August 16, 200619 yr "To hell with all these theories, if they always serve only to block the evolution of art and if their positive achievement consists in nothing more than helping those who will compose badly anyway to do it quickly." -Schoenberg, Theory of Harmony
August 17, 200619 yr "To hell with all these theories, if they always serve only to block the evolution of art and if their positive achievement consists in nothing more than helping those who will compose badly anyway to do it quickly." -Schoenberg, Theory of Harmony Come on, be fair, Mr Schoenberg! Think of all those academics who'd be on unemployment benefit! The rules were invented by academics for academics. The institutes would be badly hit because they'd have nothing to examine except performance.
August 28, 200619 yr I started questioning the general theory that we were presented in college for a while, until my composition professor noted that they should be viewed more as suggestions and guidelines than solid rules. No one says you HAVE to compose using established theory--just that if you wanted to understand why the Western ear has developed the way it has and why we find certain sounds more pleasing than others, then you have music theory to thank.
August 28, 200619 yr No you don't. Theory doesn't explain why human ears like what and which, are you insane? Human ears explain why human ears like music! Music is so delightfully universal that it changes from ear to ear whilst remaining exactly the same. It's science, math, and pure undiscovered emotion that makes it the supernatural thing it is. Theory actually does explain how the Western ear has developed. As a society, the west's ear is much different from the east's. In this case, you're wrong Nico. It does not remain the same from ear to ear, but does so only from society to society. Just curious, but have you taken formal theory classes, or music history? If you haven't, then it's easy to see why you think that. You'll be taught otherwise. Our collective ears have all changed together. Western music is very different than other forms, and theory shows just how that developed.
August 28, 200619 yr Sure. I'm pretty advanced in theory. It might explain how the ear developed, but it does NOT explain why the ear liked it. Which is what he said. Yeah it does. It's what we've come to learn as being good sounding. You hear the same cadences all your life, you're going to think they sound good.
August 29, 200619 yr There has been some entirely radical music written in a time of conventionalism. People hated this at first, and you might think this proves your point. But it's not theory that proves this, it's society. What music people are used to, people will like, but they don't like it for the soul reason of its long existance. And so theory is changed. We didn't keep Gregorian Chants, did we? No, we added to them. Theory expands and retroforms with the pushing of the envelope. Atonality is an example.
August 29, 200619 yr theory is math. Music is soul. Society adapts to new mathematics, but all emotions in music are kept. Emotions are kept, how they are invoked changes.
August 29, 200619 yr now you're arguing about something completely different. :laugh: Isn't that what I do best? :laugh:
August 29, 200619 yr Hey, I have this book :mellow:. I haven't really read it much yet (just got it), but it looks good.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.