why our scales have seven notes, part 2

[IncarnateX]

just playing around with the same seven notes scales beethoven and britney used as well as can be found in jazz and fusion and ambient and "world music". pretty immortal progressions i would say.

always nicer then btw.

Well world music can actually include other scales than western, otherwise it would not be world music.

However if jazz, fusion, Britney and Beethoven sound exactly the same to you, then I will withdraw my hostility and pity you instead. You have no idea of what musical nuances you are missing here, you poor thing

But that still leaves us with techno, ambient, 12 tone, microtonal and other experiments. But these are not developments of music according to the ad populum argument or what? 1000 flies cannot be wrong about the taste of shit?

Anyway I feel so sorry for you now. Take care mate. There are other art forms than music you can engage in if your brain cannot percieve auditory differences. What about painting or photography?

[jancivil]

just playing around with the same seven notes scales beethoven and britney used as well as can be found in jazz and fusion and ambient and "world music". pretty immortal progressions i would say.

always nicer then btw.

Look, you came in with a silly remark and a lol and now you want it interpreted to suit you. In the middle of people trying to have an exchange of ideas, you seemed to want to say the original post is a silly and pointless question. On page six of thread two, this was what you found to do. It's kind of just rude, isn't it?

Now, *seven notes* are 'immortal progressions', when the thing you wanted before was to imply 'more development to come' <isn't worth it/ad populum>. You don't have anything to offer but you seem to want attention. This is the end of it for me, though.

[aciddose]

What?

[murnau]

you didn't get it and mix simple things up.

However if jazz, fusion, Britney and Beethoven sound exactly the same to you, then I will withdraw my hostility and pity you instead. You have no idea of what musical nuances you are missing here, you poor thing Sad

who said they sound the same? because of the same scales they use? are you serious? you disqualified yourself now. its silly to argue with somebody who dont even get the basics right. sound the same.. lol

But that still leaves us with techno, ambient, 12 tone, microtonal and other experiments. But these are not developments of music according to the ad populum argument or what? 1000 flies cannot be wrong about the taste of shit?

you dont get it. you derail the thread again we still discuss why seven notes scale. i said the majority of people use it today like 200 years ago.

other approaches are no progression but other approaches and never will be that popular. your techno example is funny as when techno got popular it wasnt experimental anymore but use the same scales and harmonies of western culture in a different context. what have that to do with prove you right?

sound the same because of the same scales..

[murnau]

just playing around with the same seven notes scales beethoven and britney used as well as can be found in jazz and fusion and ambient and "world music". pretty immortal progressions i would say.

always nicer then btw.

Look, you came in with a silly remark and a lol and now you want it interpreted to suit you. In the middle of people trying to have an exchange of ideas, you seemed to want to say the original post is a silly and pointless question. On page six of thread two, this was what you found to do. It's kind of just rude, isn't it?

Now, *seven notes* are 'immortal progressions', when the thing you wanted before was to imply 'more development to come' <isn't worth it/ad populum>. You don't have anything to offer but you seem to want attention. This is the end of it for me, though.

what what? you off? great.

[aciddose]

I've noticed reading back through the previous thread and this one, if you mute both of these two you'll find that every other comment and response is conducted in an appropriate way. Some people disagree, some agree, some have their own variations of one view or the other. None of them are aggressive, hostile toward others or attack the person holding the view they disagree with. Rather they focus on pointing out what the see as problems with those views. There are many conversations that have gone back and forth and not a single confrontation between anyone other than these two!

Of course I have no problem if someone wants to come in and say "when you said X, I don't agree it was correct because: ...".

Instead these two repeatedly respond to anyone they disagree with with an aggressive tone and personal attacks while failing to mention the specific issue they have with the comment they reply to. It seems they have a problem with people, not with facts. "Everything you said was wrong because I say so."

I believe they feel personally assaulted by the comments they disagree with. Perhaps they're both professors of bogus nonsense?

[IncarnateX]

sound the same because of the same scales..

Aha, so you can actaully hear difference between Beethoven's music and Jazz but yet we are not talking about any development of music because they make use of same scales? So jazz is to be concieved more than 200 years old because of the scales used? When I said that we did not know where we would be in 200 years - the post you quoted remember- I referred to musical rules in general and not just scales, didn't I? So I am afraid you have misunderstood something from my post or that you just have a very controversial idea of musical development as something depending on the scales only and e.g. not how scales are used at different times, e.g. the tri-tone in Jazz compared to classical music.

Now that this is settled we can be friends and everything will be fine. But apart from that I really don't think we have anything in common to chat about.

[murnau]

Perhaps they're both professors of bogus nonsense?

that could explain it.

sorry i mean

[murnau]

sound the same because of the same scales..

Aha, so you can actaully hear difference between Beethoven's music and Jazz but yet we are not talking about any development of music because they make use of same scales? So jazz is to be concieved more than 200 years old because of the scales used? When I said that we did not know where we would be in 200 years - the post you quoted remember- I referred to musical rules in general and not just scales, didn't I? So I am afraid you have misunderstood something from my post or that you just have a very controversial idea of musical development as something depending on the scales only and e.g. not how scales are used at different times, e.g. the tri-tone in Jazz compared to classical music.

Now that this is settled we can be friends and everything will be fine. But apart from that I really don't think we have anything in common to chat about.

the thread is about why seven notes scale and bringing up musical development makes absolutely no sense here. really not. its even contra productive in this case.

anyway, thanx i dont have any virtual friends and dont need one only real people can be friends.

[IncarnateX]

Instead these two repeatedly respond to anyone they disagree with with an aggressive tone and personal attacks while failing to mention the specific issue they have with the comment they reply to. It seems they have a problem with people, not with facts. "Everything you said was wrong because I say so.

Yes You are a victim. You would NEVER provoke anybody like e.g. calling them brainless:

Some people are unable to comprehend why you'd want to apply axioms or that their use in a particular explanation is required for any logic to be applied, but hopefully anyone who isn't brainless gets along just fine

[IncarnateX]

the thread is about why seven notes scale and bringing up musical development makes absolutely no sense here:)

It made perfect sense but you wouldn't know because you obviously did not read the thread and are not aware of all it's nuances. The way you entered reveals that. However, maybe you did read it but just did not understand it. In that case you are excused.

[IncarnateX]

Perhaps they're both professors of bogus nonsense?

that could explain it.

sorry i mean

I am so happy the two of you have found each other. Maybe you should meet in real life? Who knows where true love can take you?

kiss

[jancivil]

EDIT rather than top post:

Instead these two repeatedly respond to anyone they disagree with with an aggressive tone and personal attacks while failing to mention the specific issue they have with the comment they reply to. It seems they have a problem with people, not with facts. "Everything you said was wrong because I say so."

You would NEVER provoke anybody like e.g. calling them brainless:

Some people are unable to comprehend why you'd want to apply axioms or that their use in a particular explanation is required for any logic to be applied, but hopefully anyone who isn't brainless gets along just fine

The arguments I've seen here against applying any sort of rationalization to music, for religious causes and philosophy about entirely imaginary concepts all seem to be rooted in the lack of a functioning brain.

Both of these are straw man fabrications. I don't resemble either one. I am not approaching it from religion or philosophy AT_ALL, for instance. The thing aciddose offered may have been axiomatic but it doesn't do anything to make seven magically essential, and it doesn't help save face to make up stories about the two people that [bothered to express how they] weren't buying it.

Everything you said was wrong because I say so.
My theory explains those facts. I'm open to a better theory, or mathematical proof of my own theory. Am I willing to do it? Why should I? honestly don't care whether it's truly accurate or not. I know it reflects reality, I know there is no better explanation available and I feel it is very likely to be accurate.

There might be a couple of things I didn't go over point-by-point with you. But you're simply lying about what went on here. The closest thing to attacking you as a person was finally a suggestion of an aspect of Dunning-Kruger as an observation of precisely what I just quoted. I don't have a top-down belief I must be right. So you're projecting your own obvious issue onto me. There it is, in full relief.

The thing about this thread that is so interesting to me is that I have delved rather deeply into the matter. I could be considered an expert on intonation and the foundations for our scales and modes, frankly.

I just don't find what you had on offer to be worth a shit. You brought a strange high-handedness in right from the start. Quit lying about what went on.

I don't enjoy this aspect of these threads. I see that shit now through quotes, I'm trying not to [muted]. I would like this thread to be a forum of ideas and intelligent sharing but no. This guy has to knock it down to his level on a number of fronts. I have been banned for two months for less than this shit right here.


If someone would like to read something that is persuasive for the notions of the essential nature of numbers in music, the first parts of the book by Alain Danielou I posted a link to are a beautiful read, written by a kind of genius that was really after something of value.

The arguments I've seen here...

Your approach, finding a historicism in arguments was to attempt to vacate that utterly: "for all you know, all of this history was made up just now". Absolute nihilism! I believe my reaction to that was rather measured. I will point out the obvious in simple terms instead: That is insane.

You accuse of not dealing with what you wrote, but you complain about how mean I was in dealing with what you wrote. What you did was dismiss everything in one fell swoop, you haven't addressed hardly anything that's been said. After a while, people will see things that are stupid and express their thought on it.

You presented this belief, and in such a way it's gobsmacking to me that one would entertain such notions, that must be right and DETERMINISTIC. If it were so, why did not every musician in every corner of the world get the memo? There are things that can be said in favor of 'twelve' and 'seven' in terms of musical value and essentialness or whatever, but you have not offered them.
I don't owe you or the other guy one single ass kiss on this forum, anyway. I_disagree. If I say 'that's stupid' your troll response is 'personal attack!'. Like every conservative that gets into it with someone with more on the ball on the internet. There is a religious quality in this thread and it's all you. There is a person with a top-down belief in his own ability that clearly has not studied the issue but has that dogmatic belief in himself and everything that comes out his back end. And it isn't me. I studied the things I'm trying to convey for a long, long time. I have read Alian Danielou on the essential nature of 12 and 7 and his quite religious conviction in a brand of numerology that informs his work. However it's serious and sober work and at the end of the day adds up to something we can use.

Don't go characterizing me, you couldn't begin to come to grips with what I brought to this thing. It's just that I found your arguments to be stupid, and arrogant, and we find an arrogance that is not based in achievement but in you enjoying your own brand. You're not fooling anybody here, I assure you completely of that.

[Tricky-Loops]

i dont have any virtual friends and dont need one only real people can be friends.

Keep in mind that most KVR members are real people...

[IncarnateX]

Instead these two repeatedly respond to anyone they disagree with with an aggressive tone and personal attacks while failing to mention the specific issue they have with the comment they reply to. It seems they have a problem with people, not with facts. "Everything you said was wrong because I say so.

Yes You are a victim. You would NEVER provoke anybody like e.g. calling them brainless:

Some people are unable to comprehend why you'd want to apply axioms or that their use in a particular explanation is required for any logic to be applied, but hopefully anyone who isn't brainless gets along just fine

Okay right should be right, Aciddose. I attacked you....BUT...I was very honest. I do think you are the worst pseudo-scientific nonsense rambling narcisistic conceited pretentious annoying intelligence-insulting internet-idiot I have ever encountered. And I am afraid I have to stand by that even if it should cost me a perma ban. Sorry, just cannot help it.