I'm a programmer that got into Music. I hit my head... and other people's heads... and tables and walls... until I realized that: 1. Yes, there are "rules" 2

I'm a programmer that got into Music. I hit my head... and other people's heads... and tables and walls... until I realized that: 1. Yes, there are "rules" 2. They are far far far more arbitrary than I realized 3. They are far from universally applicable. Personally, I expected music to be heavily math based, with universal rules. But my current understanding is that while there IS a lot of math, what sounds good / what people in any given culture like, is all arbitrary. You can use math to describe some of it, but not to derive it. As well, unfortunately, when people say "Music Theory", they largely mean a variation on one or both of: 1. Note reading - Western music notation, which I don't consider "Music Theory" but rather notation, but many will disagree 2. Western Music Theory, largely though not entirely put down by 18th century old cranky europeans based on what they happened to like at the time There is FAR less "universalness" in Western Music theory than I thought. So there is this combination of: * Huge englightnment and pattern recognition and increased understanding as I learned more music theory and * tremendous frustration at inconsistency and arbitrariness, until I realized it wasn't my music teacher who hated me, it's that what they are teaching me is arbitrary So personally, I think it's important for programmer to accept "there are no rules (in the sense that we think of "rules", boolean logic and math etc), though there are guidelines and recommendations (which are completely arbitrary and cultural-based)" It turns out "what rhythm / note / combination / frequency is more pleasing" is 99% how you were brought up / what you are used to, rather than some math/physics correlation. Move to another part of the world and throw out your 4/4 and 12-note equal temperament and I-V-vi-IV