Topic: Is My Music Pretentious? (Read 50099 times)

öde · « **Reply #50 on:** 26 Jul 2009, 15:21 »

I see absolutely no need to translate music into English.

bbq · « **Reply #51 on:** 29 Jul 2009, 09:50 »

Actually I find music theory quite interesting and fun.

anyways you can't go around being 'atonal' because tonality is a musically theoretic construct.

Black_Chamber · « **Reply #52 on:** 29 Jul 2009, 13:48 »

Quote from: Jimor on 26 Jul 2009, 13:44

While the thread has derailed (into a pretty interesting topic at least), if you want feedback on these new posts, it would help to respond to the folks who did have comments to offer on the first one rather than just spamming the board with more links.

its not spamming...if people want to talk music theory thats fine. i'm just posting some links to some of my better newer stuff for the few that care

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qElwmS2ucvM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn8z_3QrWqo

this is some of my craziest stuff yet..

MadassAlex · « **Reply #53 on:** 29 Jul 2009, 19:27 »

Quote from: öde on 26 Jul 2009, 15:21

I see absolutely no need to translate music into English.

That's silly.

Think about it. Maybe you're in an open jam situation with a bunch of other people. You don't want to sound like shit, so you ask, "What key are we playing in?"

The organiser might shout out, "A minor!".

So now you know that the notes A B C D E F and G will always work. That doesn't stop you from using the enharmonic notes! It just means that they will be more dissonant in comparison to the notes above. But you might want to use G# if you're going for a Latin feel, or if you want to bust out some neoclassical. A# is a good one if you want to add some severity or darkness to your melody. Or what about F#? That's a pretty solid choice, in the key of A minor, if you want to be a bit bluesy or jazzy.
Or we could just summon the fucking darkness up from the bowels of hell and move C to C# and B to Bb, giving us the phrygian dominant scale.

Music theory is pretty great.

Johnny C · « **Reply #54 on:** 29 Jul 2009, 20:49 »

i mean i know theory but i still just play what i feel, man

MadassAlex · « **Reply #55 on:** 29 Jul 2009, 22:30 »

But you can do so with the kind of sound you want in mind.

Durin · « **Reply #56 on:** 30 Jul 2009, 17:59 »

Quote from: MadassAlex on 29 Jul 2009, 19:27

The organiser might shout out, "A minor!".

Which consists of the same notes as C Major but with a different root note! Knowledge is power!
I'm taking a music theory course next year because I figure it will make me a more literate musician which is important considering that I'm going to be a choral student of five years and currently attempting to become a decent guitarist. Really, there's a lot of things music theory, or at least courses, can teach you that will help you even if you want to just play "noise." Transcription and ear training for example.

David_Dovey · « **Reply #57 on:** 31 Jul 2009, 06:01 »

Quote from: Johnny C on 29 Jul 2009, 20:49

i mean i know theory but i still just play what i feel, man

hey so it turns out that one does not necessarily preclude the other!

(not calling you out or anything John, your post was just a good springboard was all)

Dennisdread · « **Reply #58 on:** 01 Aug 2009, 03:49 »

That music was fine. I was not bored, I was not offended and it wasn't hackneyed. I was in fact, entertained. Is there more to it than that?

Music theory?

What?

Eddie 88 · « **Reply #59 on:** 02 Aug 2009, 05:13 »

Disease Culture IS utterly pretentious. Between the spoken voice at the beginning (which I dearly hope was a soundbyte from something and not just you speaking into your computer's mic) and the image you chose for the video (hands holding cliche-looking drugs? seriously?) I had to supress my gag reflex. But the other three songs rock my socks, particulalry Disorder.

But I hardly think you qualify as a genius. You seem to be doing with music what I did with writing; when I was first developing as a writer, I ignored all literary convention and didn't read any books because I wanted to develop a unique flavor without any outside influences. It ultimately worked, but for the first ten years I was writing, all I produced was crap. I consider having gone through that a contributing factor to the talent I have as a writer today, but know that after I had sufficiently developed my own style, I did start studying actual conventional literary form and so forth, and it helped me to refine.

So keep on doing what you're doing, keep developing without any structure or formal training, but once you think you've sufficiently developed your own style, start studying the conventions just to brush up.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #60 on:** 03 Aug 2009, 07:49 »

Quote from: MadassAlex on 29 Jul 2009, 19:27

So now you know that the notes A B C D E F and G will always work. That doesn't stop you from using the enharmonic notes! It just means that they will be more dissonant in comparison to the notes above. But you might want to use G# if you're going for a Latin feel, or if you want to bust out some neoclassical. A# is a good one if you want to add some severity or darkness to your melody. Or what about F#? That's a pretty solid choice, in the key of A minor, if you want to be a bit bluesy or jazzy.
Or we could just summon the fucking darkness up from the bowels of hell and move C to C# and B to Bb, giving us the phrygian dominant scale.

Why don't you just go and masturbate in the toilet of a jazz club?

MadassAlex · « **Reply #61 on:** 03 Aug 2009, 21:42 »

They wouldn't let me in the front door, because my grasp of theory is far too basic.

MadassAlex · « **Reply #62 on:** 03 Aug 2009, 21:58 »

I also think it's pretty funny how the most prominent metalhead on a forum where most people listen to a form of punk-derived pop rock is the one who is decrying theory.

Black_Chamber · « **Reply #63 on:** 04 Aug 2009, 14:17 »

Some more of my newer stuff

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtAq35nu-pc

some low key, trip-hop kind of sound on this song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCitO90s2s0

psychedelic improvisation here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yZVIv9vsog

psychedelic hardcore punk

KharBevNor · « **Reply #64 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 08:36 »

I'm not a metalhead.

NotAFanOfFenders · « **Reply #65 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 09:30 »

What?

Johnny C · « **Reply #66 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 10:38 »

Quote from: David_Dovey on 31 Jul 2009, 06:01

hey so it turns out that one does not necessarily preclude the other

Some of my favourite records have been created by people who have no idea about music theory, so knowing theory doesn't preclude making good music either

BUT

that being said, I have to hammer home the point that if you play music then you utilize music theory whether you know it or not and so it's kind of absurd to hold out against it like you can possibly insulate yourself against what is effectively a system that gives language to something you already know from instinct.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #67 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 13:07 »

Quote from: NotAFanOfFenders on 06 Aug 2009, 09:30

What?

You heard me.

You seem to be making a weird assumption, Johnny, that everyone, in the process of making sounds, automatically arrives at a common system of rhythms and harmonies, and this is always what sounds best to people.

Have you ever heard African or Chinese or indigenous South American music?

pwhodges · « **Reply #68 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 13:52 »

Theory is a framework for understanding music of any and all types. You seem to be talking about what in the UK I would call "Grade V Theory", which is as limited as using a nineteenth century school grammar is when you come to analyse Joyce.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #69 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 14:35 »

Picasso was an exceptional prodigy. He's hardly an example that holds perfectly across all forms of art. Besides which, there is no equivalent of music theory in painting whatsoever.

Sox · « **Reply #70 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 14:37 »

the way you hold a paintbrush? how you go about various stages of completion? Nobody paints in the same way, but everybody has a method behind it.

pwhodges · « **Reply #71 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 15:10 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 06 Aug 2009, 14:35

Besides which, there is no equivalent of music theory in painting whatsoever.

Your saying that music theory (the tonic/dominant shit that I presume is what you're going on about) is worthless because it doesn't apply to all music is about equivalent to saying that perspective is useless because it doesn't apply to all painting. That's to say, it is a quite useless remark in its turn!

KharBevNor · « **Reply #72 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 15:32 »

Quote from: Sox on 06 Aug 2009, 14:37

the way you hold a paintbrush? how you go about various stages of completion? Nobody paints in the same way, but everybody has a method behind it.

But music theory wants everyone to have the same method.

pwhodges · « **Reply #73 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 15:38 »

That's not theory, that's a bad teacher.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #74 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 16:10 »

You arrange things on staves, using all the symbols and time signatures etc. How is that not rigid.

Sox · « **Reply #75 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 16:12 »

that's not music theory, that's music notation.
for the record, I hate music notation.

Be My Head · « **Reply #76 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 16:21 »

Music notation is so composers can easily tell musicians what they want them to play.

You can innovate with music notation to express your equally innovative musical ideas.

Can you imagine trying to teach an entire orchestra of musicians a piece of music by sitting down with them and actually learning it by heart? Sight reading is way more efficient in my opinion.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #77 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 16:32 »

What's the point in an orchestra?

I can see why you would need one orchestra, to record stuff on to mp3.

Be My Head · « **Reply #78 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 16:44 »

Live music sounds better, and each interpretation of the score brings a new perspective to the music...simple as that really...

NotAFanOfFenders · « **Reply #79 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 16:54 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 06 Aug 2009, 16:32

What's the point in an orchestra?

Making orchestral music.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #80 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 17:00 »

Imagine if each member of the orchestra just went away and made music on their own.

It would be 80 times better.

Or however many people there are in an orchestra.

sean · « **Reply #81 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 17:29 »

okay guys fuck bands, much better music would be made if each individual band member went off and did their own thing.

Eris · « **Reply #82 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 17:35 »

But khar, it wouldn't sound the same. I play the clarinet, but cannot play string instruments. If I wanted to get the sound of 10 violinists playing something I would have to a) learn how to play the thing and then play and record it however many times to get anywhere near a similar sound. Even then every one of those violinists play the piece slightly differently, so it is still not going to sound the same. Also, the skill level of those in an orchestra is much higher than me, so they will be able to understand what is wanted much quicker and will be able to play it more efficiently and generally better than me.

Orchestras would be very hard to replicate, because of all the various elements in the music. You could get the various musicians and record them on different tracks and put it together that way, or you could get them all in a big group and they can work off each other and have a more organic sound. Having all the different parts and adjusting levels on a computer to make it sound right seems like a very clinical way of going about it. My brother is a classical musician, so I have gone and listened to (a ridiculous number of) Wind Orchestra concerts and have been played a huge amount of orchestral music, and saying "let each member go out and make their own music" belittles the amount of work each member puts in to their parts of the music. They all work together and have their own responsibilities and the single piccolo player that has three notes to play in the whole piece is just as important as the lead violinist who has the big solo.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #83 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 18:57 »

Quote from: Objects inside Clouds on 06 Aug 2009, 17:29

okay guys fuck bands, much better music would be made if each individual band member went off and did their own thing.

But the majority of bands write new music. Orchestras just play often boring music dead white dudes wrote. Why the fuck does Mozart ever need to be performed ever again? I'm sure we've got some stonking vinyl lying around. New music is much more interesting.

Eris · « **Reply #84 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 19:11 »

I think it really comes down to the issue of taste. Some people like hearing boring music dead white dudes wrote. Some people actually compose music for orchestras who are not dead, or old, or white! Some people like playing music that dead old white dudes wrote. You don't, I don't, but some people do. Are you going to tell some kid who plays the violin that they will never be able to play the violin part their favourite classical piece because orchestras aren't important so we're not going to have them any more?

Also, what about things like soundtracks for movies? Recording every part individually would take so much more time, money and effort than bringing in an orchestra who are good enough to play what they need to in the time frame.

sean · « **Reply #85 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 19:59 »

You make a fair point about listening to music written by dead white people. I honestly don't have much interest in mozart either. However, I do know I would at one point enjoy a live performance of music for 18 musicians, simply to name a specific example. I don't think we need to dismiss orchestras altogether, just have them play more interesting (or at least a greater variety of) things.

I mean if you are trying to dismiss the power of live music Khar than your just being a grumpy old man for the sake of being grumpy.

Zingoleb · « **Reply #86 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 20:05 »

I like how people raise to Khar's bait so easily. Is funny! So funny.

Eris · « **Reply #87 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 20:14 »

Khar makes a good points, even if he is just baiting us all or not. I like how this is actually creating a conversation and discussion about musical theory, rather than a "here, look at my music!" thread, or a list thread consisting of song names that we are listening to. I like to think he is being a devil's advocate and getting us to think for once. But, I mean, if you want to just dismiss all of us like that then go ahead!

Is funny! So funny.

Zingoleb · « **Reply #88 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 20:17 »

Hey, if you want to dismiss me like that, go ahead!

I can never tell if he's being serious or disagreeing purely to disagree (Well, here at least - in DISCUSS it's a lot easier to tell). It's still amusing to watch it all unfold.

Eris · « **Reply #89 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 20:25 »

You're the one who came in here and essentially went "oh ho ho, look at you all; arguing with the troll, isn't it cute?". It doesn't really matter if he's being serious or disagreeing for the sake of it. If you don't want to be dismissed maybe you should say something that isn't so easily dismissable.

Be My Head · « **Reply #90 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 20:30 »

Personally, I think there IS music that's being overplayed which was written by dead white european males. There's room for the classics, and the new and maybe more interesting to us music.

Yeah, Mozart is overplayed, and I'm honestly not much of a fan of his music. If that offends you well then, I don't know what to say.

I think the new thing is mixing live musicians with recordings of electronic music. That seems pretty cool to me and I think we should continue with it. There's also a lot of overlooked compositions from the last century; like stuff from composers such as Toru Takemitsu. And there are some overlooked dead white female european composers that we should revisit. Such as... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1tnzcXPWbI&fmt=18

And some Takemitsu...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT7m9LLB-Ds&fmt=18

Sounds nothing like what those white guys composed.

Johnny C · « **Reply #91 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 20:50 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 06 Aug 2009, 18:57

But the majority of bands write new music. Orchestras just play often boring music dead white dudes wrote. Why the fuck does Mozart ever need to be performed ever again? I'm sure we've got some stonking vinyl lying around. New music is much more interesting.

old dead white dudes? sounds like someone hasn't heard of tallarico-sensei's truly monumental achievement, Video Games Live

Johnny C · « **Reply #92 on:** 06 Aug 2009, 20:51 »

khar's arguments are a wonderful series of arguments in favour of the billion albums of ambient music you can find made by dudes on the internet who have no idea how to write a song or even approach music without turning out the light and fumbling in the darkness like a kid who's never seen a bra before

pwhodges · « **Reply #93 on:** 07 Aug 2009, 00:39 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 06 Aug 2009, 18:57

Orchestras just play often boring music dead white dudes wrote.

This is just the same dead-end generalisation that you were using against theory. As a counter-example, Stockhausen got orchestras to improvise en masse - I helped engineer the broadcast of one of these by the BBC Symphony Orchestra when I was at the Beeb (the broadcast wasn't as good as the best of the try-outs, sadly).

phooey · « **Reply #94 on:** 07 Aug 2009, 00:51 »

Quote from: MadassAlex on 29 Jul 2009, 19:27

That doesn't stop you from using the enharmonic notes!

I am glad you like theory so much and stuff, but the word you're looking for is 'accidental.'

KharBevNor · « **Reply #95 on:** 07 Aug 2009, 04:15 »

Quote from: Johnny C on 06 Aug 2009, 20:51

khar's arguments are a wonderful series of arguments in favour of the billion albums of ambient music you can find made by dudes on the internet who have no idea how to write a song or even approach music without turning out the light and fumbling in the darkness like a kid who's never seen a bra before

Exactly! Lots of that stuff is really good. However, it's also an argument for countless other bands and artists who created and are creating defiant, original, untutored music.

As for arguing against orchestras being arguing against live music, come on. I've been to orchestral performances, it's not live music. It's music entombed. They don't even let you dance or sing along most times. Who the hell wants that kind of joyless experience?

MadassAlex · « **Reply #96 on:** 07 Aug 2009, 08:44 »

Quote from: phooey on 07 Aug 2009, 00:51

I am glad you like theory so much and stuff, but the word you're looking for is 'accidental.'

Both are applicable, since A# is equivalent to Bb. The notes outside A to G are literally enharmonic, or have multiple names that represent the same pitch.

Also Khar refuses to acknowledge

1. That different cultures produced different kinds of musical theory. But they were all theory.

2. Music theory is inherent in any description of individual aspects of music when standardised within one's own perception.

3. Music theory is not a limiting factor because it doesn't lay down laws, just action -> consequence relationships.

4. Standard notation has so many ways to vary and express notes that it hardly managed to limit anyone, anyway.

phooey · « **Reply #97 on:** 07 Aug 2009, 08:52 »

Every note has an enharmonic note. Eb = D#;Ebb = D and so forth. "Playing the enharmonic notes" has no real meaning, because that's what you're doing all of the time every time.

Also I'm of the camp that standard music notation kind of sucks but it's the best thing for what we got. I learned to get on with it, but I like sitting on my butt and not dancing at orchestral and chamber concerts. I don't think that means that it's "music entombed" or anything; there are different ways of appreciation than participation in my opinion.

MadassAlex · « **Reply #98 on:** 07 Aug 2009, 09:03 »

Quote from: phooey on 07 Aug 2009, 08:52

Every note has an enharmonic note. Eb = D#;Ebb = D and so forth. "Playing the enharmonic notes" has no real meaning, because that's what you're doing all of the time every time.

Right, but that just becomes ridiculously superfluous except when using flat accidentals of notes already flat within the key.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #99 on:** 07 Aug 2009, 09:17 »

So, what happens when you reverse the flux polarity of the dicritical bose-einstein condensate and shutter the output on planck time?

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Poll

Is My Music Pretentious?

Author Topic: Is My Music Pretentious? (Read 50099 times)

Zingoleb

Zingoleb