Some Thoughts About "The Golden Form"

[solarjazzband]

I was studying with the book "The guitarist's guide to composing and improvising" from Jon Damian. (Fantastic, awesome, great book btw!). But it's not what I'm talking about;

He was talking about "The golden form", if you haven't heard about it: in art and nature, there's a natural climax on about 2/3 if the whole.

I had heard about it, but after that statement I realised that it was also with my own solos! I ALWAYS build my climax to (around) the 2/3 of the whole... So I was immediatly thinking: What if I use another form? I tried to play with a climax on the biginning, and fading away during the solo. Sound good, but it´s hard.

But what I try to ´ask´ is if I would use another form, would it be good to the listener, would he like it? It sounds so strange if you play it, but strange is sometimes good... But to the listener, does it have to be this golden form?

[Phil Kelly]

The theory you've mentioned is based upon an ancient
Greek esthetic principle of "perfect" proportions called
the "Golden Mean " which is supposed to be a guide
to the ideal set of balances and ratios that cross all artistic
disciplines ..

You may have see illustrations of it from time to time:
It is usally expressed as a series of curves that form
a shape like a nautilus shell.

Google "Golden Mean" and see what you find..

BTW : the climax approx 2/3 into a given piece of music, solo,
or arrangement is also very similar to what I tell
arranging students to keep in mind as well ..( although I use the expression
between 65 to 75% as a peak.

[solarjazzband]

But would the listener like it if you start with a climax for example?

[3pointdeli]

it's the same as sex. you wouldn't want to climax at the beginning. however, since it is your music you should do whatever you want and make no apologies.