|
Suggestions on two topics. 2 Handed Piano playing, arranging a track (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
I can find you plenty of rather ty music that follow complex chord progression, and 10 brilliant electronic tracks that dont. |
Please do. I would love to hear for myself what you think you're talking about.
| quote: | | The most popular tracks you've made could be straight out of a Theory Book, but how do you know they are popular based on the harmony structure? |
Because that's what theory is. Patterns and practices for making music that sounds "good" to the largest number of people. Are you saying it's just a coincidence that many of the most popular tracks and songs ever made use the I-IV-V-I progression out of literally thousands of possibilities?
| quote: | | And its ridiculous to think that the popularity of music comes from harmonic structure that could be found in a theory book. |
It's closer to being the other way around. You could think of theory as the study of what makes music listenable, or popular. A good theory book or course bills itself as being descriptive, not prescriptive, like any other art.
| quote: | | I'm not discouraging people from learning music theory, i'm actually encouraging producers who DONT know music theory, to keep making electronic music, because they probably can without it |
Fine, I agree - doesn't mean they can't also learn some theory. It's not a mutually exclusive choice.
| quote: | | ...and there are other important dynamics to electronic music. |
You keep saying "dynamics" - do you realize that the word has a specific meaning in music? The context in which you're using it makes your posts very confusing.
| quote: | | And there are plenty of producers who likely dont know about music theory, and have made the worlds best electronic music, and are others that likely know it, and make cant make electronic music for . |
Essentially what you seem to be trying to say is that your ability to find counterexamples disproves the general case. Aside from being a logical fallacy (no one said that you MUST know music theory, the entire Blues genre came from people with no education or formal training), I challenge you to find more than a handful of examples fitting into either category, because they are considerably less common than you seem to think.
| quote: | | So what does me knowing music theory or not have to do with my objective evidence backed opinion? |
It has everything to do with it. Aside from the fact that your "evidence" is actually assumptions and not evidence, you are claiming to know the usefulness (or lack thereof) of something you have no knowledge of. I'm sure that everybody can see how absurd this is. You can apply a few observations to determine whether or not it is necessary, but to say that it is not useful confers a considerably higher burden of proof, one which you haven't even come close to satisfying.
To further "kick the ball further into the goal" (to use your own ridiculous phrase), if you're going to question the relevance of this criteria, it's worth pointing out the two main reasons I knew that you don't know much about music theory:
1) Anybody who has studied it would know that it is not just about chords and progressions. A large part of theory is simply about melodies, rhythms and transitions, so it would still apply to those simple "chordless melodies" you think dominate EDM.
2) Your posts on this topic are an incoherent mess, confusing several unrelated terms and concepts. Part of learning music theory, at least the fundamentals of it, means gaining the ability to clearly discuss the topic with other musicians and composers. Every art and science has its own little dialect and set of jargon; if you don't know the one relating to your field, you're working at a disadvantage.
| quote: | | To kick the ball furthur into the goal...imo a class in psychology or phillosophy is more valuable than a class in music theory for making great electronic music, due to the dynamics of the music. If anything this threads makes people feel as if their skills are insufficient by not knowing "2 handed piano playing", and im saying, nah this bull, and my favorite producers cant play piano at all. And i'd OWN anyone here who is deep in music theory knowledge in a electronic dance music production competition, if anyone wants to step up, to show people that music theory knowledge ain't all that, and the dynamics of good electronic music is far more vast than just music theory knowledge. |
I don't think you've ever even posted a track. Where's your brilliant work? |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Please do. I would love to hear for myself what you think you're talking about.
Because that's what theory is. Patterns and practices for making music that sounds "good" to the largest number of people. Are you saying it's just a coincidence that many of the most popular tracks and songs ever made use the I-IV-V-I progression out of literally thousands of possibilities?
It's closer to being the other way around. You could think of theory as the study of what makes music listenable, or popular. A good theory book or course bills itself as being descriptive, not prescriptive, like any other art.
Fine, I agree - doesn't mean they can't also learn some theory. It's not a mutually exclusive choice.
You keep saying "dynamics" - do you realize that the word has a specific meaning in music? The context in which you're using it makes your posts very confusing.
Essentially what you seem to be trying to say is that your ability to find counterexamples disproves the general case. Aside from being a logical fallacy (no one said that you MUST know music theory, the entire Blues genre came from people with no education or formal training), I challenge you to find more than a handful of examples fitting into either category, because they are considerably less common than you seem to think.
It has everything to do with it. Aside from the fact that your "evidence" is actually assumptions and not evidence, you are claiming to know the usefulness (or lack thereof) of something you have no knowledge of. I'm sure that everybody can see how absurd this is. You can apply a few observations to determine whether or not it is necessary, but to say that it is not useful confers a considerably higher burden of proof, one which you haven't even come close to satisfying.
To further "kick the ball further into the goal" (to use your own ridiculous phrase), if you're going to question the relevance of this criteria, it's worth pointing out the two main reasons I knew that you don't know much about music theory:
1) Anybody who has studied it would know that it is not just about chords and progressions. A large part of theory is simply about melodies, rhythms and transitions, so it would still apply to those simple "chordless melodies" you think dominate EDM.
2) Your posts on this topic are an incoherent mess, confusing several unrelated terms and concepts. Part of learning music theory, at least the fundamentals of it, means gaining the ability to clearly discuss the topic with other musicians and composers. Every art and science has its own little dialect and set of jargon; if you don't know the one relating to your field, you're working at a disadvantage.
I don't think you've ever even posted a track. Where's your brilliant work? |
Its quickly getting into semantics and "but what do you meannn." I can easily prove what i've been saying, in front of your friends in a production competition, and you can easily prove what you are saying within the same competition. Since the principle is, "is music theory knowledge really essential towards making good electronic music?" You can use your music theory knowledge, and i'll use what know or dont know ;). And we'll let the music prove our ideas. Even though pretty much everything i've said is objective reasoning as it is.
Once again, it is rather simple that knowledge of music theory ain't going to do for you if you don't have the other dynamics (use a dictionary to figure out the context) of making electronic music down as well, and not having music theory knowledge will not hold you back, from making great music, as many electronic music producers have shown us thus far with some great music. With that repeated for the 2nd or 3rd time, i'm not going to kick a dead horse anymore, if you can disprove the rather simple principle i've been sharing througout this thread, then go ahead. |
|
|
| Beatflux |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
Its quickly getting into semantics and "but what do you meannn."
Once again, it is rather simple that knowledge of music theory ain't going to do for you if you don't have the other dynamics (use a dictionary to figure out the context) |
Do you even know what you're talking about when you say "dynamics?"
How does a philo or psych class improve a music production? |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beatflux
Do you even know what you're talking about when you say "dynamics?"
How does a philo or psych class improve a music production? |
::sigh::
So basically, you have never heard the word dynamics used outside a music context? It is probably word of 2009 ;p
Dynamics has a few uses, but I rather have you learn by looking it up to figure out the context here, before you come off even more ignorant, by asking the person who used the word if they know what it means (doesnt get more dumb than that)...when i've used it in a rather fitting purpose. If YOU actually knew what it means and its uses are, of course you wouldnt ask me, read up.
How does a philo or psych class improve a music production? I dont know, how does Math help? How does English help? What a dumb question, no?
I donno, maybe Google "The importance of Psychology in Music" "Philosophy and Music" as general searches, and then narrow it down as you go along. |
|
|
| Energy_3 |
dynamic - a energizing or motive force- proudly donated by Oxford.
And in relations to a musical context - i just love this notion".
1.the branch of mechanics concerned with the motion of bodies under the action of forces [thats some heavy metaphysical flip flop] 2 the forces which stimulate development or change within a system or process[ and again] 3 Music, the varying levels of volume of sound in a musical performance.
Critical debate is such a good thing!
I think that regardless of the point of view. Therefore speaking from a general point of view any notion of discourse or thought ultimately shifts the direction of a subject .i.e its matter, is thus to take. I guess this is the basic law of cause and effect. Many things have something to do with everything and somethings have nothing to do with everything [ its the circular nature that exists between paradigms so to speak]
I have no idea what im talking about..!
:crazy: |
|
|
| Beatflux |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
"Philosophy and Music" |
Okay...I found an article called "The Philosophy of Music" from the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/music/
Please enlighten me how anything in the paper will improve EDM production. Quote any source of your choice, to give an example how philosophy of music improves EDM production over a basic music theory class. |
|
|
| Energy_3 |
| I think that what hes getting at - well all i can come up with really is that the understanding gained from one principle can be readily applied to another, but i think this is also implied - That it requires a foundation of learning and that these ideas of application, can so willingly also be applied to the next, the concept of music! |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beatflux
Okay...I found an article called "The Philosophy of Music" from the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/music/
Please enlighten me how anything in the paper will improve EDM production. Quote any source of your choice, to give an example how philosophy of music improves EDM production over a basic music theory class. |
Your question is basically the same as "how does math improve music production" "how does the ability to read improve music production."
And in that link there is a ton in there that might englighten you in way that makes you think outside the box about how you make music. A philosopher might describe what the reality of what the music is, or what the listener is taking or not taking from the music, or how the listener is interpreting the music that you make. And as a Producer you can take that and create music based on questions, beliefs, and philosophies. Or the Aesthetic value of things. If you look into Aesthetics, you will learn about why the listener might find a melody beautiful, or a sound appealing. And perhaps as a producer who knows these things you can focus on those attributes in your music, to make more impactful or beautiful music. For example, the Detroit Techno Producer/Artist Juan Atkins (Cybotron) had a futurist aesthetic and philosophy. And these philosophies gave birth to how his music sounded, and the images he associated with his music, and even what he named his music. So his futurist Philosophy definately was the backbone of his music and perhaps his success as an artist.
This is good to look into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Energy_3
I think that what hes getting at - well all i can come up with really is that the understanding gained from one principle can be readily applied to another, but i think this is also implied - That it requires a foundation of learning and that these ideas of application, can so willingly also be applied to the next, the concept of music! |
Indeed. With Philosophy being a rather important principle that can be applied towards making impactful art. Even Bruce Lee's impact was very much driven by his Philosophical ideas and ideals. Philosophies that he incorporated into his work, which attracted and connected with people on another level outside of his martial arts. So he took what he knew about Philosophy, and applied it to a movie career, and created an extra dynamic for himself that people really got into. |
|
|
| Energy_3 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
Indeed. With Philosophy being a rather important principle that can be applied towards making impactful art. Even Bruce Lee's impact was very much driven by his Philosophical ideas and ideals. Philosophies that he incorporated into his work, which attracted and connected with people on another level outside of his martial arts. So he took what he knew about Philosophy, and applied it to a movie career, and created an extra dynamic for himself that people really got into. |
Man i miss Bruce Lee. Yeah so true, and again this can be said about anything, for example, cooking. i mean say your cooking and its principles, even these lie in the production of music! in some strange and twisted way. Thats if your open minded anyways. Sorry, now im being silly - but im sure you know what i mean! |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Energy_3
Man i miss Bruce Lee. Yeah so true, and again this can be said about anything, for example, cooking. i mean say your cooking and its principles, even these lie in the production of music! in some strange and twisted way. Thats if your open minded anyways. Sorry, now im being silly - but im sure you know what i mean! |
i know what you mean. Boggles my mind that someone would ask "how does Philosophy or Psychology improve Music Creation" Its like how the hell does it not? Legos...take one thing and apply it somewhere else, it might not be the same color, but it can be used to build something with. And reason why I value Philosophy and Psychology over Music Theory is because I think you can make something more amazing by having an abstract or out the box philosophy and psychological purpose. In comparison to someone who is following a music theory book or knowledge that has been done over and over again, and confines artist into a chastity belt. Thats why I say, dont follow hardcore Music Theory, perhaps create your own theories, use the different dynamics of life and music, make mistakes and try things out.
Watched Bruce Lee "Legacy Of The Dragon" the other night, goes a bit into his philosophies. |
|
|
| Energy_3 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
i know what you mean. Boggles my mind that someone would ask "how does Philosophy or Psychology improve Music Creation" Its like how the hell does it not? Legos...take one thing and apply it somewhere else, it might not be the same color, but it can be used to build something with. And reason why I value Philosophy and Psychology over Music Theory is because I think you can make something more amazing by having an abstract or out the box philosophy and psychological purpose. In comparison to someone who is following a music theory book or knowledge that has been done over and over again, and confines artist into a chastity belt. Thats why I say, dont follow hardcore Music Theory, perhaps create your own theories, use the different dynamics of life and music, make mistakes and try things out.
Watched Bruce Lee "Legacy Of The Dragon" the other night, goes a bit into his philosophies. |
Its funny you mention him i was in a shop the other day and their was a poster of him - and i stopped and pondered - what a shame! such a good actor, well i thought so.
yes very true, but remember, i mean this is being finical very finical lol. I mean even if one begins from some previous done over, again and again material. we must remember their reflection/perception is somewhat different to the original once proclaimed. Therefore, the persons own twist to the [done over] if we call it that will be re applied/applied to that which cometh before it. however, and i agree with you [even though you haven't said this] this change is always slight baring in mind that the basic principles to which the new evolved still lye in clear resolution to the former - [the done over].
And yes " step outside your square "
Man i love good conversation! |
|
|
|
|
