Recognizing and owning up to your own arrogance.

[Numanoid]

It's not about being number #1 on beatport, or selling a bunch of songs. It's all about the journey, and from this point on I'm going to start working on my humility!

Welcome to Zen

[JJ_Jettflow]

Music is not sports, no, but there is a such thing as substandard. The thing I noticed that's really irritated me is, in this milieu of technology which places things before you that won't have been place before you otherwise, we get all these people who got the idea it's time to compose music, that have not been involved in music previously. You don't learn to swim out of a book or from an internet article, and music is not different even as there are ways to present a 'production' without anything made by your hands to now, to speak of.

You're right, music is not a sport; it is an art from and as such is meant to be a tangible expression of one's emotions. So if my child brings me a painting of stick men with the caption "I love you Daddy", done in in finger paints, then I would consider this the purest form of art. Yet if my child brought me a picture of us created with Photoshop with the caption "I Love you Daddy" I would still consider that an example of the purest form of art. It doesn't matter what is used to convey the emotion as long as someone is able to connect with that emotion.

[jancivil]

That's great. But, you used a quote of mine to launch into that, which is not about 'the purest expression', or a pure intent particularly.

[jancivil]

I don't remember the beef. Last year or somewhere I vaguely recall yer user name as regards something quite unpleasant, but I wasn't even sure that wasn't "Dysfunctional".

I kind of have doubts that it was me, at least if we're talking about "year ago", because AFAIK during that time I ...

No, I noticed your user name last year and I thought I recalled it from some nasty encounters a while before that.

I'm bad with names, period.

[jancivil]

... {in principle}, the tendency of people to start 'composing' with no previous experience with music, has (on this forum) been demonstrated to be true.
If there is some evidence that the result of that, in any art form or any endeavor (running a race before you can walk, for a prime example) is desirable, please demonstrate, then you have an actual argument before us.

Like I said, you lot call someone arrogant for even noticing this little slice of reality. Do you resemble that remark, are you burned by that?

We're not calling you arrogant, you are arrogant. Everybody notices the thing, it just doesn't annoy the rest of us, nor do we use it to lift ourselves on some imaginary pedestal by bringing it up in a thread about arrogance.

This is an opportunity for you to grow as a person, I suggest you seize it.

My but is that rich. Let's have a look

No. I think I will continue.

Ok then, so you have a lot of things to sort out first.

C# major is incorrectly spelt with an F rather than an E#
Eb minor is incorrectly spelt with an F# rather than a Gb
F minor is incorrectly spelt with a G# rather than an Ab
F# major is incorrectly spelt with a Bb rather than an A#
G# minor is incorrectly spelt with a Eb rather than a D#
Bb minor is incorrectly spelt with a C# rather than a Db
B major is incorrectly spelt with an Eb rather than a D#

And that's just the basic stuff.
There is no "choice" here; there is a right way to spell things and a wrong way.

(That means, of just the major and minor triads, you have over 29% of them spelt incorrectly. Would you want to be taught something by someone who gets at least 29% of things wrong?).
If you're presenting this as an educational tool, you need to get it right. Teaching something wrong is incredibly irresponsible, and will, as I said before, do more harm than good.

There's absolutely nothing wrong in 2016 with spelling the chords with their actual note names instead of retarded imaginary names based on just intonation, practically non-existent in modern music or instruments.

JeanPhi,

don't mind these no-lifers, ...

Just intonation has nothing to do with it[...]
Gb is just as "real" as F#. - Did you "learn" from the Internet by any chance?

Look, at the end of the day, a spelling is either right or it's wrong. Spelling it wrong is fine if it's just you doing it for your own purposes, but it's not acceptable when used as a tool to teach others.

And now that the error has been pointed out, if you persist, you're not only going to cause confusion, you're doing it deliberately. That actually suggests malice to me.
[...]

Spelling F as E# is pointless, the note you play on the keys is F no matter how much you whine about it.

If you want to write notes on paper, please go ahead and spell them however you like, it's irrelevant for this application.

viewtopic.php?f=99&t=472366&start=15

Because you don't grasp the point of proper spelling doesn't mean there is no point. If a person wants to become conversant with keys, just for starters, one will want to have a good basis. You're arguing the newb remain in the dark about the very bases for the language of music.

If we heed your idiot advice, we'll end up in an incoherent mess right quick.
Let alone that the meanings of the notes in harmonies/aka chords will be severely restricted. You like where you reside in the dark, fine, but don't expect to advise it's the way to go and expect no resistance.

Then, after two whole pages of people pointing out the error of his ways, dot jon replies:

You're one of those who have learned music theory, but lack the capacity to actually understand it. Don't worry, music world is full of people like you,simpletons with their heads stuck up their arse. Uneducated and too rusted in their ways to understand that music, like any language, is in constant change.

"music, like any language, is in constant change."

Sure, just like we see people that type 'to' for the number two, we see people who don't quite grasp the language using it more and more; possibly because the internet affords the opportunity to both see more of people's lameness and for more lame people to type at other people (or, to think it's time to make some beats). Or even to toss moronic yet pompous declarations at those who happened to notice the disintegration of language usage happening right before their eyes.

In this case, no, the cluelessness of C# F G# C for a C#maj7 is not the language evolving, it's that people like you are lazy. (When all one wants is to see a chord on the keyboard? These are all tertial constructions, the knowledge is really basic.) Who are you kidding with a word like 'capacity'? Worry about yours, here is a simple matter of following the alphabet. C D E F G A B; C# D# E# F# G# A# B#. Thirds: C# E# G# B#.

So that type of critique is so strong, or this one, composing with no preparation in musical experience is supposed to be so hands off it moves you to take another shot, you can't resist... You'll go for that shit not even annoyed by anything I said? Sure, pal.

There's the backstory; what was the deal with all that vitriol?
Didn't you

use it to lift ourselves on some imaginary pedestal

And this is not a "thread about arrogance". The original post was owning up to one's arrogance figuring to run before you could crawl. Demonstrably not my arrogance, I have articulated that (and not for the first time) so you could grok it. But no. It's about something else that happened, who are you kidding.

You talking about my arrogance is classic psychological projection.
arrogant is one thing, but utterly clueless arrogance to no gain at all, ass just hanging out there now... truly amazing.

[Robmobius]

We're not calling you arrogant, you are arrogant.

Damn straight!

[JJ_Jettflow]

That's great. But, you used a quote of mine to launch into that, which is not about 'the purest expression', or a pure intent particularly.

My comment was not about "the purest" of expression or intent at all. The message I was trying to get across is that art should not be judged by the method in which it was created but if the message it conveys is an honest one and connects with the person experiencing that art. And by honest I mean not done for fame or money, but for art's sake...you know like what 10cc said.

Maybe I misread your statement but from what I gathered from it was that you think that someone who creates music that is made out of loops and uses technology to express themselves is somehow less artistic than say someone studying for decades to learn to play music to express themselves.

[jancivil]

Well, what I actually remarked on was a tendency I have noticed over some years, particularly on this forum, of people that somehow think it's time to compose that have no experience with, let me be clear, anybody's compositions.

That SO does not mean what you took it to mean. The user of a product (loops? why not) is in all likelihood going to produce the best result the more experience they have with music.

(Why would you assume I had an anti-technology stance? You gathered straw for a strawman. I use technology to create music, strictly technology. But what is technology? A guitar is technology. So wait, let me be real clear, I use only computers and software to create music.)

But to say even this must hurt people that have their ego so invested in the thing (rather than the time)? I think it's a reasonable argument. I think the analogy 'run a race before you can walk' is apt. The argument "a toddler's pure expression is the be-all, end-all to measure 'art' (or music)" could well justify the least effort on the part of grown persons, because we'd have to take the 'artist's' word for their purity. Like (the late) OBYONETAOPY. Anybody remember that kerfuffle.

[jancivil]

We're not calling you arrogant, you are arrogant.

Damn straight!

Literally

[jancivil]

I write for the whole of readership. I doubt a problem is specific to an individual. At the moment the ("Jazz Theory") article using a lot of useless lingo is not uncommon, it's actually typical.

Oh, i actually was watching that thread curiously. Topic was out of my reach, but still curious enough to read. Anyways, I think the way you write is just good, especially since you seem to consider the other possible readers. Just thought you might want to hear something positive for exchange

If you meant 'for a change', lol. The private feedback I get (regarding music theory sub-forum is about it as far as actual personal messages) is virtually all positive. "you're fighting the good fight" for example.

[Robmobius]

We're not calling you arrogant, you are arrogant.

Damn straight!

Literally

You don't know, that you don't know...

[JJ_Jettflow]

Well, what I actually remarked on was a tendency I have noticed over some years, particularly on this forum, of people that somehow think it's time to compose that have no experience with, let me be clear, anybody's compositions.

That SO does not mean what you took it to mean.

Then you should be more articulate in your comments because even the above quote clearly comes off as saying such. Again what I gather you are saying is that there must be some sort of formal study made before someone should be allowed to express themselves through music. Is that not what you are saying? If not please dumb it down for me or be more explanatory.

I think the analogy 'run a race before you can walk' is apt.

Again to agree with you that "music is not a sport", it is all about expression so learning anything is not necessary because if the end result does not achieve its goal, that will be the lesson. If the artist decides to continue, with or without help, he will continue to learn. Perhaps the hard way but still learn.

[jancivil]

The argument "a toddler's pure expression is the be-all, end-all to measure 'art' (or music)" could well justify the least effort on the part of grown persons, because we'd have to take the 'artist's' word for their purity.

Let me be fair, and not strawman you:

art should not be judged by the method in which it was created but if the message it conveys is an honest one and connects with the person experiencing that art.

Ok, I didn't know art must be about a message, either. And some art doesn't connect enough for us to even know about it until after the artist is dead, & for a while. So, whatever, your illustration of the point began with a toddler's purity. This gets into a consideration of Aesthetics, Philosophy, and I'm not predicting much success at consciousness-raising as a result of that kind of tack right now the way it's going.

[jancivil]

Well, what I actually remarked on was a tendency I have noticed over some years, particularly on this forum, of people that somehow think it's time to compose that have no experience with, let me be clear, anybody's compositions.

That SO does not mean what you took it to mean.

Then you should be more articulate in your comments because even the above quote clearly comes off as saying such. .

Well, I said what I said which wasn't that* and I have been as clear as I can following up. You want to argue with a strawman, go invent a whole dialectic, write both parts, for all that.

(* edit for clarity for all concerned to read it: "as saying such", which is that using loops meant shitty composition in itself. No, it just isn't there. Your issue.)

[jancivil]

We're not calling you arrogant, you are arrogant.

Damn straight!

Literally

You don't know, that you don't know...

I already stated, predicted some more of it, that that view will have people calling me arrogant. This shouldn't be about me. I don't give the slightest hint of a shart what you think about me.