Perfect reduction.IncarnateX wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 4:29 pm Yeah postmodernism and its endless fallacies. Language of X can be translated into this and that alternative language about Y therefore X does not exist. E.g. Apples can be thought of as fruits, therefore they are not apples. Sure, tonality can be translated into languages of mathematical relations, but this translation does not dissolve what is to be translated. It just decribes it from another angle, which should be consistent with the original description if it is a good description of any value.
About standing in key
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
Na, na, na, Jan.
Let our guest explain these exciting complexities of his statement himself. In all possible worlds, centuries of established music theory could be wrong and then this oxford entry is most important for all of us to know about.-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
I find it cute that he provides a situation where we have to jump through some real hoops, and PAY MONEY to see this explanation he can't be bothered to even copy/paste.
I did find it referenced and the ellipses at the end of the abstract are actually a period in the text.
There is another paragraph which follows, however. I believe I have found it in google books, hang on.
I did find it referenced and the ellipses at the end of the abstract are actually a period in the text.
There is another paragraph which follows, however. I believe I have found it in google books, hang on.
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
Oh dear. This is probably going to be messy. I am on the line with my first help kit ready.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Ok, I'm going to take screenshots, you can't copy text from a google books page hardly at all.
First, there is an author of this article. Who is he? Why is he authoritative?
Let's look at it. Pg 1:
First, there is an author of this article. Who is he? Why is he authoritative?
Let's look at it. Pg 1:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- KVRian
- 513 posts since 26 Nov, 2009
If you are interested in modern music theory, you may research names like Babbitt, R. Morris, David Lewin, R. Cohn, Fred Lerdahl, G. Mazzola and others. These are some of the "fathers" of modern research; still, many of the topics they were interested in, are not the most exciting (imo), but without them we wouldn't get any of the progress in the last years. Get a book on acoustics and abstract algebra too. Check Springer's series "Mathematics and Computation in Music" (they also have other good books on music theory).
The facebook microtonal group (they once did a Q&A one chinese professor about 14 edo which was tried a long time ago in China!!!) and wiki are also great. Very smart people, some are original theoreticians.
I'm not going to lecture the keyboard warriors posting on this forum (no time to waste)... There is more than enough information available for free for anyone interested (I've researched most of this, because of my interests in FM synthesis, translation planes and unexplored musical system).
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Evidently this IS what the guy wants, though.
"To begin with, there has been considerable indecision..."
There has? This writer begins with a premise we're supposed to accept automatically?
Look, this is not acceptable scholarly writing, from the get-go. You have to cite something.
THEN:
"... or includes all music that evinces a basic difference between consonance and dissonance."
And goes on to say however narrow the definition the term encompasses about anything.
This writer is an idiot. This is the rankest sophistry imaginable, it reads like a satire to me.
"To begin with, there has been considerable indecision..."
There has? This writer begins with a premise we're supposed to accept automatically?
Look, this is not acceptable scholarly writing, from the get-go. You have to cite something.
THEN:
"... or includes all music that evinces a basic difference between consonance and dissonance."
And goes on to say however narrow the definition the term encompasses about anything.
This writer is an idiot. This is the rankest sophistry imaginable, it reads like a satire to me.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Who do you think you're kidding with this? You're making excuses for not being able to address the criticisms of your points. It's just more acting big with as fancy a litany of vague references to intellectual sounding pursuits as you could grab. You're quite good at that, I must say.anomandaris1 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 5:09 pm I'm not going to lecture the keyboard warriors posting on this forum (no time to waste)...
You don't know where you are. You're clearly a green kid in college with all of this stuff you are aware of from around you can refer to. You aren't SAYING anything.
Last edited by jancivil on Sat Oct 27, 2018 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
You pointed to a supposedly scholarly article in an appeal to authority, and couldn't be arsed to even copy-paste it, we were actually supposed to pay money to see it. Hey, I found it and I'm addressing it. You're chickenshit here. You have time to beat your chest and say nothing but bullshit, but no time to deal directly with any point and while you posture and posture those who actually take the time to make points and go into a discussion are to be dismissed as 'keyboard warriors'.
I said you're incompetent; show some competence.
I said you're incompetent; show some competence.
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
Well, so far my trivial-post-structuralist-nonsense-bell starts signaling to my brain: the discoursive, the enormous, the diverse, dramatically varying languages, just as I predicited but I cannot see what this has to do with tonal melodies without tonic, mode and root yet.
However so far, it seems we are heading for a traditional “2+2=8,9754 or maybe 5 if you like” poststructuralist conclusion:
Languages are so complex that they really do not say anything about anything and therefore I principally do not say anything either when I speak (which btw is the only true part of the statement, IX) and therefore nothing really exists, including tonality and the concept of slippers. Anything is anything.
However so far, it seems we are heading for a traditional “2+2=8,9754 or maybe 5 if you like” poststructuralist conclusion:
Languages are so complex that they really do not say anything about anything and therefore I principally do not say anything either when I speak (which btw is the only true part of the statement, IX) and therefore nothing really exists, including tonality and the concept of slippers. Anything is anything.
-
- Banned
- 3946 posts since 25 Jan, 2009
Sweetie; to understand modern theory, you will have to understand the basics that preceded it first, and you have shown abolutely no signs that you do that even at the most basic levels. If you talk tonal melodies without tonality, mode or root, you are contradicting the basis that makes any modern development comprehensible in the first place and you simply exclude yourself from any meaningful conversation within centuries of music theory.anomandaris1 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 27, 2018 5:09 pmIf you are interested in modern music theory, you may research names like Babbitt, R. Morris, David Lewin, R. Cohn, Fred Lerdahl, G. Mazzola and others.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Hey, we could talk about these things.
Even though I'm aware - I read the wiki on equal temperament
- of early Chinese work on it, that's news to me. It's either about 7 tone or 12 tone. It appears the whole 12th root of 2 which is the actual basis for modern-day 12tET is pretty old.
One of the assertions in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_tem ... ly_history
is that A complete set of bronze chime bells, among many musical instruments found in the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng (early Warring States, c. 5th century BCE in the Chinese Bronze Age), covers five full 7-note octaves in the key of C Major, including 12 note semi-tones in the middle of the range.[11]
[11] The Formation of Chinese Civilization, 2005 (opt. cit.), the Eastern Zhou and the Growth of Regionalism, Lu Liancheng, pp 140 ff
That would have to be the earliest C major tonality I've ever heard of, by a lot. I cannot verify the claim however.
I have an hypothesis as to why there was even in this land a preference for 12 but it's rather basic.
So do you have any hypothesis as to where 14 comes from? Is it really 7tET.
When was 14 equal tones tried in China? Do you have a name? Can you describe it?14 edo which was tried a long time ago in China!!!)
Even though I'm aware - I read the wiki on equal temperament
- of early Chinese work on it, that's news to me. It's either about 7 tone or 12 tone. It appears the whole 12th root of 2 which is the actual basis for modern-day 12tET is pretty old. One of the assertions in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_tem ... ly_history
is that A complete set of bronze chime bells, among many musical instruments found in the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng (early Warring States, c. 5th century BCE in the Chinese Bronze Age), covers five full 7-note octaves in the key of C Major, including 12 note semi-tones in the middle of the range.[11]
[11] The Formation of Chinese Civilization, 2005 (opt. cit.), the Eastern Zhou and the Growth of Regionalism, Lu Liancheng, pp 140 ff
That would have to be the earliest C major tonality I've ever heard of, by a lot. I cannot verify the claim however.
I have an hypothesis as to why there was even in this land a preference for 12 but it's rather basic.
So do you have any hypothesis as to where 14 comes from? Is it really 7tET.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Babbitt? First name? Are you maybe wanting to say Milton Babbitt?
Why do we need Milton Babbitt specifically to talk about Combinatoriality in 12-tone serialism?
I've read George Perle's Serial Composition and Atonality:
an Introduction to the Music of Schoenberg, Berg and Webern for this.
I became aware of his concept of 12-tone tonal music while I was up in the library during this period.
That's interesting.
In my own work I found agreement with Schoenberg (and others) in the end, that tonality rears its head in such a way it become difficult to subvert it; and one may question why they are.
We've touched on this in this forum a little bit in the past, I believe.
Anyway here's an example of my cartoon dodecaphony:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ECKuIn ... iX&index=6
Why do we need Milton Babbitt specifically to talk about Combinatoriality in 12-tone serialism?
I've read George Perle's Serial Composition and Atonality:
an Introduction to the Music of Schoenberg, Berg and Webern for this.
I became aware of his concept of 12-tone tonal music while I was up in the library during this period.
That's interesting.
In my own work I found agreement with Schoenberg (and others) in the end, that tonality rears its head in such a way it become difficult to subvert it; and one may question why they are.
We've touched on this in this forum a little bit in the past, I believe.
Anyway here's an example of my cartoon dodecaphony:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ECKuIn ... iX&index=6
