Rant on music theory ignorance.

[tee boy]

I was thinking generally. You dont see many alto flute playering in metal bands

ever hear of a band called Jethro Tull? Though by todays standards they are not metal...but back then they were more heavy then most of the pop music...however I always considered them art rock....

Vaguely, a little before my time.

But again, I think you can get the jist of what Im saying. Someone trained classically in contra bassoon is less likely to become a diehard rocker than someone born and raised on a Les Paul.

[Hovmod]

edited: removed some pretentous condescending shite.

[j_T]

A lot of non-western music is done by following very strict and frequently very complicated and highly developed rules. Even when they are not written down (oral tradition) musicians of these non-western cultures know them and have to follow them. You might call that music theory, too ...

BTW I happened to meet Karl-Heinz Stockhausen during my time at university and I used to know his son pretty well - great trumpet player, mostly Jazz and classical music.

Stockhausen deliberately broke with musical traditions and he was very well aware of non-western music. (Actually, he DID and he IS. He is still an active composer.) Our institute at university took part in a few of his performances. And I still remember very well his extreme opinions concerning what's required to call oneself a musician or composer ...

Believe me, it was no fun not to match with his requirements ...

Regards,

Tommy

[kovacs]

I don't know a SINGLE jazz or classical musicians doing a great job in a rock lineup - unless they "studied" that as well.
And believe me, I know a lot of them...

Terje Rypdal.

[tee boy]

Good to hear. There's no place for that at KVR.

Oh, hang on a sec ....

[Morgaxx]

And the mighty Hawkwind used Sax/Violin to do strange jazzy noise in scary swirling rock music.

How do people end up playing a contra basson? Is it because they grew up with that type of music and enjoyed those particular tones. Sometimes I wonder?

[androidlove]

edited: removed some pretentous condescending shite.

now if we could just get this thread deleted

[Meffy]

edited: removed some pretentous condescending shite.

??? But the thread's still here...

[edit] D'oh! androidlove got there first. Must work on those reflexes.

[nuffink]

So. All of you who dislike the idea of theory...

Say somebody came up with a plugin that handed it all to you on a plate. Would you use it?

[kaden]

Brian Gulland...Rawk Bassoon. Richard Harvey...Rawk Recorder

[androidlove]

Say somebody came up with a plugin that handed it all to you on a plate. Would you use it?

you mean like wof or talent? or do you mean something that dissects your midi and tells you what it all means? no and no

[deggy]

deggy...were you ever by our place? (hehehe) You are soooooooooooooooooo close on the intersection(just a little south from queen). Was it the open stage/jammin that gave it away? That was quite awhile ago now.

These days when I'm down there all I see is non-theory using scruffs and I think "man those kids need a suit and some theory", especially the non-musicians!

i just left a band that was part of that scene to do a second degree in music comp. I was just jokin around because the guys in that band had no respect for any of the things i was into during my undergrad ie, they hated most western art music, bop, free jazz, etc.. and now i see them in interviews citing ornette and Messiaen as influences. Meanwhile, before i met them, they had no idea who these people were. After three years of playing with them, the trigger that made me leave was when the song writer couldn't name the notes in a C13 chord and had no idea that a major 9th above C was D, yet he still had complete control over everything that i was playing, often even making me replay all of my keyboard parts back to him slowly so he could go through note by note and decide "what was just not our sound buddy". I'm still friends with them but they always used to give me that "all those comp classes make you write cheezy music" and all that "music theory is for suckers” crap. I think they just wanted to be the next Billy Talent so they view anything else not directly related to that end-goal as being a waste of time. it's all good. Just wasn’t for me.

[McLilith]

McLilith, in the context of the thread, and I must stress that point, your song doesn't show any knowledge of music theory. It has no kind of chord progression, its in a really basic time signature, and the notes aren't exactly in any kind of scale.

There is music theory beyond scales. See my post. It wouldn't have surprised me if McLilith knew about dodecaphony. And if anything is theoretical, that is.

I didn't know the details or traditions of composers who have used dodecaphony, but I knew it existed. To put it one way, I know that some people had composed interesting music using "all the notes on the keyboard", but I have no idea what sort of guidelines (if any) they typically employ to do it.

As for the_nihilist's comment about my piece not showing any knowledge of music theory, that it pure rubbish. I despise such over-reaching statements made by people too lazy to be accurate and precise with their choice of words. If the_nihilist had said that it showed a limited understanding, that would have been okay with me. If he had said very limited, that would still have been okay with me. To "over simplify" the truth (I'm being gracious there) to an innacurate utterance such as "doesn't show any" is to destroy the truth entirely.

Remember: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes!"

My biggest complaint with some people in this thread, is that they make such over-generalized statements which destroy the truth of the matter, and have implications and consequences far beyond their orginal intention.

For example, TVD had some really good points to make, and I agree with some of what he said, but if you take his words literally, only a person who knows a blues scale could ever produce anything that isn't "f***ing noise". That's just absurd. He has traded the truth for an over-simplified "bumper sticker" philosphy.

the_nihilist is doing something very similar, when he says that my piece doesn't show any knowledge of theory, when instead the truth is, the piece doesn't demonstrate a mastery of traditional music theory.

Question: Does my piece really need to demonstrate a mastery of theory?

How did you fellows master complicated music theory when you don't seem to know the difference between concepts like "all and most", "never and seldom", "few and none", etc? Do you really think the world is best described by using "absolute" terms? There is a certain "atmosphere of confidence" in such language, but it is a very false sense of security. That sort of language might seem confident, and it might seem persuasive, but it is usually a gross distortion of the truth. It is usually incorrect. A person who engages in a great deal of such language and who exhibits the cocky, self-confident nature that so often accompanies it, is often in as much error as the person they are trying to "inform" or educate.

TennesseeVic has it right. I know a very limited amount of theory. The piece I offered for consideration should show that. the_nihilist is wrong mainly because of his lazy over-simplification of the truth, which effectively destroys the truth.

If I knew more music theory, I could quite possibly compose music quicker. (I could also just as likely vacillate much more over every little choice I made, trying to be as "technically perfect and demonstrably proficient" as I could be.) I could quite possibly create music which fit a certain style better than what I am able to do today. However, I resent it when some people make statements that approach the notion that whatever I create will never be "real" music, or that I will never be a "real" musician without a "proper" grounding in music theory.

If I accomplish anything in this thread, I hope it's to help point out the folly of such over-simplified absolute statements. They make a person who wanted to appear certain of "the facts" into a person who doesn't know "the facts" at all. There are exceptions to most "rules", and there are residual doubts or limitations in what most people consider to be "facts". This should be one of the first things that any "educated" person learns.

When certain people learn to stop speaking in such over-simplified terms, they will find me agreeing much more often with them. Deep down, they have some very valid points to make, several of which I would agree with, but their better ideas are obscured by these distorted expressions of truth, which I just can't endorse.


take care,
McLilith

[McLilith]

edited: removed some pretentous condescending shite.

Good choice! We wouldn't want anything like that appearing on KVR.


McLilith

[tee boy]

So. All of you who dislike the idea of theory...

Say somebody came up with a plugin that handed it all to you on a plate. Would you use it?

Hell yeah! But only as long as it didnt make me sound generic.