Nice, more off-topic. This post is literally about the rules of melody. Even IF you wanted to break the rules... you'd still need to know them.

What great advice, we should tell all beginner musicians, "don't follow the rules!".

 

In a normal Superman movie...
Superman leaves - Clark Kent arrives - and with those magic reading glasses even Lois Lane is fooled.

But the modern version below is much more entertaining
I offer a title - "Superman goes Schizo on Acid Laced Kryptonite"

With or without your reading glasses you should forget music and get a job as a script writer for DC Comics
At least then you'll stand more chance of finding gullible readers - we're not as dumb as you hope here!

 

Last edited: Oct 26, 2021

STOP PLEASE.
Your vocabulary indicates intelligence that gets completely destroyed by sweeping statements that do not have the remotest grounding in fact. This thread has laid a testament that all the musicians from different styles and genres found a common grounding where it all crosses over. The principles are identical in any style. The only difference is the application. If you knew anything about jazz, it has more ambiguity in application than possibly any other style.

Classical by nature is fixed because of its nature towards technique and is 'more perfect music' than any other. It has ambiguity but is completely different in approach to jazz or any other style as well. However, the harmony, scales and principles of all music apply with ALL music.
I disagree with you as I am confident others do because you simply have done zero research on what you claim to know something about then make outlandish statements that have no grounding in fact or even a well-rounded theory.

I am doing what I rarely do and flagging you.

 

Last edited: Oct 26, 2021

Guys, there is no need to answer to off topic comments. Just ignore them as they will be deleted.

 

we just have to take all those things for granted and pretend that everything we do and work on is the greatest thing ever, which -- of course -- is not true but serves a purpose when talking in the abstract.

it gets very hard to talk about these issues because instantly a thousand examples will pop into your head, each one in stark contrast to the next, but all seeming to make sense according to their own internal logic -- they 'work' -- on some level. in the end it may well just come down to a stylistic bias within the individual. having to work on music that is not really, 'your thing', or just boring commercial 'wallpaper' projects, really forces you to see the commonality in all music rather than the differences and find something relatable on some level -- which is a sentiment you have expressed. in the end it all just becomes 'a thing', and for convenience sake we call that thing music. it all has common characteristics, properties, methods and purpose to more or less extent.

TBH when i was immersed in the world of music, theory was an afterthought. music was constantly playing in my head. always practicing, rehearsing, gigging, touring and a lot of waiting. a musician does more waiting than anything else -- waiting in airports, train stations, bus stations, backstage, green rooms -- food and sleep was just an annoyance, but the music was still playing in your head never the less. most of the primary editing was done in the head, the trajectory of a piece could change at an instant. those were the musings i most valued, there is just not enough time in the day to address it all. strong ideas were ones that had a 'depth' to them and other ideas that lacked that were instantly forgotten. there was no reason involved in determining 'depth', or scope, it was just intuition, feelings and visions. the more you did it the more sophisticated the constructs became and the decision process became more concrete. by the time the 'writing' started a piece could be virtually fully formed -- *that is where theory can come in handy* -- to fill in the blanks. it sometimes baffles me to find that people struggle with what to write (musically) the question should be more like, "what do i throw away?". maybe they just have nothing to say (musically), which is fine -- most people don't. there are plenty of other pursuits in music that are eminently fulfilling, like collecting gear do not know how to use and you have no use for or hording redundant software programs... umm... i mean, becoming virtuosi instrumentalists (theory is probably more important in this context), etc.

it is a pretty simple process, 'hear something -- write it down'. i know it is somewhat of a boring exposition. no great internal grappling or artistic struggles with theoretical contradictions, but there it is. it's fun, i like it there. there is no beauty--not-beauty there, no this or that -- only pure potential. i enjoy the company of the muse, the grappling with duplicity and the human condition all comes in the external world -- not the wellspring of creativity -- but that is just my subjective experience. some people i have talked to have similar process (some look at you like you are nuts), everyone has a different process. viva la difference.

you just broke my brain.

 

Yes I hear you and that makes perfect sense. We all try to be impartial and sometimes we can achieve it, but hey, we are human not a machine.

As for the immersion, I think anyone who truly loves music was and perhaps still is. I am to a degree. The only difference with age is that I do not wake up at 3am with a musical idea or melody and have to get up and put it down before I go back to sleep.

As for 'what to throw away?" - This one is an enigma... some musicians way of doing something will always be too much or too little. I'd like to believe with age that a person simply keeps what is in context with what is intended and discards what is not. I know when I listen to things I did 10,20 and 30 years ago, I know a lot of it I would not play it that way now. We also will always be our own worst critics.

Collecting gear you do not know how to use?? I think everyone fits that category at least once in their life.
As for becoming a virtuoso, I think that is also different for everyone. For me when I attempted that it was all about dexterity, fluency and practising enough and hard, so whatever I heard I could almost play on the spot. The earlier theoretical knowledge gave me enough skills to do that musically enough. In retrospect, it was a good experience, but these days, it is not important. Age sort of does that.

Yes, no argument
By the sound of it you are not in too different a place to me. If you mean dichotomy as opposed to duplicity I'd totally agree, though duplicitous generally is attached to someone who is nuts. I think any musician who sticks at it or for that matter any artist in any arts field who knows they are going to struggle and battle but does it no matter the outcome has been considered crazy. That covers a larger percentage than many people realise.
There are however those rare moments of consummate beauty, those magical artistic moments that define the very reason any of us ever started playing in the first place. Even now, though random, they remind me why I became a musician so very long ago. You are a really smart person... thanks for your insight

 

Last edited: Oct 26, 2021

these sentiments are all too usual in the shakespearean comic-tragedy that is the life of artists. i can relate.

i was definitely more in the 'too much' camp sometimes -- the impetuousness of youth. listening back can be a cring inducing experience i try not do too often. playing and music can become super personal and all this can become intertwined with a sense of identity. i was not entirely serious about the virtuosity, it is a good ideal, but the dedication and commitment required to attain and maintain the skills are only practical if you have a specific need to devoting every waking moment to it.

it is increasingly hard just on a purely economic front to make that sort of commitment to music. when the value of the product is tending to zero (for the primary producer) and even then the externalities absorb most of what little value there is -- not a sound economic model. it has always been a false economy to a certain extent but rising cost of living and lowering budgets are making things ridiculous. the scope for innovation is dim if there is no clear pathway upwards through the industry for the average person. well situated people people can and will continue to make it work but a majority of revenue is probably not going to come from actual original music creation. the gods of economic rationalization do not look favorably on art or artists. death often increases an artists earning capacity. scrambling for points on distribution deals is not a fun occupation.

yes, that. something like what james joyce called, "aesthetic arrest". worlds open, a veil is lifted for a brief moment. the framing of one tiny piece reveals the relationship to the entirety of the sum total. i only really get it from other peoples work -- unfortunately i am usually too absorbed and self-critical while doing my own stuff (which is probably a good thing). it is a powerfully motivating force that can lead some their fortune and some, like the sirens of old greece, to their doom.

thank you for the kind words but they are patently untrue. if they were to be true, i would in real estate or a money lender. i still have no regrets...

"The man that hath no music in himself,
Nor is not moved with concord of sweet sounds,
Is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils;
The motions of his spirit are dull as night
And his affections dark as Erebus:
Let no such man be trusted. Mark the music."

*** i used duplicity because it is hard to deal with -- "the state or quality of having two elements or parts; being twofold or double" -- and sometimes more applicable to the industrial aspects of music. dichotomy is just a benign and ever-present state of being, we do not have much choice in dealing with that.

 

Guys, all this is interesting, but you are going off topic now.
PS: If you go PM, please, invite me, I like to read your conversation.

 

Last edited: Oct 28, 2021

Shame you cannot start an invited thread where people have to accept the invitation. Regardless, you are welcome to join in.
Maybe pick a PM topic you really want specific people to get involved in and invite them into it?

 

Well, obviously, Audiosex is not about private conversations.
But it can be done through pm as you can invite as much member you want in pm.