CAT 2025 Slot 1 · VARC · RC passage 2: Electronic Music and Its Critics

The full passage and all 4 questions (Q6–Q9) from CAT 2025 Slot 1, with answers and solutions.

The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.

Often the well intentioned music lover or the traditionally-minded professional composer asks two basic questions when faced with the electronic music phenomena: (1) . . . is this type of artistic creation music at all? and, (2) given that the product is accepted as music of a new type or order, is not such music "inhuman"? . . . As Lejaren Hiller points out in his book Experimental Music (co-author Leonard M. Isaacson), two questions which often arise when music is discussed are: (a) the substance of musical communication and its symbolic and semantic significance, if any, and (b) the particular processes, both mental and technical, which are involved in creating and responding to musical composition. The ever-present popular concept of music as a direct, open, emotional expression and as a subjective form of communication from the composer, is, of course still that of the nineteenth century, when composers themselves spoke of music in those terms . . . But since the third decade of our century many composers have preferred more objective definitions of music, epitomized in Stravinsky's description of it as "a form of speculation in terms of sound and time". An acceptance of this more characteristic twentieth-century view of the art of musical composition will of course immediately bring the layman closer to an understanding of, and sympathetic response to, electronic music, even if the forms, sounds and approaches it uses will still be of a foreign nature to him.

A communication problem however will still remain. The principal barrier that electronic music presents at large, in relation to the communication process, is that composers in this medium are employing a new language of forms . . . where terms like 'densities', 'indefinite pitch relations', 'dynamic serialization', 'permutation', etc., are substitutes (or remote equivalents) for the traditional concepts of harmony, melody, rhythm, etc. . . . When the new structural procedures of electronic music are at last fully understood by the listener the barriers between him and the work he faces will be removed. . . .

The medium of electronic music has of course tempted many kinds of composers to try their hand at it . . . But the serious-minded composer approaches the world of electronic music with a more sophisticated and profound concept of creation. Although he knows that he can reproduce and employ melodic, rhythmic patterns and timbres of a traditional nature, he feels that it is in the exploration of sui generis languages and forms that the aesthetic magic of the new medium lies. And, conscientiously, he plunges into this search.

The second objection usually levelled against electronic music is much more innocent in nature. When people speak—sometimes very vehemently—of the 'inhuman' quality of this music they seem to forget that the composer is the one who fires the machines, collects the sounds, manipulates them, pushes the buttons, programs the computer, filters the sounds, establishes pitches and scales, splices tape, thinks of forms, and rounds up the over-all structure of the piece, as well as every detail of it.

Question 6 · RC Inference Questions

What relation does the "communication problem" mentioned in paragraph 2 have to the questions that the author recounts at the beginning of the passage?

  1. A

    The communication problem is what allows us to see electronic music as music because music must be difficult to understand.

  2. B

    Unfamiliar forms and terms might get in the way of our seeing electronic music as music, but this can be overcome.

  3. C

    None; they are unrelated to one another and form parts of different discussions.

  4. D

    Its unfamiliar "language of forms" and novel terms mean that we cannot see electronic music as music since it does not employ traditional musical concepts.

Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option B

Pin down the two things being related. The opening questions are: is electronic music music at all, and is it not 'inhuman'? The communication problem of paragraph 2 is that composers use a new language of forms – densities, indefinite pitch relations, dynamic serialization, permutation – in place of harmony, melody and rhythm.

Paragraph 2 ends on a clear note of optimism: 'When the new structural procedures of electronic music are at last fully understood by the listener the barriers between him and the work he faces will be removed.' So the unfamiliarity is an obstacle to recognising it as music, and it is a surmountable obstacle.

Option 2 captures both halves – the obstacle and its removability. It is the answer.

Option 1 claims music must be difficult to understand. The passage says nothing of the sort; difficulty is the problem, not the qualification.

Option 3 claims no relation. But the communication problem is part of why the first question arises at all, so they are plainly connected.

Option 4 gets the stance backwards on two points. It concludes we cannot see electronic music as music, whereas the author says the barrier will be removed; and it says electronic music does not employ traditional concepts, whereas the passage says the new terms are 'substitutes (or remote equivalents)' for them.

Shortcut: the author is defending electronic music throughout. Any option whose verdict is negative or dismissive is out of tune with the passage's stance and can be dropped at sight – that removes options 3 and 4 immediately.

Hence, the answer is option 2.

Question 7 · RC Vocabulary in Context

From the context in which it is placed, the phrase "sui generis" in paragraph 3 suggests which one of the following?
  1. A
    Particular
  2. B
    Indescribable
  3. C
    Generic
  4. D
    Unaesthetic
Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option A

Read the sentence the phrase sits in: 'Although he knows that he can reproduce and employ melodic, rhythmic patterns and timbres of a traditional nature, he feels that it is in the exploration of sui generis languages and forms that the aesthetic magic of the new medium lies.'

The sentence is built on a contrast signalled by 'Although'. On one side are patterns 'of a traditional nature'; on the other side are 'sui generis' languages and forms. So sui generis must mean something close to the opposite of traditional or common – distinctive, of its own kind.

Option 3, 'generic', is the direct opposite of what the contrast demands, so it goes first.

Option 4, 'unaesthetic', is contradicted in the very same clause, which speaks of the 'aesthetic magic' of the new medium.

That leaves 'particular' and 'indescribable'. The composer is actively exploring and searching for these forms, which means they can be worked with and specified; 'indescribable' would make the search meaningless. 'Particular' – specific, of its own kind – fits the contrast exactly.

Shortcut: for a vocabulary-in-context question, locate the contrast word ('Although', 'but', 'rather than') and take the antonym of the term on the other side. Here the other side is 'traditional', so the answer must be the option nearest to 'distinctive' – that is 'Particular'.

Hence, the answer is option 1.

Question 8 · RC Tone and Attitude

The goal of the author over the course of this passage is to:
  1. A
    defend electronic music from certain common charges.
  2. B
    differentiate between electronic music and other forms of music.
  3. C
    defend the "serious-minded composer" from Lejaren Hill and Stravinsky.
  4. D
    differentiate the modern composer from the nineteenth century composer.
Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option A

Trace the structure. Paragraph 1 names two objections commonly raised against electronic music. Paragraphs 2 and 3 answer the first one – the barrier is only unfamiliarity of terms, and it will fall once listeners learn the new procedures. Paragraph 4 answers the second – the 'inhuman' charge is answered by listing everything the human composer does.

A passage organised as objection, reply, objection, reply is a defence. Option 1 names exactly that.

Option 2 is too weak. Differentiation happens in passing, but the author is not neutral; he is taking a side, which a mere comparison would not do.

Option 3 misreads the roles. Hiller and Stravinsky are cited in support of the author's position, not as attackers of the serious-minded composer.

Option 4 picks on one sentence in paragraph 1 – the nineteenth-century versus twentieth-century view of music – and treats that single contrast as the aim of the whole passage. Paragraph 4 has nothing to do with it.

Shortcut: count how many paragraphs an option can account for. Option 1 covers all four; options 2, 3 and 4 cover at most one each.

Hence, the answer is option 1.

Question 9 · RC Inference Questions

The mention of Stravinsky's description of music in the first paragraph does all the following EXCEPT:
  1. A
    help us determine which sounds are musical and which are not.
  2. B
    complicate our notion of what is communicated through music.
  3. C
    allow us to classify electronic music as music.
  4. D
    respond to and expand upon earlier understandings of music.
Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option A

Stravinsky's description is music as 'a form of speculation in terms of sound and time'. Take each option against what that description is made to do in paragraph 1.

Option 4 is done. The description is introduced with 'But since the third decade of our century many composers have preferred more objective definitions', set directly against the nineteenth-century view. That is responding to and building on an earlier understanding.

Option 3 is done. The author follows the quotation with the claim that accepting this view 'will of course immediately bring the layman closer to an understanding of, and sympathetic response to, electronic music'. Accepting the definition is what lets electronic music count as music.

Option 2 is done. The paragraph opens on music as 'a direct, open, emotional expression' and as 'a subjective form of communication'. Replacing that with speculation in sound and time unsettles the simple notion of what music communicates – Hiller's question (a), the substance of musical communication, is raised precisely here.

Option 1 is not done. 'Speculation in terms of sound and time' is a definition of the activity of composing, not a test that sorts musical sounds from non-musical ones. The passage never offers any such criterion.

Shortcut: in an EXCEPT question on a quoted definition, ask which option demands something the definition is too abstract to deliver. A broad, abstract definition cannot be used to classify individual sounds, so option 1 stands out.

Hence, the answer is option 1.

Take this paper as a timed test
Real exam timing, instant score, rank and topic-wise analysis.

Practice timed →