"Piece" or "Song"?

[vladimirdounin]

This is my translation of the "Chapter - 12" of  my book in Russian: "The Laws of Beauty in Music, unknown to music schools".

                                 https://www.proza.ru/2016/07/24/474

                                   "And does it sound like a song?"

In 1941, the entire senior year of the 1st Moscow Medical Institute, where my father studied, was sent to the front instead of state exams. A friend of my father Gosha Glukhikh helped the wounded under fire. For this hero action he was presented to the award and promoted to the rank. But he did not have enough time to receive the award, since he was executed "for anti-Soviet conversations" by denunciation from his colleagues who envied him. The very old mother of this Gosha sometimes lived in our family and once very amused me and my friends with her comment on my music studies: "He is studying, studying, playing, playing, however his music does not sound like a song at all".


Many years after that I became a student of the Moscow Conservatory and served as a security guard when the artists came to perform in the Great Hall of the Conservatory. I accompanied from the car to the hall and back Arthur Rubinstein, Van Cliburn, Arthur Benedetti Michelangeli, and other celebrities. For this I was allowed to listen to their rehearsals and concerts.

One morning I listened to S. Richter's rehearsal with K. Kondrashin. It was Grieg's concerto. For some reason, Richter had the mood to hang on to rehearsals, which he did. When the orchestra prepared to play, Kondrashin raised the conductor's baton and silence reigned.  Richter just at that moment "fell asleep" on the music stand of the piano, laying on it chest and shoulders with a head on the strings. Kondrashin asked him several times: "Can I start?" But Richter's dream was "so deep" that he did not react to the question. Kondrashin waved his hand and gave a sign to the timpani, who began their introductory tremolo with a huge crescendo. Richter still continued to "sleep" as before.

And then, when it was already clear to everybody that the timpani had been too long, the shoulders and Richter's arms suddenly slipped from the music stand, and he "smeared" the initial a-minor chord almost on time, though not exactly for the notes that were needed. In the same spirit, all the rest of the rehearsal passed, on which the pianist rather "fooled" rather than rehearsed. Some students just left this rehearsal, and the rest were divided in opinions: some thought that "Grieg was not for him," while others said that Richter simply "does not want to spend himself before the evening concert." No one had desire to go to an evening concert after such a rehearsal. All decided to go to the cinema.

For some reason, the trip to the movies broke, and I was still at this evening concert.

But, unlike the rehearsal, it was such an exciting performance, such a wonderful, truly great music performed by really great artists, that I, without even noticing it, bruised my hands.

What struck me most after this concert was my complete loss of voice - I could not even talk on the phone, only whispered until the next day. And I did not shout  "bravo" and "encore" at all.  I do not have a luxurious bass. A squeak in the high register of a man somehow does not fit. I did not shout for sure, but I lost my voice.

This phenomenon was explained to me at the Scientific and Research Laboratory of the Moscow Conservatory. It turns out that all the listeners (and often the performers themselves), if they are completely captured by the music, begin to perceive this music as a song and always involuntarily begin to sing along with it (at least "inside of themselves", in the soul) - this is a widely known phenomenon. But if I suppress this singing inside of myself (singing in the hall aloud during a piano concert is indecent), and the ligaments, voice cords still try to sing, then I over-stress them in such a way, and they lose their working capacity because of this for a certain period. So the expression "I'm speechless after your performance" can have a completely literal meaning.

And here the success of great artists is based on this effect- they involve all their listeners in performance, everyone in the room becomes (albeit only mentally) its participant, singer, everyone merges with the heart and soul with the general flow and mood of this music festival, and not remains only a passive, outside observer. My teacher V.Nilsen spoke about this with these words: "There was a holiday/festival - there was a concert. There was no celebration - there was no concert "

If the listeners did not want to sing, it means that this music "did not catch" them, left them indifferent. By the way, in English-speaking countries, whatever you play, it's still called a song ("song"), even if it's "Prokofiev's" Toccata ".
I bumped into this fact, when I start my performances in Sun-City (the most luxurious resort in the world at that time. Republic of South Africa). Each evening guests from around the globe asked me the title of the last SONG I played. The same SONG instead of PIECE I hear everyday around me in the most international country - Canada.
 
The huge popularity of Russian music abroad is primarily due to the fact that it is not something that sounds like songs, but simply consists of songs. This was convincingly proved by American composers, stealing almost all the themes of Russian great symphonies, operas, ballets and concertos for "their own" songs. And now they are already seriously and under threat of prosecution demanding royalties for every performance of "Fly on the wings of the wind" from the opera "Prince Igor" by Borodin (now it is called "Strangers in Paradise") The 6th Symphony of Tchaikovsky ("Starry Night"), the 5th Symphony - (again some kind of "Night"), "Swan", "The Nutcracker", the 2nd Concerto by Rachmaninov, etc.


When I began to learn from V. Nielsen, he immediately put me on a "song diet" - Schubert, List, Glinka, Balakirev, etc., telling me that a pianist who can not play a song is not worth a penny. "As a song," he demanded to play both Mozart's Sonatas and  Bach's Preludes and Fugues. It was forbidden for me to sing at the same time, although the world-famous Bach performer Glen Gould, for example, simply could not play and make his record without simultaneously singing the same music with his own voice (and quite loud). His "vocal part" was never possible to remove from many of his records.

Nielsen likewise considered the Studies of Cherni (a pupil of Beethoven) excellent music and demanded to play them absolutely seriously, and also "as a song." And recently I learned that (at some period in his life) only the  Cherni's Studies were recorded  by the famous pianist Vladimir Horowitz. Hence, he considered them to be good music, in contrast to lazy students and bad teachers.

By the way, the famous Chopin's Study in E-Major (op.10 №3) at first was just the beginning of the next rapid Study, C-sharp Minor (op.10 №4). And Chopin separated No 3, making it a separate piece, only under the pressure of the public, who wanted to sing this Study in their souls, and not just listen to it at a fast pace. Subsequently, Chopin always considered this Study in E-Major the best melody of all that he wrote.

In 1993, I signed a contract with the resort "Sun City" in South Africa. I had to play in their huge Crystal Palace with wonderful acoustics on the wonderful "Boezendorfer" grand piano 6 days a week playing for guests from all over the world "pleasant, quiet, relaxing music" for 6 hours without repeating the played melodies in the course of the day. Then I was offered to play not for 6 hours a day, but already for 13 "on conditions that can not be refused."

However, I did not have enough "pleasant, quiet, relaxing melodies" in my memory for a 13 hour shift (there was no library and internet at that time). Not having a better way out of the situation, I started playing the fast works known to me in the "slow-motion" mode. - No one objected.

But one day a group of people, obviously experienced in music, sat around me (they asked the servants to bring chairs closer to my piano) and began to smile  looking me in the face. They sat there for about two hours, then came and asked if I knew who they were? They introduced themselves to me - the professors of the Madrid Conservatory.  I did not expect anything good from them, except severe professional criticism. But instead of criticism they gave me a hundred-dollar bill and a bottle of wine with the words that they could not even imagine how enjoyable  can be the Chopin's Studies(I played almost all 24 but the most dramatic ones) at the "pace of Adagio" (very slowly).

By the way, for my fast technique I received many ovations, flowers, screams "Wow!",  sometimes even kisses.  However, all the money that I received  from my grateful listeners in my entire life - they were only for slow music. If someone else has not become a millionaire yet - keep in mind.

Today I always try, that my and my students' music sounds like a song, and I advise others to do the same.

[themeandvariation]

Interesting story.

It seems to me that Music as Song (whether actually sung, or internal) has been a recurrent theme - as an Approach for composers and performers for centuries.. (There are times/styles where that is out of fashion though)…
An approach of (singing) method is one thing (a good thing, i think) … But the actual title by the composer is another.. But just calling it All - 'songs'  - means that "Three Blind Mice" is also included in that labeling…  

[visitor]

Is a piece of a song a piece or  a song

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I didn't read the post but I think I get the general idea of it

Anyone who gets mad when you call a piece a song are snobs.  And they probably suck anyways

[stevensk]

So..now I am a singer?   

[visitor]

So..now I am a singer?   

no. you are piecer. 

[keypeg]

You have two very different concepts going on.  (I suspect that this post was influenced in part by the criticism of your video, where you called another piece a "song".)

Any field has specific terminology which is shared by those in the field, and this helps people work together and communicate.  Otherwise you have to explain what you mean using lots of words.  As such, "song" and "piece" have defined meanings.  A song is music created for singers to sing, and usually has words.   A piece is music written to be played by instruments.  Just like quartets have four instruments playing, etc.  That is what they are.

The other is a concept of how these things are to sound.  You are after song-like qualities, or he quality that a singer brings into the music.   In this, you mean the lyrical flowing quality, the phrasing.  You are not trying to put words into the playing, which is a clear impossibility - an other aspect of songs). Instrumental music that are played in a song-like manner is still called "pieces", not "songs".  I'm also thinking that some sung music tries to sound instrumental.  (Does "scat" go in that direction?).  If so, these would be songs, that are sung like pieces.

We have an additional challenge that Russian art developed in isolation for a period, and various concepts sprang up, which were expressed in the Russian language.  Attempts are then made to bring across these concepts in the new "international language" --- English --- using words.  Those words may already contain meanings and associations.  "Intonation" is one example.  Over here, when I took violin lessons, it meant "play in tune" --- if A = 440, don't make it 445 or 437.  But the Russian word means something quite different, more subtle.  Words are tricky things.

(When people at concerts talk about "songs", it is because unfortunately places like iTunes categorizes them as such, so it's slipping into the vocabulary.  It has nothing to do with whether they hear a played piano piece as singing.)

I am a trained teacher, but I have worked in the field of languages for quite a few years.  Terminology across languages, and within various fields, is a thing I do on a daily basis.  Words are tricky and slippery.

[marik1]

We have an additional challenge that Russian art developed in isolation for a period, and various concepts sprang up, which were expressed in the Russian language.  Attempts are then made to bring across these concepts in the new "international language" --- English --- using words.  Those words may already contain meanings and associations.

It is important to mention, unlike it might come across from Mr. Dounin's post, in Russian the usage of  "piece" (pjesa) and "song" (pesnja) are very specific, have very clear definition, and refer to completely different genres.

While indeed, the singing qualities in Russian music and music pedagogy are very important, to call in Russian say, Liszt Sonata a "song" would be highly illiterate, uncultural, and considered inappropriate. In Russian that would be absolutely not the way to discuss methodological, or performance problems on more or less amateur (let alone professional) level--nobody would understand what you mean...

Best, M

[rachmaninoff_forever]

While indeed, the singing qualities in Russian music and music pedagogy are very important, to call in Russian say, Liszt Sonata a "song" would be highly illiterate, uncultural, and considered inappropriate. That would be absolutely not the way of discussing methodological, or performance problems on more or less amateur (let alone professional) level--nobody would understand what you mean...

Best, M

Dude no

EVERYONE knows what you're talking about whether or not you refer to a Liszt sonata a piece or a song and anyone who makes a big deal out of it is just being elitist.  In my five years of studying music at a university level I've heard so many professionals use song and piece interchangeably it's just not a big deal.

I think it's more inappropriate to point out that someone called a piece a song than someone just calling a piece a song

[marik1]

I think it's more inappropriate to point out that someone called a piece a song than someone just calling a piece a song

Following the same logic, it's more inappropriate to call a 'snob' someone who pointed out that calling a piece a song is unprofessional than someone pointing out that calling a piece a song is unprofessional;)

In any case, the very first hit for Google search on 'song vs. piece difference' is here and nicely summarizes things:

https://www.pianodiscoveries.com/wordpress/2009/10/song-vs-piece-what-is-difference/

but of course, we decide for ourselves...

Just do yourself a favor, when (if) you go to a graduate college and write a paper say, on harmonic analysis of Schubert Lieder--you can call it a 'song'. Whenever you talk about Schubert Sonata--call it a 'piece'. Trust me on that one--I've been teaching on college and University levels for number of years--depending on other things you might very well get your grade lowered.

Good luck, M

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Dude no

EVERYONE knows what you're talking about whether or not you refer to a Liszt sonata a piece or a song and anyone who makes a big deal out of it is just being elitist.  In my five years of studying music at a university level I've heard so many professionals use song and piece interchangeably it's just not a big deal.

I have *never* heard a "professional" use the terms indiscriminately. It's not "elitist" to get it right, it's just another facet of presentation. I guess Apple have a lot to answer for.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I have *never* heard a "professional" use the terms indiscriminately. It's not "elitist" to get it right, it's just another facet of presentation. I guess Apple have a lot to answer for.

My teacher called the rach 3 a 'long song' then he performed it twice in Japan.  But that makes him illiterate and uncultured right?

Dude it totally is elitist you just said if you call a piece a song that makes them uncultured and illiterate get off your high horse.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Following the same logic, it's more inappropriate to call a 'snob' someone who pointed out that calling a piece a song is unprofessional than someone pointing out that calling a piece a song is unprofessional;)

In any case, the very first hit for Google search on 'song vs. piece difference' is here and nicely summarizes things:

https://www.pianodiscoveries.com/wordpress/2009/10/song-vs-piece-what-is-difference/

but of course, we decide for ourselves...

Just do yourself a favor, when (if) you go to a graduate college and write a paper say, on harmonic analysis of Schubert Lieder--you can call it a 'song'. Whenever you talk about Schubert Sonata--call it a 'piece'. Trust me on that one--I've been teaching on college and University levels for number of years--depending on other things you might very well get your grade lowered.

Good luck, M

I'm already in grad school

You're judging people based on how they say something instead of the actual content of what they're saying that makes you elitist

[marik1]

My teacher called the rach 3 a 'long song' then he performed it twice in Japan. 

I feel the irony in your teacher's words and... agree with him)))

[ronde_des_sylphes]

My teacher called the rach 3 a 'long song' then he performed it twice in Japan.  But that makes him illiterate and uncultured right?

Dude it totally is elitist you just said if you call a piece a song that makes them uncultured and illiterate get off your high horse.

I didn't call anyone uncultured, or illiterate.

And so what? My teacher played Rach 3 and Tchaikovsky 1 oodles of times (and the Liszt Sonata in public at 16, at a point in time when that really meant something) and he would have had a good chuckle at this.  A song is something which is sung. But if people want to try and redefine the vocabulary, far be it for me to try to stop them.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

I think, marik, our comparative ages are showing here 

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I didn't call anyone uncultured, or illiterate.

And so what? My teacher played Rach 3 and Tchaikovsky 1 oodles of times (and the Liszt Sonata in public at 16, at a point in time when that really meant something) and he would have had a good chuckle at this.  A song is something which is sung. But if people want to try and redefine the vocabulary, far be it for me to try to stop them.

My bad I thought you were the other guy whoops

[keypeg]

annoying dancing picture

If you don't want to read something lengthy, that is your prerogative.  But some of us would like to be be able to read posts without having to scroll past moving images which frankly don't tell us anything worthwhile anyway.  It is literally distracting.  Like somebody waving their hands in front of your face while you're trying to read something.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Bottom line is if I'm talking to someone as long as I know what they're talking about then whatever.

People come from different backgrounds so they might use slang and double negatives and mispronounce words and misuse they they're and their but idc as long as I understand the content of their message.  

[keypeg]

It is important to mention, unlike it might come across from Mr. Dounin's post, in Russian the usage of  "piece" (pjesa) and "song" (pesnja) are very specific, have very clear definition, and refer to completely different genres.

While indeed, the singing qualities in Russian music and music pedagogy are very important, to call in Russian say, Liszt Sonata a "song" would be highly illiterate, uncultural, and considered inappropriate. In Russian that would be absolutely not the way to discuss methodological, or performance problems on more or less amateur (let alone professional) level--nobody would understand what you mean...

Marik, thank you for the explanation.  I did get a fair smattering of Russian years ago and knew the words pyesa and pesnya (English readers might mistake the "j" for the sound in "jump"), I did not learn these as music terminology.  My first inkling that some words may have different connotations was with the word "intonation".  That left open the possibility that other terms may have different shades of meaning too.  Thank you for explaining this.

[ca88313]

.

[marik1]

You're judging people based on how they say something instead of the actual content of what they're saying that makes you elitist

No, that's not true. I judge people not on what they say, but rather on what they do, which IMO, is all that matters. If a person states that: "[Horowitz] performance 'so terrible and stupid'" and then offers his own rendition of the piece then I'd expect something if not spectacular, but at least some new approach, which opens one's eyes on that piece and gives new life into it. Instead, the person posts IMHO, quite questionable in its musical merits performance on many levels. My comment on the use of 'song' instead of 'piece' was made to point out that this was yet another detail in unprofessional approach.

And BTW, my use of "illiterate and uncultural" was referring to use of 'pesnya' and 'pyesa' terms interchangeably in Russian, if you read it carefully.

Hope now it is clear.

Best, M

[marik1]

I think, marik, our comparative ages are showing here 

No doubt)))

[keypeg]

more gifs in response

Mjames, I have eye problems and am not young.  You are making it very difficult to read the thread.  What possible motivation can you have in making things difficult for others, after they have told you of the problem?  Maybe you don't understand that it does create difficulty reading?

[marik1]

My first inkling that some words may have different connotations was with the word "intonation".  

Indeed, sometimes it can be hard to explain words like 'intonatziya', or 'intelligentziya', which very much understood by any Russian native speakers--one of those cases when there are no direct translations. However, to stress again, there is no any doubt in use of 'pesnya' (song) and 'piyesa' (piece) as distinct music terms in Russian where those are not interchangeable.

Best, M

[klavieronin]

While I don't usually bother to point out the mistake when I hear it, I do always wince a little when I hear someone call and instrumental piece a "song". To me it's like hearing a Chopin nocturne and calling it a sonata. "My favourite sonata is Chopin's Op.9 No.2" just doesn't sound right.

My understanding though was that "song" is a genre within the broad category of "pieces". Sonatas are pieces, concertos are pieces, waltzes are pieces, and songs are pieces, but you are jumping into a different category when you call anything other than a "song" a song.

However, like others have pointed out, it could be different in other languages and in general conversation there is usually no need to make that distinction. In more formal settings though it does to my ear sound very amateurish to call a piece a song.

[ca88313]

.

[marik1]

Every piece can be sung though.

Every piece could also be danced. Still by any stretch that would be hard to call something like say, Frank Prelude Chorale and Fugue a dance...

Best, M

[ca88313]

.

[ca88313]

.

[nickc]

Complete silence can also be a form of music. You could have a set of empty musical staffs in front of you and follow its directions. For example, John Cage's 4'33":

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

How would you interpret it though? Has John Cage created music that can be interpreted in any way, shape or form by anything or music that can be interpreted in exactly one way because there is only one way to truly adhere to the score, i.e. by staying completely silent for four minutes and thirty three seconds? How can this paradox be solved?

In regards to this creation, I feel that most people miss the other musical aspect of this work. Most would listen to this and focus on the music surrounding them physically... but not many will focus on themselves and the music internally. It truly is a wonderful composition...

[klavieronin]

Every piece can be sung though.

The fact that every piece can be sung doesn't make every piece of music a song any more than the fact that every piece can be orchestrated doesn't make every piece of music a symphony. A song is a particular kind of piece and the term carries certain connotations (at least in English).

I think the reason most people refer to any piece of music as a song is because 99.9% of popular music are songs and since relatively few people get exposed to anything outside of popular music they assume everything is a song, and so the term just sticks.

Google's definition: "a short poem or other set of words set to music or meant to be sung."

[vladimirdounin]

The fact that every piece can be sung doesn't make every piece of music a song any more than the fact that every piece can be orchestrated doesn't make every piece of music a symphony. A song is a particular kind of piece and the term carries certain connotations (at least in English).

I think the reason most people refer to any piece of music as a song is because 99.9% of popular music are songs and since relatively few people get exposed to anything outside of popular music they assume everything is a song, and so the term just sticks.

Google's definition: "a short poem or other set of words set to music or meant to be sung."

Even Google gives another meaning of the word "Song" (read  Google under quoted by you definition another one: "a musical composition suggestive of a song"

Other dictionaries give another meaning as well: " SONG"

noun -  "melody sung or played with musical instrument"

I quoted  https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/song

I do not communicate in Toronto with native English speakers, probably, they died off long time ago.
ALL people around me (teachers, examiners, adjudicators, students, their parents) never use the word PIECE. I realize that it can irritate those who's mother-language is  English.

In Republic of South Africa i had the same environment.

[vladimirdounin]

Every piece could also be danced. Still by any stretch that would be hard to call something like say, Frank Prelude Chorale and Fugue a dance...

Best, M

You are absolutely right. When I worked as a Chorus Master in Opera and had to teach my choristers, who did not know anything  about Music and even did not speak any language I knew, I got excellent results by teaching them to step dance on music of Rigoletto and Carmina Burana. I even got double pay for the results (I hope to translate my Chapter - 13 on this topic from my "Laws of beauty in Music unknown to Music Schools  ) https://www.proza.ru/2016/07/25/801

By the way: How many pieces of Chopin can not be danced?

[keypeg]

Even Google gives another meaning of the word "Song" (read  Google under quoted by you definition another one: "a musical composition suggestive of a song"

Other dictionaries give another meaning as well: " SONG"

Google is no source at all.  Anything at all, including very incorrect spellings, can appear on Google.  When dealing with a term in a specialization, a specialized resource should be used.  Terminology is important because it allows people to communicate.

From the Harvard Concise Dictionary of Music and Musicians:

"Song: A form of musical expression in which the human voice has the principal role and is the carrier of a text; as a generic term, any music that is sung; more specifically , a short, simple vocal composition consisting of melody and verse text....."

It continues for another 16 paragraphs.

I do not communicate in Toronto with native English speakers, probably, they died off long time ago.

I do.  The word "piece" is used for instrumental music, and "song" is used for vocal music.  The exception is that Apple's iTunes refers to "songs" so people are starting to be influenced by that misuse via that medium.  But that is relatively rare.

THE POINT is that you are trying to bring across a concept. Why get hung up on a term, in a language that is secondary to you, when you are first of all a musician, and not a linguist, trying to communicate with musicians?

[vladimirdounin]

It is important to mention, unlike it might come across from Mr. Dounin's post, in Russian the usage of  "piece" (pjesa) and "song" (pesnja) are very specific, have very clear definition, and refer to completely different genres.

While indeed, the singing qualities in Russian music and music pedagogy are very important, to call in Russian say, Liszt Sonata a "song" would be highly illiterate, uncultural, and considered inappropriate. In Russian that would be absolutely not the way to discuss methodological, or performance problems on more or less amateur (let alone professional) level--nobody would understand what you mean...

Best, M

Marik1 is absolutely right about the use of the words  "song" and "piece" in Russian. The Russians never call a "piece" a "song" and vice versa.

In Russian language I never do it either.  However, I am learning English from the people around me  and want to be understood by them easily. 99% of the nowadays  teachers, examiners,  students, their parents etc. today prefer to say "song" instead of "piece".

It shocked me as well on my first days of my work in English speaking country (Rep. of South Africa) but numerous conversations with plenty of people from around the globe changed my  permanent desire to say "piece", when ALL of them say "song". I did not want to brag with my "professionalism" in front of the people,  who liked me and wanted  to be friends.

I did not visit Pianostreet for 10 years and forgot local traditions and puritanism.  Sorry for that.

[chrisbutch]

In Russian language I never do it either.  However, I am learning English from the people around me  and want to be understood by them easily. 99% of the nowadays  teachers, examiners,  students, their parents etc. today prefer to say "song" instead of "piece".

I find that very surprising, particularly the inclusion of teachers and parents. As has been said earlier in the thread, the corruption of the term 'song' to connote other than music for voice can be traced to an origin as recent as 2003, when iTunes was launched. Here in the home of the English language (the United Kingdom), this usage is still confined largely to the iTunes generation. Those not of that generation still find it variously confusing, irritating or rebarbative.

[vladimirdounin]

I find that very surprising, particularly the inclusion of teachers and parents. As has been said earlier in the thread, the corruption of the term 'song' to connote other than music for voice can be traced to an origin as recent as 2003, when iTunes was launched. Here in the home of the English language (the United Kingdom), this usage is still confined largely to the iTunes generation. Those not of that generation still find it variously confusing, irritating or rebarbative.

Anyone, who knows Russian, can check all the 33 Chapters (written for now) of my book "The Laws of Beauty Unknown to Music Schools" on Internet.  https://www.proza.ru/2016/07/23/645

I never confused these two words even ones in the whole text.

In the future, I will, probably, try to translate some chapters into English.  So,  please,  check my statement regarding "piece" and "song"   in my native language.

[keypeg]

Marik1 is absolutely right about the use of the words  "song" and "piece" in Russian. The Russians never call a "piece" a "song" and vice versa.

In Russian language I never do it either.  However, I am learning English from the people around me  and want to be understood by them easily. 99% of the nowadays  teachers, examiners,  students, their parents etc. today prefer to say "song" instead of "piece".

It is understandable that you would not be up to speed about usage in English.  But you have now been told by quite a few people what the usage is.  It is like Russian.  It is absolutely not true that 99% of teachers, their students, and examiners use "song" when a piece is meant.   That would mean that 99% of students would fail general, low level exams here.  No teacher I have studied with has used any other word than "piece" to mean piece.

It is ok to have a mistaken impression about words in a second or third language.  But now know: in English among musicians, the music played by an instrument, is called "piece".  I gave an authoritative source.

[klavieronin]

As has been said earlier in the thread, the corruption of the term 'song' to connote other than music for voice can be traced to an origin as recent as 2003, when iTunes was launched.

I'm a little suspicious of that claim. I'm sure itunes has a lot to answer for but I remember being laughed at by one of my high school friends (I left high school in 1999) for using the word "piece" to describe a solo piano work.

[vladimirdounin]

It is understandable that you would not be up to speed about usage in English.  But you have now been told by quite a few people what the usage is.  It is like Russian.  It is absolutely not true that 99% of teachers, their students, and examiners use "song" when a piece is meant.   That would mean that 99% of students would fail general, low level exams here.  No teacher I have studied with has used any other word than "piece" to mean piece.

It is ok to have a mistaken impression about words in a second or third language.  But now know: in English among musicians, the music played by an instrument, is called "piece".  I gave an authoritative source.

Do you live in the same city, where I am living  (Toronto, Canada)? If not, how can you deny MY statistics for MY city?

On You Tube you can find HUNDREDS of performances of Traumerei  by choir, vocalists, vocal ensembles etc  You can find even movies with vocal Traumerei.

What is the sense to deny absolutely obvious vocal nature of this piece/song? Unfortunately, this music does not sound like a song during the usual postmortem path-anatomical autopsy at tempo "40".

And what about  so called "Vocalises" ( a vocal piece sung by human voice but without any words)?
Is "Vocalise" a song or a piece? 

[marik1]

Do you live in the same city, where I am living  (Toronto, Canada)? If not, how can you deny MY statistics for MY city?

On You Tube you can find HUNDREDS of performances of Traumerei  by choir, vocalists, vocal ensembles etc  You can find even movies with vocal Traumerei.

What is the sense to deny absolutely obvious vocal nature of this piece/song? Unfortunately, this music does not sound like a song during the usual postmortem path-anatomical autopsy at tempo "40".

And what about  so called "Vocalises" ( a vocal piece sung by human voice but without any words)?
Is "Vocalise" a song or a piece? 

I find it amusing--you created a thread asking for correct use of terms 'song' vs. 'piece' in English. Quite a few members gave you explicit answers, bringing very credible sources. You did not hear the answer you wanted to hear, so you keep going on proving you are right...

Isn't that funny?

Best, M

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Do you live in the same city, where I am living  (Toronto, Canada)? If not, how can you deny MY statistics for MY city?

It is funny: I know a few musicians from Canada, and indeed Toronto also. They must be part of the 1% who say "piece".

 
(To be fair, whether it's a "song" or "piece" doesn't really affect the original argument about tempo, but this is a specific thread on usage.)

[keypeg]

Do you live in the same city, where I am living  (Toronto, Canada)? If not, how can you deny MY statistics for MY city?

I did in fact live in Toronto, Ontario (as Canadians tend to refer to it) for quite a few years.  In the period where I was a teacher, it was in the outskirts of Toronto.  The RCM has its headquarters in Toronto and exams (practical, theory) are booked throughout the province via these headquarters.  Passing RCM material by young students is officially recognized for credit at Canadian universities.  Here, for example, instrumental music is referred to as pieces.  Nonetheless, what is done in one single city does not dictate usage within the entire English speaking world.

If the circle of people you communicate in uses the word "song", then the statistics for that circle will be as you say.  But that does not indicate usage.   This is altogether silly.  I've probably been the friendliest voice in this forum, barring one or two.  I encouraged that the IDEA you are trying to bring across is something to look at, and tried to help you with vocabulary as a non-native speaker.  Yet you stubbornly cling to using a word that will tend to make many not look at your idea.  It is probably time to bow out of this.  Basically I'm bemused.

And what about  so called "Vocalises" ( a vocal piece sung by human voice but without any words)?
Is "Vocalise" a song or a piece?  

The answer to this can be found in my quote from the Harvard Concise Dictionary of Music and Musicians.  Please have a look back, and see what you think.

[timothy42b]

Most fields have their particular jargon.

When you are communicating in that field, or with other members, you adjust to that use.

At other times you use the more general popular meanings.

With musicians, you have to distinguish between song and piece.  That's just the shared understanding we all have.

With nonmusicians, you can use a dictionary definition or a common sense one.  You need to know your audience.

With a scientist, the word theory has a very specific and rigorous meaning.  It's a hypothesis that with of support from data and a detailed explanation of the mechanics has risen to the level of knowledge.  To a nonscientist, it just means something unknown or uncertain. 

I'm an engineer.  Stress and strain are very different things and can't be used interchangeably.  An O-ring is not a shape but a function, despite common usage.  But outside my peer group these words mean something quite different. 

[marik1]

I encouraged that the IDEA you are trying to bring across is something to look at, and tried to help you with vocabulary as a non-native speaker.  Yet you stubbornly cling to using a word that will tend to make many not look at your idea.  It is probably time to bow out of this.

On a fair side, despite rather poor presentation, unprofessional use of music terminology (as well as factual confusions) and general attitude, I tried the idea. While it sounds unusual, it can be done that way too, which I stated a few times in other threads. Yet, for some reason Mr. Dounin in the same stubborn way keeps telling over and over again I need to test it on some 'guinea pigs' and accuses of being an 'old soul'. Indeed, to bow out seems like a good idea...

Best, M

[chrisbutch]

I'm a little suspicious of that claim. I'm sure itunes has a lot to answer for but I remember being laughed at by one of my high school friends (I left high school in 1999) for using the word "piece" to describe a solo piano work.

That's interesting. I take it from your reference to 'high school' that you are, or were, in the USA? It may be, then, that the usage had earlier origins in the US, but it took the universal reach of iTunes for it to cross the Atlantic. Perhaps I was unfairly blaming protégés of the late Mr Jobs when they were merely picking up on a trend already current among their Californian contemporaries.

[klavieronin]

That's interesting. I take it from your reference to 'high school' that you are, or were, in the USA?

Australia actually. But we do seem to import a lot of our culture from the US.