6 ms·

I think this is just the nature of music. It requires a rather rigid system which does not offer enough diversity to be completely unique. All musical genres ne

by tr0ut 9y ago

I think this is just the nature of music. It requires a rather rigid system which does not offer enough diversity to be completely unique. All musical genres need to at least share the same root elements for association. https://youtu.be/Co9mW_9hH2g https://youtu.be/Co9mW_9hH2g

mping 9y ago
This is not true. It may be true for modern pop, but I can give lots of examples where originality abounds: Classical music, Jazz and its derivatives, prog rock. I never understood why people listen to radio music and don't even know what is out there, it's like seeing the same dull basic painting over and over again.
- jdietrich 9y ago
  Almost uniquely in art, free jazz retains the power to shock even sophisticated audiences. There is a brutality to the work of artists like Albert Ayler or Milford Graves that transcends the intellectual. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwkHCLI1j1w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwkHCLI1j1w
- tr0ut 9y ago
  No it is true. I said all music genres share a common ground. We can take all genres of music and boil them down to a structure. What makes Jazz different than Heavy Metal? Or better, what makes Bebop different than Big Band or Fusion? They all share the "Jazz" element that we recognize as being uniquely Jazz. Its the Rhythms, notes, chord progression, modals, timbre and harmonies. You get the idea.
ebbv 9y ago
This is not true. There is nothing rigid about music. You can do whatever you want. Unless you care about being popular. Then what you run up against is what people enjoy.
- bitwize 9y ago
  You can do whatever you want, but the estate of John Cage owns the copyright on not making music, so if you plan to not make music at all, lawyer up.
- tr0ut 9y ago
  You can certainly do what ever you want. But there are distinct rigid structures to all forms of music. If I make a close approximation to B.B. King's "3'o'clock Blues". It is most certainly Blues and not a Polka song or Reggae. Even Avant-garde Jazz has a common theme. Music is formulaic.
cturner 9y ago
Western tonality has some rules. Composers can operate outside of that if they want. With computers, a single composer could make up a new set of rules for every piece. You can turn a drum beat into a note by accelerating the wave form, invent your own scales. It is interesting that even electronic artists tend to operate within the constraints of the western tradition. It is probably a struggle to find an audience once you start doing wacky things. Or maybe it will happen, but has not yet.
- d13 9y ago
  Electronic artists are limited by the rules programmed into their software, and very few people realize how severely limiting those rules are - they make 99% of the decisions for you. The fundamentals are never questioned, but it's only by questioning those fundamentals that true can innovation happen. If you want a mainstream audience, fine, if not, throw your laptop out the window :)
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Or write the software yourself...
  - jdietrich 9y ago
    >Electronic artists are limited by the rules programmed into their software, and very few people realize how severely limiting those rules are - they make 99% of the decisions for you. That isn't remotely true. Yes, you can choose to quantize to a 4/4 grid, but that isn't mandatory. You can choose to operate in equal temperament, but it's relatively straightforward to work microtonally in most DAWs, particularly Reaper. Hugely popular instruments like Xfer Serum, ZynAddSubFX and UVI Falcon have full support for microtuning. IMHO, it's far easier to make properly weird music in software than with traditional instruments. You have a vastly greater range of timbral choices, you have total control over intonation and you can program complex polyrhythms that would be far beyond the abilities of most professional musicians. If you really want to go balls-out on the weird, just learn Pure Data - there's literally nothing that it can't do.
- mrob 9y ago

by tr0ut 9y ago

mping 9y ago

This is not true. It may be true for modern pop, but I can give lots of examples where originality abounds: Classical music, Jazz and its derivatives, prog rock. I never understood why people listen to radio music and don't even know what is out there, it's like seeing the same dull basic painting over and over again.

jdietrich 9y ago
Almost uniquely in art, free jazz retains the power to shock even sophisticated audiences. There is a brutality to the work of artists like Albert Ayler or Milford Graves that transcends the intellectual. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwkHCLI1j1w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwkHCLI1j1w
tr0ut 9y ago
No it is true. I said all music genres share a common ground. We can take all genres of music and boil them down to a structure. What makes Jazz different than Heavy Metal? Or better, what makes Bebop different than Big Band or Fusion? They all share the "Jazz" element that we recognize as being uniquely Jazz. Its the Rhythms, notes, chord progression, modals, timbre and harmonies. You get the idea.

ebbv 9y ago

This is not true. There is nothing rigid about music. You can do whatever you want. Unless you care about being popular. Then what you run up against is what people enjoy.

bitwize 9y ago
You can do whatever you want, but the estate of John Cage owns the copyright on not making music, so if you plan to not make music at all, lawyer up.
tr0ut 9y ago
You can certainly do what ever you want. But there are distinct rigid structures to all forms of music. If I make a close approximation to B.B. King's "3'o'clock Blues". It is most certainly Blues and not a Polka song or Reggae. Even Avant-garde Jazz has a common theme. Music is formulaic.

cturner 9y ago

Western tonality has some rules. Composers can operate outside of that if they want. With computers, a single composer could make up a new set of rules for every piece. You can turn a drum beat into a note by accelerating the wave form, invent your own scales. It is interesting that even electronic artists tend to operate within the constraints of the western tradition. It is probably a struggle to find an audience once you start doing wacky things. Or maybe it will happen, but has not yet.

d13 9y ago
Electronic artists are limited by the rules programmed into their software, and very few people realize how severely limiting those rules are - they make 99% of the decisions for you. The fundamentals are never questioned, but it's only by questioning those fundamentals that true can innovation happen. If you want a mainstream audience, fine, if not, throw your laptop out the window :)
- icebraining 9y ago
  Or write the software yourself...
- jdietrich 9y ago
  >Electronic artists are limited by the rules programmed into their software, and very few people realize how severely limiting those rules are - they make 99% of the decisions for you. That isn't remotely true. Yes, you can choose to quantize to a 4/4 grid, but that isn't mandatory. You can choose to operate in equal temperament, but it's relatively straightforward to work microtonally in most DAWs, particularly Reaper. Hugely popular instruments like Xfer Serum, ZynAddSubFX and UVI Falcon have full support for microtuning. IMHO, it's far easier to make properly weird music in software than with traditional instruments. You have a vastly greater range of timbral choices, you have total control over intonation and you can program complex polyrhythms that would be far beyond the abilities of most professional musicians. If you really want to go balls-out on the weird, just learn Pure Data - there's literally nothing that it can't do.
mrob 9y ago