KVR Audio

stk · Post by **stk** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:02 am

wow, theory or not, imagine how much music you could have made over the past nine pages

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:03 am

metrosechual wrote:
nuffink wrote:
Looking forward to learning as well. hopefully i can input something.

I doubt it, but a forum is holding it's breath in anticipation.

metrosechual · Post by **metrosechual** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:04 am

nuffink wrote:
metrosechual wrote:
nuffink wrote:
Looking forward to learning as well. hopefully i can input something.
I doubt it, but a forum is holding it's breath in aticipation.

gotta love catching those post whore spelling errors before they edit them.

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:09 am

metrosechual wrote:post whore

You need to take a look at your posts per day total, troll

metrosechual · Post by **metrosechual** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:10 am

nuffink wrote:
metrosechual wrote:post whore
You need to take a look at your posts per day total, troll

yeah, its been a slow weekend

ummm, but thing is, i think you qualify for the troll role around here, with only a few posts here and there that are even a bit constructive.

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 13#2290113

know anyone named CD3 by any chance?

herodotus · Post by **herodotus** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:27 am

fanfarecircuit wrote:why are people who don't study classical theory ignorant? most musicians know enough theory to make nice music for themselves. the world is full of new ideas, methods and technology. i couldn't possibly know "everything" i need to know at any given moment, but i am able to use books, internet, etc to reference info when needed.

nuffink, you are continually stuck up and boring at the same time. perhaps you should stop being insulting to those that "know less than you". i don't think anyone here feels blissful in their ignorance, as you put it. and i think most people here are happy to learn all kinds of different methods and theory. are you? seems like you are continually stuck on the same topic. i guess your plug is just not selling well and this is a way for you to blow off steam.

Although attacking nuffink is fun I'm sure, the fact is that almost every time a thread concerning theory is started here, there is a predictable little drama: a spat between the people-who-don't-know-much-theory-and-who-are-doing-just-fine-thank-you-very-much on one side, and the people-who-do-know-theory-and-who-are-sick-and-tired-of-all-of-these-kids-badmouthing-something-they-don't-understand on the other.

So nuffink created this thread, and gave it a catchy (and polemical) title worthy of its gravity. Which will hopefully help to send everyone who wants to duke it out on this particular issue to this thread, and away from all of the innocent little 'whats a major triad?' threads that seem to get invaded by this issue over and over again.

And anyway the theory forum was my idea!!

metrosechual · Post by **metrosechual** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:34 am

good suggestion herod... ill keep it here

thanks fink!

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 1:01 am

herodotus wrote:So nuffink created this thread, and gave it a catchy (and polemical) title worthy of its gravity. Which will hopefully help to send everyone who wants to duke it out on this particular issue to this thread, and away from all of the innocent little 'whats a major triad?' threads that seem to get invaded by this issue over and over again.

Surely not?

Topiness · Post by **Topiness** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 1:55 am

opia wrote:oh how I love these music theory threads

the agreeing...the disagreeing

those akward moments in-between that remind one that one does still have a pulse

I see what you mean now. Still, try anything once

...

Lunatique · Post by **Lunatique** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 4:16 pm

shinken wrote:I agree with ffc's analysis. Another thing I would add is that none of us are up here touting our non-music degree certificates or professional quals and decrying those who don't have them in our respective disciplines as ignorant boors. As if having studied subjects like law, software development, accountancy, French (LOL) etc. at Uni in preference over music theory and now just having fun with DSP software and learning informally marks you out as a worthless, inbred, subhuman wretch not fit to live on God's clean earth. Shit, that's how I used to think about art students..

About this time of year I imagine not everyone is 100% sober anyway, and this might account for the barely-disguised sneering derision towards us mere mortal amateurs from certain directions. I don't think this sort of attitude will cultivate the sort of sympathy that might help to recover any costs involved in developing the now-cracked plug in the first place.

You have to see this whole thing from the historical perspective of KVR. This used to be a forum where many members routinely bashed anything related to conventional music, theory, or anything that wasn't edgy, hip, experimental, ambient drones/soundscapes, glitch..etc. Anyone who dared to suggest that theory can help you become a better musician, advocated playing and practicing an instrument, composing/arranging/performing your own stuff instead of relying strictly on pre-recorded material/loops..etc would get ridiculed and called horrible names. It was the OTHER way around back then. Members like us were deemed unoriginal, boring, vanilla, soulless, unimaginative, stuffy, elitists..etc and so on. It is only in the last year or so that this general attitude has shifted, and it's only because more and more members who are well-versed in music theory has joined or became more vocal, thus changing the general attitude here.

Topiness · Post by **Topiness** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 4:16 pm

nuffink wrote:"Great music has been made by people with no theory."

True.

"Therefore music theory is useless."

False.

Was having coffee in starbucks and picked up a book called "writing music on the keyboard" or something. The introduction of one chapter said something like:

'Ignorance is very often bliss. It is amazing how often relative beginners can be captivated and put into a creative frame of mind by the beauty of a simple idea which might be written off as not technically special enough by a more accomplished player.'

in art, nothing is ever always true. Take any statement with 'is' and replace it with 'can be' - you've now corrected it.

Amberience · Post by **Amberience** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 4:30 pm

Lunatique wrote:
shinken wrote:I agree with ffc's analysis. Another thing I would add is that none of us are up here touting our non-music degree certificates or professional quals and decrying those who don't have them in our respective disciplines as ignorant boors. As if having studied subjects like law, software development, accountancy, French (LOL) etc. at Uni in preference over music theory and now just having fun with DSP software and learning informally marks you out as a worthless, inbred, subhuman wretch not fit to live on God's clean earth. Shit, that's how I used to think about art students..

About this time of year I imagine not everyone is 100% sober anyway, and this might account for the barely-disguised sneering derision towards us mere mortal amateurs from certain directions. I don't think this sort of attitude will cultivate the sort of sympathy that might help to recover any costs involved in developing the now-cracked plug in the first place.
You have to see this whole thing from the historical perspective of KVR. This used to be a forum where many members routinely bashed anything related to conventional music, theory, or anything that wasn't edgy, hip, experimental, ambient drones/soundscapes, glitch..etc. Anyone who dared to suggest that theory can help you become a better musician, advocated playing and practicing an instrument, composing/arranging/performing your own stuff instead of relying strictly on pre-recorded material/loops..etc would get ridiculed and called horrible names. It was the OTHER way around back then. Members like us were deemed unoriginal, boring, vanilla, soulless, unimaginative, stuffy, elitists..etc and so on. It is only in the last year or so that this general attitude has shifted, and it's only because more and more members who are well-versed in music theory has joined or became more vocal, thus changing the general attitude here.

I don't really agree. Loop usage has been bashed ever since I've been here. If you used a phaser in a more orthodox way, there was a high degree of probability that people here would find it boring.

I think there has been a shift in thought though. I think people are finally starting to realise that you need something in music other than sonic interest. I think people are finally coming round the idea that music is a lot more than just sound.

Toxikator · Post by **Toxikator** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 4:37 pm

Topiness wrote:'Ignorance is very often bliss. It is amazing how often relative beginners can be captivated and put into a creative frame of mind by the beauty of a simple idea which might be written off as not technically special enough by a more accomplished player.'

"Accomplished" means next to nothing.

However, if your claim is that NOT knowing theory lets you appreciate simplicity in a way that KNOWING theory will never let you, my response is that a musician who would dismiss an idea for ANY reason other than "it sounds bad" is not a very good one, no matter how much "theory" they think they know.

Toxikator · Post by **Toxikator** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 4:54 pm

(having just read 5 pages of the most testicle-headed crap I have ever seen)

You guys are stupid as shit. You think that your Theory 101 class and your "learn piano" book from the local music shop make you qualified to pass judgement on the depths and complexities of music?

Please. I took a year of Spanish in the 8th grade, does that qualify me to speak on the depths and complexity of the language? "Oh, there's only about 500 words in Spanish. I know, I took a class".

You guys are real idiots, especially Metrowhateverspelling. Theory is not a restrictive force, and until you've truly studied it you can't even pretend to be an expert. If all you know of Music Theory is four-part harmony and a little bit of Species 2 counterpoint, of COURSE you'll think it's crappy and restrictive. The same way a first-year Spanish student would think that Spanish was crappy and restrictive.

To really suggest that just hitting some notes and hoping for the best is more meaningful and artistic than a true understanding of music is ludicrous. To put it more poetically, you have no idea what "beauty" is in music until you have seen what makes it function.

And yes, not knowing theory makes you IGNORANT (by definition). Of course, people on here will claim that "people who study theory get all stuffy and are afraid to experiment," but that's so far from true it's almost come back around again. Bela Bartok, John Cage, Beethoven, Arnold Schoenberg, each REINVENTED the freaking craft with their approaches to music and musicality. You think they just sat down in front of a piano and a blank piece of paper and "went with a feeling"?! f**k no. They knew EXACTLY what they were up to. They studied all the ground covered before them, they pushed the known limits. In fact, the most "experimental" or "soulful" musicians are the WELL-VERSED ones; the ones who don't know crap always just end up sounding like a bad imitation of their favorite records.

"But Tox! Good artist X made awesome CDs and never took lessons!" So? So what? You think that just because someone didn't hand you a textbook you're not employing theory? You think that Hendrix, for all his doped-up hype, didn't know what key he was in? Had no idea how to count a beat? Wasn't aware of chord motions?

Just because it isn't your chapter one Mozart clone circle progressions and counterpoint theory doesn't stop it from being theory.

Damn.

metrosechual · Post by **metrosechual** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 5:07 pm

you have absolutely no idea what was being said. Theory is not useless. I never said this

moron.

The ignorance is bliss fallacy