Music Theory books based on Piano Rolls not Staffs?

[chj]

... There is no such literature for the piano roll. Prove me wrong! ... etc. etc.

So you're saying right now there is more music theory literature available for those that read sheet music. You're right. (In ten years, that may not be the case anymore.) The original poster already knew this, that's why he asked if there was anything piano roll oriented.

He knew that something will be maybe true in the future?

Does the parenthesis help? No, you probably understood the first time, but still felt the need to make a wise ass reply. Congrats, you have a solid base of music theory learning under your belt. Keep it under your belt and get the chip off your shoulder. Remember this one?
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... sc&start=0

[jancivil]

(3 links)
There are references to standard notation but the audio/visual teaching format communicates the themes.

and at least the first course on music theory relies heavily on staff notation ...

it would have to. where are the flats in that piano roll. how can you get into flat keys just with a piano roll and not use notation as a model. how do you talk about enharmonics ignoring notation.

it's a pretty stupid concept. It's amazing that someone would stick to it just to argue.

[jancivil]

... There is no such literature for the piano roll. Prove me wrong! ... etc. etc.

So you're saying right now there is more music theory literature available for those that read sheet music. You're right. (In ten years, that may not be the case anymore.) The original poster already knew this, that's why he asked if there was anything piano roll oriented.

He knew that something will be maybe true in the future?

Does the parenthesis help? No, you probably understood the first time, but still felt the need to make a wise ass reply. Congrats, you have a solid base of music theory learning under your belt. Keep it under your belt and get the chip off your shoulder.

is simple logic completely lost on you? Do you think you address my points with 'maybe in the future'. I understood exactly that, you don't have anything and have resorted to speculation. You deserve a larf for it.

Do keep to yourself your personal projection of your own empty argumentative style, chip. That you are sticking to a point you cannot support this late in an old thread really shows your ass here.

[chj]

Hmm, your posts in the thread have been simple logic? Sorry, I guess simple logic IS lost on me then. I thought I detected several insults, tons of attitude, and a generous helping of anger. My mistake.

[jancivil]

your first mistake is that you have no argument. following that, pure argumentation and what looks to me like not more than you trying to gainsay me, compounds that.

here's the specific mistake I had to laugh at: "(In ten years, that may not be the case anymore.) The original poster already knew this, that's why he asked if there was anything piano roll oriented. "

"So, he knew that something will be maybe true in the future?' is a logical reduction of what you tried to do there. That your try at a comeback was 'does what's in the parentheses help you any?' shows you missed the logic of my remark.


Your implying that I ought to be dismissed because I said I think this kind of project will be essentially a scam, isn't reasonable and shows only your frustration at never making a point stick. Is that a chip on your shoulder? I honestly don't care. I am replying to what you say. You as a subject do not interest me.

I am sarcastic. I don't have to be perceived as the nicest person in the world, because it isn't true. OTOH, I have held back expressing my estimation that you're just here trying to gainsay me, but you keep pushing. That you keep pushing and, now having truly lost the argument, that you resort to ad hominems attacking my character is a little pathetic.

I would suggest you give it a rest, you're not going to top me or look good trying. I'm not above saying that, I understand myself well enough, so knock yourself out telling me I'm not a good person.

[Meffy]

I think this thread needs more people showing off!

There's a fine art to composing questions with the proper balance of pheromones to activate the "pissing contest" reaction among know-it-alls. But when it's done right, it's quite spectacular.

You said it. Think I'll lock this until the OP sends me a PM saying he or she has read all the replies and has more to contribute to the discussion.