Modal Harmony vid series

[fmr]

... when you write arguing that a work called Musica enchiriadis wasn't written by Hucbald in response to a post I made partially quoting from the different and earlier De harmonica institutione (which is accepted as being Hucbald's), it's easy to make the assumption that it's a correction aimed at me as opposed to an irrelevant detail that serves no apparent purpose.

You're right. It was just an observation, but irrelevant for what's being discussed here. Forget it.

[stringtapper]

oh give me a break, stop the melodramatics.

I don't think you know what that word means. Or you only read the last sentence I wrote. Or you just don't have a real answer to anything I said. Most likely the last.

playing music for the sake of it is "anti intellectual"

Playing music for the sake of it and learning music theory are not mutually exclusive. Logic is hard for you, huh?

what are you even smoking. lol.

What are you, fifteen years old? Jesus…

[jancivil]

I'll try to explain you (again) why that's incorrect:
1. The piano keyboard is not an invention that appeared with the piano. There were keyboard instruments way before the piano.

I don't see where anyone claimed the piano was the first keyboard instrument. The issue at hand was why the keyboard on a piano would seem to favour a C Major scale if such a scale was a late invention.

What's the deal with this cherry-picking? The issue at hand involved the C Major scale (in an actual definition rather than a vagary in your received reference to an ancient text) as a later development than the Church Modes. Whether or not zethus saw the piano as the first keyboard, he claimed the C Major scale was the mother of all, or the font from which all else flowed, or pick your metaphor, the basis for all music. Because, you know, white keys.

[zethus909]

its all just whole tones and leading tones though. thats what modes are...same with scales. all that matters is the intervals. not who decides to name them, or what is fashionable.

why are you being rude and mean to me stringtapper, theres also been several other insults to me, and some racist remarkds even. and I dont appreciate that. it doesnt look good on you guys...really...it just makes your opinions seem less valuable when all you do is insult people. smart, intelligent, wise, caring,, well-read, happy people, do not have the need to insult people like that. you aare just coming off as angry and petty, with all the insults and bitter retorts.

who even wants to accept advice from people who just constantly insult your intelligence and musical aptitude. if you want people to even pay attention to any of the stuff you are saying, it would probably make sense not to belittle and insult everyone you are advising.

i believe some of you are academics or say you are, its doesnt seem like that honestly, i mean, is this how converse with your peers, insulting them at every chance you get? I'm having a hard time believing any of your are actually academics. I have been friends with PHDs, even one who had a music PHD, and he was a nice, chilled out person. basically all the PHDs (or studying for one) i have known, are intelligent, laid back, respectful and care completely about learning, and value knowledge and the quest for knowledge. they are people who are successful and hardworking, and i couldnt picture them acting in such petty ways. maybe they do though when they get online in forums.

I speak my mind, i am eccentric, but I am never insulting, to people, at least i try not to be, it's just really bad manners, and makes people value your opinion less when you act like that.

like, does it make you feel good to put peopel down? thats how it seems. because why else would you do it so much. people seek pleasure and avoid pain. if you get pleasure from insulting people, who you openly state, are amateurs and "not on your level", then what do you even gain from that? smart peopel who are knowledgeable and like imparting knowledge dont act like that. they want to make the people around them smarter, and empower them, not belittle them.

[Gamma-UT]

What's the deal with this cherry-picking? The issue at hand involved the C Major scale (in an actual definition rather than a vagary in your received reference to an ancient text) as a later development than the Church Modes. Whether or not zethus saw the piano as the first keyboard, he claimed the C Major scale was the mother of all, or the font from which all else flowed, or pick your metaphor, the basis for all music. Because, you know, white keys.

Should anyone want to a musical reboot of Kafka's The Trial, I think I've found the perfect basis for it. "Prove that the name of a scale formulated several hundreds years after an instrument is invented is the driver for the architecture of an instrument that implements it readily." Josef K ponders for a moment and asks if he can be tried on the original, unspecified charge.

Any sensible reading of the mother scale claim (which I don't believe, but it is a scale that does indeed fit Aristoxenus' diatonic version of Lydian) is that a scale that fits the description appears to have driven the design of keyboard instruments: how is that likely or possible? I put forward a reasoned proposal of how it is possible, and also noting that pulling up zethus909 on the age of the piano isn't all that relevant and not all that helpful. But if you want to carry on with your Maoist Struggle Session, don't mind me.

[jancivil]

look the whole thing started because someone asked what "modal harmony" is, so I explained what it is. in a straightforward way. modal harmony is when you restrict your self to only using the notes available in the classic modal intervals (i also linked like 5 sites that say the same thing)...ie. diatonic notes, to make your harmony.

You can build chords on a scalar set of notes. Big fugging deal. You appear to not agree that there even are modes at this point after all the garbage trying to seem like you know something. At any rate, I don't trust that you know how to make music modally. So your modal harmony is diatonic harmony.

The melodic characteristic of modes can be destroyed by diatonic harmony, because the harmony tends to function. You have to be mindful of, for instance B and F sounding at the same time (and in the Church music mindful of it in the line to the extent of avoidance. So a total neophyte simply stacking triads onto a MODE is liable to fail because she should know what a mode is. We end up with the blind leading the blind when you explain things from a lack of understanding.

SO the whole thing started when you decided to embark on a twisted path of self-justification out of an utter lack of humility.

[stringtapper]

its all just whole tones and leading tones though. thats what modes are...same with scales. all that matters is the intervals. not who decides to name them, or what is fashionable.

why are you being rude and mean to me stringtapper, theres also been several other insults to me, and some racist remarkds even. and I dont appreciate that. it doesnt look good on you guys...really...it just makes your opinions seem less valuable when all you do is insult people. smart, intelligent, wise, caring,, well-read, happy people, do not have the need to insult people like that. you aare just coming off as angry and petty, with all the insults and bitter retorts.

who even wants to accept advice from people who just constantly insult your intelligence and musical aptitude. if you want people to even pay attention to any of the stuff you are saying, it would probably make sense not to belittle and insult everyone you are advising.

i believe some of you are academics or say you are, its doesnt seem like that honestly, i mean, is this how converse with your peers, insulting them at every chance you get? I'm having a hard time believing any of your are actually academics. I have been friends with PHDs, even one who had a music PHD, and he was a nice, chilled out person. basically all the PHDs (or studying for one) i have known, are intelligent, laid back, respectful and care completely about learning, and value knowledge and the quest for knowledge. they are people who are successful and hardworking, and i couldnt picture them acting in such petty ways. maybe they do though when they get online in forums.

I speak my mind, i am eccentric, but I am never insulting, to people, at least i try not to be, it's just really bad manners, and makes people value your opinion less when you act like that.

like, does it make you feel good to put peopel down? thats how it seems. because why else would you do it so much. people seek pleasure and avoid pain. if you get pleasure from insulting people, who you openly state, are amateurs and "not on your level", then what do you even gain from that? smart peopel who are knowledgeable and like imparting knowledge dont act like that. they want to make the people around them smarter, and empower them, not belittle them.

Now you're just being disingenuous. You know full well that you insulted me first with the "what are you smoking" jab. So don't play innocent now that I responded in kind.

[jancivil]

What's the deal with this cherry-picking? The issue at hand involved the C Major scale (in an actual definition rather than a vagary in your received reference to an ancient text) as a later development than the Church Modes. Whether or not zethus saw the piano as the first keyboard, he claimed the C Major scale was the mother of all, or the font from which all else flowed, or pick your metaphor, the basis for all music. Because, you know, white keys.

Should anyone want to a musical reboot of Kafka's The Trial, I think I've found the perfect basis for it. "Prove that the name of a scale formulated several hundreds years after an instrument is invented is the driver for the architecture of an instrument that implements it readily." Josef K ponders for a moment and asks if he can be tried on the original, unspecified charge.

Any sensible reading of the mother scale claim (which I don't believe, but it is a scale that does indeed fit Aristoxenus' diatonic version of Lydian) is that a scale that fits the description appears to have driven the design of keyboard instruments: how is that likely or possible? I put forward a reasoned proposal of how it is possible, and also noting that pulling up zethus909 on the age of the piano isn't all that relevant and not all that helpful. But if you want to carry on with your Maoist Struggle Session, don't mind me.

WTF.

Your first paragraph is seriously twisting what happened. The major scale would seem to have been defined. zethus claimed something you don't believe either, that it was the basis for the other modes (at the least). I sure didn't embark on the inquisition you charged there, which is itself the Kafkaesque tricky shit you accuse me of. I have expressed no interest in the age of the piano, I just wondered about your narrow framework (I suspect you're essentially competing with fmr that strenuously.).

As to ancient Greek justification of the major scale seeming sensible enough as this basis (which oddly you don't believe in), I just mentioned that "Major scale" seemed to have been defined. Maybe you have yet to read very much of the thread. Major scale means it functions harmonically, this is the context for distinction from Ionian mode in particular. The ACTUAL intervals in Aristoxenus are not workable for harmony that involves KEYS. It might work more or less to match Ionian mode in the general sense (regardless of the historical problem fmr and JJF have studied) the one time, but "C Major scale" is restricted in this discussion (properly I think) to a definition. IE: this whole reason for keyboard temperaments (in the tonal era, cf *Major*) is that a 'just' intonation is only right for one key. "Major" does indicate *key*.

So here's more cherry picking from you. Super clever twisting, super dishonest intellectually.

Nice ad homs too.

[Gamma-UT]

i believe some of you are academics or say you are, its doesnt seem like that honestly, i mean, is this how converse with your peers, insulting them at every chance you get?

That isn't unusual in academia, to be honest.

[Gamma-UT]

Nice ad homs too.

Where?

[zethus909]

i am honestly tuning most of this out now, by this point, because it's just alot of hot air and noise, and if there ever was a point where I was trying to pick through the insults for some sort of something to learn, it's gone now.

it feels like basically two things going on,

there is this uni-directional angry insulting fountain of semi-useful information being spouted at me, about organs and esoteric historical footnotes (that has no actual practical use to me as a musician)...

and then there is the actual topic of modes. and how modes work. and how harmony works with modes. and i am the only one who is talking about that.

in simple concrete terms. that make sense. i am speaking of how i understand modes, and how I make use of them...from a practical standpoint. it's just intervals. and all you are doing is saying how everything i am saying is incorrect and innaccurate. yet, if we both sat down, and had to work something out in a practical situation, using modes in some way musically, i'm sure that i could do it...could you? I am not even sure at this point, because it seems like you are more concerned with showing off how much peripheral knowldege yhou have absorbed from studying music history classes than actually knowing how to apply it from a practical musical sense.

you are making this out to be some ultra complex thing, that is like solving rubix cube. it's not. and people reading shouldnt think that either. it doesnt matter how much you have read, and logically understand about modes (or what their entire historical evolution was)(although it clearly cant hurt...or can it...its more actually just reinforcing my thoughts on that, that some people have way too much information, and no release)(release as in, taking at least 3 hours every day and just "playing"...letting it all out....this in itself, puts you in a good state of mind, where the last thing on your mind is insulting someone about music theory history) it matters if you can apply it in a practical sense.

[jancivil]

"Maoist" would seem to accuse me of repressing, of repression as a way of life. You earlier implied fmr was posing as a scholar.
Full disclosure, I expressed I thought you were on a quest to top everybody and deleted it like a coward. It's similar quality of ad hom, and for me to have done means you upset my cart.

I don't know what the struggle session part of that refers to as I'm no scholar. I did read The Trial. I think you sought to trap me with language that twisted the whole discussion in order to catch me. But you'd have to confound me with fmr to even have done that one.
I only addressed 'C major scale is the mother of all the modes'. The name of the scale is more meaningful than you want for this trial. I suppose your proposal is reasoned, but I find it false. I'll explain later, breakfast getting cold.

[Gamma-UT]

"Maoist" would seem to accuse me of repressing, of repression as a way of life.

The phrase Maoist Struggle Session is an allusion to the process that seems to be going on here of pounding on someone until they confess their sins. It's not directed at you individually, though you are clearly a willing participant.

You earlier implied fmr was posing as a scholar.

It's the internet. I can only determine so much from a screen name and behaviour.

I apologise if they come across as ad hominem. Maybe my interpretation of what an ad hominem really is has been distorted by what I thought to be examples but apparently aren't:

Dunning-Kruger Effect doesn't seem to go far enough to describe your arrogance and top-down, absolutely mistaken sense of how you're doing. You're entirely full of shit.

SO the whole thing started when you decided to embark on a twisted path of self-justification out of an utter lack of humility.

[jancivil]

Well, argument at the person is a fallacy if it's done in order to make the person the problem in their argument.
My remarks to zethus there are well after the fact of his arguments (which I address for what they are). Your whole argument with my words seemed to be a beef with me. NB: I've no expectation of any confession by or enlightenment of zethus909.

I don't know what actual dog you have in this hunt beyond that. Do you actually share zethus' understanding of 'major scale', the root of all things? If not, you're barking up some trees just to make people look stupid. If I look mean, fine, maybe I am. Frankly I'm not too worried about that coming from you.

[jancivil]

NB, I absolutely stand by both those quoted remarks. If you don't like 'em, I'm good with that. There's a whole thread here which you jumped into kind of late.