Talk to you tomorrow! Peace.

Hey, you can be a Superior Prick if you want. Especially, if you're still applying for the former postion held by Seba. We still have that Zorn problem to deal with.


I actually agree, that one should always start with the foundation before you start building anything on top of it.


Yo!

You know, so do I, in a sense. I learned what I now know about scales from the smallest amount of reading and perfect pitch hearing. Being able to immediately discern melodies has always seemed to be far more valuable to me.

I've mentioned before that colors come up when I hear melodies in given key signatures, and that I associate certain emotions very specifically with certain key signatures. Yet when I talk to Jack, who graduated from Guitar Institue of Technology, he speaks in languages I can barely comprehend. Then we finally work on a song I have written, and he decides that it would be easier to play in a different key. I have practically come to blows over this sort of thing. DON'T YOU DARE PLAY THIS IN A DIFFERENT KEY, MOTHERFUCKER. I have had perfect melodies compromised, and sad songs turned to mad songs, as the result of this. But Jack just looks at me as if I've no idea what I am talking about. The tonal relationships are intact, he says.

But there is a world of difference between C-sharp minor and D minor. I know what I am talking about...I just don't know how I am supposed to be talking about it...

well unless you're friend doesn't know how to tune a guitar... i really don't know what to say. equal temperament is made so that there are no differences between any of the keys, just the speed of the vibrations. and i guess i'd probably argue too that the key you write or transpose something into does make a difference, it's not that big of a difference, especially from C-sharp minor to D minor!


i guess it might be different having perfect pitch, since you might make associations with certain keys. but for me theyre all relative

For him they were relative, too. This was straight up transposing. He was tuned to E, and simply wanted to do a drop D. I had told him if he wanted to do that, he'd have an even bigger pain in the ass playing the song because I had written it in C-Sharp. He insisted on a complete transposition, and the song literally did not sound right. It sounded fine as a different song, but many subtleties I had been counting on were lost. If you only have relative pitch, that won't make sense. But you could play a simple melody 12 times, and I will tell you it sounds better or makes its point more strongly in some keys than others. The overall sonic effect of working to the minor 6th (a heavy metal staple) will vary depending on what scale you are using, and even dissonant tones (such as a diminished 5th) will sound softer or more discordant depending on the scale in question.

When key signature doesn't actually matter, these note relationships are indeed equal. From my perspective, it makes every bit of difference in the world.

From what I have learned about temperament, in the old days (sorry, can't give a date but including the baroque era) the tuning of instruments made some keys more favourable than others. In a lot of Bach's music which are often titled by the key they were written in, it has been found that the music contained the least amount of the least consonant (or most dissonant) intervals, which appears to be very intentional.

So, seerix, it sounds like perhaps your perfect pitch is 'tuned' to something that isn't equal temperament.

For you, do intervals sound differnt depending on their origin?

My lecturer in 'the Languages of Music,' as they call it at school, believes its best to look at music from all eras to get an understanding of its make up, or language. He continuously stresses the presence of a 'continuity of music' and how music is ever evolving and drawing from the past. So, in our lectures, he always had a bit of the new and a bit of the old to explain things to us.

Just with this in mind, maybe it would be best not to refer to the basics as neccesarily comming from any particular historic period or style.

I thought that maybe this forum should be called Musicianship in stead of Music Theory, because while it is entirely true that 'Theory' applied to popular music, it hardly refer to it. I thought this sort of exclusion was something negative, and 'musicianship' might bridge it. I suppose it is with the same intention I made the above suggestion...

Musicianship might get took the wrong way, and we'd get a load of new track postings.

Maybe Music Theory and Music Philosophy might be nice

I'm not sure what you mean when you say it could be taken the wrong way... what else can musicianship mean?

But another possibility:
Music Practice?

Musicianship can turn into production or physical playing, that kind of thing as musicianship is a catch-all term.

We have production and instrumental forums so I think theory works.