Please consider these statements concerning theory:
So this is the start of trying to get my post count up, to get basic privileges, in case I need that. I hit on various topic which are titled in bold.
The Theory of Why "Music and Repertoire/Music Theory" is Sparse
In any technical endeavor, there tends to always be a big mismatch when it comes to people seeking culture and support. For a particular person, usually the person knows too little to be of value to those who know more, or knows too much to want to spend time talking in-depth with those who know a lot less.
And those who know a lot probably get their fill of the technical subject because they're a professional or a serious amateur, who use the subject at hand on a frequent basis. And those who don't know much, but want to learn, will only understand the most superficial of talk, until at such time as they pursue some rigorous, disciplined course of study, which they probably won't, so it's useless for the advanced to be trying to teach novices, which they don't want to do anyway, because, again, they get their fill of technicals as a professional or a serious amateur.
But, there being billions of people on the Earth, and the web being the web, there are possibilities when people do the work of creating a forum such as Talk Classical, and create groups such as Music Theory.
The Progession of Bach, Funk, Plastic Recorders, Italian Nomenclature, and Dizzy
Bach has been on my radar for a long time. The idea for a long time has been to find some way to learn from his music.
As to funk, in Dallas, in a fitness gym, a Dallas radio station was playing old funk. Stuff I'd never heard. Not that I've heard much stuff. That was a long time ago.
Some months ago, I started collecting 1970's era Soul Train videos, but only of a certain kind, the funk kind, because though the Soul Train crowd could always dance, the Soul Train music was not always funky, especially when disco started to hit.
Seeking to substantially upgrade my theoretical understanding of funk music, I read the Wikipedia page. Chord progressions, they're not necessary.
Somewhere in there, wanting relief from DAWs and computers, and wanting sort of a substitute for an electronic music gadget, and wanting it to be cheap, I bought some recorders: soprano, alto, and tenor. And though plastic recorder are cheap, if you buy 4 of them, and other stuff, it can be less than cheap.
Then, looking on YouTube for shred-quality music on the recorder, I found those who shred, classical music style, that being the style, because Vivaldi is classical, at least it sounded that way, the recorder having heavy historical ties into classical music.
Having confidence that a recorder has shred possibilities, I pursued a good book, and on YouTube I found the Italian, Aldo Bova, who has some good books. It was in his books that I was exposed to Italian nomenclature: crotchets, quavers, semiquavers, that kind of thing. "Interesting," I said. "There appear to be things about music I never learned. This makes sense, given that my family moved to a school that had no band, when I was 13."
Having seen shred-quality recorder music, I plugged away, and periodically would surf YouTube also looking for Jazz on the recorder, which led to jazz on the clarinet, which led to the Cuban clarinet player mentioning Dizzy.
Dizzy has compression because the trumpet has compression. The recorder has no compression. Dreaming about shredding no longer satisfied me. I began to dream about shredding with compression. And given that I was never going to shred on the recorder anyway, I pitched all the recorders in the trash and went back to pursuing what I was doing on the DAW, but with Dizzy's shredding in mind.
Well, there are connections that I make between Bach's use of multiple melodic lines, funk with it's bass line that gets riffed on, and Dizzy's style of jazz where there's riffing over the supporting rhythm section.
Harmony and Counterpoint
Trying to go through some music theory books has been on my todo list for a long time.
I collected a lot of books, and then deleted them all except [Music Theory for Computer Musicians and Harmony for Computer Musicians, by Hewitt.
I still haven't worked through those, but from the first post of the list of theory books, on the main Talk Classical group, I got Kennan's Counterpoint, 4th. Having looked at that briefly, possibly it's friendly enough that I can understand it without having to work through a harmony book. But possibly not, and it will take time and work.
My initial delving into trying to make music, years ago, revolved around banging on the piano with 7 fingers. It's too bad that it took me so long to see that I don't need all the clutter, that intervals are enough.
The Big List of Scale Variations
Having acquired a jazz theory book, in doing my usual brief look, for the purpose of coming up with a pipedream course of study, I saw something about the 7th, 7th major, 7th minor, something like that. I do remember precisely that it had a 7 in it.
All that terminology stuff, like "augmented".
Anyway, there's the major scale and minor scale. My scheme below, other than for the modes, shows what relative notes have been added or subtracted. The number in the braces is the number of notes in the scale. I'm working on sequencing these to all the the keys, along with some other stuff that I want to put up on a site like GitHub.
I have some sequencer syntax I'm working on that's meant to be entered with Markdown.
My purpose for Talk Classical is for the purpose of motivation. But talking music technicals by text is a hassle, like trying to talk math by text, rather talking than face to face.
(The Talk Classical site constantly logs me out after short intervals. I have to keep logging back in.)
23 major scale derivations
27 minor scale derivations
- The Theory of Funk is easy. You find a funky bass groove, and you be funky.
- The Theory of the Meaning of Life is easy, it's 42.
- The Theory of Dizzy Jazz is easy, you riff, but the theory of Dizzy's jazz, it's not so easy.
- The Theory of Bach is easy, you like it, but the theory of Bach's music, it's not so easy.
So this is the start of trying to get my post count up, to get basic privileges, in case I need that. I hit on various topic which are titled in bold.
The Theory of Why "Music and Repertoire/Music Theory" is Sparse
In any technical endeavor, there tends to always be a big mismatch when it comes to people seeking culture and support. For a particular person, usually the person knows too little to be of value to those who know more, or knows too much to want to spend time talking in-depth with those who know a lot less.
And those who know a lot probably get their fill of the technical subject because they're a professional or a serious amateur, who use the subject at hand on a frequent basis. And those who don't know much, but want to learn, will only understand the most superficial of talk, until at such time as they pursue some rigorous, disciplined course of study, which they probably won't, so it's useless for the advanced to be trying to teach novices, which they don't want to do anyway, because, again, they get their fill of technicals as a professional or a serious amateur.
But, there being billions of people on the Earth, and the web being the web, there are possibilities when people do the work of creating a forum such as Talk Classical, and create groups such as Music Theory.
The Progession of Bach, Funk, Plastic Recorders, Italian Nomenclature, and Dizzy
Bach has been on my radar for a long time. The idea for a long time has been to find some way to learn from his music.
As to funk, in Dallas, in a fitness gym, a Dallas radio station was playing old funk. Stuff I'd never heard. Not that I've heard much stuff. That was a long time ago.
Some months ago, I started collecting 1970's era Soul Train videos, but only of a certain kind, the funk kind, because though the Soul Train crowd could always dance, the Soul Train music was not always funky, especially when disco started to hit.
Seeking to substantially upgrade my theoretical understanding of funk music, I read the Wikipedia page. Chord progressions, they're not necessary.
Somewhere in there, wanting relief from DAWs and computers, and wanting sort of a substitute for an electronic music gadget, and wanting it to be cheap, I bought some recorders: soprano, alto, and tenor. And though plastic recorder are cheap, if you buy 4 of them, and other stuff, it can be less than cheap.
Then, looking on YouTube for shred-quality music on the recorder, I found those who shred, classical music style, that being the style, because Vivaldi is classical, at least it sounded that way, the recorder having heavy historical ties into classical music.
Having confidence that a recorder has shred possibilities, I pursued a good book, and on YouTube I found the Italian, Aldo Bova, who has some good books. It was in his books that I was exposed to Italian nomenclature: crotchets, quavers, semiquavers, that kind of thing. "Interesting," I said. "There appear to be things about music I never learned. This makes sense, given that my family moved to a school that had no band, when I was 13."
Having seen shred-quality recorder music, I plugged away, and periodically would surf YouTube also looking for Jazz on the recorder, which led to jazz on the clarinet, which led to the Cuban clarinet player mentioning Dizzy.
Dizzy has compression because the trumpet has compression. The recorder has no compression. Dreaming about shredding no longer satisfied me. I began to dream about shredding with compression. And given that I was never going to shred on the recorder anyway, I pitched all the recorders in the trash and went back to pursuing what I was doing on the DAW, but with Dizzy's shredding in mind.
Well, there are connections that I make between Bach's use of multiple melodic lines, funk with it's bass line that gets riffed on, and Dizzy's style of jazz where there's riffing over the supporting rhythm section.
Harmony and Counterpoint
Trying to go through some music theory books has been on my todo list for a long time.
I collected a lot of books, and then deleted them all except [Music Theory for Computer Musicians and Harmony for Computer Musicians, by Hewitt.
I still haven't worked through those, but from the first post of the list of theory books, on the main Talk Classical group, I got Kennan's Counterpoint, 4th. Having looked at that briefly, possibly it's friendly enough that I can understand it without having to work through a harmony book. But possibly not, and it will take time and work.
My initial delving into trying to make music, years ago, revolved around banging on the piano with 7 fingers. It's too bad that it took me so long to see that I don't need all the clutter, that intervals are enough.
The Big List of Scale Variations
Having acquired a jazz theory book, in doing my usual brief look, for the purpose of coming up with a pipedream course of study, I saw something about the 7th, 7th major, 7th minor, something like that. I do remember precisely that it had a 7 in it.
All that terminology stuff, like "augmented".
Anyway, there's the major scale and minor scale. My scheme below, other than for the modes, shows what relative notes have been added or subtracted. The number in the braces is the number of notes in the scale. I'm working on sequencing these to all the the keys, along with some other stuff that I want to put up on a site like GitHub.
I have some sequencer syntax I'm working on that's meant to be entered with Markdown.
My purpose for Talk Classical is for the purpose of motivation. But talking music technicals by text is a hassle, like trying to talk math by text, rather talking than face to face.
(The Talk Classical site constantly logs me out after short intervals. I have to keep logging back in.)
23 major scale derivations
* {7} major Ionian
* {7} Dorian [3b 7b]
* {7} Phrygian [2b 3b 6b 7b]
* {7} Lydian [4#]
* {7} Myxolydian [7b]
* {7} Aeolian [3b 6b 7b]
* {7} Locrian [2b 3b 5b 6b 7b]
* {5} major [-2 -6]
* {5} major [-2 -7]
* {6} major [-5]
* {6} major [-6]
* {6} major [-7]
* {7} major [6b -6]
* {7} major [7b -7]
* {6} major [5b -6 -7]
* {7} major [5b -6]
* {7} major [5b -7]
* {8} major [3b]
* {7} major [3b 5b -6 -7]
* {8} major [3b 5b -6]
* {8} major [3b 5b -7]
* {9} major [2b 5b -6 7b]
* {10} major [2b 5b 7b]
27 minor scale derivations
* {7} minor
* {7} minor harmonic
* {5} pentatonic
* {6} blues
* {6} minor [-7b]
* {7} minor [-6b 6]
* {6} minor [-6b -7b 7]
* {8} minor [5b]
* {8} minor [5b -6b 7]
* {6} minor [5b -6b -7b]
* {7} minor [5b -6b]
* {7} minor [5b -7b]
* {8} minor [5b -6b 6]
* {8} minor [5b -7b 7]
* {7} minor [-2 5b -6b 7]
* {8} minor [-2 3 5b -6b 7]
* {8} minor [3]
* {8} minor [3 -7b 7]
* {9} minor [3 5b]
* {7} minor [3 5b -6b -7b]
* {8} minor [3 5b -6b]
* {8} minor [3 5b -7b]
* {9} minor [3 5b -7b 7]
* {9} minor [3 5b -6b 7]
* {10} minor [3 5b -6b 6 7]
* {9} minor [2b 5b -6b 7]
* {10} minor [2b 5b 7]