Rant on music theory ignorance.
-
- KVRAF
- 6519 posts since 13 Mar, 2002 from UK
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
personally no way would I judge you...I took a year of theory in college, but that wasn't really cause I was actively pursuing it either...that was cause it would be a nice class and informative....and an easy A. Like I said last night, it's really about being openminded...after a while of putting pieces together though it seem you eventually have a few gaps and some spare parts then some thing like Chord Wizard come in handy to some pices together...McLilith wrote:Since you insist on using such language:Hovmod wrote:Here's a simple statement:McLilith wrote:If I accomplish anything in this thread, I hope it's to help point out the folly of such over-simplified absolute statements.
Ignorance is bad. Chosen ignorance is moronic.
Learn everything, *then* subtract or ignore what you don't like. You can't disapprove of music theory if you don't know what it is, FFS!
FFS Hovmod!
I don't disapprove of music theory in general. I find it to be a helpful tool in many cases, and I respect many of the people who have invested the time and energy required to master it. (I'm pretty sure that I've indicated this earlier in this thread.)
In this thread, I have explained that I have taken a very casual attitude to learning more music theory. I am in no hurry to master traditional music theory, because I'm personally having enough fun as it is.
I repeat, I don't disapprove of music theory, or most music theorists. I simply choose not to pursue it agressively for my own personal reasons, and I would hope that people could still respect me, in spite of that personal choice.
What I do disapprove of, is people who insist on making over-simplified, emotionally-charged, over-reaching statements appended with little barbs like "FFS!" !
If you are going to argue with me, at least read what I wrote, and argue about what I truly did say--not something totally orthogonal to what I said. You have over-simplified and misstated my position on music theory. You then employed your own over-reaching and over-simplified "absolute" statements to attack what you incorrectly claimed my position to be.
I repeat:You post actually goes a long way toward proving the validity of the remark you were responding to.If I accomplish anything in this thread, I hope it's to help point out the folly of such over-simplified absolute statements.
sweet dreams,
McLilith
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRian
- 659 posts since 29 Feb, 2004 from Toronto
Well then... Way back when Mclilith put up a track. I now offer this little bit. Its 7 years old now, but I keep as a reminder to myself on the importance of learning.
Built thusly...
write out a,b,c,d,e,f,g in a random order (each letter only once)
write the same line backwards
sort of invert the two lines. from above b would become f, c becomes e etc...
using these four progressions build chords (at least two notes) and melodies/harmonies all the while not changing the order of notes ie. if you want a chord you have to use at least the next two notes (or all if you wish) from only one of the four lines
once a line of notes is used up start again
it looks confusing (hard to describe quickly), but its fun.
Anyway this is what I ended up with
http://www.audioshots.com/auditorium/vi ... php?t=1879
This little bit uses random/theoretical/creative energy. Some of you can put the name to this style of writting. Just one little exercise from an old Comp/Arrangement course, but it opened doors and windows to how I worked. Knowledge does not kill creativity...
Oh, is it any good for what it is (an exercise in formulaic writing)?
Built thusly...
write out a,b,c,d,e,f,g in a random order (each letter only once)
write the same line backwards
sort of invert the two lines. from above b would become f, c becomes e etc...
using these four progressions build chords (at least two notes) and melodies/harmonies all the while not changing the order of notes ie. if you want a chord you have to use at least the next two notes (or all if you wish) from only one of the four lines
once a line of notes is used up start again
it looks confusing (hard to describe quickly), but its fun.
Anyway this is what I ended up with
http://www.audioshots.com/auditorium/vi ... php?t=1879
This little bit uses random/theoretical/creative energy. Some of you can put the name to this style of writting. Just one little exercise from an old Comp/Arrangement course, but it opened doors and windows to how I worked. Knowledge does not kill creativity...
Oh, is it any good for what it is (an exercise in formulaic writing)?
Reverbnation
see ya 'round...
see ya 'round...
-
- KVRAF
- 3002 posts since 24 Nov, 2003 from Heidelberg&Hamburg
I think rants like this will go on forever because maybe your statement is true for you and for many and for me maybe, but not for all.Morgaxx wrote: Knowledge does not kill creativity...
Oh, is it any good for what it is (an exercise in formulaic writing)?
So there are many good sentences stating just the contrary. And there are maybe some (fewer, admitted) examples as well.
Anyway your experiment is a pretty nice one and I love to listen to that. Great. And getting to know what you built is most inspiring.
-
- KVRAF
- 7217 posts since 21 Aug, 2004 from Trondheim, Norway
Hey, McLilith, I apologize for putting your name in my post, I didn't really reply to you, I just used that one statement of yours as a launching point for the one statement I wanted to make, which I retracted before you replied anyway... I didn't mean it as a reply to you or an opinion about anything you said. I haven't read all the posts in this thread. I saw your little thing about over-simplified statements being silly, and thought I could make a one-liner I could stand for. I used FFS because I really do get pissed off when people refuse to learn stuff because they think knowing something is going to be bad for them, and for some reason a lot of people (I'm not implying you) seem to think learning music theory is going to eat up their soul or something.
And with the word "you" I meant "one". Not you personally.
And with the word "you" I meant "one". Not you personally.
Rakkervoksen
- KVRAF
- 2548 posts since 7 Jul, 2003 from Huntington, WV
I think it's safe to say that the rant will continue as long as the ranters have the desire and opportunity to continue.Klemperer wrote:I think rants like this will go on forever...
However, I'm getting a bit tired. I'll probaby watch this thread "from the sidelines", but I'm not sure I have anything else to say on this subject of any great significance. If I haven't explained myself by now, I doubt I ever will.
take care,
McLilith
-
- KVRian
- 659 posts since 29 Feb, 2004 from Toronto
Thanks Klemperer. I will admit that I went a little Sithy with that line. I never mean to force my view on anybody. Sometimes I just wonder what would happen if anti-theorist just cracked a simple book, had a look and threw it out. Somebody that can think clearly enough to put a song together without any formal knowledge must have enough intellegence to ignore or expand on even the tiniest bit of knowledge. Nobody has to do anything, but some people are just trying to point out new possibilities in the hope of helping others better thier craft. If people think they have mastered all they need then fair enough, but you dont know till you atleast have a quick look. In my humble opinion.
Reverbnation
see ya 'round...
see ya 'round...
- KVRAF
- 2548 posts since 7 Jul, 2003 from Huntington, WV
Thanks, for clarifying that Hovmod. I did think you were replying to me in particular, since it came right after my quote.Hovmod wrote:Hey, McLilith, I apologize for putting your name in my post, I didn't really reply to you, I just used that one statement of yours as a launching point for the one statement I wanted to make, which I retracted before you replied anyway... I didn't mean it as a reply to you or an opinion about anything you said. I haven't read all the posts in this thread. I saw your little thing about over-simplified statements being silly, and thought I could make a one-liner I could stand for. I used FFS because I really do get pissed off when people refuse to learn stuff because they think knowing something is going to be bad for them, and for some reason a lot of people (I'm not implying you) seem to think learning music theory is going to eat up their soul or something.
And with the word "you" I meant "one". Not you personally.
No harm done, I suppose.
However, I am serious about the dangers of over-simplifying a subject. It really does tend to destroy a certain amount of truth, and it quite often weakens one's argument in the long run. It also tends to corrupt one's thought process, if you tend to believe an over-simplification as being an accurate and absolute fact, instead of being the flawed, rough approximation which it truly is.
take care,
McLilith
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
Morgaxx????
Play for the dead do yah? 
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
- KVRAF
- 2548 posts since 7 Jul, 2003 from Huntington, WV
That sounds pretty reasonable, why can't more KVR posts be like that one?Morgaxx wrote:Thanks Klemperer. I will admit that I went a little Sithy with that line. I never mean to force my view on anybody. Sometimes I just wonder what would happen if anti-theorist just cracked a simple book, had a look and threw it out. Somebody that can think clearly enough to put a song together without any formal knowledge must have enough intellegence to ignore or expand on even the tiniest bit of knowledge. Nobody has to do anything, but some people are just trying to point out new possibilities in the hope of helping others better thier craft. If people think they have mastered all they need then fair enough, but you dont know till you atleast have a quick look. In my humble opinion.
McLilith
- KVRAF
- 2548 posts since 7 Jul, 2003 from Huntington, WV
..or maybe it's a reference his "killer" instrument skills.Hink wrote:Morgaxx????Play for the dead do yah?
Maybe his guitar playing has been registered as a lethal weapon?
McLilith
-
- KVRian
- 659 posts since 29 Feb, 2004 from Toronto
Why, thankyou Mclilith
And to Hink... alive upon entry, then I slay em'
I'd never actually thought of my name like that. A guitarist you areist, yes?
And to Hink... alive upon entry, then I slay em'
I'd never actually thought of my name like that. A guitarist you areist, yes?
Reverbnation
see ya 'round...
see ya 'round...
- KVRAF
- 2548 posts since 7 Jul, 2003 from Huntington, WV
For the record, my guitar playing could be considered a lethal weapon, but it has nothing to do with skill.

McLilith
McLilith
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
I just went too long, too serious...it was starting to hurt...McLilith wrote:..or maybe it's a reference his "killer" instrument skills.Hink wrote:Morgaxx????Play for the dead do yah?
Maybe his guitar playing has been registered as a lethal weapon?
McLilith
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRian
- 659 posts since 29 Feb, 2004 from Toronto
I agree Hink. The air was a little stuffy. Thanks for letting in a breath of fresh text...
Do I get a muffin or a kipper, or even a kipper muffin for finally reaching 100 posts? Gosh 100
Gonna have to write out a random string of 100 letters from a to g and write a little celebration song....
Do I get a muffin or a kipper, or even a kipper muffin for finally reaching 100 posts? Gosh 100
Gonna have to write out a random string of 100 letters from a to g and write a little celebration song....
Reverbnation
see ya 'round...
see ya 'round...
