Page 120 of 122
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2024 11:36 pm
by noddy
yeh, the comparison can only go so far.
it is interesting tho - the things which survive time and keep getting rediscovered, and the things of their time which just happen and then fade away.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2024 12:08 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
yes, that's a fascinating bit to it.
Brian May, being the extremely smart guy that he is, put a lot of leg work into making Queen an evergreen band.
Lotsa hustling involved, as always. It wasn't just the movie from a few years ago, or the at the time ironic Wayne's World scene. Lots of ground work through accessibility, still going out there playing as Queen, being a good interview. While attempts have been made to turn Freddy Mercury into a gay icon; May's turned him into more of a mascot.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2024 12:25 am
by noddy
problem with globalist market identity that one
Iranian .. good.. diversity!
raging homo with a drug problem... lets keep that more ambigious.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2024 10:31 am
by Typhoon
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2024 5:45 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2024 6:24 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
Someone reminded me that
Pearl Jam- Dark Matter has been released.
Matt Cameron is still a very good drummer.
---------
I've been dipping into
Maps by billy Woods and Kenny Segal but can't really get into it.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2024 11:55 pm
by noddy
the trying to be michael franti trying to be gil scott heron trying to be hip preacher thing is not working for me.
the self serious pretentious preacher thing is done to death.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2024 12:55 am
by noddy
like the phrasing.
the youtubes offered up this,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu5uRiEuPFg
which is him, and mingus and dolphy (also so far unmentioned)
their are only a handful of jazz albums Ive completley hammered until I know them inside out,
out to lunch is one of them - its dissonance done right, with complete control.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRekHkcS2X0
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2024 2:37 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
Orville Peck's voice is Elvis, Johnny Cash, Morrisey, Roy Orbison and Chris Issack rolled into one.
Roses Ae Falling (Live on KEXP)
Dead of Night (Live on KEXP)
Peck is the alter-ego of punk drummer Daniel Pitout.
A big name in the alphabet community for a while now. On one hand, should've figured that one out by the high camp of it all....but we were driving around, listening to the college radio station and this guy came on with that voice and just blew all the rest of the wallpaper indie stuff they had been playing away.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2024 3:00 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
I think it was posted earlier in this thread, and it's been on my list.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2024 9:13 am
by noddy
beene njoying this meme on youtube as it expands
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... +im+afraid
showing my age and lineage
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2024 3:09 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
I thought that in addition to the Tantacrul videos posted sometime last year, someone posted his video about the false assumptions made about musical notation and the problems with alternative systems (often the same chromatic sort of thing suggested again and again for 1000+ years).
I finally all but finished that video-- I skipped his final conclusion because he had already made his point-- and seemed to imagined whole cloth the post on here.
Am going to say that yes, I think he lays out (maybe laboriously) that the system for western music we have has stuck around for good reasons that aren't easily solved otherwise. Sight reading musical notation on staff paper is not an elite snob conspiracy and many of the alternatives are suggested either by snake oil salesman types who don't really care about how music is conveyed or eccentrics (whether cranks or geniuses) who are just being difficult. The third category he doesn't really touch on are the 20th century academics who have both the "publish/perish" and "gatekeeping" anxieties going on so their academic work requires extensively novel systems for any one to actually play his or her material. This last bit is only unfair to the few of 'em who really do require something else, though these would tend towards the eccentrics list.
While going down the checklist of alternative attempts is interesting; it's really two videos in one and he could've cut the hour and change video down to 15 minutes, as the most interesting bit (which he mostly glosses through) is his own expertise at ultimate-guitar (or something like that) as chief tabulator. The man in charge of guitar tabs (we found him!)
I know he's made other videos about it but this was the most concentrated part of the video because it was something he could actually speak towards; the accessibility and positives of tablature is nice but limiting in teaching musicians. Unlike a lot of assumptions that the language of music drives people away from playing, it actually isn't a significant factor according to in house surveys and data/research he's privy to because of his position. An interesting point, to me at least.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:18 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
I clicked on this once and now my youtube algorithm is all brostep.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2024 4:22 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
This is now a decade on but there was the
Svpreme Fiend
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 12:34 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
114, The Complete Songs of Charles Ives: Dora Ohrenstein, Phillip Bush, Mary Ann Hart, Dennis Helmrich, Paul Sperry, Irma Vallecillo, William Sharp, Steven Blier
and of course, the classical nerd's documentary on Ives,
Charles Ives: The Eternal Maverick
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:04 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
Nonc Hilaire wrote: ↑Wed Jan 31, 2024 8:37 pm
I've been looking for examples of rock after 1970 where a piano/keyboardist and guitarist are really working together in sync.
Dream Theater
After listening a good amount and watching one of those teaching videos by Rudness where he goes over how he constructs his parts with dream theater, I don't think he fits into what I have in mind.
Besides sounding like Rick Wakeman or Tony Kaye-- nothing wrong with that but it had me laughing-- it's the prog-problem.
Rudness explanation of how they construct songs sound like what I imagine all prog bands go through: "Someone comes in with an idea and instead of developing and crafting it, we just start adding a million frankenstein limbs to it so that everyone in the band gets to take center stage at some point."
That's not far off when he was explaining how the song he was talking about needed two guitar solos, a keyboard solo, an interlude....at some point the bearded lady comes out and plays a digression on harpsichord while the band lights themselves on fire....
It's musical theater or opera more centered around athleticism as opposed to story; not the type of song writing I had in mind.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:07 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
Rudness, who is Juillard trained (as he kept reminding us peons watching his video), has a wonderfully developed right hand. Not that he is anywhere near a slouch with either but watching him play, a lot of it is 1 hand keyboard man soundscape/aural stuff.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:14 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 11:02 am
by noddy
NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 3:09 am
I thought that in addition to the Tantacrul videos posted sometime last year, someone posted his video about the false assumptions made about musical notation and the problems with alternative systems (often the same chromatic sort of thing suggested again and again for 1000+ years).
I finally all but finished that video-- I skipped his final conclusion because he had already made his point-- and seemed to imagined whole cloth the post on here.
Am going to say that yes, I think he lays out (maybe laboriously) that the system for western music we have has stuck around for good reasons that aren't easily solved otherwise. Sight reading musical notation on staff paper is not an elite snob conspiracy and many of the alternatives are suggested either by snake oil salesman types who don't really care about how music is conveyed or eccentrics (whether cranks or geniuses) who are just being difficult. The third category he doesn't really touch on are the 20th century academics who have both the "publish/perish" and "gatekeeping" anxieties going on so their academic work requires extensively novel systems for any one to actually play his or her material. This last bit is only unfair to the few of 'em who really do require something else, though these would tend towards the eccentrics list.
While going down the checklist of alternative attempts is interesting; it's really two videos in one and he could've cut the hour and change video down to 15 minutes, as the most interesting bit (which he mostly glosses through) is his own expertise at ultimate-guitar (or something like that) as chief tabulator. The man in charge of guitar tabs (we found him!)
I know he's made other videos about it but this was the most concentrated part of the video because it was something he could actually speak towards; the accessibility and positives of tablature is nice but limiting in teaching musicians. Unlike a lot of assumptions that the language of music drives people away from playing, it actually isn't a significant factor according to in house surveys and data/research he's privy to because of his position. An interesting point, to me at least.
yes, his point of it being the densest, yet readable, iteration - was well made.
I enjoyed the history lesson part of that.
.. and ill stick to tabs and piano roll like the peasant i am
funnily enough, I did music lessons at school, I played band, I joined the high school orchestra - so at one stage I could actually sight read well enough and understood all of the rules.
then I got a guitar, and none of the music I wanted to create or copy was to be found in that system.
it only existed in copying things by ear and passing scribbled chord charts and crude tabs around.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:33 pm
by Nonc Hilaire
the bearded lady comes out and plays a digression on harpsichord
Is this a Spengler reference?
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2024 1:02 am
by noddy
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2024 2:51 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
Nonc Hilaire wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:33 pm
the bearded lady comes out and plays a digression on harpsichord
Is this a Spengler reference?
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2024 3:11 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
My problem is orchestral.
Interesting watching Rudness explain how much work goes into matching his keyboard to the timbre&texture of guitars.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2024 6:35 am
by NapLajoieonSteroids
I think he is spot on that tabs don't really familiarize someone to the instrument.
This gets into the weeds of a million different experiences, so when it works for someone, it works and it's not a big deal.
It is a big deal when it becomes a crutch or get people in guitar hero mode: "the guitar is a pattern matchine, and if I imitate these patterns, it's all gonna work out."
Same reason I get kinda put off by all the box system- youtube channel people.
But what that means to people is so different because of x,y,z that it is a sort of shared monologue because of all the caveats that go along with it.
Re: Musicology | Love 'em, Hate 'em
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2024 8:15 am
by noddy
once i have the YMMV disclaimers, and politieness out the way.
all those arguments to me a strawman filled and clouded with personal predjudices - my experience has been the opposite
the folks that want to learn *more* about their instrument and theory are not held back by starting with pentatonic boxes and simple chord shapes, it has zero effect on the ability to do that.
the example of the folks who dont learn more than that, and stay in pattern based "guitar hero mode" is they dont even bother playing at all when forced to do it the "proper way" and they dont count - its only the simple approach that let their level of carefactor get wins.
learning the C magor scale and then slowly learning how to sight read "moonriver" and "saints come marching in" and "greensleeves" has stopped more people from learning their instrument than any other approach I can think of... it nearly put me off music, I spent years learning how to play songs I didnt like listening too, "moving through the approved steps in mastering your instrument"
a few months ago I taught an old friend pentatonics and tab shapes, because he had given up 20 years previoous due to music school tedium
now, he is keen to learn about the 2 and 6 missing from the pentatonic, and how all the chords work, the starting point became a stepping stone of growing his knowledge and the instant wins of being able to play along with classic songs he liked on the first day of learning, was unbeatable.
guitar is a folk instrument - it doesnt need to operate on proper music terms and the tantacruls of this world can only look at the word of mouth, teaching other the "wrong way" systems with a layer of condescension.