Dave Pizter wrote:

>Of course one can transcribe any music for performance on any device which
>produces a diatonic scale.  The "trick" is to have the "new" music sound
>good.  ...
>
>...  The LINE in Bach is all-important.  (Set aside the fact that several
>running lines together produce contrapuntal music.) In other words, much
>of Bach's music is (Hold on, now!) --- monophonic.  Or, more correctly,
>several monophonic lines running together in time.

But even on some Bach linear melodies do not have this same ability, like
the concerts, or masses and choir music, so his hypothesis helps some
times, but not always.

I tried to make a intuitive (not structured) distinction between what I
called "pure" music (just voices) and "engaged" music [not in the political
acseption], in which this second would happen when the texture (height) of
the sound brings with it part of the music's "core".  A not good idea; it
just keeps the problem but on different terms.  The point is what makes
some Bach music "pure"? I don't know.  As I said to Tom Connor in a private
mail, I don't think it can be fully explained, even being very nice to keep
trying.

I tried to find a music that could get nice with different instrumentation,
so that I couldn't find a hole composer.  Maybe, with to a small group
(eight different intruments, including oboes, flutes, and violins) could
play Prokofiev piano sonata nr.  6, but I am not sure.  I will keep trying
to find one.

Regards,

Renato Vinicius