Oh Melody where have you gone...?

[griels]

griels quoth
Now you're speaking for all of KVR

Actually I wasnt, I was speaking from a strictly personal viewpoint. My apologies if that wasnt made clear.

Cool, apologies for speaking for you

So firstly: how free from rules are you if you only try to break them?
And secondly: what's the point? It's getting a bit old-fashioned to deliberately denie the existence of rules- isn't it time to take it somewhere, to have a message or whatever in your piece accept for 'i don't accept rules'?

Nothing wrong with being old fashioned, but I definitely agree with this sentiment.

[Panda]

Techhouse and "nuschool" techno are great examples...pounding tribal rythms and noises that forms into melodies in a listeners head...far more advanced than any composition by Bach or Mozart...

I would reconsider that...
If you ever analyse a piece of Bach, you'll see that it's full of mathematical and hyper complex structures (yes, they are melodic, but wtf?), changing by permutations and in fact in some cases even meant to be a puzzle (das muzikalisches opfer for example). I'm not gonna go on about this, but as i'm a big bach-fan i couldn't let it go just like that: no, tech-house is NOT far more edvanced than classical music- 'different' is the nicest thing i could say about it...

doesn't take much listening to understand classical music, but you can spend a whole lifetime trying to get to grips with EDM...

Of course, as with electronic music, first you need to LEARN to listen to it before you say such things...

[CypherOne]

griels quoth
Now you're speaking for all of KVR

Actually I wasnt, I was speaking from a strictly personal viewpoint. My apologies if that wasnt made clear.

tut tut, shame on you...

where's my milky bar?

[whyterabbyt]

The milky bars will be at vurtStock II.

[CypherOne]

aha, the carrot has been dangled...

[griels]

The milky bars will be at vurtStock II.

[Caleb]

So firstly: how free from rules are you if you only try to break them?
And secondly: what's the point? It's getting a bit old-fashioned to deliberately denie the existence of rules- isn't it time to take it somewhere, to have a message or whatever in your piece accept for 'i don't accept rules'?

Nothing wrong with being old fashioned, but I definitely agree with this sentiment.

Maybe the question is - what isn't the point?

Of course not accepting rules is actually different from denying they exist so the statement itself doesn't seem to logically follow.

Is the concern that people don't think that rules exist when making music or that people know that rules exist but don't accept them as their own.

I'm not even sure what type of "music" is being referred to by these arguments anyway. Which music is being created that you would attach this anti-rule sentiment to?

Caleb

[snooky]

Techhouse and "nuschool" techno are great examples...pounding tribal rythms and noises that forms into melodies in a listeners head...far more advanced than any composition by Bach or Mozart...

I would reconsider that...
If you ever analyse a piece of Bach, you'll see that it's full of mathematical and hyper complex structures (yes, they are melodic, but wtf?), changing by permutations and in fact in some cases even meant to be a puzzle (das muzikalisches opfer for example). I'm not gonna go on about this, but as i'm a big bach-fan i couldn't let it go just like that: no, tech-house is NOT far more edvanced than classical music- 'different' is the nicest thing i could say about it...

doesn't take much listening to understand classical music, but you can spend a whole lifetime trying to get to grips with EDM...

Of course, as with electronic music, first you need to LEARN to listen to it before you say such things...

Well, firstly, I must say, that to me, electronic sounds are much more complex and emotive than classical music...so it was more of a personal reference...but really, the kinds of mathematical and hyper complex structures are no dif. from those of electronica...it's easier to understand classical tho'

Take a bunch of ppl (assuming that they have never heard any music in their life, impossible but wtf?) and play them a piece of classical and a piece of electronica and you'd surley get the response that the classical music is easier to listen to...of cource, it's all a matter of what those specifical tunes are...but I think you'd agree no?

I have no idea how much you know about electronic music, but I can tell you that after a liftime of living with it, I'm qualified to make statements of it's complexity and structure...And yes, I do enjoy classical...I even "play" some classical type arrengments my self (moviescores)...not saying that I'm any kind of expert on classical composition, but the kinds of arrengements possible with electronica are faaaaaar out of reach with any classical composition...therefore I draw the conclusion that electronica is more advanced than many other types of music.

Thanks and Godbye!

[soulata]

Not that i think that everybody should do this and nothing else, but for me, to be truly good and original, a piece needs other things than non-conformity, and that might include melody, and it might not... Point is, it's not really about the melody for me, but about giving your listeners a new experience- and nowadays, noise ain't gonna do it any more than old-fashoined housegrooves or pop or whatever conventional genre there is...

nicely put.

k

[griels]

Is the concern that people don't think that rules exist when making music or that people know that rules exist but don't accept them as their own.

Caleb

My personal concern ( ) is that people know the rules and go out of their way to break them, often at the expense of self-expression. People who seemingly try to break all the rules can sound remarkably similar to my untrained ears

As I said, I love a bit of rule-breaking, so I'm not immune anyway

[clueless]

Techhouse and "nuschool" techno are great examples...pounding tribal rythms and noises that forms into melodies in a listeners head...far more advanced than any composition by Bach or Mozart...

I would reconsider that...
If you ever analyse a piece of Bach, you'll see that it's full of mathematical and hyper complex structures (yes, they are melodic, but wtf?), changing by permutations and in fact in some cases even meant to be a puzzle (das muzikalisches opfer for example). I'm not gonna go on about this, but as i'm a big bach-fan i couldn't let it go just like that: no, tech-house is NOT far more edvanced than classical music-*snipped*

doesn't take much listening to understand classical music, but you can spend a whole lifetime trying to get to grips with EDM...

I'm glad this came up, and glad both of you have avoided use of the words 'better' or 'worse'.

serious question, fractalism, have you ever attempted to compose a canon? interesting you should cite Bach as an example of 'that simple classical [or rather, 'baroque'] music stuff'. The first time I heard Bach I was struck by the mathematical beauty of the music, and it's underlying complexity.

You might find this* interesting when considering the apparent simplicity of his composition

*first example i found

[CypherOne]

As I said, I love a bit of rule-breaking, so I'm not immune anyway

you webel.

[soulata]

...therefore I draw the conclusion that electronica is more advanced than many other types of music.

Erm, I wouldn't say more advanced, just soooo different.

I'm not defending classical music BTW, quite some of it I find "dead", however some things (f.e. Stravinsky, Bach) are still top or very interesting (Boulez, Varese), all IMHO.

k

[griels]

you webel.

[snooky]

Techhouse and "nuschool" techno are great examples...pounding tribal rythms and noises that forms into melodies in a listeners head...far more advanced than any composition by Bach or Mozart...

I would reconsider that...
If you ever analyse a piece of Bach, you'll see that it's full of mathematical and hyper complex structures (yes, they are melodic, but wtf?), changing by permutations and in fact in some cases even meant to be a puzzle (das muzikalisches opfer for example). I'm not gonna go on about this, but as i'm a big bach-fan i couldn't let it go just like that: no, tech-house is NOT far more edvanced than classical music-*snipped*

doesn't take much listening to understand classical music, but you can spend a whole lifetime trying to get to grips with EDM...

I'm glad this came up, and glad both of you have avoided use of the words 'better' or 'worse'.

serious question, fractalism, have you ever attempted to compose a canon? interesting you should cite Bach as an example of 'that simple classical [or rather, 'baroque'] music stuff'. The first time I heard Bach I was struck by the mathematical beauty of the music, and it's underlying complexity.

You might find this* interesting when considering the apparent simplicity of his composition

*first example i found

Well, as I said, I'm not composing much classical, and when I do, it's not by any kind if rules...Well, think about it in this way:

Almost anyone with a musical talent can learn to compose classical...but very few can compose electronica (there are a lot of electronica producers, but they're few compared to the amount of classical that would be composed if everyone was at it)

So, Do you honsetly think that Bach or Mozart would understand and succefully compose electronica if they were alive today??

It takes a certain kind of brainfunktion/type to appreitiate electronic sounds...not everyone can do it...but almost anyone can understand classical.

At least this is what I belive...not sure if it's true.