@lbnv and @Roject

Look, my friends, let me correct what you said:

Music is like food and making music is like cooking. The more you know about foodstuffs and their compounds and how the body reacts to those compounds, the more careful you would be in cooking and not mixing anything with anything.

We have a fundamental problem here, and it is that we do not know foods well and we do not have comprehensive and accurate information about the mechanism of the body, but we just like to make something called food and put it on the table.

The situation becomes even more complicated when we compare making music with making medicine. Is it possible to combine substances without having their properties and effects on the cells of the body, and expect the desired effect?

Nowadays, people try to make music without trying to know it deeply. Deep knowledge of music takes a lot of time, but music makers avoid this very hard and difficult practice and choose the easiest ways to create and present it to the listeners. After all, they are looking for simple materials, choosing simple types, choosing simple manufacturing methods, etc.

But when the knowledge of music deepens, people do not look only for simple concepts, simple tools and simple feelings and try to give as much depth to their music as they can.

Now a fundamental question is why do people run away from learning and try to make up for their poor learning with other things?

 

It's for me pretty great but not to be consumed on a steady basis because it's brain fucker food. I dare you to eat 5 grams of schrooms and then put on a pair of headphones to digest this.

 

Nowadays are crazy. People doesn't have time for nothing. Everyone is in a hurry. They are impatient. They all want everything for now. They have learned that they have everything for now. And They don't think, they've learned that the smartphone thinks for them, wikipedia and google. If They don't have internet access they are lost. In the past musicians spend hours doing what is now achieved in minutes. This was mainly due to the hardware limitations but it gave them more time to think and learn.
Now all free time is wasted browsing social media instead of thinking and learning.

 

I have a simple solution to this big problem and that is:

Removing the complex rhythms from the music

I know this is a bit funny, but if we do not interfere with the rhythm in the early stages of making music and keep it for the final stages, many problems are solved.

When we consider complex rhythms in the early stages of making music, our power to make deep music decreases. Complex rhythms are very attractive, but at the same time, they greatly reduce our ability to apply other musical concepts.

When we use complex rhythms from the beginning, what is achieved in the end is good only for dancing and nodding, and nothing else.

Many times what makes people find making music easy is because what they get most from music is rhythm. Rhythm can haunt both the music makers and listeners for the rest of their lives. I do not think that the method of exorcism used by the Bible for the haunted bodies also applies to the rhythmized minds.

 

Sorry, I don't understand you.

1. Yes, we could compare music to food or even medicine. But it isn't food nor medicine. It's music. And I could develop my thought. Every food and remedy are a poison. It depends on dosage. Even beautiful music consumed in a bulk becomes a poison.

2. We learn (get knowledge) about food and body by experience, by acting "at random", without knowing. Your metaphor doesn't take it into account. Do you think that books contain the truth? I don't think so. May be yes, may be not. But our experience always precedes our books (that is our knowledge).

3. Are all the examples of "brainfucker tracks" in this thread simple and primitive? But have you listened them? I think we talk about complex music, unusual music and unconventional music. And music which has a strong and strange emotional impact.

4. "Nowadays, people try to make music without trying to know it deeply". - Really? This generalisation is wrong. Somebody does, somebody doesn't. Simple and complex music existed in all the times. I don't see anything wrong in simple nor complex music, beautiful nor weird music. (I have preferences but they are mine and I would want to reserve them to myself). In music, we know that something is wrong or bad when analysing what we hear. And that doesn't mean we should choose only beautiful things. You cannot paint a picture on a white paper using a white paint only (I think it's what you'd prefer to do). You need the black (as a minimum), but also the red, the green, the blue, the yellow...

 

I was always worried about this child's mental health.

 

You're very misinformed on just about everything that you said.

Music can be used as medicine and the act of either listening to it, creating it and playing music s used in therapy for many maladies.

There are white on white paintings, black on black paintings, other monochromatic colored paintings, and if you were well read concerning art, art history and of course modern painters, you would know of Pablo Picasso's blue period where he chose to limit himself solely to a blue palette. Which brings us to...and, as above so below....

Your experience does not precede what you might have read about and have seen in books (so definitely past arm reach of your knowledge) as you would have and could have found all that we are talking about in one book or another without having seen, heard, personally been involved with or been party to.

Lastly, "In music, we know that something is wrong or bad when analysing what we hear" is a falsity as I know many people who have listened to examples of microtonal music and negatively commented on how "wrongly the music is played" although it is deliberate and as well culturally apropos to the particular genre.

"Education is borne with your desire to seek it out and should only succumb to its end upon the moment of your last living breath".

Lois Lane (9.12. 2020)

You can quote me, no charge.

 

Last edited: Sep 12, 2020

After a heavy jam session many years ago, followed by a heavy chill out session we cracked open a case of this beer. It took a while for us to realise the anagram.

 

@Lois Lane
You are right on all comments. Although you came as a bit harsh on the dude imho hehe. I didn't -yet once more-want to be the one to start another of those endless debates, and it's the only reason i avoided commenting but since you started it...
-My wife just got a degree on Music Therapy last year. She's a violin player and music teacher and took the course not knowing that she would face a shtload of unknown topics. She came through though and i can vouch first hand that music therapy is not a hoax as some would answer, it works and in many cases is the perfect remedy for some human conditions.
-And yes on the microtonals as well. Part of my heritage is Byzantine music and -put simply- it includes too many microtonal pitches that would seem totally irregular to western folks. On the other hand, to persons who studied and performed Byzantine all their lives, western music would seem simplistic and square, lacking elegance and charm. Western music has 12 notes, whereas Byzantine has 72. To extend the argument even further, from a spectator's view, it's very weird how all classical and baroque Western music is played almost entirely on fretless instruments (with the exception of piano and guitar), yet it insists on this 12 note discipline, which seems very restricting, given that you have all this "field" to explore and move around in both string and wind instruments. One could argue that all Classical is just a dumbed down fraction of Greco-Roman-then-Byzantine music. Surely in reality, it is not as simple as this. To fathom how Western music came to be, we should take into consideration much more factors including geographical, demographics, political and religious ones, so i'll just stop here.
-Yes on the colours too, my fav painting is in my studio and is made by a painter friend of mine, an abstract oil painting of just green. I love looking at it's monotonal anarchy, it's both relaxing and complex at the same time.
-You are also right, experience doesn't precede knowledge. If i may add, knowledge, with practice may lead to experience, but since there's always something new to learn, experience comes off as a auxiliary human attribute.
Now i have no quote of mine to fit this so i ' ll leave you with a classic.
"Γηράσκω δ΄αιεί πολλά διδασκόμενος" - Σόλων
Which quote by Solon means "I age while constantly learning a lot".
Thanks for baring,
Cheers

 

OK, I think that it's you who is misinformed in what you say.

Yes. But curing isn't an essenсe of music. If music would be a medecine we'd have a medecine, but not music.

Music can be a medecine and a poison. It depends on a sort of music, it depends on dosage. But regarding a medecine it's right too as every medecine can be a poison.

Music can be something neutral and indifferent regarding cure and health as these aren't its essence.

There is no white on white painting. White on white painting is just a white paper. Absolutely pure. You need a contrast. Even if it is a contrast between "a bit more white" and "a bit less white". Or it could be a shadow that makes your strokes visible.

I know about Picasso. Did he really use one color? Blue palette isn't blue color. And if you really look at his pictures you'll see that he used not only blue palette. Brown, black etc. Blue palette (different gradations of the blue) just prevail in their pictures. Look at them, please. What you read or listen somewhere isn't so important. Words sometimes lie and mislead. Look at Picasso's pictures, you'll see that I'm right.

Have I said something about my experience? No. I've said about our experience. Somebody got an experience and (may be) I don't need to repeat this experience. Somebody solved a problem and I can just use his/her decision.

There are two sources of knowlege. Experience and "books", it would be silly to argue to it. I'm reading a book where somebody wrote... what? He/she explained and expressed his/her experience or just retold what he/she read somewhere else. But where is the first source of knoledge? It is contained in an experience. Not mine.

P. S. You can quote me too, no charge.

 

Last edited: Sep 17, 2020

Counterstrike - Mindfuck (donny remix)

 

Other people listened to it and decided that this is good. And they started to repeat it. Without theories.

People who don't like it (don't undestand it, haven't learned to listen to it) won't use this tuning. As they think that is bad sounding tuning. They feel it.

It's very likely that the earliest tunings was created by "trial and error", all the theoretical explanations and descriptions appeared later. And anyway, when you tune an instrument for the first time (you are the first musician and there is no tradition before you) you do it by ear. "Oh, it sounds cool... and it sounds bad..." Is it theory or experience? Theory will appear when we need to repeat a result or make a found tuning common for different misicians.

One question.

First, there was real music, and then music theory appeared. Is it wrong?

I don't mean your experience and education (but I'm sure that it's real music rather than music theory that was in the first place in your life). I mean the naissance of music and music theory ("books") in the human culture.

If you think that this happened vice versa please explain how it's possible. And where the first musician read about notes and melodies.

 

Last edited: Sep 17, 2020

Is music just a sort of medecines? It's a big surprise for me. We are members of a medical forum... Or is this forum pharmaceutical?

No, this is a musical forum.

Music has many more specific functions that are not medical. To name a few:
- music is an art, its goal and value is in itself, a medecine isn't, the value of medecine is in its effect,
- music unates people, a medecine doesn't,
- music gives us possibility to express ourselves, a medecine doesn't,
- music develops our emotional sphere, forms the "culture of feeling", a medecine doesn't.
Etc., etc.
All this functions are more appropriate to music than a "medical" one.

But you a partly right. There is no sense to participate in debates. Especially because there are no any debates.

ME: Music can be a medecine, it can be a poison. But it's not its essence. Music is music. An art.

YOU: No, music can be a medecine!

Is it a duscussion? Really? [/USER]

 

Music therapy has nothing to do with medicine or pharmaceutical products. The fact that music can be soothing to some human conditions doesn't mean it is an equivalent to Aspirin. Nor does it mean it doesn't have many other attributes.
And although i can think of many, poison is not one of them unless you need help defining what the word poison means.
Metaphorically speaking, music could be anything, but since language is here so we can communicate, if music can be poison to you this doesn't mean it should be for the rest of us. I respect your opinion but it's just what it is, an opinion as mine is.
Speaking of aspects of music: A friend of mine is keen on the idea that music is the bridge that unites nations and people. So is it a bridge ? To humour you, if i had to answer my own question, it's more of a bridge than it could be poison... To go even further, most Lil Wayne tracks may sound like poison to me (if poison made any sounds), but it's just me. It doesn't mean he's out there to murder me lol.
And because earlier you wrote that medicine can be poison, poison -by definition- can not be medicine. So yes music (by the book) is an art, but really, after 40+ yrs of learning/playing/creating music, i wasn't expecting anyone to tell me i am possibly poisoning the world. Unless of course i am Lil Wayne and i don't know it
Cheers
https://www.musictherapy.org/about/musictherapy/

 

Last edited: Sep 17, 2020