Re: [microsound] |-| Re: // techniques ]]

[Michal Seta <mis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

jonah dempcy wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sjb" <sjb@xxxxxx>
>
> > learn music theory.
>
> heh, traditional music theory? i question how useful this is for
> experimental/electro styled music. perhaps it would be a detriment?

> what's that, a plagal cadence? a deft resolution to the relative minor? how
> passe. ;)

If you figure out what a cadence really is, if you analyze a number of scores
to see how different composers approach and use such concepts as cadences,
counterpoint etc you might change your opinion.  Consider tonal, modal, atonal
music and various mixes of those you will see much clearer the usefullness of
"traditional" music theory.  Throw into it the study of form and structure.

I freaked out when I took a closer look at the score of Threnody to the
Victims of Hiroshima by K. Penderecki and discovered a 16 voice cannon with a
retrograde made up of various "sound effects" produced by non-standard (at the
time) strings playing techniques.

And if you don't care about rules governing "traditional" music you need to
know them all before you start breaking them through experimentation.  That,
providing that experimentation for you means discovering NEW ways of doing
things.  It is self evident that in order to discover new ways you need to be
aware of all the old and present ways.


>
>
> > listen to chic corea, stockhausen, bella bartok, lizt.
>
> or break some home appliances and just listen to that.
>

That could be charming.  I wish they'd start teaching those techniques at the
university.  I would not have dropped out!

MiS