KVR Audio

Toxikator · Post by **Toxikator** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:51 pm

rhythm makes us dance because our sense of rhythm COMES from our bodies; walking, breathing, heartbeats, etc. The reason that we don't dance to 5/8 is because it doen't fit with our natural physical movements.

Harmony, I'd wager, comes from the relationship between consonances and dissonances; consonance and dissonance come from the relative tunings of the harmonics of the harmonic series, and how they're reinforced/countered.

As to defining music itself, I'd say that music is any sound which is intended to be percieved as music. The audience's reaction to music really has no say is whether it's music or not; only whether its GOOD music

Your art metaphor kind of breaks down just a little bit.

The kinds of people who really hate modern art are very likely to have a preference for folk or contemporary music. They appreciate "art" when it's the kind of visual cues which depict something; they likely appreciate "music" when it's the kind of auditory cues which depict something... here, LYRICS.

Km7 · Post by **Km7** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:07 pm

As I said in another topic, things that happen in music depend on two things - sound's nature and its perception (acoustics - musical acoustics, psychoacoustics; music psychology). And for example, while frequency is fixed and is physical quality that can be measured by equipment in Hz, pitch is subjective, it depends on the qualities and the structure of our auditory system, and it is measured in Mels. For example, two sounds with equal frequencies but different sound-pressure levels result in different pitch (the louder one seems to be a bit higher in pitch).
Music is sound and it consists of sound. The difference between music and noise is that in music we can recognize logical structures.
I think anyone who is interested theoretically and technically in topics such as how tonality and harmony works, why some rules exist, how and why dominants work, why minor chords sound sad, why intervals become more dark, tense and dissonant in bass and so on, should familiarize himself with acoustics and music cognition.

Adaerus · Post by **Adaerus** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:55 pm

Varadin wrote: The difference between music and noise is that in music we can recognize logical structures.

Right. I could see why some musical styles are considered noise by some when the logical structure is too hard to be recognized. However, once we discover those structures that are inherent to an acoustic event/events we can acknowledge at least some of the laws that create them (be it laws of physics or musical theory laws) then they become more inteligible thus more musical.
I don't think there is pure noise in nature if noise was described strictly as a lack of logical structure.

I remember when I was a kid I could not understand symphonies (more complex musical structures) and it seemed to me just notes at random. Of course same for jazz which to my mind was just like noise. Once I understood the patterns as I listened they became more beautyful, more musical.

Maybe I should correct myself to what I said before that music is a psychoacoustic reaction to sound. Since psychoacoustics deal with the mecanics of perception only, it does not count for the psychological effects of it, which btw is a much deeper issue and far more difficult to quantify. I'd say music is a psychological result of the psychoacoustical effects of sound.
So there is a point at which a piece of music you listen to relax is the same with the ocean waves from those therapeutical CD's.

finalfantasy8 · Post by **finalfantasy8** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:21 pm

so what rythym is our body in? 1/1? 2/4 ?

Barf · Post by **Barf** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:23 pm

finalfantasy8 wrote:so what rythym is our body in? 1/1? 2/4 ?

Depends on what you are doing

finalfantasy8 · Post by **finalfantasy8** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:25 pm

examples?

Toxikator · Post by **Toxikator** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:31 pm

Walking: 4/4. (step, lift, step, LIFT)

Heartbeat: 3/4 (lub-DUB-rest)

Breathing: 2/4 (Out-IN)

etc.

Km7 · Post by **Km7** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:32 pm

Nice examples.

Adaerus, yes, and the psychological part of music perception is also relative to some degree and I could even say that I think it is something between science and philosophy... and not very clean subject...

Toxikator · Post by **Toxikator** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:33 pm

yeah. I could have gone down a dirtier road but I'm better than that

Of course, there's a LOT to be said for the rhythms of sex and our associations of sex with dancing...

finalfantasy8 · Post by **finalfantasy8** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:35 pm

so we're totally polyrythymic !!!

Adaerus · Post by **Adaerus** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:36 pm

Toxikator wrote: The reason that we don't dance to 5/8 is because it doen't fit with our natural physical movements.

That not entirely true. There are folk dance styles that are written in complex time signitures like 5/16, 7/16 or even other odd beat complex measures.
Here's an example:
http://www.romanianvoice.com/culture/populara/index.php the 6th one from the top "Geamparalele de la Babadag" 7/16 (2+2+3).

Km7 · Post by **Km7** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:00 pm

Right. Nice! I like complex time signatures. And as most of you probably know, complex time signatures is charm of the Bulgarian folk music and folk dances.
Of course, it is easier and usually comes more natural for one to dance to simple time signatures.

Toxikator · Post by **Toxikator** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:03 pm

Indeed. the complex signatures cause weirdness.

Hemiola is a good example. Very common in a minuet and trio form, but still IMPOSSIBLE to dance if you haven't memorized the steps.

Adaerus · Post by **Adaerus** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:44 pm

This is going off topic but since we're at it here we go:
Complex signitures are characteristic in folk dance music of countries in and around Balkan Peninsula but not exclusively.
As I listened to the example, although I would have wanted to dance on it I couldn't imagine how I would do it. Indeed the binar time signitures are the easiest to move to and improvise dance. And since the dance music is for the masses, the easier the better. But I woldn't underestimate the masses' ability to improvise dance. After all the example above is not nobility class dance style that was played in the Count's ballroom. It was and still is (in some geographical parts) regular folk's dance music for parties such as birthdays and weddings. I would go even further and argue that even seemingly random movements of the club dancers are well exercised patterns. And still some of them dance really well and some others dance really bad (like me for example) even in a binar time signiture.

mayan · Post by **mayan** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:02 pm

music/sound? "music" is "sound/silence" used with intention...mayan -2/5/07

Is music different to sound..?