Objective Quality in Music: Comparing 'I Think I Love You' and 'Schism'

With all due respect to the other answers, the question is not as flawed as it first appears. The prime directive of music theorists is to ldquo;scientificallyrdquo; suggest a certain work style or composer is of higher quality. However, the concept of aesthetics is understood by everyone but often not proven. This article explores the objective quality of two songs from different eras, ldquo;I Think I Love Yourdquo; by The Partridge Family and ldquo;Schismrdquo; by Tool, and how their melodic ranges and techniques influence their perceived quality.

Understanding Quality in Music

The concept of a ldquo;geniusrdquo; like Mozart vs. an artist like Babatunde Olatunji, who performs traditional African music, highlights the subjective nature of musical quality. While Mozart’s talent is undeniable, he was also privileged in his ability to compose in a style that was notated and preserved. However, the improvisational nature of Olatunji’s music might be seen as a strength in its own right. What makes one piece of music high quality over another is often influenced by external factors such as the method of preservation and cultural context.

I Think I Love You

Letrsquo;s consider ldquo;I Think I Love Yourdquo; by The Partridge Family, which was a number one hit in 1970. Written and mostly performed by professional musicians, this song is often treated as pop fluff in an era dominated by psychedelic arena rock. While it was recorded by professionals, the melodic range and technical challenges faced by the singers were significant. Melodies from that era often took larger, more open intervalic leaps. This means that singers had to perform these complex leaps without the aid of pitch correction software.

Extreme cases, such as flatness, could be addressed by simply speeding up the track, making the vocals sound higher than they were originally sung. One example of this technique is Del Shannonrsquo;s 1961 hit ldquo;Runaway.rdquo; His voice was not as high as it sounded, and he was reportedly very nervous during the recording session. This necessitated the need for pitch correction during mixing to maintain the desired sound.

Schism

Now, letrsquo;s examine ldquo;Schismrdquo; by Tool, a song with a more contemporary sound. One aspect that sets this song apart is its melodic range, which falls within a more constrained intervalic leap. Unlike the expansive melodies of the 1960s and 1970s, ldquo;Schismrdquo; features melodies that are more consonant, making it less technically challenging in certain ways. However, this does not necessarily mean that ldquo;Schismrdquo; is of inferior quality; rather, it is a reflection of the evolving musical landscape and the technological advancements that have influenced the way music is produced.

Comparing the Two Songs

The comparison between ldquo;I Think I Love Yourdquo; and ldquo;Schismrdquo; reveals the complex nature of objective quality in music. Both songs are products of their respective eras and cultural contexts. ldquo;I Think I Love Yourdquo; represents the technical requirements and challenges of a time when live performances were often natural and unfeigned. On the other hand, ldquo;Schismrdquo; reflects the controlled and polished sound of modern music production.

Conclusion

The objective quality of music is a multifaceted concept that cannot be solely defined by technical aspects such as melodic range. Both ldquo;I Think I Love Yourdquo; and ldquo;Schismrdquo; showcase the unique strengths of their respective eras. While ldquo;I Think I Love Yourdquo; requires technical precision in live performance, ldquo;Schismrdquo; benefits from the precision and control provided by modern recording techniques.