When you talk about the music of those such as Bach, or anything you are likely to listen to, you speak of the Western organization of tones and music. That is, in general, scales with consonances and dissonances, etc. everything you are likely to know about music falls under this “Western” system.
Developing parallel to Western music is any number of what we call Non-Western musical doctrines (yes, unless you are a musicologist, you tend to classify all music as either Western or Non-Western). This is Japanese music, Javanese gamelan, and any other usually Eastern types, but including things such as Aboriginal Australian and African music as well. They are based on different things. African music for one is based a lot on aesthetic, on feeling, they use instruments and pitches that are difficult to use in error, so that everything sounds “correct”
Now Bach is a very interesting individual musically. He had the primo job that a musician could have for most of his life, the director of a Church music program, Maestro di Capella. This is a double edged sword. Most of these positions were in private chapels owned by very rich families who used them only as vehicles to show off their own wealth. A lot of the competition for them was very ugly. A lot of composers who took these jobs also composed very secular works that at the time was borderline heresy. So having the church job by no means meant that you were pious. It would be interesting to see how he operated today. There’s no mention to my knowledge of Bach moving to and fro for any particular religious reason, always musical or money. Granted we will never know the true feelings of most composers of this time, because -not- doing it “For the glory of god” usually ended up shortening your lifespan considerably, secular or no. But this was a time where you absolutely did not live if you did not have money, so who could blame him? And yes he was an expert at using the formal structures of the day and crafting said pieces perfectly, and yes his legacy is followed by a great many.
But his legacy was also preceded by a great many. Popular musical form was by Bach’s time a good 150 years or so in the making (you’ll find 150 is a good number in early musical history).
Music history is rife with changes as polarized, shocking, and full of contempt as any social argument today from abortion to morality. From the Church executions on the use of the tritone, to Beethoven destroying the symphonic genre with the Ninth, Schoenberg divorcing tonality completely, John Cage composing 4’33" of silence, there is always something changing.
Can we really say that Bach is perfect? Granted Bach is good, but Bach leads to Beethoven, Beethoven leads to others, eventually you have Debussy, Rachmaninoff, Copland, Ewazen.
Consider the conditions under which the composer composed what he did.
Beethoven never worked for the Church. His Ninth Symphony is one of the most comprehensive musical works you can find, consisting of well over 30 or 40 musical forms, including anything Bach wrote. Not only that he shattered the Symphonic Genre by adding a Choral section in the final movement, the “Ode to Joy”. No music from this period is simply music, but a very complex message woven by the composer. What’s funny about Beethoven given your comment is that he knew he was good, he knew he was perfect, he lived under a self imposed apotheosis, and there’s plenty of letters and journals to document that. Beethoven’s message is like any artist of the Enlightenment though, we must strive together for greatness, to reach god, etc etc. But specifically Beethoven breaks the rules of music both literally and figuratively… the baritone in the choral movement sings, in the first words after 30 or 40 solid minutes of music “My friends, not these tones, let us sing something more agreeable”, to which the choir takes up on the climb to Elysium.
As Westerners we primarily judge music on the set-up and resolution of dissonances. The fact that we like this is by no means a natural phenomena. I can guarantee if I play for you one day a chord progression leading to “I”, and every day after that play the same progression except not resolving to “I”, for 50 years, even though you only heard it once, you will always be craving that original resolution.
Nothing else in life is as instilled into us as the yearning for the resolution of a dissonant interval. It can make you shake, it can distract you from work, it can make you restless, yearning, waiting for the ultimate arrival. This is why it was at one point the greatest offense to create such dissonance, because it was seen as evil. This is why symphonies usually end with a lot of repeats of the same chord, to drive the point home, finally we have arrived. This is why bugles are usually only played in the lower areas of the harmonic series, nice open octaves and fifths to inspire the troops.
Music truly is a universal language, it can create feeling with absolutely no words, it can tell a complete story (see: Don Quixote) or deliver a powerful message, it can invoke the presence of a higher power much easier and with more force than any sermon or scripture. It is the ultimate expression of the soul, though we might not always agree with or like the message, we can all agree on the attitude on which it was created. Nothing else created by man touches the soul so early and so completely. Our capacity to create something so perfect, so comprehensive, so powerful. It attests to God’s ability to do the same, and by extension attests to our being, as we say, in his image.
Music exists, in all forms, therefore God exists.
