Composing in the style of...

[Sixofour]

Classical music is the definite definition of non-random sound. What is this paki-indo-chinese-non-white native saying?!?!

If you can't laugh, something is wrong.

[nuffink]

I think everyone atleast gets the jist of what counterpoint is. I basicly quoted wikipedia on it, as i said i don't have training in musical theroy, but 99.9% of what anyone who HAs been trained in it tells me, i already knew, i just didn't know the terminology.

Music theroy is fine, but i see it has in general a method to catagorize everything so that it is easyer to communicate things with others. Its not, for me atleast, a knowledge that teaches me anything new. For instance, i didn't know what a chord was, i didn't know that 2/3 was a minor and 3/2 was a major...but i did know that 2/3 was a dark sound and 3/2 was a light sound. [if that made any sense ]

So why are you active in a forum specifically for theory if you don't know any? You don't appear to be here to learn.

[Sixofour]

I think everyone atleast gets the jist of what counterpoint is. I basicly quoted wikipedia on it, as i said i don't have training in musical theroy, but 99.9% of what anyone who HAs been trained in it tells me, i already knew, i just didn't know the terminology.

Music theroy is fine, but i see it has in general a method to catagorize everything so that it is easyer to communicate things with others. Its not, for me atleast, a knowledge that teaches me anything new. For instance, i didn't know what a chord was, i didn't know that 2/3 was a minor and 3/2 was a major...but i did know that 2/3 was a dark sound and 3/2 was a light sound. [if that made any sense ]

So why are you active in a forum specifically for theory if you don't know any? You don't appear to be here to learn.

I'm here to give non biased review of topics discussed. Other wanted to challange what I said and take it offtopic, and here we are now.

Speaking of which, can we get back to topic?

[nuffink]

I think everyone atleast gets the jist of what counterpoint is. I basicly quoted wikipedia on it, as i said i don't have training in musical theroy, but 99.9% of what anyone who HAs been trained in it tells me, i already knew, i just didn't know the terminology.

Music theroy is fine, but i see it has in general a method to catagorize everything so that it is easyer to communicate things with others. Its not, for me atleast, a knowledge that teaches me anything new. For instance, i didn't know what a chord was, i didn't know that 2/3 was a minor and 3/2 was a major...but i did know that 2/3 was a dark sound and 3/2 was a light sound. [if that made any sense ]

So why are you active in a forum specifically for theory if you don't know any? You don't appear to be here to learn.

I'm here to give non biased review of topics discussed. Other wanted to challange what I said and take it offtopic, and here we are now.

Speaking of which, can we get back to topic?

You're a reviewer? You're going to review what we say? Despite the fact that you don't know any theory?

[nuffink]

Or music history.

[Sixofour]

Or music history.

The winners write the history. Doesn't make it right

[Ogg Vorbis]

What we're talking about when we talk about music theory is the language of music itself. This is our common language as musicians. It's like any spoken or written language and to say one is a writer, it's helpful to have mastery of the language.

I suppose I could go troll a forum on Finnish literature and opine about its value (in spite of the fact I have no familiarity with the Finnish language).

But the original topic is composing in various styles. I guess my point is that using my analogy, if I want to write in the style of the Kalevala, I'd better learn some Finnish first.

[Sixofour]

What we're talking about when we talk about music theory is the language of music itself. This is our common language as musicians. It's like any spoken or written language and to say one is a writer, it's helpful to have mastery of the language.

I suppose I could go troll a forum on Finnish literature and opine about its value (in spite of the fact I have no familiarity with the Finnish language).

But the original topic is composing in various styles. I guess my point is that using my analogy, if I want to write in the style of the Kalevala, I'd better learn some Finnish first.

Who is debating the value of music theroy? We are talking about most of the people who swear by it. The language, as you put it, is not the subect of debate, its the people who speak it. You don't have to learn the language of a peoples, to critque those peoples.

[nuffink]

Who is debating the value of music theroy? We are talking about most of the people who swear by it. The language, as you put it, is not the subect of debate, its the people who speak it. you don't have to learn the language of a peoples, to critque those peoples.

No this forum is specifically about the language. As is the original post.

This is the only forum that continually has to justify its existence to trolls who believe theory doesn't or shouldn't exist. How about Instruments? Do you doubt their existence or worth? Effects, a myth to you?

[Sixofour]

Who is debating the value of music theroy? We are talking about most of the people who swear by it. The language, as you put it, is not the subect of debate, its the people who speak it. you don't have to learn the language of a peoples, to critque those peoples.

No this forum is specifically about the language. As is the original post.

This is the only forum that continually has to justify its existence to trolls who believe theory doesn't or shouldn't exist. How about Instruments? Do you doubt their existence or worth? Effects, a myth to you?

Who said this forum? This thread, right now, is about people. Its offtopic, but it is what it is.

You said it has to justify its existance to trolls alot..maby the real problem is between the chair and keyboard? I never once gave unjust sentiments about any musical therom, I only mentioned the common people that follow certain knowledges.

[jancivil]

Hold on...

Classical music, I shit it! Harmony. Counterpoint. All bollocks. They nicked it all from a bunch of Indians or Chinese or something 7000 years ago.

...I see what you mean.

Ok, Indian music, for instance, doesn't deal with harmony or counterpoint AT ALL. It's wholly different.

The argument would run, that the principles of Indian music are ANCIENT, and are believed by most of the people involved in the study of its antiquity, to predate the written word. There is an entire, vast cosmology and description of time, involving syllables which are believed to be sacred, aligning with objects on the micro and the macro level. In time. Transcendental Meditation, is in fact based on these principles, syllables in time. Compared to western music theory, it's huge.

You seem to be entirely ignorant, based on a number of things you have said here, of this tradition.
Again, you have no real argument to support your thing, but you feel it's appropriate to prattle on anyways.

Per your comment on fashionable aesthetics, let me hip you to this. Aesthetics, the philosophy of aesthetics, takes into account the world view of an art. A thorough study of this field usually begins with Plato, in the west,. Personally, I have possibly the same level of objection to Western Music as you appear to have on the East. Ass for "Fashionable", I don't know or care about that. I am 1/16th Indian. I've been into Indian music for nigh on 40 yrs. I have a certain world view that informs my preference.

What informs your world view? You appear to be a really unhappy guy, frustrated with views that don't mesh with yours, and instead of constructing something coherent in an argument, you attack people personally, often quite snidely. Your preference for the music of the ruling class of Europe during the transition between feudalism and the industrial age, would fit well, should that be the case.

[nuffink]

Hold on...

Classical music, I shit it! Harmony. Counterpoint. All bollocks. They nicked it all from a bunch of Indians or Chinese or something 7000 years ago.

...I see what you mean.

Ok, Indian music, for instance, doesn't deal with harmony or counterpoint AT ALL. It's wholly different.

The argument would run, that the principles of Indian music are ANCIENT, and are believed by most of the people involved in the study of its antiquity, to predate the written word. There is an entire, vast cosmology and description of time, involving syllables which are believed to be sacred, aligning with objects on the micro and the macro level. In time. Transcendental Meditation, is in fact based on these principles, syllables in time. Compared to western music theory, it's huge.

You seem to be entirely ignorant, based on a number of things you have said here, of this tradition.
Again, you have no real argument to support your thing, but you feel it's appropriate to prattle on anyways.

Per your comment on fashionable aesthetics, let me hip you to this. Aesthetics, the philosophy of aesthetics, takes into account the world view of an art. A thorough study of this field usually begins with Plato, in the west,. Personally, I have possibly the same level of objection to Western Music as you appear to have on the East. Ass for "Fashionable", I don't know or care about that. I am 1/16th Indian. I've been into Indian music for nigh on 40 yrs. I have a certain world view that informs my preference.

What informs your world view? You appear to be a really unhappy guy, frustrated with views that don't mesh with yours, and instead of constructing something coherent in an argument, you attack people personally, often quite snidely. Your preference for the music of the ruling class of Europe during the transition between feudalism and the industrial age, would fit well, should that be the case.

You missed the point. Completely. As usual.

Never mind. Which 16th of you is Indian?

[mhemnarch]

That was the point, to trivialize Western Classical Music.

This is exactly the kind of stupid, reactionary quasi-liberal bull that's just about ruined the arts in the academia. People obsess over "Eurocentrism" and "Colonialism" and this and that and whatever buzzword is in fashion at the time. All of this, but never actually listening to the music or reading the novel or reciting the poem. It's as if art has become some sort of vehicle for cultural sensitivity rather than a means of self-expression and self-understanding. This view is more than simply pathetic or sad; it is downright damaging.

The things you find in classical music are not new for their time, or even original. Comparativly speaking. Western Classical music is not very old. not even a thousand years old.

Really, now? This seems like an interesting statement to me. First you say that classical music isn't new for its time; then you say that it isn't very old. Are you criticizing it for being too young or for being too old? You can't have it both ways. As it is, you're wrong on both counts. The harmonic and rhythmic methods of composers like Debussy and Stravinsky are essentially original - they may have taken influences from other musical traditions, but the core of their work is unique not merely in the West but in the world as a whole.

You have traditional Indian, Chinese, and Arabian music theory that surpasses anything western by several thousand years. If you want to see the big picture, imho, it would be better to study the roots of music. If you want to do as you say and compare classical music to better your self.

I find it disheartening that people consider classical western the be all end all of music, the epitomy even.

Again the claptrap. It's worse than useless to bitch about how classical is unfairly considered the "be-all-end-all" of music if you have nothing to replace it with. This is the problem that constantly comes up with these discussions - you are not proposing a more inclusive canon, you are proposing a more exclusive one, with Western classical banished and no particular composers left to fill the void. In your post, as in every discussion of the topic I've seen from your point of view, there is a conspicuous absence of - of what? Of art! There is nothing more than vague gibbering about "Indian" and "Chinese" and "Arabian" music. Not a single reference to a work, to a composer, even to a specific style of music. And the reason? Because for all the valiant attackers of the western canon have to rant about, they have been utterly incapable of producing a new set of works to consider.

[Ogg Vorbis]

Because for all the valiant attackers of the western canon have to rant about, they have been utterly incapable of producing a new set of works to consider.

Are you saying, "Okay, India. Let's hear your equivelent to Beethoven's Ninth?"

[mhemnarch]

No, there's no reason there should be exact equivalents, and the culture itself is under no obligation to provide this or that list of great works. My point is that complaining about classical being overrated or over-considered is vacuous without giving a specific alternative. Rattling on and on about Indian music or Arabian music and so on (all of which, I'm sure, have a lot of value) without actually giving names of works or artists just proves that you have no concept of what you're actually talking about; anyone can seem highbrow and sophisticated if all they have to do is pretend to like music from other cultures.