Experiential discovery vs. formal training in music theory

[jancivil]

Sorry, I got confused. Satriani, 1988
Vai joined FZ in 1980. Sent Frank a tape of him playing The Black Page, which is impossible on guitar, and that he took it off the record is serious business.

[N__K]

You've asserted that training leads to something negating potential discovery.

I have done no such thing, except perhaps to the extent that knowing a previously-existing name for some phenomenon is likely to remove the need to invent one's own word for it.

Or in other words, if you have a pre-existing map of something, you will be less likely to need to draw your own map of it. I believe we have recently seen an interesting reverse example of that phenomenon on this forum.

You cannot tell me that my training stops me from anything.

I told no such things

I have my own harmonic language, mine, original. It's grounded in something, but it isn't an anchor weighing me down.

Indeed. And for what it is worth, your works are more original than most of mine, that is for sure. I subscribe, to some extent, to the general ideas of "The Manual" by KLF/ Timelords

'the physics of music will lead to learning some elementary basics."
I don't know what that means.

For example, experimenting with a monochord (or pretty much any stringed instrument) will lead one to discover - and perhaps name, in their own way - some basic principles of acoustics and musical intervals, even if they had no theoretical knowledge of it before that.

Similarly, experimenting with software synths and piano rolls will lead to some (re)discoveries.

Granted, in both cases it will almost invariably be personal rediscovery of things that are already known to a number of people and likely associted with some words and symbols.

I think that it is OK to use that kind of rediscovery approach, just as it is OK to learn and utilize pre-existing knowledge.

[vurt]

@jan ah that makes more sense, with the whitesnake timing.

[jancivil]

You've asserted that training leads to something negating potential discovery.

I have done no such thing, except perhaps to the extent that knowing a previously-existing name for some phenomenon is likely to remove the need to invent one's own word for it.

Or in other words, if you have a pre-existing map of something, you will be less likely to need to draw your own map of it. I believe we have recently seen an interesting reverse example of that phenomenon on this forum/

Ok, I'm glad we've cleared that up. The point is there is no real useful difference between having a map and being able to go off road quite freely afaic.

[jancivil]

'the physics of music will lead to learning some elementary basics."
I don't know what that means.

For example, experimenting with a monochord (or pretty much any stringed instrument) will lead one to discover - and perhaps name, in their own way - some basic principles of acoustics and musical intervals, even if they had no theoretical knowledge of it before that.

Oh, ok. I guess I know some physics, then. even as a trained musician...

[N__K]

But if one said to a formally trained violin player something like "play notes in that passage as steps with zero release" instead of "play notes in that passage as staccato 1/16ths", that'd be confusing.
And the other way around: to someone who has never read traditional theory but understands "steps and envelopes" paradigm, "staccato" might be the more confusing term.

how does staccato 16ths equate to zero release, per se?

I was comparing the situation specifically to the step sequencer of FL Studio. In it, notes are by default of "infinite" length; that is, samples are played to their end. So to get staccato there [while using a long sample], one would need to set the release to zero (or whatever sounds short enough to create that effect).

It also appears to assert that "trained violinist" equates to 'person that has no knowledge of sound otherwise', if you mean release characteristic in an 'electronic' instrument.

I meant simply that a person "talking in FL Studio" and a person "talking in formal theory" may experience misunderstandings.

A bit like we appear to be doing right now

[jancivil]

fucka buncha FL Studio
you may have a real dichotomy between me and that whole kind of thing. I donevenwannaknow

I would say use a staccato articulation or maybe a host more suited to musicians

[vurt]

fucka buncha FL Studio
you may have a real dichotomy between me and that kind of whole thing. It's not your fault so much that sounds like nonsense.

i want a t-shirt now with "it's not you, it's fl studio"

[jancivil]

Well, N_K is right that this "trained musician" is confused by that.
I don't know why samples that play to the end is unique or a problem like that, it's quite bizarre to me.
A staccato sample may be shortened in a capable vi at either end, cutting into it by degrees, but you choose the thing that already works afaic, saving time and hassle. Step sequencer for a violin part is not really the tool for that anyway

[N__K]

theres nothing wrong with self discovery, as long as you don't try to pass it on.

Admission of guilt: I'm quoting you a bit out of context for sake of conversation.

That admitted, I disagree to some extent with that emphasized part (emphasis mine).

I'd say that some amount of peculiar ideas and rebellious attitude is good for music and also its theory, or else we would have less new things. But that is more on existential level, and in practice there needs to be some self-moderation on part of a wannabe prophet or messiah.

Personally I have perhaps overstepped the boundary of reasonable in that regard... a few times. I hope no-one got injured.

[jancivil]

do you both have the self-same definition of 'self discovery' tho

[vurt]

theres nothing wrong with self discovery, as long as you don't try to pass it on.

Admission of guilt: I'm quoting you a bit out of context for sake of conversation.

That admitted, I disagree to some extent with that emphasized part (emphasis mine).

I'd say that some amount of peculiar ideas and rebellious attitude is good for music and also its theory, or else we would have less new things. But that is more on existential level, and in practice there needs to be some self-moderation on part of a wannabe prophet or messiah.

Personally I have perhaps overstepped the boundary of reasonable in that regard... a few times. I hope no-one got injured.

the taking it out of context, does make it maybe a different matter, if it's just a general chat between musicians then yeah, but as i said, if someone is asking specific questions, our knowledge, can confuse the issue. here id suggest it's more helpful to let the people who have studied hard, pass that on.
as youve said yourself, we often don't have the terminology, even when we have the technique.

[N__K]

fucka buncha FL Studio

At the risk of HPCing this thread, that expression was my positive LOL of the day Someone should make a trap / hiphop piece of it, obviously made with FLS.

I admit to having grown theoretically queer-er during the time of using FLS, though I believe the fault lies more with myself than the app. I use it less often than in the past - being something of a REAPER evangelist nowadays - but I'm a regular on FLS forums and remain nostalgically linked to the software.

do you both have the self-same definition of 'self discovery' tho

Good question...

[donkey tugger]

theres nothing wrong with self discovery, as long as you don't try to pass it on.

the taking it out of context, does make it maybe a different matter,

Oh indeed.

[vurt]

theres nothing wrong with self discovery, as long as you don't try to pass it on.

the taking it out of context, does make it maybe a different matter,

Oh indeed.

dirty old man