Nice Numbers

OK Theorists!

Enough numbers, let's hear some music.

Thanks,

Jeff

Dear Jeff,

{you wrote...}
>OK Theorists!
>
>Enough numbers, let's hear some music.

Not sure who you were referring to, but both Graham and Gene have just posted links to pieces of music. I can always step in when the theory should find a more apropo home, but it looked to me like all the discussions of scale steps, etc., had come directly from music post, including the recent piece by Jacky.

That said, we can all use our own judgement as to when the theoretical aspects start to beckon to another forum...

C'mon kids, play nice.

Cheers,
Jon

Hey Jon,

I was just speaking to a generalized 'Theorist' -- the
capital 'T' was meant to suggest the purity of refined
theory unblemished by practice. Meant to conjure up
the image of someone who comes up with theories and
never gets their hands dirty with the degrading filth
of actual music production.

Although the Theorist does not exist in the real world
since no one can manage to live in an ivory tower full
time unless they are on the dole, the Theorist does
exist to a certain extent within each of us as an
aspect of personality to the extent that we are drawn
towards talk over action.

Graham, though a theorist (lower case 't') is also
a producer -- he writes music in the scales he
talks about so the post was not directed at him.

Not sure why Graham posted. Were you just being playful
Graham?

Anyway, my post was merely intended as a 'Go Team!'
cheer emitted in the excitement of all the recent REAL
MUSIC action on the list lately, like you might hear at
a Big Game - "Rock em Sock em Knock em down! Pummel
those b*stard Numbers and get on to Music town!"

- Jeff

----------
>From: "Jonathan M. Szanto" <JSZANTO@...>
>To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [MMM] Nice Numbers
>Date: Thu, Jan 24, 2002, 10:44 AM
>

> Dear Jeff,
>
> {you wrote...}
>>OK Theorists!
>>
>>Enough numbers, let's hear some music.
>
> Not sure who you were referring to, but both Graham and Gene
> have just
> posted links to pieces of music. I can always step in when
the
> theory
> should find a more apropo home, but it looked to me like all
> the
> discussions of scale steps, etc., had come directly from
music
> post,
> including the recent piece by Jacky.
>
> That said, we can all use our own judgement as to when the
> theoretical
> aspects start to beckon to another forum...
>
> C'mon kids, play nice.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

In-Reply-To: <E16TnAR-0002j8-00@...>
X. J. Scott wrote:

> Graham, though a theorist (lower case 't') is also
> a producer -- he writes music in the scales he
> talks about so the post was not directed at him.

Thank you for recognising that.

> Not sure why Graham posted. Were you just being playful
> Graham?

I had posted the previous two messages to this list before your critical
one arrived. I find some of your posts to be unduly aggressive, and I
thought I'd point that out in a playful way. From other comments you've
made, I think maybe you don't intend them to come across that way.

I also like a lot of the music you've posted. So it's a shame you seem to
set yourself up as an opponent to some of the things I do or believe in.

> Anyway, my post was merely intended as a 'Go Team!'
> cheer emitted in the excitement of all the recent REAL
> MUSIC action on the list lately, like you might hear at
> a Big Game - "Rock em Sock em Knock em down! Pummel
> those b*stard Numbers and get on to Music town!"

I'd prefer we could motivate each other, where necessary, without having
to find another group (existent or otherwise) to describe as bastards.
You can be right without somebody else having to be wrong.

Graham