What patterns? Chords and scales are the building blocks of music, and every song has them. If you want patterns, you make them yourself.

 

Everyone has the right to live however they want. They like to combine anything with anything and I do not object to this right and I respect it. Myself, when I see that there is a deep mistake in something and I start to explain it to others that this path is wrong, I feel guilty. Because in the shortest possible time, people will put their guard in front of me. I know that their path is wrong, but because the number of people who are following this wrong path is very large and they are united against me, I feel that I wish I should not have interfered in this work in the first place. It is really painful for me to explain to other people that many of their tasks are problematic and it takes a lot of energy from me, both mentally and physically, and in the end I am accused of violating the freedom of others. I have nothing to do with the freedom of others in their choices, but it's clear as day to me that their choices are wrong, but it's a pity that the front in front of me is very strong and ready to answer, an answer that I don't deserve.

 

Man, the big problem lies in the opposite extremes. In the same way that our consumer society is decadent for proclaiming the planned obsolescence of anything, neither will a society guided by academic and elitist values resolve the issue. Since the beginning of the rise of the modernist avant-gardes (at the end of the 19th century) and the rise of contemporary art, attacks against methods and ideals that constitute what, roughly speaking, could be called common sense have multiplied. This constant search for experimentation and new techniques (at any cost) that causes the general viewer to be confronted and questioning long-held notions that true art must always disturb and shock common sense has occasioned a more than conservative reaction, manifests in what Byung-Chul Han refers to as Shitstorms. See the irony: Contemporary art, which sought so much to delegitimize and attack illusory representations, now suffers from the rise of variants of neo-fascism that confront science and reason. In short, any form of extremism is always shit. I understand what you try to do. I just don't agree with the method. But I forgive you, because I think your intention is correct. It's just that your way of acting isn't working (it's already been tried and it didn't work).

 

The existence of chords and scales in the software is not important, the main issue is their choices.
The main reason why users use this tool is the lack of power in choosing. The person himself cannot make a decision and leaves the choice decision to this tool. If you refer to the menus of this tool, you will come across a series of presets, which mostly are not good. Short presets and mostly based on unthought music.
The user randomly selects one of these and continues his journey in his/her DAW, and then returns to this software again and makes another random choice suggested by the software.
The software is not able to provide the best options for different sections of music and usually relies on pre-determined options that are already placed in the menu of different genres. It is possible to offer a series of new options, but these options are not fully optimized.
Music is a world of choices, but the choices the software makes available are not the choices resulting from a detailed analysis of all available music. Accurate choices are possible when the musician measures the various requirements of that moment in every moment of his music and can choose the option he wants based on the conditions he is in. The options that the musician needs at different moments are not offered by the software at that moment, but the software's suggestions are mostly limited and depend on the decisions that the programmer has already included in the program.
Every moment of music requires its own choices, which are determined by the musician whereas the software is limited to pre-determined choices, which may not be the main solution to the musician's current problem.

 

 

Last edited: May 19, 2024

It is so difficult to explain the concepts of music to people whose minds are full of issues of popular genres (Avant-garde & Experimental, Blues, Country, Electronic, Folk, Hip Hop, Jazz, Pop, R&B & Soul, Rock, Metal, Punk, the number is endless).
Anyone whose goal is one of these genres, practically has no chance to understand music better.

 

Yes, the entire history of recorded music is an A-Z of people who never knew what they were doing.

 

A simple look at music is what these softwares ultimately create in their users. As the creators of those genres have created in their listeners and musicians.
These genres have been and are mostly created in the American consumer music community and there is no strong intellectual backing behind them. Unfortunately, the rest of the countries have followed the uncharacteristic American music and have allowed a music market to be created in their country that does not follow any specific goal.
Simplification is the bane of music. Any tool that does this, both the software itself and the creators of that software are harming the music.
Music should be made by understanding all conditions and awareness of all moments and a comprehensive and complete plan, not based on algorithms and random choices.

 

I was listening to the Beatles Sgt Pepper album last night and I noticed that most of the notes were in the wrong order.

 

Last edited: May 20, 2024

i say theres a little magic in not knowing exactly what you're doing in music.
of course is good to have the knowledge, but sometimes is even better to just throw it out the window.

that's how new things are created

 

sounds great and very uncreative!!

 

Oh man, I can relate to this thread but don't have an answer yet . . . but I'm thinking of forcing myself to reduce options, make it work, and don't look back (easier said . . . ) I'm in a freakin' candy store with money!!

 

There are two modes in music. The first state is that you know what you are doing and the second state is that you do not know what you are doing. In the first case, you can manage everything with full awareness, but in the second case, you cannot have a particular control over the music and you have to wait for random choices to bring a semi-optimal result.
Magic does not exist in the physical world and only happens in stories. The real world is based on law and order. We either know that order or we don't. If we do not know, we have no choice to make random choices.
And unfortunately, because the world of music is a complex world, it leads many users to sorcerers and witches to show them the way and they usually cannot help much and users are left with an uncertain future in the music world.

 

if you already know what's gonna happen, then there's nothing new about it.
don't you see to create something completely new you gotta experiment, try something that you don't know what's gonna result?
the song you describe sounds to me like something a robot would do... you just gotta input the right commands..

also did you realize your instrument and all your songs uses the WRONG tuning?
12 TET is not the right tuning you know, is just the tuning we're used to

 

Being creative has nothing to do with random choices. It is a big mistake to think that anyone who knows a little about a subject is a creative person. A person who produces a lot of things is not a creative person, but only a producer.

 

i totally agree with you. i never said it has to do with random choices.

it has to do with experimenting (something new), and after that taking well thought choices

 

Willingly or unwillingly, you are making the use of these software legal and legitimate. Empiricism leads to indefensible results when you don't know what you are doing. Empiricism is good when a person has as much information as he can about a subject and uses it just for developing new varieties, but when a person does not have a proper understanding of the subject, his choices lead to disastrous results like an abortive coup.

 

it's a though subject. i can't say you're completely wrong.
But i also think not EVERYTHING in music is about knowledge. I think it has to be a little of the thrill of something completely new...
The way you say sounds like a simple book would make anyone the greatest composer

 

I ask the OP to change the title to:
A software that simply ruins your musicianship.

 

Not a simple book, but a very deep study. All the prominent composers of western history were first of all very expert studiers, both books and music texts of their times. But now, instead of studying, people are looking for software that can easily solve their problems and don't know that such software does not exist. They think that if there is something that fills the empty space for them in any way, then their problem is solved though don't know what their problems are.