Music is sound, and sound is harmonic, and harmony is instantaneous, and sound is bei

I am he as you are he as you are me
And we are all together.
Goo goo ga joob.

In the beginning, was the stack. The syrup came later.

millionrainbows said:

Music is sound, and sound is harmonic, and harmony is instantaneous, and sound is being, and being is always now. Can you dig it, man?
All function came from the vertical. All else is arbitrary, and came after. All scales are modeled after the harmonic series.
Harmony is instantaneous. All horizontal events involve time, and the thinking brain.
Harmony is experienced immediately and instantaneously.

Click to expand...

Well, nobody's going to argue that music is not sound (and that any sound can be perceived as having "musical properties" depending on the context and the ear/mindset combination that receives such signals), but I cannot agree that all sound is harmonic. Is this what you are suggesting? As far as I am concerned, there are sounds with definite pitch (perceived frequency) or indefinite pitch (let us call it inharmonic spectra). I will pass on commenting on the rest of your post.

Is there also "sort of definite" or "almost indefinite" pitch?

Dim7 said:

Is there also "sort of definite" or "almost indefinite" pitch?

Click to expand...

Yes, for example cathedral bells that seem to have multiple pitches instead of one clear "note".

millionrainbows said:

Music is sound, and sound is harmonic, and harmony is instantaneous, and sound is being, and being is always now. Can you dig it, man?

All function came from the vertical. All else is arbitrary, and came after. All scales are modeled after the harmonic series.

Harmony is instantaneous. All horizontal events involve time, and the thinking brain.

Harmony is experienced immediately and instantaneously.

Click to expand...

Isn't there a more appropriate place for threads like this? Perhaps in the Community Forum or something?

I wouldn't smoke from that tree.

I don't know...

In C major, a first inversion C tonic chord has such a vastly different effect and meaning than, say, a Neapolitan sixth chord, even though they're the same first inversion major chord sonority.

It seems that the context of a chord is much more important than its sonority.

(Or for that matter... a root position tonic chord vs dominant chord, even without the seventh, are so different)

SeptimalTritone said:

I don't know...
In C major, a first inversion C tonic chord has such a vastly different effect and meaning than, say, a Neapolitan sixth chord, even though they're the same first inversion major chord sonority.
It seems that the context of a chord is much more important than its sonority.
(Or for that matter... a root position tonic chord vs dominant chord, even without the seventh, are so different)

Click to expand...

I agree to a point, Sept, but there are instances where the sonority is more important than function, for example in the Bach 'cello suite N° 5 (C minor) where the A string is tuned down to G, resulting in much richer chords (because of the overtones).

TalkingHead said:

Well, nobody's going to argue that music is not sound (and that any sound can be perceived as having "musical properties" depending on the context and the ear/mindset combination that receives such signals), but I cannot agree that all sound is harmonic. Is this what you are suggesting? As far as I am concerned, there are sounds with definite pitch (perceived frequency) or indefinite pitch (let us call it inharmonic spectra). I will pass on commenting on the rest of your post.

Click to expand...

I used to play a game, and I still do; I would try to hear the "pitch" of noises in the environment. Some of them had pitches, but with some of them, like vacuum cleaners, which produced a constant roar of noise which contained a lot of harmonics, I realized that I could hear it as almost any pitch I wanted. Later, I realized what was happening. I was "filtering" the sound with my brain, and just tuning in to the pitch I wanted to hear.

As Dim7 was asking, all "noise" is, is sound with a whole bunch of harmonics and no definite pitch; and yes, there are degrees of this.

Stockhausen did a piece called Mikrophonie, where he struck a gong (pretty noisy), and got a flat-head condenser mike, and ran it over the surface, not touchin, but very close. Through the amps, it sounded like a single tone. This is because the mike was picking up whatever harmonic was present in that particular spot.

He invites us to get microphones ourselves, and become "microscopic sound explorers."

EdwardBast said:

Isn't there a more appropriate place for threads like this? Perhaps in the Community Forum or something?

Click to expand...

If you ask me, this rude response is inappropriate. This thread is about music theory; isn't it, man? Stay groovy!

Richannes Wrahms said:

I wouldn't smoke from that tree.

Click to expand...

Gee, that's quite an avatar you've got there! Who is that, Wagner? What a gigantic, towering figure!

SeptimalTritone said:

I don't know...

In C major, a first inversion C tonic chord has such a vastly different effect and meaning than, say, a Neapolitan sixth chord, even though they're the same first inversion major chord sonority.

It seems that the context of a chord is much more important than its sonority.

(Or for that matter... a root position tonic chord vs dominant chord, even without the seventh, are so different)

Click to expand...

That's fine if you are a "flatlander." For many people, the cognitive, horizontal dimension is all-important. Of course, it might take you a bit longer to process all that contextual information, whereras the vertical is instantaneous. Hurry up, and don't block the hallway!

SeptimalTritone said:

I don't know...

In C major, a first inversion C tonic chord has such a vastly different effect and meaning than, say, a Neapolitan sixth chord, even though they're the same first inversion major chord sonority.

It seems that the context of a chord is much more important than its sonority.

(Or for that matter... a root position tonic chord vs dominant chord, even without the seventh, are so different)

Click to expand...

Oh, I almost forgot, I was grooving so hard: doesn't a neopolitan sixth have a different root under it?

SeptimalTritone said:

I don't know...

In C major, a first inversion C tonic chord has such a vastly different effect and meaning than, say, a Neapolitan sixth chord, even though they're the same first inversion major chord sonority.

It seems that the context of a chord is much more important than its sonority.

(Or for that matter... a root position tonic chord vs dominant chord, even without the seventh, are so different)

Click to expand...

Isn't the root of a neopolitan chord a vertical context? Maybe you're not seeing what I'm saying.

TalkingHead said:

I agree to a point, Sept, but there are instances where the sonority is more important than function, for example in the Bach 'cello suite N° 5 (C minor) where the A string is tuned down to G, resulting in much richer chords (because of the overtones).

Click to expand...

In vertical-land, all function is derived from the vertical. This also gives rise to sonority. They are the same thing.

I can't tell; is this thread a serious, over my head discussion or a place to take the wet?

dogen said:

I can't tell; is this thread a serious, over my head discussion or a place to take the wet?

Click to expand...

It's serious, but not "wrinkling up your brow" serious. I'm sure it has that potential, though.

millionrainbows said:

It's serious, but not "wrinkling up your brow" serious. I'm sure it has that potential, though.

Click to expand...

Ok, thanks for the clarification!