike, use or don't use. The rest is people wanting to have their name attached to the label. Also, this Jacob cat though super talented and great, didn't invent any of this. All been done.
I'm not a master theorist, but I was going to leave a comment similar to this. After struggling for a few decades, I've come to accept that the reason for a lot of compositional decisions is because it just sounded good, or was what they were going for. When you add timbre, dynamics and tempo, you realize you can make dark scales sound light and light scales sound dark. So then what's the point of all this crap? Music isn't a mathematical formula, there are many ways of achieving a desired impact, and all the rules are waiting to be broken. You venture into music theory, realize it's kinda bs, and step back out of it and into the creative process. If you treat music like a formula, it becomes a fractal of infinite substitutions and cycles. All pieces of music are one subset of the infinite fractal containing all possibilities. If music is a formula that you can grasp, you create everything without ever doing creation.
4:52 I KNEW it I fvcken KNEW it... I just commented under a recent lydian chromatic video that some of Russell's contentions feel like backronyms, to me... IOW, it seemed as if he designed his theory, and then found potentially conflicting musical examples, and then expanded his theory to explain some common practice... even though that practice had come out of a different theoretical and cultural framework. Which is fine, but it adds to my confidence since I was able to observe that.
Production quality is *chef's kiss*. Could you do a video on STAY by Justin Beiber/Kid LAROI but transpose the song into different wacky Lydian scales? Or an interpretation of how Jacob Collier would cover a pop song like this?
Lol 😂 I have that chart, it’s at the back of his unbelievably difficult book to understand, in my piano studio, over on the shelf. I had to take his class with him at NEC in the 80s. Next to worst class I had to take and stay awake, worst was Elliot Carter semester seminar. YAWN. Just looked at it for the first time in 35 years.
