Do away with dogmatism

[Ed Fuqua]

Still wonder why all the other brothers who contributed to this thread were not asked to show their recordings, unlike me. And don't go: you started this thread, so...

Because some of them, like PAC and Bruce and Mike Case etc. have already made those things available, generally unbidden. Others haven't really made any substantive contribution that I've found to be egregiously misinformed, while others are pretty obviously at the start of their path.

Now, does studio work really count? Or live recordings only (do you have any)? Any requests ?

I'm not sure what you mean "count"? Where did you go to hear sound files? The stuff at Raney's site was recorded (as is most jazz) with all of us playing the same song at the same time. There was some editing of the piano part on BEFORE I CLOSE MY EYES, otherwise, most of those are second or third takes in their entirety. If you went to the myspace page that stuff was mostly first or second full take, with no editing overdubbing etc. Just us playing.
If you go to the Talk Bass Double Bass Johnson Chronicles website, you can stream some minidisc stuff from performances (COOL BLUES) or sessions (SOME OTHER TIME); there might be some other non-studio stuff in there, it's been awhile since I've been there and I can't remember what's up. There's a large number of guys on the DB side who have contributed stuff, the idea is to be able to put a sound with the people you type to regularly. All the folks that contributed are working towards the same thing, getting deeper into the music, and giving folks, all of whom have different skill sets, ideas, approaches, a chance to hear us play and talk about how we might accomplish that.

So it format doesn't matter. If it's what you sounded like on that day (that it was recorded), then that's what you sounded like. What somebody else sounds like has absolutely no effect on that. One still just sounds like one sounds like...

Just bite the bullet. Continuing to post about how you might but this method is this and that method is that blah, blah, blah. It's just another way to "not practice"....

 

[Michael Case]

Forgive my confusion, but there seems to be a cord coming out of ALL of those guitars, even the bass one. Maybe unplugged doesn't mean what I thought it meant....

Man such dogma!

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

"Unplugged" is a Marketing term patented by MTV in order to sell more units of clapped-out bands who can't come up with any new tunes, but who look fairly presentable and can get fresh money for churning out the same stuff but in a relaxed-looking environment!!

 

[greenboy]

What's more dogmatic than a premise that gets put forward, and then argued for a crapload of pages? ; }

There are plenty of examples of knowledgeable players who are well-versed in western harmonic theory who have expanded on different vectors of what is implicit in its study. Theory is a useful tool for building and analyzing, and it's open-ended: play or compose something that sounds like some boundaries are getting redefined and it's likely that the concepts in that can be "reverse-engineered" and understood within the parameters of "theory".

So theory is not a constraining clamp on a creative mind - it's actually as often an aid to developing one's own ideas to a higher level. It's only constraining to those who choose to use a subset of it for their own explorations (which is totally valid), or for those who haven't truly understood enough to apply it well.

 

[Bruce Lindfield]

What's more dogmatic than a premise that gets put forward, and then argued for a crapload of pages?

Actually if there is true "argument" of a topic - then that is in fact the very opposite of dogmatism.

If we were all truly dogmatic, then no argument or discussion would be possible!

 

[greenboy]

Actually if there is true "argument" of a topic - then that is in fact the very opposite of dogmatism.

Is it?

DOGMATIC:
1 : characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively as if they were facts <a dogmatic critic>
2 : of or relating to dogma

Obviously people are prone to strongly expressing their opinions and countering the strongly held opinions of others. And the opposing holders may in fact both subscribe to dogmas. Many a religious war would seem to bear this out.

If we were all truly dogmatic, then no argument or discussion would be possible!

If individuals are dogmatic it simply means they pursue only their own opinions, or the particular dogma they have subscribed to. This does not mean that everybody has the same dogma provider.

Now that I've said my dogama I think I've been satisfied, and I will retire to listening to some Allen Holdsworth or something ; }

 

[Chris K]

Forgive my confusion, but there seems to be a cord coming out of ALL of those guitars, even the bass one. Maybe unplugged doesn't mean what I thought it meant....

It's a confusing world where nothing seems to be the way it should. Anyway, I don't play double bass so in the groups I gig with it's just me who's plugging.

 

[Chris K]

Because some of them, like PAC and Bruce and Mike Case etc. have already made those things available, generally unbidden. Others haven't really made any substantive contribution that I've found to be egregiously misinformed, while others are pretty obviously at the start of their path.

I'm not sure what you mean "count"? Where did you go to hear sound files? The stuff at Raney's site was recorded (as is most jazz) with all of us playing the same song at the same time. There was some editing of the piano part on BEFORE I CLOSE MY EYES, otherwise, most of those are second or third takes in their entirety. If you went to the myspace page that stuff was mostly first or second full take, with no editing overdubbing etc. Just us playing.
If you go to the Talk Bass Double Bass Johnson Chronicles website, you can stream some minidisc stuff from performances (COOL BLUES) or sessions (SOME OTHER TIME); there might be some other non-studio stuff in there, it's been awhile since I've been there and I can't remember what's up. There's a large number of guys on the DB side who have contributed stuff, the idea is to be able to put a sound with the people you type to regularly. All the folks that contributed are working towards the same thing, getting deeper into the music, and giving folks, all of whom have different skill sets, ideas, approaches, a chance to hear us play and talk about how we might accomplish that.

So it format doesn't matter. If it's what you sounded like on that day (that it was recorded), then that's what you sounded like. What somebody else sounds like has absolutely no effect on that. One still just sounds like one sounds like...

Just bite the bullet. Continuing to post about how you might but this method is this and that method is that blah, blah, blah. It's just another way to "not practice"....

Again: point taken. And thanks for comparing me to a Ferrari Hope it comes true.

I followed your link to the Jon Raney website, that's where.
Also listened to Michael Case's stuff.

As I said: I have work to do.

 

[Chris K]

Is it?

DOGMATIC:
1 : characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively as if they were facts <a dogmatic critic>
2 : of or relating to dogma

So this is where the dog bites its tail. Because music theory isn't fact.

It's theory. May we never forget.

I'm out. /thread as far as I'm concerned.

 

[onlyclave]

So this is where the dog bites its tail. Because music theory isn't fact.

It's theory. May we never forget.

I'm out. /thread as far as I'm concerned.

You sir are an idiot.

Music theory is a fact. It is NOT string theory, the theory of relativity, creationism or evolution. It is a provable, repeatable, quantifiable fact.

This thread is ludicrous.

 

[greenboy]

So this is where the dog bites its tail. Because music theory isn't fact.

Actually it's just as likely that it's called Theory because they didn't know what else to call it ; } - and then again, Einstein's thing was called "theory" too and it's been a tool for greater advancement than "alchemy" ever was ; }

Western Harmonic Theory encapsulates a lot of known relationships a lot better than any blurry fuzzy "whatever" stuff that's been put forward as some kind of replacement, going right down to the names of the notes and chords. And most people even of the self-professed ignorant variety are riding on the structures it represents, and are not too likely to be "creative" without also grokking some of the relationships therein, regardless.

But hey, come up with some FACT stuff that actually gets the job done better and the world might beat a path to your door. Until then, theories based on peer review - and of the expandable variety - beat vague formless proposals to ignore them, every time.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

And thanks for comparing me to a Ferrari

I'm wondering how much of your current dilemma is based on your penchant for the quick skim?
If you'll actually read what I typed, it will quickly become evident that I did not, in actuality, compare you to a Ferrari.

You want to engage in dialogue, you actually have to pay attention to what other people say. And kind of all the time, not just when they say something that comes close to fitting into one of your pigeonholes...

 

[Chris K]

You sir are an idiot.
QUOTE]

Rule #1: Respect your fellow members
All registered users must address fellow members with the utmost respect at all times. If you do not agree with a fellow member, be courteous in your response. Thomas Jefferson said it best: "When I hear another express an opinion which is not mine, I say to myself, he has a right to his opinion, as I to mine".

Because of the limitations of text based communication, the expression of intent can be tricky. One of the most common triggers of rule violations is the misinterpretation of intent behind a post. Use smilies often, and remember, it never hurts to begin a response with "In my opinion"...

If you do not address everyone on the board with respect, be prepared to lose your membership.

 

[onlyclave]

You sir are an idiot.
QUOTE]

Rule #1: Respect your fellow members
All registered users must address fellow members with the utmost respect at all times. If you do not agree with a fellow member, be courteous in your response. Thomas Jefferson said it best: "When I hear another express an opinion which is not mine, I say to myself, he has a right to his opinion, as I to mine".

Because of the limitations of text based communication, the expression of intent can be tricky. One of the most common triggers of rule violations is the misinterpretation of intent behind a post. Use smilies often, and remember, it never hurts to begin a response with "In my opinion"...

If you do not address everyone on the board with respect, be prepared to lose your membership.

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=520150

" New rule in the general instruction forum - Please Read
i've been perusing a lot of threads lately in this subforum, and have been apalled at the level of incomplete and just plain wrong answers being offered by people under the guise of being fact.

if you do not know what you are talking about, do NOT offer an answer to someone's theory question. that does not help anyone - in fact it goes a long way to hurting the discussion.

from here on out, the moderators in this forum are going to be given wide lattitude in correcting/deleting misinformation, and if someone is found to repeatedly post incorrect assumptions about music theory, this will be considered trolling.

discussions are fine. offering "assumptions" or "guesses" as actual "music theory" fact is -NOT FINE-. music theory is a quantifiable, learnable, knowable topic. LEARN IT, KNOW IT, LIVE IT. and THEN post about it. ."

 

[Michael Case]

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=520150

" New rule in the general instruction forum - Please Read
i've been perusing a lot of threads lately in this subforum, and have been apalled at the level of incomplete and just plain wrong answers being offered by people under the guise of being fact.

if you do not know what you are talking about, do NOT offer an answer to someone's theory question. that does not help anyone - in fact it goes a long way to hurting the discussion.

from here on out, the moderators in this forum are going to be given wide lattitude in correcting/deleting misinformation, and if someone is found to repeatedly post incorrect assumptions about music theory, this will be considered trolling.

discussions are fine. offering "assumptions" or "guesses" as actual "music theory" fact is -NOT FINE-. music theory is a quantifiable, learnable, knowable topic. LEARN IT, KNOW IT, LIVE IT. and THEN post about it. ."

The dogma is killing me. I need to be free with the flowers and the trees, where no recording devices or written music exist.

 

[mstott25]

Is it?

DOGMATIC:
1 : characterized by or given to the expression of opinions very strongly or positively as if they were facts <a dogmatic critic>
2 : of or relating to dogma

Wow...how in the world did you miss Bruce's point?

 

[Chris K]

Western Harmonic Theory encapsulates a lot of known relationships a lot better than any blurry fuzzy "whatever" stuff that's been put forward as some kind of replacement, going right down to the names of the notes and chords. And most people even of the self-professed ignorant variety are riding on the structures it represents, and are not too likely to be "creative" without also grokking some of the relationships therein, regardless.

But hey, come up with some FACT stuff that actually gets the job done better and the world might beat a path to your door. Until then, theories based on peer review - and of the expandable variety - beat vague formless proposals to ignore them, every time.

I wouldn't dare to say anything different from what you say here, because you absolutely hit the nail on the head.

Western music theory resulted from centuries of western musical experience. Therefore it is a very important body of knowledge. Therefore I studied it professionally. Therefore I wholeheartedly support Mr. John Turners very necessary rule quoted by onlyclave (who IMHO could do with some manners).

But though music theory is important, to be studied, to be preserved etc. etc. it is with the utmost respect to everyone of you (how low can you go?) that I have to stick to my (most humble) opinion that it's NOT quantifiable, therefore not objectively true, therefore subjective and subject to discussion, therefore not to be imposed on others as the one and only truth.

And for those among you who would wish to catch up on their knowledge of music history and the formation of the western concept of harmony:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmony

 

[greenboy]

Wow...how in the world did you miss Bruce's point?

Maybe you need to explain it to me.

Because mainly what I saw an assumption that if we were all dogmatic that we wouldn't argue. It appears to me that opposing dogmas have driven some of the world's worst human-triggered disasters (of which this thread is but a paltry reflection).

 

[uethanian]

You sir are an idiot.

Music theory is a fact. It is NOT string theory, the theory of relativity, creationism or evolution. It is a provable, repeatable, quantifiable fact.

This thread is ludicrous.

please (i can't believe this thread is still going, so my apologies) think about this.

the existence of the harmonic series = fact.

there are twelve notes in an octave = not fact

whereas the first is generally considered a physical law, having any specific number of tones to the octave (and following a particular system of tuning, notation, and performance among other things) is not. a system of 'music theory' only serves that system for which it was developed. and since every musical system is to some extent arbitrary, it follows that neither a musical system or the theory attached to it is fact.

on a deeper level, there is some 'fact' in music, but only when it pertains to quantitative, numerical representations of rhythm and pitch relationships (which are really both aspects of time).

 

[WRBass]

You sir are an idiot.

Music theory is a fact. It is NOT string theory, the theory of relativity, creationism or evolution. It is a provable, repeatable, quantifiable fact.

This thread is ludicrous.

Music is an art form and a form of communication, where people can express their feelings and emotions. Music theory (what sounds good and what doesn't) is theory, not fact. Your sentence "Music theory is fact" is illogical. A theory can not be a fact. A fact has already been proven. A theory needs to be proven, although you can use a theory like a tool, which is what we are doing in Western Music. We should all learn how to use our tools, but a tool can be altered.
(I think you owe Chris an apology for calling him an idiot. )