Ableton Forum

9V wrote:

Good idea

aisling wrote:I think the whole point has been missed. The real question we need to be asking is: Does Raggedy Ann still have cotton tits, or are they polyester now that she is made in China?

also... if she plays the piano, does she let her tits hang out while doing so.... AND is that music or sound she is making?

9V wrote:

I give this movie two thumbs up.

I give this movie two thumbs up.

How does he die in the end?

Still going eh?

One last try to reason with 9v-

The meaning of a word is what people generally agree it to be. You can make up your own definitions if you really want, but it's meaningless. In this case you are wrong simply because everyone says you're wrong. There is no argument against this fact, regardless of whether you respect other peoples opinion or not.

i've just noticed american people here tend to make no difference between midi tracks (music) and audio tracks (sound) and tend to call vst "plugin" because they have american derivative vst (AU and RTAS). But as soon as i wrote that they called me "a racist" (?!) insulting american people (?!), feeling superior because italian (?!!) and invoke the ban.

People are strange when you're a stranger
Faces look ugly when you're alone
Women seem wicked when you're unwanted
Streets are uneven when you're down

9V wrote:i've just noticed american people here tend to make no difference between midi tracks (music) and audio tracks (sound) and tend to call vst "plugin" because they have american derivative vst (AU and RTAS). But as soon as i wrote that they called me "a racist" (?!) insulting american people (?!), feeling superior because italian (?!!) and invoke the ban.

Go read Trevor Wishart. Hell, go read Stockhausen and Eimert from Die Reihe. Until you can update your conceptions of what "music" and "composition" are and can be, there's really no reason to take you seriously regarding this topic.

I'll be waiting for whatever youtube link or Zappa photo/lyric you post since I know you won't actually read any of the sources I've offered in this thread so that you can speak competently about the issue.

music is worldwide still 99,9% made with italian tonal classical rules. The rest is "concept"

9V wrote:music is worldwide still 99,9% made with italian tonal classical rules. The rest is "concept"

And where are you pulling this figure from? Do you have a source?

And the "Italian tonal classical rules??" Sorry, but Palestrina didn't just jump straight to Vivaldi and then tonal music appeared. You have once again revealed yourself to either 1) have a poor command of musical history, or 2) have a skewed view of musical history due to some nationalist tendencies.

You're only going to stress yourself out more by taking him seriously. Troll has been fed to Jabba proportions and loving every minute of it. Congratulations!

Don't respond to the little cunt and he might fuck off.

well, classical greek modal music became tonal in 1500 thanks to italians, and nothing changed since then

9V wrote:well, classical greek modal music became tonal in 1500 thanks to italians, and nothing changed since then

Nothing changed from 1500 until now?

Wow. You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Please find a copy of the Cambridge History of Western Music Theory and don't embarrass yourself any further here until you have actually read it.

stringtapper wrote:

9V wrote:well, classical greek modal music became tonal in 1500 thanks to italians, and nothing changed since then

Nothing changed from 1500 until now?

The only things changed are the styles (which are based on rhythm, not on harmony). The rest is just a matter of tonal rules remixed: jazz included. Regarding "pop" music, every genre out there (rock, blues, folk, electronic, avant-gard, hip hop, latin, r&b... what you want) is based on (simple) typical chord progressions (tonal rules, usually simple scales: see the blues scale).

9V wrote:The only things changed are the styles (which are based on rhythm, not on harmony). The rest is just a matter of tonal rules remixed: jazz included.

Wrong. In fact the period from 1500-1750 represents the period of evolution for one single musical element above all others: harmony. To say that the cadential patterns and harmonic progressions found by 1750 were already complete in 1500 is absolutely inaccurate. You can trace the evolution, and the hints of harmonic usage to come are striking in the works of Palestrina, but to talk as if they were matured to levels of 1750 is simply ignorant of history.

And what's better, this period of harmonic advancements from 1500-1750 really culminates in the compositional and theoretical work of two people who were not Italian; that is J.S. Bach (German) and Jean-Phillipe Rameau (French). Of course the Italians played a significant role in the form of Gaffurius, Palestrina, Monteverdi, Tartini, etc., but they were not the sole "inventors" and 1500 was not the culmination.