The secrets of discussing.

Warning: foundated

 

Here is a song I made in 1999.
http://jamen.do/t/187651

I am going to critize it now .

Start off with good aspects .

1. Emotion
It does express a clear powerful although negative emotions clearly .
2.form it has ABAB form
3.melody
There is a okay Dorian melody expressed to follow.

Let's look at the negatives.
1.Form
AABB
Is pretty weak form for the song . Could have been much better if more effort was taken .
Melody
The form of melody is Dorian modal language
( At the time I knew nothing at all about music theory)
The form of the melody gives structure but it gets repetitive and boring not much taking place.

The weakest of the form is the harmony.
The harmony is " Mary had a Little lamb"
Quality there is one main chord and only subtle implications of a cadence . Not strong for the listener.


2.connection.
Although there is strong emotional connection in the song ,
The lyrics too basic and repetitive and
The low quality of the recording makes too hard to understand what is being said lyrically .it's poor.
There is not nearly enough embellishments to make a strong connection for listener to connect with identity of the song.


3.sound quality.
A good aspect is the charactor gives cohesion .
However the cloudyness of the song does more to hurt it than to help it.
The poor sound quality , and production engineering
Work against the bits that are good about the song.

4.motion.
There is pretty good contrast of stillness and motion but there is too much repetition in parts and not enough embellishments .
Conclusion.

It's trash garbage.
Yes it meant something to me and maybe some people thAt have heard it ( unless they were lying to be polite(
It's trash because there just a couple good things and many many things wrong with it.
The music component is infantile.
The good aspects are brought back down into the negative because of the things wrong with it.
It's an amatuer song made by one person just starting out not knowing what they were doing .

 

Last edited: Jul 6, 2019

Here is a song I wrote and recorded in 2001.

http://jamen.do/t/187652

Now I will critize it

First the good things.

It has ABAB form.
Has a mellow tone.

Some melody to follow some lyrics to connect to the identity.
Only a few embellishments but they help it along to be less boring.

The negative.

1.Form
Although it has ABAB form with pre chorus,
It's too blocked out repetitive which is poor and distracting .

Melody.
Although there is basic modal melody.
The singing is trash really irritating out of tune parts.
Goofy sounding voice . Bad quality singing all around

Rhythm is okay , but too repetitive not enough transitions and em embellishments to bring it alive.
It is dead music it has no soul.
( No matter how much I tried to pour into it at the time and the real feelings I was trying to express)

Harmony is blah blah boring old trash single chord modal language so generic so repetitive.it destroys anything good about the song.


2.connection.

There is an idea expressed emotion comes through to a degree lyrics are good ( except they incomplete!)
The verse wAs pasted both times and left the story incomplete this half assed attempt ends up destroying the good attributes of the lyrics .
So boring cry me a river whine about life you have is so rough nobody gives a shit .

The quality of the vocals are just boneheadedly horrible out of tune parts no control over articulation . It's trash.

The blocked out patterns not enough transitions out if tune parts and no harmonic spine to stand up on make it garbage for the listener.

Those things rob any good fragments of their value.

3.sound quality
Too cloudy too plain
Some character but the other failings make it irrelevant .

4.motion.
Some good aspects of rhythm but the repetition and lack of embellishments put it in negative.

Conclusion there just so much wrong with it that any tiny good aspects are beaten away by the failings so much so to make it a dead lifeless soulless song which you would be better off starting from scratch doing a better job of the overall concept and execution ,than any attempts to fix the individual failings .
It's trash and it's garbage , made when I was an amatuer knew nothing about music theory.
Could not sing, etc.

 

Please dont shut down this thread. The other one can carry on his pending deletion, whatever, but keep this thread going. With music theory.

 

That last song I reviewed was actually a acoustic version of the original.
This is the original I made in the year 2000.

http://jamen.do/t/186921

Here is the critique of said original.

First the good parts.

There is some fluctuations of excitement compared to the acoustic which are better.
The emotion comes through some degree.

The bad.

1.Form the form is ABAB
So blocked out so repetitive.
It makes it terribly boring.

Melody
Same boring old modal language as before except even more out of tune vocals.
( Singing was high volume for the chorus)

Rhythm
So plain so boring nothing happening .

Melody
It's just one chord the whole time modal language
Empty and fragile feeble and shallow there is no harmonic motion for a spin r to hold it up anywhere
To out of tune parts make that even worse!
Not only is there no motion .
The " argghhhhhrrrgghh"
Sound of a drunken village idiot tripping over their own feet is so distracting it makes it impossible to concentrate on the good aspects ( few that exist )
The harmony is musically infantile.

2.connection.
The little bit of potential in the concept and lyrics for connection with the listener
Is so overwhelmed by the mistakes and failings
It's hard to enjoy much about the song.
The repetition blocked out areas are so distracting .
Not enough transitions and embellishments to give the song a life it's dead . Lifeless trash.

3.sound quality
Oh, this one is bad .
Everything is twisted in wrong directions with eq
The drums sound like
Flicking a peice of paper
The mixing and production and engineering
Sounds and feels like
I pulled a peice of paper out of a hat and randomly drew a homeless man's name of the draw and had him do it.

4.motion
There so okay attributes with Dynamics and contrast between stillness and motion ,
So much us wrong with it in terms of transitions embellishments and small details that it so repetitive and boring rendering it unlistenable .

Conclusion .
Same as with the acoustic it's just garbage nobody is going to listen to this whiny nonsense.
The couple good attributes are so outweighed by the failings in almost every way that the listener comes out from the experience feeling dumber and more ignorant and confused than before they played the song.
It's trash it's garbage .
Weak in everyway that counts.
As before the few good things going for it would be better suited to start all over from scratch than any attempt to fix the song.

 

Thank you friend .
But I don't see why it would be shut down ,
What justification?
Because some group of knuckleheads disagree with another knucklehead?
Nah .......
We good mofo.

 

@notsoloud I'm really sorry for your deletion my friend. For all ungrateful attitudes I do apologize!

 

Big dog big nuts

If you get into the pen with the big dogs.


What I mean is , notsoloud running around running mouth and accusations and attacks over and over
Then because I respond with a honest critique that everyone else agrees with , that's a psychologically brittle spirit. ( Cannot take 10% of what he dishes out?) This is survival of the fittest .
How on Earth could it be possibly be expected of me to be bashed in my thread by him repeatedly
While at same time expected of me to coddle and be afraid to tell them the truth so I don't hurt his feelings?
The world does not work that way.
In every imaginable way possible notsoloud.
Had difficulty distinguishing his fantasy from reality. Had no consideration for his actions and the consequences which they bring.
Anyone who cannot handle 5% of what they dish out , eventually need to be chopped down .
But guess what a strong person gets chopped down they learn valuble lessons and they get back up.
Always get back up with your head held high .
You fix your problems you don't run away from them.
NotsoBrite
Can rise from the ashes , start treating others the way he wants to be treated .
Learn his lessons, advance grow .
And is welcome to this thread .
To learn
How to create great music at no cost to him .

 

I'm wary of getting embroiled here, but i must say if there's one thing this thread has instilled in me, @MMJ2017, is a genuine curiosity of how all of this hard-won theory expresses itself in your current music making.

If readers of this thread are expected to invest a substantial amount of their time learnng from a self-proclaimed music theory guru (which actually does come at a time-cost, even if you don't personally charge for the knowledge), then at least you should place an example or two of this advanced understanding to demostrate the real-world benefits such wisdom has to offer the potential student. I say this, 'cos in many movie narratives it's not until we get to see the master in action that (due) respect is given. Otherwise you should hardly take exception that some folk might charge you of merely engaging in self-regarding, dogmatic pedantry - especially after all the my-dick-is-harder-than-yours put-downs over the last few pages...

 

Okay, I'm going to try to give you the benefit of the doubt .
I understand the type of direction your talking about . I think nothing negative about you for it .And I welcome this type of expression .

Here is the problem with the Logic ,
( In other words thinking that makes sense )

Information stands on its own merit.
E = mc2 is the same whether Hitler presents it .
It Einstein presents it.
If information is demonstrable that means it's true.

Zeroing in on another aspect of the situation in which the information gets presented such as
The individual who presents it and their ability to use it is irrelevant.

Now say I do just as you suggest.
I make music with the presented information
Such that the outcome is one which every single person thinks to themselves " this made by this person using the information is amazing "
So let's assume this situation from the start.
Now even if that's the case ( not possible due to some people hating forvtrollz sake etc. Rebellion same thing we just seen with notsoSmart.)

But let's assume a situation which 100% of people
Experience that .

Here is the question.

How is my ability to create the most amazing music with this information,
Relevant to whether another person can?

What I can or cannot do , has no connection to what you can or cannot due.
This thread is about the information ITSELF.
Not me .
It is about how the information impacts a person's ability .

It is about how every aspect of your music gets better by " knowing what you are doing"

Think of this phrase

" You know what you are doing "

Now think of this other one

" You do not know what you are doing"

If we assume the sentence is factual , which is a positive annotation , which is a negative annotation?
What is it that's makes each one positive or negative?
The fact that
" You do not know what you are doing "
Is a negative phrase .
Why is that?
Does it depend on who is saying it?
Is it true that there are situations where
" Hello, I do not know what I am doing "
Is a preferable factual statement as opposed to
" Hello, I know what I am doing"

If you are asking proof of knowledge being a better outcome than ignorance.
I reffer you to the cavemen .
They lived that way because they where ignorant of 99% percent of reality and how things work.
As time progressed we found ways to figure out how things really working *knowing what you are doing*
Having knowledge of music, knowing what you are doing is proven by the best music you can find anywhere it's not amatuer ignorant of music people making the best music that has existed. It's easy problem.

After saying ALL this however, I am NOT
Saying that I will not full fill a request to post music.made with the knowledge presented here such that people can see what is possible .

Lastly I would like you to reflect on everything which has happened in the thread for far .
And please feel free to discuss with me here, the aspect of requesting me to create music with the knowledge used.

 

Music Theory is A database for you to quickly decipher thought and translate it into an expressible action, With Sonics and Words.
Music Theory is that To how English Lets us Express Our Feelings. We wall feel what we do and when you know what you feel, you chose the right words for it

 

I would love to hear more of what you have to say: specifically with the analog simulating mix techniques, even deeper what characteristics of the Machines themselves lead them to be your choice

 

I am happy to make music using the knowledge I have been presenting .there are many considerations of context to discuss related to that.
But here are some other considerations in the whole situation as well.

1. As you learn this knowledge
You are going to have a transformation in the way that you hear and experience all music.
This is because as your brain learns to name, categorize, and priorize how much works , you begin to hear music more holographically .

For example .

If we take Cmajor9 chord.

CEGBD
Your brain will hear it and know that it is what you are hearing presented in these different ways.

CEGBD
EGBDC
GBDCE
BDCEG
DCEGB

Those 5 unique separate sounds of just straight block chords your brain when hearing it 8n music .
Will think in your mind ( Cmajor9)
There are many many varieties of each inversion spaced different and notes on different order where they have a unique sound , but with chords your brain will think the same thing " Cmajor9 "

That is just 50+ separate and unique sounds of the same identical chord you brain will see as 1 thing, the same exact thing "Cmajor9"

Next melody

Follow and play along

E up to B slides up to C up to G down to D
Your brain will hear this melody the same as all those 50 + chords it's one object the same object
You will think " Cmajor9"
How about a totally different melody?
C up to G slides up to B down to E down to E
Again like with the other melody anD the 50× chords , you brain will learn over time to hear one object in your brain " Cmajor9"
I can go on listing thousands of musical actions
All representing Cmajor9
Where overtime your brain hears all these thousands separate yet unique things as one thing one object Cmajor9.
This works in reverse also.
If you are writing a song you write
Cmajor9 down for first part of verse 1 .
In your mind all those thousands options appear visible to you because , each one of those independent and unique sounding things ARE
What that Cmajor9 means.

Let's take a baseline ascending in steps low to high
We want Cmajor9

B C D E F# G A B
Same thing your brain behind to hear that as the same object as tthe 50+ chords , the hundreds of Melody's etc. You see it right in your minds eye pop up one object Cmajor9.

How about a descending stepwise motion baseline from high to low? Cmajor9

C B A G F# E D C
Same thing .

So this consideration which I have brought up.
Is that dedicating yourself to learning the presented information .
Changes the way you hear music . Tens of thousands of separate and unique sounding music movements and actions ways to play. All get categorized as s one object " cmajor9"
This is so important because context is everything.


The second way learning this transforms nd changes how you hears how you experience music
Is that during the time you are learning this you are developing " critical listening'
You ear developing ear training yes but also your eArs ability to hear finer levels of the tiny details in music which exist that 5ake development overtime.

 

If I wrote a song you thought was very you ever heard , however to our hadn't yet learned
What it is on the deeper level which you are hearing
You would take it as a bunch of sounds you like
But not know WHY you liked it.
You wouldn't know what I was doing why I chose it.
( Because you would need to know ALL of that to do it yourself ,and more importantly
Make your own unique expression of the same underlying structure s
You would not be able to create 10 or 50 versions of the same song each unique sounding nothing alike yet all with identical structures and form
If we take
Dmin9, Galt, Cmaj9
That can be expressed millions of ways which all sound unique different and feel different.
The goal is to understand music the deepest level of music.
( That deepest level is NOT a choice made in a song in one moment of time captured and recorded to hear back )
The deepest level is ( every single possibility chord,melody,harmony millions different unique things which all represent
Dmin9,Galt,Cmajor9
Which is also one object your brain hears .
Your brain thinks ( Cmaj Cadence)
One object to describe those millions of separate and unique and different feeling things .


It's identical to how my brain thinks "store"
That's the concept .
I can say " shoe store"
I can say " I am going to the store"
Or " let's go shopping for shoes"
Millions of wAys to say one thing.
But ONLY if you have knowledge of how the language works what things mean.
Does this mean you become a prisoner of always saying the same sentences? Nah.
You choose amoungst millions of possibility
In order to express what lives inside if you.
Maybe it's .
" Yo mofo, need to got done kicks to rock these threads for the club nicca."
Or another.

Hers a question for you though.
Imagine being totally ignorant if the language
Compare this last sentence to this new one.

" Rxbug sejih trhkgd ifgioh drgkj dhkjb "

When totally ignorant these two sentences would have the same amount of depth and meaning .

 

I do want to, and am going to create music which uses the info for you to hear .
I believe it is important to have you 7nderstsndvshat you are hearing and how it works.

I have been planning for several months to create a YouTube channel as a tv station music education.

I want it be the highest quality .
I have been studying film making for a year to do it.
Been getting the things I need like movie camera and other equipment involved to do it.
I have sit down with investor next month for it .
I don't have lot money and have not focused on making money instead I been focused on learning and sharing it a long time.
But I'm going to have to get the money aspect , in order to create motion picture movie quality .
Of education material like I been presenting with demonstrations and artistic expression but into the content not just sitting in front camera boring talk.
I want to bring it next level.
The drawback is that it's taking time lots time a year of study alone but I have made good steps towards it. I really need find a way to get decent amount money to cover the highest quality possible .
I'm looking through all of that as well
In the mean time I hope to give the most information possible this way at least it's interactive on here and can connect people.
So I have given lot thought to how to best
Do exactly that gave people hear what can be done .( Not just one choice in one sec of time which a million other could have been made)
I need to shoot information directly encoded in the brain for people, highest level of music education but yo the listener watcher or reader , their experience is like watching amotion picture or reading great book or listening great song
It's actually challenging haha

 

When they make entirely unsubstantiated claims to possess "The Secrets of Music"... 'We' - ignorant students all, according to you - are yet to hear any proof of proof of this whatsoever.

If i had a time machine and played a tune to JS Bach and he said that, i'd certainly take it far more seriously than if i received the same critique from e.g. Justin Beiber.

About 10 years back i had a friend-of-a-friend come round, boasting that he could improve my PC performance, 'cos he's invested a great deal of time on this particular matter. I naively let him at my machine.... he then simply installed a whole bunch of bullshit 'speed-up' utilities that actually impaired my computer's performance... in the end i had to restore a backup of my old system, 'cos i ended up with a serious dose of malware... afterward, i really would have preferred that the guy had been wholly honest about his actual real-world experience - as opposed to his desire to impress - 'cos even though he meant well, he actually caused more harm than good... that being said, i do agree with your general point i.e. willful ignorance only appears to be bliss.

Certainly if that person is looking to, say, professionally score a big-budget movie, orchestral symphony or somesuch. As for popular music... from The Beatles onward, there are literally 1000s of greatly influential music artists whose innate abilities amply compensated for a lack of formal education. Indeed, their ignorance may have helped them break 'rules' that constrained their over-educated peers, who end-up in formulaic staightjackets by the deadening weight of dusty, dogmatic rulebooks - the common malaise of the classically trained. That being said, i am NOT a cheerleader for 'blissful' ignorance, and generally applaud all those who earnestly strive to educate or enlighten others! I'm merely suggesting that some audio (visual?) presentation would certainly help make your point(s).

Nice one - i'm certain it will help your cause!

Writing seemingly complicated music is far easier than writing complicated music that strikes home first time. Consider the word Music itself i.e. art of the muses - certainly it can be augmented by dedicated skill, studied knowledge etc. However, it is NOT pure science or differential calculus: It's living art, whose principal function is communication of thought and feeling between (de)sensitised homo sapiens. So....does it inspire?; elevate?; inform? IMHO, these are the only criteria from which it is fairly judged... the rest is just hot air.

 

Last edited: Jul 6, 2019

The one about Bach and Justin beiber

The idea is to differentiate knowledge from where it came from
If you have the sentence
( We are assuming it is accurate and factually true)

" You don't know what your doing "
So imagine the sentence is towards you and it is actually true that beiber is telling you a true sentence ( meaning in this situation you didn't possess the knowledge of music language)

Now compare to everything exactly the same except bach is there saying it.

It does not change anything .
You see you have to think about the information itself.
This thread obviously has not and is not just the story of a person's life and what they can do or not do that's not the content of the thread.
The content is * the way music works "
That is the information if how music language is.
It's zoomed out if a human perspective
It's not that you are looking at things from inside a tiny sliver of experience.

So given that the information is what the thread is about how music works.
Next if you take a ignorant person ( don't know how music works )
Than this knowledge is a mystery they don't have it.
It's s secret so to speak from their to y sliver of human perspective
( Especially nowadays where it's difficult normally to find ANY plAce that presents the way music works in the order that it works.
Hopefully that gives you better understanding .

With the friend and PC thing about fixing your computer
In this situation it IS
About a person , and that person is not presenting the way pcs work in a demobstrable way .
He just saying HE is something ( something being knowledgeable

This whole situation is about 2 people, one claiming ability ( not presenting info about PC and then leaving)
Right now you knocked on my door entered my house
( Your standing in my thread right now which I invented , I'm not at your thread telling you something about myself yo give me a chance to do something cool for you )
Those differences are immense.
I am presenting in my threads only demonstrable information.

By reading the thread about music theory for example it's entire layout is demonstrable and testable .it 8s a science of music language.

I'm not making any threads about myself
What color drapes I prefer.
( Except times where I will comment saying
" From my perspective so and do my input what I like is x ")
That happens now and then.

The whole thing about about Beatles clsssically trained
Both of those situations where about people and what they can do or know
(The language of music was not fully known yet only fragments , it was not until the end of the jazz age that the music knowledge became organized step by step and it was public knowledge the majority of music theory by most musicians .

So I just want to differentiate situations about people and their actions abilities and lack of.
Compared to music " the way music works "

There is a way music works on its own , our discovery of that , ignorNce of it , knowledge of it that comes once you enter humans into the equation. But before you do enter humAns into it.
You just have music itself.
That is my primary focus music ( I don't mean songs or played parts I don't mean the slang term music like " Bob, you want me to put on some music?*?"
In that instance the word " music" is a slang for
Song.
In other words
A series of choices made about moments of time
None of that is music
That is something made by humans a song .
Music the way I mean it means
The entire language.
Not one melody playing in 13 second time frame
But every possibility that the Dmin7 DFAC could be given , that it is the foundation for that melody.
"Music" a s I use it is the language.
Just as mastering engineering
Is not a adjustment made In a moment of time to finalize a song.
It is EVERY adjustment than can be made to finalize every song.
The reason why it's so important to differentiate
Is becuase
The word " music " nowadays is slAng for 100 different things .
In tiud context of this thread that would get us talking past each other if I'm tAlking about the structure the whole language, whole to he other person is talking about a sob. Or one choice made in one moment or a recording itself or genre differences.or pop vs classical etc.
Music the way I use it is deeper level than surface level of sounds genres styles how sense it sparse etc.

 

When they make entirely unsubstantiated claims to possess "The Secrets of Music"... 'We' - ignorant students all, according to you - are yet to hear any proof of proof of this whatsoever.



There is no claim about myself .
There is a title yes then when you look at the content , it lists out the information itself.

It seems like you think that is the same as as another situation where you have a person

Secrets of music.
And the content is them saying phrases like
" I know so much , I can do that and this and that me me me . Etc ( while never talking about the thing itself like your PC friend.

Those situations have nothing in common.

 

Getting back to the idea of seeing and hearing how the knowledge of music can advance you .

We going to look at the technique called
" Triad pairs"

This writing or playing technique
Focuses on a single chord
You take a 7 note chord to begin with

In this instance I will take F Lydian chord
FACEGB D
135791113

Now to use this chord ( Fmaj)

You create two triads which share no notes
Let's make a triad pair

FAC. And GBD

We have two major TRIADS a whole step apart.

This pair is one object (Fmaj13#11)

Now to start we will climb up one and down the other
FACFGDBG

We can do this in several ways like inversions

FAC. GBD
ACF. BDG
CFA. DGB

So selecting inversion
ACF. And BDG

Up one down other
ACF GDB ACF GDB ACF GDB

How about next inversion
CFA. And DGB
Up then down other

CFA BGD CFA DGB
What about same inversion except down then up other?
AFC DGB AFC DGB

Etc.
These are just a couple things you can do with triad pairs let's look a a video someone made demonstrating this where you can hear it

Remember triad pairs is taking place in a moment which one single chord exists.

Now regarding the secrets of music as it relates
To this comment a context of one technique " triad pairs " the information is demonstrable and independent of who presents it.
The information is futher demonstrated to be factual by the audio examples provided in the video
In summary
Triad pairs is 8be particular technique where you transform a 7 note chord into thousands things to write with or play no matter how many unique melodies you write with it each sounding feeling different your always representing the language of one single chord .
In my case example
Fmaj13#11
FACEGBD

 

Last edited: Jul 7, 2019

Let's look at a c major cadence
Dmin7, G7, Cmajor7

We have 3 functions
Dmin7 subdominant ( small tension away
G7 dominant ( tension far away from home
Cmajor7 ( no tension home relaxed)

The cadence is just a more detailed version of Cmajor.
Because we have 3 different functions let's see
The 7 note chord for each of these 3 chords in the c major cadence.

DFACEGB ( d dorian)
GBDFAC#E ( G Lydian dominant )
CEGBDF#A ( C Lydian
Now we can create triad pairs for or the duration of each chord .

DFA EGB, GBD AC#E, CEG DF#A
Dmin Emin, Gmaj Amaj, Cmaj Dmaj

Up then down next

DFA BGE GBD EC#A CEG AF#D

Down then up the next
AFD EGB DBG AC#E GEC DF#A

How about inversions?

DFA. EGB. GBD. AC#E. CEG. DF#A
FAD. GBE. BDG. C#EA. EGC. F#AD
ADF. BEG. DGB. EAC#. GCE. ADF#

Try up then down or down then up
Try different combinations