NO I am lateral which means I think outside of the square. What you do by negating any other possibility is a linear negativist who refuses to accept anything other than what they put up as being legitimate. You have done this MANY times on this thread.

It's not any of that, it is FACT. Taught at 2nd year Bachelor level.

Then stop thinking that you are the only person in the world who knows what you are talking about, stop crapping on people who just might know something you do not, because the world is full of people who do with all of us.

Thanks for the evidence in your own posts, look at your posts. Stop addressing me, insinuating insults at others and stop replying. Do you understand manners and courtesy? If I am addressed I reply, It is what most people do when addressed. Walk your own talk please.
No more noise? You make the biggest waffling noise of all of us.

 

Is that you'd call mature self-made man behaviour?

Quit the fallacies man. Everyone is free to say what they will here, including you.

That's pure noise. No substance to it, sorry.

 

It's called context - Something MANY people have attacked you as being severely LACKING.

The very thing I have said many times and you have demonstrated perpetually as LACKING.

Noise- sheesh - Put your real name upon a forum I do not care, Do not cry if someone who is actually a stalker does just that.
Basic etiquette. In this I was mistaken to make a suggestion not to do that. You are incapable of learning anything outside of your own philosophies until too late. Stop the transferral of everything I have already said it is sad, and it's evident all over this thread I have said these very things to you. Speak to someone else and take your meds.

 

Are you echoing me now?

Check your facts then. Many other subjects derived from the main topic have been approached by now, not only the ones you cherry-pick to dedicate your bashing to. Bring us your enlightenment to those ones as well.

That's your exclusive personal take about me, thus not related to my real/actual behaviour since page 1.

Ok Mr. Ego. It's all about you and my utmost urge in drawing your special attention. Now please, bless us with your obliteration so we may keep praising only your fading memento-moris...

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2021

Guys, I read some of the comments in this thread... And, please, stop calling each other's names ...
Some comments seems to come from 14 years old boy trying to demonstrate who's got it bigger ...

How can it be so difficult to have a conversation about theory without a fight?
Please, guys, show respect to each other...

 

Thank you for your intervention Olymoon.
I don't even know how to carry on with the thread anymore, given the gratuitous and incessant detracting interactions, always by the same individuals.
Sometimes myself and some other well-intentioned thread attendants, unwillingly engage in confront with those individuals for the sake of continuation, as so as I've reported some of them as you previously suggested, but the content gathering and chaining now suffers.

Edit: not limited to insulting and foul usage, recently I've been accused of plagiarism and stealing, with no proof or evidence whatsoever. How to amend/address that?

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2021

@Olymoon I have set this person to ignore. He decided to pretend he did not contribute to it as you can clearly see we BOTH did. and I have no tolerance for no integrity.
Regarding for addressing plagiarism Oly, it is an academic fact that any work that is not your own must be credited to the source. It is not an accusation It is fact if you go back through many of his images on posts at no point in every one of his posts does he say "Image courtesy of".
Oly you know my qualifications and that I know this academic essential practice and a fail at any academic level not to credit your sources. This is no accusation as evidenced by many of his posts which have been screen-captured and now, sent to the sources. If they choose to go at him it is his Karma.

@Freetobestolen please do not communicate with me ever. @Olymoon please note my request for him to not communicate. I have set him to ignore and other people will let me know if he does insult again. Set to ignore. Do you what you have been instructed FTBS, the rules apply to everyone. or should we call you MMJ? You behave identically.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2021

Thanks, it make sense, after reading your post carefully I realized why some people is playing with TET 108, 12*9 (I was wrong it's 106?! not 108), and well it's messy arabic is 24 tet that is ok, but hindu is tet 22, thai tet 7 and probably I think there are others in asia and africa.

I am trying to visualize a simple approach, and the best so far it's using a ratio, because tet 999999 will still fail to match perfect harmonics, snd it's already easy to me to make sense of something like ratio represented by divisions
1 unison
2 octave up
1/2 octave down
3/2 fifth
3/4 fifth down
4/3 fourth
2/3 fourth down
5/4 third mayor
5/8 third mayor down
6/5 third minor
3/5 third minor down
.....
make a lot of sense that way and intuitively can be related to physics, geometry, rythms and other things, easy to remember and deduce, just math language, universal.

for TET 12 using a notation based on the math formula ( circle of fifths )
Freq = unison * 2 ** (interval/12) (<i need to check this)

TET (0/12) = unison
TET(7/12) = tempered fifth
TET(12/12) = octave up

Others TET could be the same notation

TET (#interval/#total intervals)

for harmonics series it's even easier

1 = unison
2 = octave
3 = perfect fifth
4 = octave 2 up
5 = perfect third 2 oct up
6 = perfect fifth 2 up
7 = harmonic sixth or seventh 2up (wrong denomination as you pointed out I need to check this)
8 = 3 octaves up

The only thing left is EDO system but could easily be added with a similar notation as TET.

now this is pretty odd too, specially for people that don't make sense pf what is going on mathematically on music, but I could add an abstraction layer so can be shown as frequencies, cents, commas, western notation A B C or La Si Do, inclusive colors that it's used in microtonal scores, anyway that is the graphical representation.

To me it's easy to use the maths, when I played guitar, I could imagine or visualize the strings vibrating in different harmonics and having the same mathematical relations, it's the way I think, I see, listen, things in my mind vividly, It's very hard to me to think using words, this also affect my memory, I always forget names, dates, locations, or any other
kind of mental shortcut, i don't even remember to what side pipes or doors should be open, is like my brain dont care to memorize stuff, but I managed to use other methods, for example i am very fast to do mathemathical calculations, so i dont need to remember nothing, then I do all the stuff, deductions from start to end in my mind.

 

Last edited: Jul 1, 2021

@Olymoon

I personally never bothered listing to ignore BaSsDuDe, or should I say The Freq, as I noticed since last June 11th, both to be the same passable character, then by me naturally becoming ignorable.

And so it continued to be, until today, when in yet another of his outbursts, he started his direct and nominal attack, as if offended by conjectures I've brought up about the difficulties to be dealt with so far in order to progress with the thread.

As you can see on his last message, to you and myself, he recklessly reworks and redo the accusations of plagiarism, fraud, intelectual misappropriation from third parties and worse, discloses having me reported to what himself claims to be the "actual sources" ?!

This individual simply cannot back up such severe acusations due to the simple fact that every print I have posted in here are screen-captured from my very own, self-made, material, thus not liable of being found anywherelse; morever, he tries to get away by simply sliding in the "academic small talk".

That's a serious, inconsequent, fabulist absurd and deeply outrageous!

What are the consequences?

 

BTW love this kind of experimentation, She is showing her set of keyboards, fretless keyboards, also many insights about polychromatic music, and also polychromatic notation. So many sounds, pitches!

 

Last edited: Jul 1, 2021

What I don't really understand is how can the Dorian Pentatonic scale generate all this Discussion..

As I said before, I already knew the Dorian Penta scale: 1-b3-5-6-b7,
because it's part of what some ppl call Modal Pentatonics or Super-pentatonics.

And I learned this topic +15 years ago on the iBreathemusic.com portal..

So how can it be Stolen material if I knew about it?
(and from a random internet portal, not a book, conservatoire/university or anything special..)

Besides it's just an Harmonic or even Empiric concept that could hardly be copyrighted..
Nobody can Copyright or have the authoring rights of the Major scale, the Pentatonic scale,
or in this case > the Dorian Pentatonic scale 1-b3-5-6-b7..

Because it's part of Music, Human cultural Heritage, Nature.. and the Universe itself lol
You know what I mean..

So where/why does discussion arise from?
The scale?

Or is it the nomenclature used for the harmonization of the scale: F#ºb9/A?

Because that's also a way to complicate oneself, relating it to the Relative Locrian scale,
just as things are usually related to the Relative Major or Relative Minor..

I would first call it Am7add6,
and then in any case F#ºb9/A if I ever wanted to relate, or look at it from its Relative Locrian perspective.
(and that's two of five/seven, or even 12 possible base nomenclatures..)

Still, I also don't see how F#ºb9/A can be copyrighted, or belong to any one individual..
Modal Pentatonic scales don't belong to anyone, but Everyone.

And anyone can Chart them digitations, and write/name their chord harmonization,
because it's common knowledge.. isn't it?


-Another topic is if Freetobestolen really uses the scales or not,
and to what effect..

But that's pretty much an Irrelevant matter to me.

Freetobestolen brought the idea after I did,
and I don't think he claimed Autorship of the idea, nor of the provided Digitation Chart

Did he made the chart?
I don't don't know, but as long as isn't scanned from a Book, it doesn't matter,
and even it if it was it still won't matter to me..

He brought it completely charted, whereas I only given/spelled 3 examples.
Also 2 of those examples coincide, whereas I gave another Alternative for a possible Lydian Penta..

Probably because I didn't rember it well at the moment,
but also because Modal Pentatonics is not a single Fixed thing..

You can generate different Pentatonic scales from an Heptatonic scale,
some will be better/worse, more common/uncommon, or this way/that way..

But they are valid options afaik..

 

Last edited: Jul 1, 2021

sorry please delete this message

 

Unfortunately, music theory has a big problem and that is in many cases, everyone offers their own understanding of theory, and these understandings are likely to be inconsistent at any moment with other people's.

When these perceptions of theory do not coincide, two conditions occur: 1- People do not insist on their opinions and do not attempt to reject the opinion of the other person. 2- People think of their opinion above others' point of view and try to prove their opinion at any cost.

There are always these two modes in music theory. If music were like other sciences, one could discuss the authenticity of the opinions expressed in it, but unfortunately music theory is not made of science, but is based mostly on the works of music geniuses, and those geniuses have never provided some good verbal reasons for using the different techniques of music that they themselves have been the source of, causing such a messy situation in the music world.

Shame on music geniuses... Who did they think they are? We need their written explanations rather than their music.

 

Also things can be seen/understood many different ways, or from different Perspectives..
Granted, some will be more Practical/Logical than other, but the the options are there..

For instance the Second chord of Armando's Rumba..
Cm7 - D7 - G7 - Cm7

It could be seen/understood as a V7/V chord,
which is Non Diatonic (to C Eolian, Dorian or Harmonic Minor, or any other..)

Or it could be seen/understood as a II7 chord Diatonic to Dorian #4..

So what IS it?

You decide, in relation to the Context,
and from your Personal perspective/point of view..

So it is Both,
and more things if we wanted to relativize it to something/anything else..

 

It's actually quite simple. When you first learnt even the II Dorian of a major scale that was taught to you, weren't you told by whoever taught you that it was predominantly minor? When you were first shown diminished and relevant scales, was that association also given? Of course it was.
Therefore correctly in the case of a chord like F#dim7(b9)/A the majority of experienced musicians see this as? A diminished structure not a Dorian. If you write it as Am7(b5) add6 or add13, they are naturally more inclined to see it as minor and not a diminished. Neither are incorrect, it's just how people see the same thing. Both chords contain the same notes. The leaning will be more like intended if the person looking it has the easiest path to it. It was not that difficult really, a person only has to see a different point of view and that on a written part that has really fast changing keys every second bar or less, no improvising musician is going to think every bar: "Ooh I think I will play a Dorian double augmented" then do the same again- they just do not have the time in a tune that is moving over 250bpm. So a person knowing how to do this for musicians theoretically will write something the players have to do less thinking about to achieve the desired result. Ask any pro musician if they would prefer something simplified or complicated when it does not need to be complicated. That's why.

 

That's why I'm saying real improvisation doesn't exist. There's not even a real music composition.


Music is like solving an equation with an infinite unknown that all these unknowns affect each other. Also these unknowns appear to everyone in very different ways. Music is not a category of notes in scales and chords. It's in how we use them.

No one in the whole history of music, whether past, present or future, is able to solve the very, very complex equation of music.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jul 1, 2021

I agree, there's no need to over-complicate things..

That's why I would call it Am7add6 in the first place,
never from F# unless I wanted to relativize it from there..

What I don't see is why you call it Am7(b5),
there is no b5 in that fourth scale of the charts..


But in any case, this is just tools,
material one studies and will integrate more/less depending on one's taste/focus..

On a real life situation you're not usually thinking too much..
but it could happen that one given person was a big fan of say Mixo Penta,
and was always prepared/waiting for the opportune moment to throw it..
(Opportunism)

Or that as he was playing, he realized it could fit the moment..
(Opportunism/serendipity)

Or that he Practiced/prepared the song before playing, and thought there was a good spot for trying it.
(Planning)

Etc..
Everything is possible,
but yeah, I agree at 250 mph, you usually don't have the time to reflect in relative Locrians,
if you didn't plan that detour before hand.. or if it isn't something you have 200% integrated..

 

Last edited: Jul 1, 2021

What are the notes in an F# dim7 chord? F#,A,C,D#(Eb) the b9? = G with an A in the bass it tells you straight away with or without the Eb it is an Aminor because of the bass note so why complicate it and make it an F# diminished?? That is completely unnecessarily complicating something if you want to call a Dorian. In terms of the leaning it's quite simple that in F#,G,A,A#,C,C#,D#(Eb),E,F# that this works perfectly over an F#Dim(b9)/A so the natural leaning is correct. If I wanted that to be Dorian as most would, it would lead as a minor6 sound and the written diminished while not incorrect tends to create a different natural approach. same thing with the Eb - same leaning in both scenarios and both work perfectly.

Even without an Eb you have F#,A,C,G/Abass - if you really want semantics, you could also call it a Gmaj9sus4/A (no3rd) - most people when they see a sus4 won't put the major 3rd anyway and good players do not play the fifth unless altered as a perf5 points back to the tonic. The main point is that it is minor not diminished even though is completely made up of minor 3rd intervals, so do not point it that way when you want someone to see it as a minor scale derivative, and not a diminished.

Addition: The catch in writing a Gmaj9sus4/A (no3rd) is you may not get a good player and they would add a D natural which would then make that incorrect so Am7 add6 or Am7(b5)add6 is how you would get the desired Dorian approach if the person was only a scale player. Even if they added an E natural or the Eb if you look at the half-whole, every note is in that scale (except the D of course) F#,G,A,A#,C,C#,D#(Eb),E,F#. Why do you think Brecker, Corea and Hancock used diminished scales so extensively?

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jul 1, 2021

It does. Before COVID if you looked it up, you could see anything from string quartet improvisations, to graphic music improvisations to free jazz - All improvised no chart, no preparation - nothing. They all have to use their ears.
If you listen to Chick Corea's 'Three quartets' - you can probably find it on youtube, listen to Michael Brecker's sax solos even though you mentioned you do not think of sax as an instrument. He was given no chords and improvised all of his solos by ear.

It does exist.

True high quality spontaneous free improvisation in any genre, which is what I think you are talking about, is experience and relying on your ears.

 

Yes, it's not incorrect in the context of an actual F# HW Dim scale..

But now that you mention,
it would actually be kind of incorrect given the Dorian Penta 1-b3-5-6-b7 Context,
because there's no Eb note included/involved at all..

So calling it F# dim is wrong in that context..

Curiously enough, if that scale included that Eb it would be a sort of Dorian #4 hexatonic scale,
then it would be right. But ofc it's not the case..

So it's only if you take that F# dim statement as true that the problem arises

I guess it could also be called Gsus4,6Maj7/A, or Gsus11,13Maj7/A
but that will be bonkers anyway.. lol better to just just elude 3rd and 5th..

Well, they shouldn't!
Otherwise it won't be a Sus chord at all..

Good point!

I guess it's true in a Modern music context, as the chords will be more Ambiguous,
while letting more room for the decorations/alteration to define its character..

Agree,
so this was basically a little mistake by whomever made the Charts/Digitations and spelled the chord..

Unless they somehow wanted to imply an A Dorian #4 or F# Locrian #6 Context,
or wanted to use it in that context themselves for whatever reason..

(or ofc F# dim context, but it's wrong for many reasons,
F# HW Dim has no B or D, but has Bb Db Eb which Dorian does not have..)

 

Last edited: Jul 1, 2021