Is there a Eurorack module for that?
Does Melody Even Matter??
-
- Beware the Quoth
- 35435 posts since 4 Sep, 2001 from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair
An idiot on Set Theory:
"In some cases there is an object called red that contains everything that is red. In much the same way a pot is a plate."
"In some cases there is an object called red that contains everything that is red. In much the same way a pot is a plate."
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
Only fraud here is you. And cantomerics is not a method that can be considered hypothese testing on par with laboratorie experiments or brainscans or micro-biology or observations within cosmology. There are mixed methods from qualititative and quantitative traditions within anthropology but overall it is an etnoghraphic observational and historical analytic discipline. It involves a lot of interpretative methods naturally and fewer quantitative.
Your own hypotheses are certainly not backed up by tests here but are a big pile of incoherent points en masse completely mixed from vague references, anecdotes and speculation pulled right out of your rectum and the darkness of non sequitur. You wouldn’t know a testable hypothesis from an ex nihilo assertion if the first one was a sparrow shitting in your hair and the latter the horn of a goat up your ass.
I was like that too, 25 years ago when I entered university. So smart that I thought they should just give me my title right away. It is very student-like and typical. You will gradually get over it and get your mind in order once you realize that everything you thought you knew about science is wrong. That is one more important entry to academics
And to your appeal to your own authority: This fraud here has a ph.d. in psychology, have been a full time researcher for over a decade, and make use of ethnography as well. Now what is your title, I wonder, and university are you from?
Finally, you have not given us any hint what it really is you want to say with regard to melodies. See my former question to that. I am still waiting for the punchline here. Even within academics, we try to build around a few points at a time related to a main topic and not 1000 more or less related issues under the same thematic umbrella. In other words: You have not made your point yet, oh great scientist. You do not think that is required?
Last edited by IncarnateX on Wed Feb 27, 2019 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
KVR scientism ffs, as if it was not enough you have managed to get your leader in the in the White House on top of half the world’s nuclear arsenal. God have merci on all of us.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111283 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
anyone fancy some ice cream?
-
- Beware the Quoth
- 35435 posts since 4 Sep, 2001 from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair
i do now.
An idiot on Set Theory:
"In some cases there is an object called red that contains everything that is red. In much the same way a pot is a plate."
"In some cases there is an object called red that contains everything that is red. In much the same way a pot is a plate."
-
- Boss Lovin' DR
- 14312 posts since 15 Mar, 2002 from the grimness of yorkshire
Would you like some warm chocolate sauce with it?
-
- KVRist
- 350 posts since 11 May, 2008
Jan, every generalization is probabilistic and it is a reduction. Horses and birds are diverse among themselves but still we put them in a "category" so we can describe them by patterns.
The particular point that infurated you I think was misunderstood. What I meant about imitators not being valued was - more often than not (a generalization, probably might be exceptions) jazz musicians don't value someone who transcribes a mile davis solo or a coltrane solo and then goes on stage to reproduce it verbatim as if it were a classical musician. If you value this move, then you are truly an exception to what I know from this culture. The cases I've read about and seen in my life value people that learned from records, use lead sheets to have a kind of a "structure" and them improvise unpon it, in real time, and everytime is different, because that's their own musical practice.
It is in that sense that this culture is very different from say "conservatory classical-musicians" which usually formalize and compose entire works in notation - "texts" - to be then played verbatim by other players in which rigour and precision is valued and praised.
IncarnateX, your question has been answered since my first post. You just don't seem to be able to interpret it and then attack me ad hominem. My point was that "melody" matters to several cultures in different degrees, while others not so much. And then I tried to explain which cultures and practices value it the most and why. Hence all those descriptions. I also made a case that in certain musical cultures melody in form of a tune is basically the core value of what matters, namely in some folk song cultures, and among most western pop music listeners, because they lack concepts to value other parameters (like complex harmonies for instance).
And for me the difference between philosophy, art, literature and science is that science produces tested knowledge. If the knowledge produced is not tested then it is not science yet. If you don't agree that musicology is science and Lomax's project is invalid you are free to contest it and publish your own papers on the subject. Regarding psychology of music, deutsch has a very large and good book that I've read. The problem with all those studies is that they study the brain and sounds. They don't study music, because since music is a cultural understanding of sounds, it is mainly expressed externally and can't be observed internally - you have to grasp it by observing people, listening to them, reading their discoursed, observing their behaviour and then analysing the sounds IN context, and in the terms of the culture you're analizing. You can't just do it in a lab.
The particular point that infurated you I think was misunderstood. What I meant about imitators not being valued was - more often than not (a generalization, probably might be exceptions) jazz musicians don't value someone who transcribes a mile davis solo or a coltrane solo and then goes on stage to reproduce it verbatim as if it were a classical musician. If you value this move, then you are truly an exception to what I know from this culture. The cases I've read about and seen in my life value people that learned from records, use lead sheets to have a kind of a "structure" and them improvise unpon it, in real time, and everytime is different, because that's their own musical practice.
It is in that sense that this culture is very different from say "conservatory classical-musicians" which usually formalize and compose entire works in notation - "texts" - to be then played verbatim by other players in which rigour and precision is valued and praised.
IncarnateX, your question has been answered since my first post. You just don't seem to be able to interpret it and then attack me ad hominem. My point was that "melody" matters to several cultures in different degrees, while others not so much. And then I tried to explain which cultures and practices value it the most and why. Hence all those descriptions. I also made a case that in certain musical cultures melody in form of a tune is basically the core value of what matters, namely in some folk song cultures, and among most western pop music listeners, because they lack concepts to value other parameters (like complex harmonies for instance).
And for me the difference between philosophy, art, literature and science is that science produces tested knowledge. If the knowledge produced is not tested then it is not science yet. If you don't agree that musicology is science and Lomax's project is invalid you are free to contest it and publish your own papers on the subject. Regarding psychology of music, deutsch has a very large and good book that I've read. The problem with all those studies is that they study the brain and sounds. They don't study music, because since music is a cultural understanding of sounds, it is mainly expressed externally and can't be observed internally - you have to grasp it by observing people, listening to them, reading their discoursed, observing their behaviour and then analysing the sounds IN context, and in the terms of the culture you're analizing. You can't just do it in a lab.
Play fair and square!
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111283 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
time for the glorious aum riff 
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
WOW. What an amazing revelation, then. I bet that recognition will lead to a friggin paradigmatic revolution within science on a broad scale. Maybe musciology turns out to the mean by which we escape this doomed Earth and colonize space.My point was that "melody" matters to several cultures in different degrees, while others not so much.
Hurry. Make an article from your loooong posts where you show us how to reach this surprising conclusion and publish it in Nature and Science, THE outlet for natural science. Come back and tell us how it went. If it is accepted, I will shut up and rest my case. Meanwhile I will consider you an amateur scientist without a real clue about what he is talking about and why.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111283 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
didgeridoo moods
20 all time favourite hits and melodies
on the didgeridoo
where were you when this was a hit
mowowowoeowoewowowoooooow
and we all remember dancing to this
mowowowoeowoewowowoooooow
and this classic
mowowowoeowoewowowoooooow
order now and get the companion vuvuzela cd free!
20 all time favourite hits and melodies
on the didgeridoo
where were you when this was a hit
mowowowoeowoewowowoooooow
and we all remember dancing to this
mowowowoeowoewowowoooooow
and this classic
mowowowoeowoewowowoooooow
order now and get the companion vuvuzela cd free!
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
I have just read further into your ramblings @musiologo and now you are starting to teach me about psychology too with sheer nonsense statement. If I should trace every ungrounded, contradictory and ignorant statement of yours, there would be material enough for a whole friggin conference about cognitive distortions and fallacious thinking, so I am not even going to try to explain it to you. You and science are not genetically fit for one another, I recommed yoga, spiritualism, astrology and crystal theraphy instead. There, anything goes as long as you remember to say “namaste” afterwards.
Last edited by IncarnateX on Wed Feb 27, 2019 1:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111283 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
oi! 
yoga and astrology are not equal
astrology is bullshit
and yoga helps keep me calm ffs 
yoga and astrology are not equal
astrology is bullshit
and yoga helps keep me calm
ffs -
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
Namaste, bro. Seems like you could use a session now.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111283 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
theres a shop round the corner from here called namaste
when it first opened i was quite excited by the prospect of maybe finding singing bowls in there...
when it opened, f**king interior decorating? f**k all to do with buddhism or anything
when it first opened i was quite excited by the prospect of maybe finding singing bowls in there...
when it opened, f**king interior decorating? f**k all to do with buddhism or anything
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111283 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
yeah, therein lies the humour
