listen up
i think people "get" music theory in a way, but the pattern to me is either one of me looking in and not understanding
or me looking in, after reading a lot, trying to ask questions to form a more fundamental understanding, and seeing no answers
music theorists fags, put on your critical thinking
it is possible that music theory is rampantly incoherent and misunderstood, or perhaps _JUST_ understood?
one piece of evidence I submit is that the wikipedia pages are changing to much, it's like they are trying to rewrite and say "well no no no we did know"
there is science behind frequencies, ear n shit
and we know intuitively about what sounds good
music theory looks like a mix of pseudoscience and unfounded theory based on intuition, rewritten with some science, and a whole load of uncertainty
there's no structure to what is music theory
and they seem to want to rely on some jargon that they cannot explain when explaining something
I read
en.wikipedia.org
and I posit that it does not explain what a key is in music (but it's just not that ... is the foundation... of a piece of music)
I am telling you now: I do not think this is the accurate and technical definition of key
which begs the question, why isn't there a specific definition of a key?
am i right? are people playing at leaning "music theory" and learning basically "pidgin" music theory?
>inb4 some faggot pretends to misunderstand what I am saying and say "but look at all these books"
again, are people learning "pidgin music theory" and in reality they are missing the accurate and technical details? or am I just not versed enough, despite having researched it as much as I can?
Sneaking suspicion people do not truly understand music theory
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtu.be
twitter.com
so* much
ii V I in C
GTFO jazz fag
Wtf are you asking this board for?
Ive been reading a book on music theory lately as well (electronic musicfag) but I still have a very rudimentary understanding of everything
my challenge is for someone to create the accurate and technically complete definition of a key in music (i've read all the top 20 pages on it)
and to then show me a page published BEFORE 2018 that contained a semantic facsimile of what the full and complete definition is
my improbably conjecture?
there is no page on the internet that completely and accurate puts up a definition of a key in music that bridges "intuition" with hard basis in technical definitions, or at least correctly defines the limitations of the term
John Dowland used to send secret codes in his sheet music as few people could read sheet music.
yes, I know that progression
you sputtering that out only confirms my theory
if I keep asking why you quickly run out of steam, or you don't, and I am wrong, and a stupid fag
but I still think you think you know more than you do
you have hollow knowledge
word knowledge
not an UNDERSTANDING
that's my theory, people have a rudimentary and hollow knowledge, built on words and ideas, rather than a deeper understanding
that's what I get
I feel like if I studied a degree in this at the end I would say "IS THAT FUCKING IT?? JESUS CHRIST"
and if I said "don't you mean, technically, a key is X, Y, Z" they would jump on it and say "yes, and thats... what we've always said" and then quickly rewrite the wikipedia page
so it's either that music is complex (nothing is complex) and people that learn it somehow overcome a magic hurdle that gets into their brain, but cannot get back out
they are smart enough to understand it
but not smart enough to reflect the understanding
they only have intuition
they are not able to explain and understand it deeper
How hard is it to understand the basics of progressions? I'm half way through a book on basic music theory but it's getting complicated
There are musicians who've never had any formal training or education and have been plenty so a lot of it could be within, you could argue a huge chunk of musical ability is talent, though you still have to practice and such
I think you are overthinking this musicianship thing. If you have to look up the definition of a "key" and argue about what it is, then you're probably not trained in music enough to get it. Are you trying to learn music theory separately from music? Get a beginner piano book and start reading actual notes, and you'll start to get what a key is. It's difficult to isolate music theory outside of music performance. Do you play an instrument?
but reading sheet music is easy and a closed problem
you can show someone the pages they would need to understand the symbols and they would be able to read it
would there be another level of code?
such as relations between notes that you wouldn't know without knowing more than reading sheet music symbols?
then you have to learn how to convey that
that's my problem here, I think people don't know how to specify things very well
It's like saying I am using the alphabet to communicate codes, because people cannot read the alphabet
and I write "lemons are sweet" and then you say "no no actually I meant they'd have to know that lemons aren't sweet to get the code"
and that's my problem
I think a lot of music theory is "no actually i meant"
why not specific?
I think it's to do with the brain types of people going in, and how complex it is versus how complex they can express
they can learn something more complex than they can express.
I agree with you, for what it's worth
What book are you using? Jazz harmony gets pretty deep
which is part of my theory here
I know what sounds good, and sounds bad.
the skill of an instrument let's say is one thing, but to create that music, to paint those sounds and know you can reflect what you feel to others
and how sound creates feeling
now, is it just we don't understand it enough to create a "unified" music theory?
in which case, what we have should be more honest and not so cock-in-mouth deceptive, they overwrought nature of how they write these fucking wikipedia pages
> the key is the middlish note in a series of notes you use so the others don't sound shit
they write that in 11 pages of BULLSHIT
which makes me think they don't get it
>If you have to look up the definition of a "key"
again you've proven my point
>not trained
again you've proven my point
>are you
this isn't irc, don't feel you need to ask why i am asking a question
>it's difficult
nothing is difficult
you've proven my point
and what stage is this, where musicfags get angry at people asking the questions? lol
my charge is, people cannot express this music theory
congratulations OP, you figured out music theory is a human abstraction to facilitate communication. Why not complain about the arbitrarities of whatever language you speak instead, did a musician steal yo waifu?
This is the first I'm learning of it ive been self teaching myself electronic music for about a year and a half and really enjoying it so im trying to learn more about music theory in general so all my melodies and such can work better
Theory is just a tool to help organize and explain what we hear. There are no rules. Fuck theory if it’s causing you this much grief
I had the same theory with philosophy, I asked someone: what's the 3 big questions
it's a scam, a shitshow, a dance created by the fact that we can wrote "this sentence is false" in a million different and uninteresting ways, and they seem to think there's meaning in that
The book is pic related from this post
Dm G7 C
Op is an idiot who doesn’t understand what he’s talking about. Music theory is concrete, insomuch as we have established tropes we can analyze with a system we’ve created. Much like everything else. We can reason at our subjective enjoyment through conjecture, why such and such sounds nice. We can also firmly observe patterns, between frequencies for our major scale and triads, etc. it is all a system we created to communicate. Advanced theory I’d imagine is more abstract and fart sniffing.
But sound and music are constants that exist in the world, we made our own, we made a system to notate it after we became familiar enough, and now we observe trends in the systems, while positing why it sounds good. Most say it sounds good from conditioning, our twelve tone system.
You know what sounds good to YOU that doesn't necessarily mean anyone else will think that
oh ok, brainlet with an inferiority complex
music theory is easy, playing piano with tiny hands like mine is hard.
Can barely stretch to an octave.
again, see: what stage is this
i'm a linguist, there's a lot more data on how languages develop
and it reads nothing like music theory
that seems to not understand itself at a deeper level
or it mocks the reader
if it wants to say
>this sounds good
say it, don't wrap it up in a way that creates more questions
u mad lol
what is a key?
mad lol
Don't expect to have a completely scientific understanding of an art form.
A key in music is a short way to describe a set of notes that go together to form a scale. The key is generally just the first note in the scale. A major key means the notes in the scale are generated by the pattern whole step whole step half step whole step whole step whole step half step ascending from the root note and ending on the root note one octave higher. You can start on any note and generate a major scale using this pattern.
Just think of theory as a base of knowledge that lets people have a common lingo to talk about and play music together without needing to use kilohertz and shit whenever they want to play a 12 bar blues.
>not just using piano roll in a DAW to send information to hardware synth
music theory is a jew conspiracy, real music is made only with your heart
>we have established tropes we can analyze with a system we’ve created
aaaaaaahahahha *laughing like a deaf chick being raped*
lol. so you defend your little ideas, at the same time deprecating them? interesting
>But sound and music are constants that exist in the world, we made our own, we made a system to notate it after we became familiar enough, and now we observe trends in the systems, while positing why it sounds good. Most say it sounds good from conditioning, our twelve tone system.
>system to notate
again, i'm talking about music theory, and the simplest example
what is a key
you sound like you've just sucked off a donkey that went to eton
...
become a fluffer for the pedo-rape gangbangs in bongland, your hands will get more exercise after you wrist off 200 pakis that are about to rape a small girl
kys bong
It does get kind of confusing when you're trying to figure out which flats/sharps are ok to use if it's in major it's easy but the sharps/flats are somewhat tricky
too many fags
Dude, is this all just because you can't figure out what a key is? A goddamn major key - Whole step, whole step, half step, whole step, whole step, whole step, half step
shit
I like to play live instruments, all that daw stuff holds no appeal..
I agree, more to music than we know. I just found this laying around
And a key has a tonic, like Amaj, a scale will coincide with it, and will have a harmony to outline that that is the key. A key is just something you play and write in, that’s it. You can come up with your own abstractions. You’re probably a stoned idiot or some shit.
Playing in KEY is the KEY to UNLOCKING “music” (in quotations cause not all music conforms to our tonal system, some music is modal, atonal, has monkey center(but I don’t like that shit usually)
Take it over to /mu/
A key or scale is just an appropriate range of pitches to a sound to stay inside of so that specific part of the melody doesn't sound too wacky
you first old chap.
and this is about the fact that I think it's a weird incestuous and scared field, not the content itself
and taking this pattern, what else can we find that is not fully formed?
also laugh at mufags that spent 4 years to learn that they don't really know what a key is, even tho they really really feel like they do know what one is, they can tell you them, show you them, and show you bad examples, but still can't tell you really lol
Nose one else will see it there.
Drum machines and synth are live instruments, I love the sounds of knobs being twiddled while notes are being sent
Check this out
Jew
C Major. Innocently Happy. Completely pure. ...
C Minor. Innocently Sad, Love-Sick. ...
C# Minor. Despair, Wailing, Weeping. ...
DB Major. Grief, Depressive. ...
D Major. Triumphant, Victorious War-Cries. ...
D Minor. Serious, Pious, Ruminating. ...
D# Minor. Deep Distress, Existential Angst. ...
Eb Major. Cruel, Hard, Yet Full of Devotion.
then find me a page that says:
> a key is a set of notes that form an interference wave that matches the mid 61% of the cochlear causing the most pleasing sound
go on.
This guy is fucking retarded. He’s saying
>music theory can’t real
It’s a fucking system we made you fucking daft retard. It’s prettt simple at the basic level too.
I mean real instruments with hammers and strings etc.
Oops wrong thread, sorry
again, you've just proven my point.
to wit:
i know what music sounds like. i know what it does. i've played instruments. i know scales, Pythagorean scales, harmonics. i know fluid dynamics
i'm trying to examine the field as it is, and why it seems to try to either mystify itself, or won't be honest that it's not entirely concrete.
I gave an example of what a simple concrete expression would look like
mufags always get antsy when I ask this, which makes me think I'm onto something
what is a key
Music theory is at the boundary of human experience. It tries to encapsulate sounds into manageable ideas but because music is at the boundary of our cultural response to the unknown the use of music theory actually makes music real.
Here is an example:
When you are learning how to read and write rhythm as you learn you become more and more aware of how measures are divided up. As you become more adept at recognizing rhythm the rhythms become more real and apparent to your perceptions. Music theory is a type of magic in this sense.
This becomes especially apparent with triplets, quintuplets, and septuplets. Until you know what a quintuplet sounds like it does not exist even if you heard it in a song before.
to explain what I think
I think music theory is like "cookery theory" that reads like a recipe book and "ingredients and flavors that go well"
NOT a book that talks about Maillard reactions, volatile compounds, chemicals and sugars
I don't really get your main point?
You want to know what a key is or find the esoteric in music?
>music THEORY seems just like unproven theory to me
Stay on it, I think you might be onto something big there
>Music theory is a type of magic
see, Schitt like this
there is no magic
pushing back against me and saying "it's magic"
then update the cock-and-ball sucking wikipedia pages and force them to write it's magic
instead of 22 pages of meandering trying to avoid the fact that they haven't answered the question
A key is a set of notes, I don’t care to know the specifics of the frequencies between intervals, but going from 7 note major scale and it’s modes we transposed that to the twelve tone system, and a key is when there is an observable tonic, harmony, and melody that coincide.
I want to know if music theory is pretending to be concrete, while not being concrete, and why the fuck they are lying about it - why not, as suggested to
doesn't wikipedia just write "it's magic" on the pages that explain the concepts
so there is a "kilogram" problem, how to create an absolute definition of some terms
I am not criticizing that
I am criticizing the lack of self awareness, probably driven by some level of consciousness on the part of people that pay to get a certificate in this
Lead sheets and sheet music are a recipe books. Jazz musicians are Chefs and orchestral musicians are Bakers.
Music theory is magic in the sense that you are conjuring up a reality by learning how to cast spells.
Don’t bother. He’s a fucking troll arguing the molecular structure of music
>A key is a set of notes, I don’t care to know the specifics of the frequencies between intervals, but going from 7 note major scale and it’s modes we transposed that to the twelve tone system, and a key is when there is an observable tonic, harmony, and melody that coincide.
ok, but you've said what it is, but not why they are
just that you don't care why they are.
>I don’t care to know the specifics of the frequencies between intervals
well that's just proving my point
cookery book
not
science of cooking
It’s trying to mystify itself? You’re the one mystifying it and making a mountain into molehill shitlord.
Why study theory to a level you feel is mystifying?
>you’re on Jow Forums
>you’ll never compose anything great
I might have to start watching that guy after I finish this boom
I think he's on meth or something
>no i said what is a key
Cool with your analogies. Music is subjective so take what you will from the theory surrounding it. Make your own based off your own tastes. Don’t come complaining it’s all wrong.
Tldr- parallel fifths in your pic OP
No good
Music fag who has been studying music theory a lot in an actual music school, what are you asking that you don't get?
its only a theory.
A division of any given music model.
A music model is the result of dividing sonic vibrations into certain frequencies or level.
music theory is an octavic model meme.
>thinks magic isn't real
Lol
Don’t bother. He’s like a schizo or troll. He thinks keys are a lie
>I am criticizing the lack of self awareness, probably driven by some level of consciousness on the part of people that pay to get a certificate in this
There's a lack of awareness that is very hard to get over because music is at the edge of our perception. It's perceived by a sensory mode that is quite lacking in comparison to sight. Music is also at the edge of our perception to be one of the first things we have to grapple with the unknown.
Get some rest buddy.
>we know intuitively about what sounds good
Not convinced, im taking WE mean WE as society.
I've been playing guitar, bass, drums, keys, sequencing and sampling for almost 2 decades and what i like these days musically most people think is annoying noise.
I find it almost impossible to listen to modern chart music or modern popular music, its too boring and generic. Same goes for my musician friends. We are all stuck in jazz/metal/rock/classical/industrial/80s synthpop/electronica genres.
I dont know a single non musician who likes stuff like meshuggah or miles davis's 70s psychadelic jazz phase, or aphex twin etc.. Its all of my musician friends whom like stuff like that, all of them, no exceptions.
I think regular people like stuff that sticks to general major scales and predictable chord progressions and hooks. Musician circles from my experience are all into dissonence, odd scales, playing with dynamics, weird effects.
I really cant see normies understanding or liking mr bungle.
no there's not
no, you are missing it and jewing up the analogy here
fuck off saying sheet music is a recipe
I am saying music theory is presenting the ideas in terms of "this works"
not "why this works"
nope, mufag, how much did you spend on glorified guitar and piano lessons?
I am trying to find the pattern of things that SEEM COMPLETE in terms of their solution space
BUT
are NOT EVEN COMPLETE in terms of their problem space
100% of mufags on this page will disregard what I just said
again, why would someone lie and say I said it's all wrong
I am saying it's 100% correct
but unable to explain itself
it's something that most people seem to LEARN MORE than they can explain
people can call this a "je ne sais quoi" or some shit
I say it's being imprecise
No I don’t fucking care why they are, I don’t plan to leave the western tonal system. Pythagoras noticed a pattern. Pattern was adapted. Pattern evolved. It is what it is. I listen to a variety of music, I don’t need to know everything.
what makes it a key then
you realize my entire post is about using words to gloss over ideas
you just did that
you said a key isn't a key it's a division
maybe just throw a dictionary at the problem and see if that works
explain why a key is a key
again, why would someone lie
I'm saying music theory is 100% correct, read this shit you butthurt music theory paper holding faggot
Aphex Twin is like life's version of an unlockable that makes a vidya ten times better
Just so you know, nobody "invented" the key. It just happened over time
The rule for this is called the order of sharps and the order of flats. If you are in a key with one sharp that key is always G. They order of sharps is F#, C#, G#, D#, A#, E#, B#. The key for a scale with sharps is one half step up from the last sharp added. So for example.. the scale with three sharps is always.. "A" since three sharps in a key are always the same three added in the same order (F# C# G#), and the note A is one half step up from G#.
The order of flats is the reverse of sharps, BEADGCF. And the pattern for determining the key from the number of flats is simply that the key is the same as the second to last flat added to the key signature. So, if there were four flats they would always be BEAD and you would be playing in the key of A flat.
My theory is not great, but what i think sounds good is clearly not what other people think sounds good.
Good irks me too, because i wouldnt say some of the stuff i like sounds good, interesting, would be a better descriptive.
Been playing about the same time as you and I don't like annoying noise.
For music to please the Gods it must have harmony and melody.
there is no deeper level you're missing the basic concept language the major and minor scales are all human constructs that we used to communicate ideas and information. It's not scientific if you want science in music you'd talk about hertz frequencies and duration and residence a good sound engineer would be able to give you a pretty good rundown on music if you want to look at it from a scientific side
A sequence of pitches within an octave.
Then go edit the wiki article. You’re gonna get a ton of peoples own understanding of a key. They can apply the knowledge. It’s correct. Music is subjective and understanding varies. I don’t know the article nor will read since my knowledge suits me, but if it isn’t to your standards, edit it.
you not needing to know everything doesn't invalidate my premise
people getting this angry when I poke the ideas just validates my theory
wrong, it's probably related to the cochlear and at some point to the same network scales that govern our heart rhythms n shit
but nobody is looking because
as I posit
music theory is presenting itself as something more coherent and based than it is
and I don't care about that
I am curious why
and can we use this to find other shit that is hollow
blah blah is not about the key!
is all about the intervals, the distance between notes.
I guarantee it is scientific
which means you are just proving my point
keep throwing more words at it
read this
Thats confusing, this stuff never makes sense the first time or two i read it until I'm making a song or studying another and then apply it there, kinda like how I learned what knobs on a synth/vst do what
>wrong, it's probably
>I am saying music theory is presenting the ideas in terms of "this works"
>not "why this works"
Yeah, that's what a lot of music theory is, a classification system. Read Helmholtz' book On The Sensation of Tone
I feel like this as well sometimes, but maybe I misunderstand you, or maybe we both just overthink things a lot.