/music/ - Music

>>31690
Yes, music is all about analyzing patterns(mostly used in field recordings and noise, rhythmic). Ancient music uses patterns or frameworks that we now call "modes." and the atonal music requires you to know about harmony and study a lot in regard of the pattern making and harmonic progressions. It's a lie when they tell you that studying music is limiting your imagination, it rather opens you to new stuff the more you study and explore it.

>>31691
>It's a lie when they tell you that studying music is limiting your imagination
Yeah, I agree with this. I just wonder if theory is at all tailored to certain genres better than others. I'm sure you're right that it's applicable to all genres, but maybe there's still some difference in degree.

To that end, I wonder if there are alternative/supplementary theories out there, aside from what would normally be taught as theory, to suit specific purposes

Yes, all music is sound in time. If you are playing any kind of music that has harmonies then you will benefit from music theory. Academic music theory mostly focuses on the classical repertoire, but every genre has its idioms. Studying theory enables you to hear and identify those idioms and also see where they relate so that you may mix them.

>ancient music

there are entire fields of study deidicated to this

>atonal music

probably the most theory heavy music there is

>field recordings

i dont know what this is

>noise music
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Intellectual properly has all the relevance to art, since it's what protects original artwork. It seems stupid to me how in the world of visual art, you can't even copy minor things, while in music, it used to be common practice to take another's art and use that for your own.

The harsh reality is that in music, using any copyrighted audio is simply theft. And you know what? That's alright. Because a whole new market has arisen around sampling. You can just buy samples, loops, complete vocal kits for tracks and the like. Thus creating more jobs in the music industry. It may have also created a lot of basement producers, but that's fine. With sampling, only creativity can make it truly proper. And that's where brilliant minds will shine.

>>31685

1/2

I get what you mean. As you say, intellectual property does protect artwork, so it serves the practical purpose of creating jobs in the music industry. And this makes it relevant to the way art is made.

However, I think as far as the art itself goes, plagiarism is irrelevant. Like you say, when it comes to sampling (or any of the other things I listed in the OP), there's a possibility to do it well or poorly. Sampling/reference fits the definition for art in every other way I can think of too.

This isn't to excuse shitty bedroom producers. Sampling/reference is done ineffectively a lot of the time, just like anything else in art. But I get that the concern a lot of people have is that it can sometimes be done badly without going noticed just because the source material is good. I'll admit there isn't much justice in rewarding bad artists for albeit effective art.

>>31686

2/2

In a way though, isn't that like anything? I would say things like a high quality instrument, an instrument itself (built and invented by others to make good sounds), a high quality microphone, and a knowledge of theory are similar to "source material." There are also other factors that don't even relate to the sound of an artist's music that could be seen as leading to injustice in the "reward" the artist receives- chance, privilege, personality, etc. Finally, I don't think an artist will get very much critical acclaim if their sound owes too much to its source material, because people can notice that stuff, and the more people who listen the more likely someone will notice.

So, overall, I think it's probably good that artists are paid royalties where they are due. But the concept of intellectual property shouldn't restrict any type of expression. "Where they are due" is where emphasis should be placed, and I think generally, not much is due, especially if not much money is being made off it.

>>31686
>>31687
One other point- not to be anti-capitalism, but consider that if it weren't for capitalism, intellectual property would have NO bearing on art

>>31685
> It seems stupid to me how in the world of visual art, you can't even copy minor things

i am not sure that is true. Appropriation is a longstanding tradition in visual art

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appropriation_(art)

>With sampling, only creativity can make it truly proper. And that's where brilliant minds will shine.

I do agree with this. Whether it is a band playing an arrangement of an existing folk song, or sampling a well known song, but making something new out of it, true creativity it what will make it unique.

>>31687
>I don't think an artist will get very much critical acclaim if their sound owes too much to its source material, because people can notice that stuff, and the more people who listen the more likely someone will notice.

there are plenty of massively popular songs that rely on an entire chorus from a preexisting massively popular song. See Flo Rida - Right Round for just one such example.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>31376
Hmm, maybe these aren't the right lyrics…. take your pick
http://thankyoustu.tumblr.com/post/30381973469/stan-hubbs-juggernaut-also-from-crystal-i

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONIJXHvoynw

"you're so baby" - donnie and joe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwYDyoHcoRc

Superstar & Star

Bump

While it’s only a remaster of a release from last year, I’ve been enjoying Un Blonde’s “Good Will Come to You” quite a bit.
For this year, though, I’d say Richard Dawson’s “Peasant”

Here is my acoustic. It's a Taylor E110

>>31329
I have now had this guitar for 11 years. New 110s are made in Mexico, but this was made when Taylor was still making 110s in the USA. I didnt realize that until recently. There probably isnt much difference between a USA and Mexican made 110, but it does give the guitar a certain aura of "higher quality."

>How long have you played?
Not very long, just started last june.
>What do you like to play?
Usually I start listening to something and wanting to play it, and that's partially how I've been advancing. I think the earliest style I wanted to try (back when I was still the guy you laughed at at a guitar store) was black metal, and I only had an acoustic. Turns out that's boring as fuck and as soon as I got my hands on an electric it was My Bloody Valentine and assorted doom metal. Right now a great deal of my time is eaten up by noodling around, not advancing with song ideas.
>What is your practice routine like?
It used to be just memorizing the modes of the a minor pentatonic and g major, as well as some dexterity exercises, but I sadly got content at a point and stopped really practicing anything.

As for the last it's a Gibson SG and a Sammick, laptop camera's broken sadly. Rig is weird, beat up old Crate GX-15 and a Spider V60, and I just recently got the huge gratification of plugging them both in using a friend's muff with two outputs. It gets sufficiently loud for my tastes now, and the quality of the sound isn't TOO much of an issue.

>>31278
I know exactly how you feel, it's such a fun thing to do but it gets boring once you start doing the shitty practice routines people have put together.

>>31275
But you have played with an amp, right?

>>31668
I have played with an amp, I just dont anymore. These days I am mostly playing the Taylor.

>>31668
My best friends

Small Philadelphia (I think) power pop band's debut, very comfy, worth a listen

This is dropping tomorrow, already heard every track multiple times. Fun and cool if you're into bass music, otherwise, not. I love it.

It's been a shite year for music. My AOTY would have probably been Melody's Echo Chamber's album that was supposed to come out before she had an aneurysm

My current album of the year.

As for Metal AOTY, So far, it's this for me.


Power Trip - Nightmare Logic

1. Ghost
2. Holland, 1945
3. Two-Headed Boy, Pt. Two
4. Two-Headed Boy
5. In the Aeroplane Over the Sea
6. The King of Carrot Flowers, Pt. One

7. the rest

Listening to this song is like having sex with the op image

A terrible experience

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi-1_xFUONk&t=0s

This is an improvement

Frank Zappa comes to mind

>>31641
>>31633
Basically only these two guys, but honestly neither one of them are truly accepted in the classical world. It would be extremely rare that you would see Zappa on the same program as Beethoven.

>>31642
Yeah, even though I posted a pic of Greenwood, I know he isn't respected. I don't think Zappa quite makes the cut either. Maybe there's someone though. I'm considering performers too, not just composers

It's useless to imagine "pop music" before it made sense as a concept, but I'm tempted to say Liszt is the closest to fitting this bill, Lisztomania and all

>>31644
Lang Lang played with Metallica at the Grammys