(In reply to 23322332)

First, I didn't say there's anything Complex about the Circle of Fifths.
I said it didn't Click for me, because to me it is Pointless..

It would be hard to reply exactly to everything you said, but basically what I gather is that:
You've got no idea about what's explained in Russell's books, because you haven't read them,
so basically you've got no idea of what you're talking about..

But that doesn't stop you from taking some Fractional and Limited pieces of information,
and create a proper Strawmen context that you can comfortably "rebate"..

"Statements like Lydian scale is the most natural scale" are not a big joke,
but a Philosophical statement based in the fact that:
If you stack fifths, the first full heptatonic scale that naturally arises is Lydian..

The fifth being the most Consonant and direct/natural interval that exists.
Right??

For instance: Let's do it in G
G what's the fifth? -> D
D What's the fifth? -> A

Keep with the process and you get:
G D A E B F# C#

Put them in order and you get G Lydian:
G A B C# D E F#

Now, I don't know if that's a fundamental truth of the universe.
But at least it's a good Philosophical point of view, and opinion,
and at least it tries to explain why things are the way they are in a fundamental way.

Which is More than what the orthodox common view of music/theory does,
since it doesn't try to explain anything at all. It's just a given, and you take it, and that's it.

If you cannot see the Logic or the Value in the fifths/lydian statement,
it's not my responsibility to make you think and realize.

"his theory is completely ignored in academia"
Not true at all!
Just read the Wikipedia article and you'll see how the Academia not only didn't ignore it,
but in fact adopted and used some of it..

"not being able to describe existing older music or music out of its categorical boundaries"
It doesn't Pretend, or Need to describe any older music,
and I don't think it's limited to any categorical boundaries..

"The main basic mode that was actually used in Medieval times (in Pythagorean tuning) was Dorian"
That's True.
But that's only part of your strawman argument -> Nobody is denying that, or talking about Medieval times at all here..

Besides, Russell's concept doesn't End with the Lydian/Fifths idea,
that's only the beginning, its philosophical foundation.

But it keeps on going, and from there it covers and derives almost ALL the other scales/modes that exist,
which emerge naturally from his fifths premise.


-And pretty much the same applies for the Neely stuff..
Nobody said it is an absolutely Perfect and All Encompasing description or Solution to Anything.

It's again, a Point of View,
and a try to visualize/organize harmony in a quick/efficient way..

And that's what it is really.
¿¿Can you ponder in you head all the 28 modes at the same time, and determine with absolute precision which mode has more sharps/flats than the other, or which modes are brighter/darker sounding??

Of course you can think and determine the relative position of many,
but unless you've got a privileged rainman brain, having a Classification like the one Neely brings it's handy/USEFUL.

And also an interesting point of view, which Alas,
traditional Orthodox musical understanding doesn't provide, or ever thought about providing.

"Actually, I am not right"
No, you're right here.. ;)

"the most melodically interesting scales are improper - for example: double harmonic"
Maybe.. but that's Subjective, no?
I also like Lydian Dominant, Phrygian Dominant, Romanian Scale or Superlocrian and they're all proper.

"the interesting part about this scale is that it also has no problems in just intonation (probably because it has only 4 good chords)"
Nice!!!
That's what we are trying to do here -> bring Information, Comment, Share and hopefully try to Explain stuff.

Not -> creating strawmen arguments to poorly rebate and "to be right" just because..

 

Last edited: Jun 13, 2021

I asked a straight question? Your answer was strange.
"You playing them?" Them what? You want to improvise you a piece of music to prove what exactly?
1)That someone can play standard or non-standard melodies+chords in any musical systems? (And this is only my guess, because of your vague language)= Which is trivially true, so you don't need a demonstration.
2)Or to prove that I am proficient as a keyboard player? (Which from your viewpoint may be true or not true, in both cases you get nothing, and doesn't even prove or disprove any "academic" music theory)
Seriously, doug, I don't see how any these two cases wins you anything.
But, I know that:
A) I don't like your attitude (you basically bragged about being a jazz player with lots of practice , OK, this doesn't give you any authority over music theory or rights to tell people to do stuff to your liking).
B) Even if I had any motivation to do any favours to you, you ego is so inflated and your viewpoint so skewed, I don't have any reason to fulfill your vague request (which was in general to demonstrate you "something" in regards to "something else" that you didn't even clearly motivate)...
TLDR, I don't like your personality and you didn't even manage to clearly state what you want to hear exactly in relation to which one of my "academic theories", so I probably already wasted too much in this conversation with you.

 

Last edited: Jun 13, 2021

The funny thing is a lot of people think I am having a go at them about their theories. Or about what they have learned, or like to learn. Everyone is missing the point.
It's obvious people have studied. What every teacher anyone of you ever had, they did so with audible examples and more often than not, the tutor teaching played them herself or himself.

Spouting anything we can all do. I can easily keep up and similarly use a diatribe full of a plethora of esoteric musical rhetoric and equivocally make myself look like I have my cranium buried between my gluteus maximus, but WHY????
It does truly only look like that if the person does not show their own examples that they can actually play everything they are speaking of.
Music is to be played, not just talked about. If people want others to learn what they wish to teach theory is only one tool of many. demonstration wins every time.

 

Last edited: Jun 13, 2021

I don't have time to answer this right now, but I will say that one of my teachers a long time ago used Dick Grove jazz method and theory (which is basically partially based on Russells theory, of course, I didn't know that back then), so I am familiar with most of his practical theory. Later I have seen the book Russells book itself, but I didn't finish it, it felt like a waste of time.

 

No, it's not. You physically playing the audio demonstrations that you propose you can. Not a computer. manual execution on an instrument. Any REAL musician can. Simple really.
Putting down Adam Neely and other award-winners, I mean really?
And you have how many awards? if you did, you would not.
My request for real people playing it is because anyone can use a dedicated program like sibelius, Finale etc etc and get a computer to play it. That is not them playing it.
That is easy. That is a computer playing theorised data.

So my request was simple and ANY real musician could understand it. You may have some skills theoretically, but putting down award-winning authors only indicates someone with a chip on their shoulder.

You do not like my 'attitude' that challenges a person to walk their talk on an instrument, and that has become obvious to probably everyone who read the comments. Your skills to teach anyone depends on the ability to translate theory into REAL music as a tutor by playing what you are supposedly 'teaching' because no tutor would teach the way you structure it, it is too inconsistent. If you can not play your theories, please, go and speak to someone who is discombobulated by your avoiding BS snowballing them with unstructured technobabble. Do you have multiple accounts? If so, you do know that is a bannable offence? I got that from a moderator.

Also, how can I be bragging when I put demonstrations of me playing it up and you do not? Who is bragging?
You are basically saying, "Look at my theory documents but I am not playing anything in them that I say I know what I am talking about because I am so good I do not have to? I know everything and nobody on here knows as much as I do" - This is the message you send to people on here.

Then you try to redirect the very thing you do at others as being them. Then you put crap on others. You know why you deserve all the crap you get and you do get it? You crap on famous people and you are not and have never walked in their shoes. What kind of person does that? Not a particularly nice one.

Bad news I studied with George at NEC in 1988. You did the Grove course? That explains it but do not crap on George Russell, people in 300 years will know who he was but nobody will know who you are. I am sure there are people who do not find you transparent or a charlatan on here. I, however, am not one of them. Speak to someone else because you no longer can. The music world is smaller than you think. Stop crapping on notable authors, composers and musicians. It will cost you what you will not realize until it is too late to do anything about it if it is not already too late.

"Ignore"

 

Last edited: Jun 13, 2021

TLDR.... be more concise or you're wasting my valuable time.
Oh, and I don't like your personality.

 

Excuse me your Highness,
I've got a question that stirs me up at night, and I thought maybe you could Graciously answer..

¿¿Whats more Powerful, an Exorcist or an Inquisitor??

 

Oh this good. Let's break it down. First you don't have time to waste now.
"One of my teachers taught theory based partially on Russell's book.
Then I started Russell's book but it was a waste of time"
So is anything actually not a waste of time for you?

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 13, 2021

Please call me Lenny, or Holy Father.
True power lies in silence. Humility surrounds the silence and reinforces it. He who can harness this strength is invulnerable.
Practice quietude every day. Practice until silence is your natural way of life. Then you will understand. For in the silence you will hear everything.