Experiential discovery vs. formal training in music theory

[jancivil]

Conclusion: Lovely word indeed. To craft music or sound. Seems more broad and inclusive than "composing" to me, which can sound somewhat technical and linked to its use in classical music.

And it was definitely crafted more than played.

is that a fact

you're truly showing us your ass now. We got it, long time ago, your insecurity will not allow you to accept the reality that playing music is better for a musician than... well, bullshitting. Are you actually pretending not to get the particular meaning there from context? Or are you f**king dense.

are there visual arts fora where people incessantly argue for not being able to draw at all? You can haz a software to do everything, after all...

I absolutely have no more time for your games

[N__K]

[...] when it came time to play for jury [...]

On what grounds did you accept their authority to judge you?

How obtuse can one be? I mean is there such stiff competition for Dunning-Kruger Effect world champion here?

I suspected you'd take it that way - thank deities I recently learned that your style of communication has a sharp edge to it, or we'd be at an unintentional flame war

I was there to get some chops together, specifically to be judged.

So you mean something like: noticing that the folks there are better than you at something you wish to learn, and utilizing their judgement as a form of helpful critique - that perhaps has some degree of objectivity, due to there being several judges?

To what extent the chances of attaining tribal belonging, social acceptance, and personal achievement contributed to allowing yourself to be judged?


Contrast, for example, to contemporary TV music talent competitions, in which egos and dreams of hopefuls are oftentimes (ab)used for sake of entertainment.

[jancivil]

it's an insult to our intelligence to act like you're so clever we can't smell the bullshit - the utter word salad* - a mile away.

*: composing" to me, which can sound somewhat technical and linked to its use in classical music.

You've f**ked over the language deliberately (or you've tied yourself in knots trying to justify your lack as an asset) trying to make people that understand from technique suspect, gatekeepers, reactionary. It's intellectually dishonest. It's the same move as that against diversity bullshit.

which can sound somewhat technical Craft = technique.

Compose. Look it up in any dictionary of the English language. If I make a still life at my breakfast table out of the plate, the cup, and the cutlery I've composed the thing.
So, again, we have your rebel without a clue disposition since some time ago. That is the reactionary aspect here, not speaking to studying music in terms of learning craft.

You're playing a game and testing our patience. I've run out.

edit: you can have the last word but I ain't gwyne read it

[N__K]

Conclusion: Lovely word indeed. To craft music or sound. Seems more broad and inclusive than "composing" to me, which can sound somewhat technical and linked to its use in classical music.

And it was definitely crafted more than played.

[...] We got it, long time ago, your insecurity will not allow you to accept the reality that playing music is better for a musician

I consider myself a music maker or a sound artist, not a musician in traditional sense

are there visual arts fora where people incessantly argue for not being able to draw at all?

Not sure, but there are forms of visual art done via programming, in which drawing is unnecessary.

You can haz a software to do everything, after all...

"This is the way"

Seriously speaking, why not? Might as well argue against some physical instruments on similar grounds, as many are effectively machines; a pianist is useless without a piano, and so on.

I absolutely have no more time for your games

I suspect you're having a bad day. No problem, my best wishes

[N__K]

it's an insult to our intelligence to act like you're so clever we can't smell the bullshit - the utter word salad* - a mile away.

*: composing" to me, which can sound somewhat technical and linked to its use in classical music.

You've f**ked over the language deliberately (or you've tied yourself in knots trying to justify your lack as an asset) trying to make people that understand from technique suspect, gatekeepers, reactionary. It's intellectually dishonest. It's the same move as that against diversity bullshit.

Compose. Look it up in any dictionary of the English language. If I make a still life at my breakfast table out of the plate, the cup, and the cutlery I've composed the thing.
So, again, we have your rebel without a clue disposition since some time ago. That is the reactionary aspect here, not speaking to studying music in terms of learning craft.

You're playing a game and testing our patience. I've run out.

Sounds like you're replying to me, but you're quoting TribeOfHǫfuð there ( viewtopic.php?p=8336409#p8336409 )
I did not know you fellows had become that tense to eachother

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

Do not know what happened to my saying, but point was that I found crafting more inclusive than composing. Inclusive would mean that it contains composing in a classical sense but also sound sculpting in a broader sense. This on a continuum, thus, N__K, you cannot say In Star Wars, Ben Burtt did one and John Williams did the other. A continuum does not work like an either or neither, so you have misunderstood it nevertheless.

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

I'd say that self-delusion is sometimes the only way to survive, psychologically.

You mean like pretending the wheel has not been invented yet, so you can take credit for it yourself?

[N__K]

Do not know what happened to my saying, but point was that I found crafting more inclusive than composing. Inclusive would mean that it contains composing in a classical sense but also sound sculpting in a broader sense. This on a continuum, thus, N__K, you cannot say In Star Wars, Ben Burtt did one and John Williams did the other. [...]

I quite agree that it's an artificial distinction.

The fact is merely that in terms of professional specialization, Ben Burtt crafted the sound effects and John Williams composed the orchestral music.

In terms of aesthetic result, the sounds and orchestral music could be considered as crossing over into eachother and taking turns as most important parts of the soundtrack, depending on the scene.


The seismic charge is probably one of simplest and most interesting examples of a musical effect - it's a low note (harmonic series) that can be made by feeding a percussive sound (or noise burst etc.) into a delay line or comb filter with feedback near maximum:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erFcYsC6JaY

I'd say it is a musical element; and lack of other music in that scene seems to agree.

Also, more than million views for just that one sound - if it was a competition, Ben would be surpassing the popular success of most of our discographies with a "piece" of just a few seconds

[N__K]

I'd say that self-delusion is sometimes the only way to survive, psychologically.

You mean like pretending the wheel has not been invented yet, so you can take credit for it yourself?

No - as said, more along the lines of the expression "Faith manages".

I believe the rest of my post there elaborates on it: viewtopic.php?p=8336024#p8336024


But to explain it further: think of the moment when you are not yet able to do something, but wish to. To carry on, and eventually make that wish into reality, you must imagine that someday you will attain the ability. In between is faith and effort, and usually many instances of failure.

The delusion at the time of lack of ability can be a great motivator. The image of a castle in the sky one holds onto, while building the real one, brick by brick.
Of course, at some level, one must realize that the castle in the sky will never materialize; and that the real one will probably not look much like the imagined one, if at all.

A related saying is "aim for the stars, land on the moon".

[jancivil]

I'm going to say my piece, one last shred of it, and vacate.
The straw that broke this camel's back was 'on what grounds do you grant authority to...'
I know where I fit in, I know where I am in regards to others and the particular things they have on offer. Did you look up Henry Meyer? You've never heard of the La Salle Quartet? Do you feature you're everybody's equal? WTAF is that shit.

When I was 14 and playing with professionals for the first time, I knew who they are and I knew who I was, a punk kid in a dinner jacket struggling. When Bill Hanna called a slow ballad in 5/4, played with brushes, I knew I was being CUT, and WHY.

So, when I went off to study I had proper humility. Not only that, I put myself in a position where I would be the very bottom of the totem pole. You're doing the very opposite, you've protected yourself all this time from knowing where you stand in a room, this is palpably clear. One supposes you have a defense mechanism all set so you may dismiss this, but I'm getting it off my chest so I can be clear of this shit.

Posing a sound design cat AGAINST a film composer: are you f**king kidding? You just reach up your anus and pull these nuggets out don't you.

Look, if the sound design _is_ music, rather than someone's foley gig, it's COMPOSING.
The foley could well have a design and be said to be a composition. The film is a composition.
Here, again, is your "versus", everything is zero sum. Dichotomous/mutually exclusive, experiential discovery versus formal training... I don't reckon you fully grok what the latter is tbh. The whole exercise is negative, teenage wind.

You're cleverer than PMN guy, but it's the same problem, you talk and talk and talk but can't listen

[N__K]

The straw that broke this camel's back was 'on what grounds do you grant authority to...'

I meant it in a casual philosophical way. I'm surprised that you saw it as an insult of some sort.

I believe that answers to that question ( viewtopic.php?p=8336612#p8336612 ) can bring to light some reasons why some of us choose formal paths and some choose informal (or partially formal). We tend to accept being judged by others on various grounds, including various personal reasons. Exams, skill and talent contests, job interviews, demo submissions etc. are an interesting phenomenon in that regard.

Do you feature you're everybody's equal?

Aren't we all, on some level?

You can do some things I cannot. I can do some things you cannot; I'm not looking down on you because of that.

I have noticed that it bothers you that I treat you as an equal, despite not belonging to hierarchies you're familiar with.

So, when I went off to study I had proper humility. Not only that, I put myself in a position where I would be the very bottom of the totem pole. You're doing the very opposite, you've protected yourself all this time from knowing where you stand in a room, this is palpably clear.

Indeed, I have intentionally not told much of my backgrounds.

I believe I do have humility to some degree. I also make an effort not to belong to any tribe, at least not to the extent of fitting into totem poles, figuratively speaking.

The foley could well have a design and be said to be a composition. The film is a composition.

I quite agree - I'd say music is a subset of sound art. Rhetorical dichotomies help to examine the differences, if any, for sake of conversation.

You're cleverer than PMN guy, but it's the same problem, you talk and talk and talk but can't listen

Not sure if I'm cleverer, perhaps just more wary of people. There is some truth to the latter part, but I do make an effort, for what little that is worth.

But what of you? To borrow a quote from a famous movie: "are you strong enough to point that high-powered perception at yourself?"

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

Do you feature you're everybody's equal?

Aren't we all, on some level?

Nope, not even close. And that would be some boring condition for mutual exchange of skills and experience, and there would be nothing to learn because everybody's arse already knows. It is not about looking up to- or down on someone as human beings, but recognizing your better, so you can listen and learn, instead of thinking you know it all and can reflect upon it to highest level already. Basic requirements for learning in general.

Tbh. I do not engage much in your posts because I think you either do not get the points, make free associations from quotes to whatever you like, or like in the case with the composer-craftman continuum, simply interpret/twist the saying to mean the exact opposite. Consequently ending up in confusion: At one point you treat the composer-craftman continuum as an either or neither, the next, you comply with my critique and say it is an artificial distinction. Well, it cannot be both, mate, so will at least have to make up your mind about your distinctions to steer your Titanic free of icebergs and make the conversation meaningful. To me, it is all a mix up of "it is, it isn't", forth and back + more than a few free associations going nowhere.

[Bulbizarre]

I look at theory when I'm trying to get better chords and I think something is missing. In general I forget most of what I read or end up not using it in the moment and I do fine without it. Theory is essential for jazz, classical, some distinct ethnic styles with "that" scale or core rythm, but for electronic music, not so much. In terms of pure theory, I get better inspiration by listening to something that I don't fully see mentally or that sounds fresh technically, like classical.

[N__K]

Do you feature you're everybody's equal?

Aren't we all, on some level?

Nope, not even close. And that would be some boring condition for mutual exchange of skills and experience, and there would be nothing to learn because everybody's arse already knows. It is not about looking up to- or down on someone as human beings, but recognizing your better, so you can listen and learn, instead of thinking you know it all and can reflect upon it to highest level already. Basic requirements for learning in general.

I agree with what I've emphasized there, although I have to add that it depends on each person's own interests what to take from the exchange.

I believe that I recognize my betters quite well. For example, analysis of works I aspire to match is a regular practice of mine.

There is a likelihood that someday (probably years from now) I'll be going over jancivil's pieces like I've been going over those by Stravinski or Astral Projection or Michael Jackson - or, for that matter, many less-known names. I hope jancivil licenses the source files to some entity that will preserve them.

I've listened to your stuff with some interest as well, although I do not aspire to make the same genre, at this time.




I suppose that one of annoying things about me is that I'm here less for the social club, and more to take in whatever information that might help in my own quests. I bypass much of anything that does not, and I expect most folks to bypass most of what I write, as well.

For example, I did check who were the LaSalle Quartet which jancivil mentioned, but I did not go further, as it's outside my immediate interest. Just like some 2000s trance with debatably quartal-like solutions is of little interest to what jancivil seems to be doing currently.

I appreciate such things being mentioned, however, and that they remain in the repository of knowledge on this forum.

Tbh. I do not engage much in your posts because I think you either do not get the points, make free associations from quotes to whatever you like, or like in the case with the composer-craftman continuum, simply interpret/twist the saying to mean the exact opposite. Consequently ending up in confusion: At one point you treat the composer-craftman continuum as an either or neither, the next, you comply with my critique and say it is an artificial distinction. Well, it cannot be both, mate, so will at least have to make up your mind about your distinctions to steer your Titanic free of icebergs and make the conversation meaningful. To me, it is all a mix up of "it is, it isn't", forth and back + more than a few free associations going nowhere.

(Emphasis mine)

I'd say that it indeed can be both, depending on perspectives and mindsets a person is considering at any given time.

Compare it to using different software on same computer. In best of cases, one can run macOS, Linux and Windows on same exact hardware, triple-booting off the same drive. Granted, brains are not quite like that - and one could get into some interesting rabbit holes if virtualization and emulation are considered as well - but the comparison has some value, I think.

Another comparison is how when watching/reading dramatic stories, one can identify with different characters, depending on the moment.



As for free association - it is one of my natural skills, at least on good days
If that makes my posts and style of communication confusing to you, I believe we have found yet another thing that may be at the core of this topic.


Regarding interpersonal engagement, I'm darn near unreachable, and I apologize for that (to the extent it can be considered to be my fault, anyway). I suspect one of your backgrounds allows to infer what I mean there without having to spell it out in public.

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

I'd say that it indeed can be both, depending on perspectives and mindsets a person is considering at any given time.

There you go again. Missing the point completely or twisting it in your head as premise for your text-wall. An either or neither cannot be a continuum as well (a gradual change from one to the other in terms of relative amount of both). It is a rule of logic and screwed personal perspectives to it do not make a difference. Thus your composing versus crafting in terms of your StarWars analogy is an either or neither, therefore a suggestion of a real dichotomy, which consequently cannot be a false dichotomy at the same time, which you also said it was as response to my continuum reminder. It is but rubbish.

Again, you show no particular skills or training to discuss at the level you want. Getting grip on your own logic and contradictions would be a prerequisite. Understanding what people are saying by such a grip would be another.