Re: Math and music
From: Bob Pease (robertjp_at_askmeinapost.com)
Date: 10/14/04
- Next message: David Webber: "Re: Math and music"
- Previous message: Bob Pease: "Re: Math and music"
- In reply to: Jon Slaughter: "Re: Math and music"
- Next in thread: David Webber: "Re: Math and music"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 14 Oct 2004 00:58:24 EDT
"Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaughter@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10mrf125rgb2pc8@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "David Dalton" <dalton@nfld.com> wrote in message
> news:sb9rm0hkuur5735dcl9iqsnskjcd7d4vrq@4ax.com...
> > Could you recommend good book(s) on the mathematics of music?
> > Such could be a book on music theory with a lot of mathematics.
> >
> > I am very advanced mathematically and know a good bit about
> > acoustical physics and related mathematics but not much yet
> > about music theory including the frequencies of various notes,
> > the mathematical definition of musical keys and of harmonization
> > and more. But again I am mathematically advanced and
> > also have a good ear I think now, and may try to learn an
> > instrument soon.
> >
> > David
> >
>
>
> This is a quite from http://geodyne.com/schillinger/index.html#top:
>
> "Music has remained in the dark, without geometric form, because we still
> refer to C as 1 instead of zero. Geometry begins with 0, not 1. With C as
0,
> coherent visual form ensues. The twelve notes in our primary selective
> system are used because 12 is the most versatile number; 12 is the
smallest
> number with the most divisors."
>
> Now, as an "advanced" mathematician, does that make sense to you? If it
> does, then your not as advanced as you think.
>
>
> I've been studying music theory for about 5 years now and math for about
10
> and, while music can be setup in a very mathematical way(such as using
> musical set theory, etc...), they all only seem to confuse the subject.
> Just go take a look a several "music theorists" work and see if you like
it.
> Most "mathematical" musicans tend to treat music as a set of objects that
> are related, but they make up there own relations between them, in
general,
> and throw them together and get "music". Just ask one to compose in the
> style of Bach or Beethoven... most likely you will not something that is
> nearly as satisfying the original... the reason is, not all "laws" have
been
> stated and the ones that do exist are not stated properly(IMO).
>
> What I have "discovered" is that music theory is no theory at all(not in
the
> mathematical/physics sense)... but just a set of so called common
guidelines
> that "music theorists" have found in studying composisions by the great
> composers... the problem is, and they note this, that there are tons of
> exceptions... and if there are so many exceptions then how can it be a
> "rule".... people say all the time in music that rules are ment to be
> broken... well, in my book, there not rules then. For example, there is a
> "rule" that says parallel motion by perfect intervals are bad, and if you
> take a class in counterpoint and use those in your examples, you will get
> marked off... doesn't matter how they sound. Yet, Beethoven uses them all
> the time. Its not that they are "bad", but that you have to know how to
use
> them... and ofcourse, they don't teach you that. Why? I don't know, but my
> guess is that its to complex for them to understand as a rule. Music is
> composed of 3 main area's: Melody, Harmony, and Rhythm. But you cannot
> analyze, in general, one without the other two... for example, there are
> many melodies that consist of the same notes but have different rhythms...
> and hence different "functions". But, atleast AFAIK, they do not teach
you
> how these all work together. While, music theory has helped me a great
deal
> in sounding more classical, it hasn't helped much in sound better.
>
> I suggest that you do not venture down this path, as I did, unless you
want
> to take a chance of wasting your time and money. I've been studying, as
I've
> said, music theory for about 5 years and have read some pretty "advanced"
> books such as Theory of harmony by Schoenberg, and many books on
> counterpoint. Yet, a friend of mine who's never studyied music theory can
> imediately improvise much better music than I can. Now, the reason is
that
> I've spent to much time studying the theory and haven't put it into
> pratice... and to do that, you pretty much need to have mastered an
> instrument. Just cause you know what a Neapolitan chord is, if you can't
> play it in context to hear how it sounds, then it does no good. I've found
> that "music" theory to be very easy to understand, but hard to hear. So,
> I'm sure you could easily pick up the theory, so I wouldn't focus on that.
> I mean, "most" musicians "think" that chord construction is somewhat
> advanced "music theory". To me, its very basic... its like knowing how to
> add.
>
> So, I think, if you just dive into music theory you might become
frustrated
> like I have... the reason is, the theory is so easy to understand, but so
> hard to put into pratice unless you are very good at playing an instrument
> such as a piano(well, you pretty much have to use a piano if you want to
do
> the theory). To me, music theory is really just a langauge so that two
> musicans can easily communicate. Its not so much to explain how music
> works. I suppose if your ear was so great, then you wouldn't need any
music
> theory.. your brain would have all the theory already. Ofcourse, I don't
> think anyone has such an ear, and hence some theory helps... helps you
> atleast to know what you are doing so you can try to break away from it
and
> do something else. But first you gotta be able to do something.
>
> Anyways, There are many music theory books, but you might want to pick up
> something to teach you how to play an instrument such as piano(I think you
> need to learn piano first)... and almost all books, atleast ones for
adults,
> have basic music theory in it... Then, by the time you can play some
songs
> and you know your chords, you can dive into a harmony book and start
playing
> around with harmonic concepts such as modulation... which you might have
> already discovered while learning the piano... and just didn't know what
you
> were doing and why it sounded good/bad.
>
Does that come with fries???
Bob Pease
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 8/16/04
- Next message: David Webber: "Re: Math and music"
- Previous message: Bob Pease: "Re: Math and music"
- In reply to: Jon Slaughter: "Re: Math and music"
- Next in thread: David Webber: "Re: Math and music"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
