Oh Melody where have you gone...?

[snooky]

Markleford, you're such an angry man...here, have a banana!



to the rest of you:



PWONED!!

[Meffy]

You were joking? Bah, shame on you. I hereby sentence you to listen to "Don Ho Sings Island Favorites" and "Lite Hits of the 60s with Lawrence Welk" until you grok that e-z listening is the BEST -- yes, BEST! -- genre, and all others are trash.

:-D

Meffy

[aMUSEd]

I don't understand the problem here - music has never been about melody alone. A lot of music has very little or even none and focuses far more on the rhythmic, temporal or textural aspects - this is a very western centric view of music and even then a lot of western music has grown beyond traditional melodic limitations.

That's very true. But you're kind of opening the same can of worms, because there too you have the same dichotomy. Does Bollywood have anything to do with classical hindi music? Nope. It's not enough to stick some tabla loops and a sitar drone in there to make it music. That a lot of people dance to it and cry to it and make love to it and fill their CD shelves with it does not make it art.

And it has nothing to do with "feeling" or "brainfunction". It's mostly a matter of education and commitment there as well.

It's not a question of whether it's "art". Music is not always about melody alone and that that - whether it's any good or not or to a certain person's taste is another matter and that is largely subjective and culturally/historically influenced. I don't care how many people buy it or listen to it - that means absolutely nothing.

[snooky]

You were joking? Bah, shame on you. I hereby sentence you to listen to "Don Ho Sings Island Favorites" and "Lite Hits of the 60s with Lawrence Welk" until you grok that e-z listening is the BEST -- yes, BEST! -- genre, and all others are trash.



Meffy

half-joking...I do belive that electronica is a highly evolved style of music...not everyone can appreciate it.

But some trollin' is always fun
(since it's not an uber serious subject)

[Meffy]

Righty, then, here goes.

Tiiiii-ny bubbles... Up, up and away in my beautiful balooooonnnn... [continue until cured]

[Markleford]

Yeah, it's always fun to use "just kidding" as a convenient way to escape painting yourself into a corner, eh?

Love ya, frac.

- m

[griels]

half-joking...I do belive that electronica is a highly evolved style of music...not everyone can appreciate it.

But some trollin' is always fun
(since it's not an uber serious subject)

Well, you've hardly contributed to the cause of understanding... Fortunately I know many electronica fans have a much more open minded attitude than the one you presented in this thread. If I didn't already appreciate abstract electronica then you might just have put me off investigating further.

[snooky]

Yeah, it's always fun to use "just kidding" as a convenient way to escape painting yourself into a corner, eh?

Love ya, frac.

- m

oh god, I was trolling...belive it if you want to...as I said, I do honestly think that in terms of compexity, not much can rival true electronica.

there, how's that banana?

[snooky]

you peeps are so sensetive...ah well, go and have a good cry.

[idobs]

I have a funny story on this "melody" topic... My mom's a piano teacher, and when I was a kid I took piano lessons. I stopped the lessons when I left for college.

Now that I'm back into music (electronic music this time), I always get into a funny argument with my mom: Whenever she hears any modern music, she points out that they usually have 2 chords (yes, we're down one from the 3 chords of the 60s-80s).


I sort of agree with her, it's all about the "sound" and effects now, rather than a melody, etc. No music-theory needed. I don't think this is that bad, as I like the sound of sweeping filters, heavy-reverb, delays, etc.


-Ido

[snooky]

I have a funny story on this "melody" topic... My mom's a piano teacher, and when I was a kid I took piano lessons. I stopped the lessons when I left for college.

Now that I'm back into music (electronic music this time), I always get into a funny argument with my mom: Whenever she hears any modern music, she points out that they usually have 2 chords (yes, we're down one from the 3 chords of the 60s-80s).


I sort of agree with her, it's all about the "sound" and effects now, rather than a melody, etc. No music-theory needed. I don't think this is that bad, as I like the sound of sweeping filters, heavy-reverb, delays, etc.


-Ido

yes!

exactly.

[1-2-Many]

Sans the digressions of humor, much of this thread is merely an interplay between two logical fallacies (see long quote below), as evidenced by this ongoing classical vs. electronica debate (not a new one btw). Like walking vs. horseback riding vs. bicycling vs. trains, planes, and automobiles, they all get you from point A to B, just at a different pace and experience along the way..…. And Hell, what’s wrong with just staying at Point A and playing the latest electronica smash hit (oxymoron?) on your piccolo?

Appeal to Novelty
Appeal to Novelty is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is new. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
1. X is new.
2. Therefore X is correct or better.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the novelty or newness of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something older. This is made quite obvious by the following example: Joe has proposed that 1+1 should now be equal to 3. When asked why people should accept this, he says that he just came up with the idea. Since it is newer than the idea that 1+1=2, it must be better.

This sort of "reasoning" is appealing for many reasons. First, "western culture" includes a very powerful commitment to the notion that new things must be better than old things. Second, the notion of progress (which seems to have come, in part, from the notion of evolution) implies that newer things will be superior to older things. Third, media advertising often sends the message that newer must be better. Because of these three factors (and others) people often accept that a new thing (idea, product, concept, etc.) must be better because it is new. Hence, Novelty is a somewhat common fallacy, especially in advertising.

It should not be assumed that old things must be better than new things (see the fallacy Appeal to Tradition) anymore than it should be assumed that new things are better than old things. The age of thing does not, in general, have any bearing on its quality or correctness (in this context).

Obviously, age does have a bearing in some contexts. For example, if a person concluded that his day old milk was better than his two-month old milk, he would not be committing an Appeal to Novelty. This is because, in such cases the newness of the thing is relevant to its quality. Thus, the fallacy is committed only when the newness is not, in and of itself, relevant to the claim.




VS.



Appeal to Tradition

Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or "always has been done." This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
1. X is old or traditional
2. Therefore X is correct or better.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer. This is made quite obvious by the following example: The theory that witches and demons cause disease is far older than the theory that microorganisms cause diseases. Therefore, the theory about witches and demons must be true.

This sort of "reasoning" is appealing for a variety of reasons. First, people often prefer to stick with what is older or traditional. This is a fairly common psychological characteristic of people which may stem from the fact that people feel more comfortable about what has been around longer. Second, sticking with things that are older or traditional is often easier than testing new things. Hence, people often prefer older and traditional things out of laziness. Hence, Appeal to Tradition is a somewhat common fallacy.


It should not be assumed that new things must be better than old things, any more than it should be assumed that old things are better than new things. The age of something does not, in general, have any bearing on its quality or correctness (in this context).

Obviously, age does have a bearing in some contexts. For example, if a person concluded that aged wine would be better than brand new wine, he would not be committing an Appeal to Tradition. This is because, in such cases the age of the thing is relevant to its quality. Thus, the fallacy is committed only when the age is not, in and of itself, relevant to the claim.

One final issue that must be considered is the "test of time." In some cases people might be assuming that because something has lasted as a tradition or has been around a long time that it is true because it has "passed the test of time." If a person assumes that something must be correct or true simply because it has persisted a long time, then he has committed an Appeal to Tradition. After all, as history has shown people can persist in accepting false claims for centuries.

My point: "the universe is diverse, so reconcile your single file." It's not A OR B, but more A or B or C and D or ......AA or AB ....A1E nor A1F..........$%#!@ not &%^#$*#@.

[Hink]

whyterabbyt - A fantastic and well balanced response. Nothing more to add, you said it all

I agree except would add one thing and to the beginning. Music is about you, the sooner you learn that the sooner you'll understand. Music has become a business, but to many of us myself included, music goes way beyond that. Too me, music is my way of expressing myself, it's always been my best friend. As many know here it got me through the worst of al imaginable times and celebrated with me during the good. How can anyone judge that?

Music=art art=self expression who else but the self can define the form of expression? So the way I see it, it's my music if you like it great if you don't that's cool afterall if you are hearing it that means it's done, if it's done I expressed what I needed, any other validation isn't needed...it has already been successful...

[griels]

you peeps are so sensetive...ah well, go and have a good cry.

I'd rather not. I prefer to laugh at narrow-minded elitists.

It's not A OR B, but more A or B or C and D or ......AA or AB ....A1E nor A1F..........$%#!@ not &%^#$*#@.

Precisely! There are so many people who I like to call 'Pre-Bayesian mutual exclusivists' who are seemingly unable to cope with the simultaneous validity of traditionalism and innovation. There is no evidence that modern composition techniques and more traditional values cannot coexist in the same fragment of sound. I happen to think there's lots of evidence that they can, but that's in the ear of the beholder, so to speak.

[shamann]

people who I like to call 'Pre-Bayesian mutual exclusivists'

I can see why you like it, just rolls off the tongue, that!