The Most Complex theory concept you've learned.

[Cailyn]

Originally Posted by ExSaint1379

There are so many Bartok pieces that I couldn't even hear correctly until I understood what he was doing. I mean I thought it was just noise, but for some reason when I know what he's doing, it stops being noise and becomes really beautiful. There are a few composers like that. Still learning the 12 tone system does not make me enjoy Schoenberg at all. I still can't stand it and don't think I ever will be able to.

I have a personal bias against having to learn anything to enjoy a piece of music. I tend to music that speaks directly to me and it doesn't have to be simple to do so. I enjoy some Bartok but the beauty in his music is very obtuse. I have never developed a liking for music in the 12 tone system, it seems too intellectual, not spiritual enough--though there are a few odd pieces I like. I'm not suggesting obtuse music is bad either. There is some fairly wild jazz and fusion I like even it may sound like noise to the average listener. Or more modern classical like Stravinsky, especially The Rites of Spring which some people have a hard time appreciating.

If knowing more will cost me my love of Mozart, then perhaps ignorance is bliss.

[sparqee]

Originally Posted by Cailyn

I have a personal bias against having to learn anything to enjoy a piece of music. I tend to music that speaks directly to me and it doesn't have to be simple to do so. I enjoy some Bartok but the beauty in his music is very obtuse. I have never developed a liking for music in the 12 tone system, it seems too intellectual, not spiritual enough--though there are a few odd pieces I like. I'm not suggesting obtuse music is bad either. There is some fairly wild jazz and fusion I like even it may sound like noise to the average listener. Or more modern classical like Stravinsky, especially The Rites of Spring which some people have a hard time appreciating.

If knowing more will cost me my love of Mozart, then perhaps ignorance is bliss.

I am *totally* in touch with what you're saying here but whether I agree or not seems to shift on a daily basis. These days I especially notice the phenomenon you describe only with recording/arranging/mixing rather than the actual music. That is to say; while listening to rock/pop recordings I often times find myself focusing on the production of the music rather than the music itself. Once I notice this I can actually choose to either continue (it can be fascinating listening to how someone has produced a song) or I can shift my mind state and go back to enjoying the music. Having the ability to choose between right brain and left brain focus is an important skill for an artist to develop.

[ExSaint1379]

Originally Posted by Chazamatazz

The most complex thing to me is that the ear can only discern one thing at a time. Call me pretentious if you will, this is honestly what I said.

Ahh it depends on what you mean by that. If I'm listening to something and the melody is simple and the harmony is one I've heard a billion times before than I could write both down. But if I'm listening to Jazz Fusion ... I don't think I could write anything down due to the ridiculous harmonies (I mean in complexity... I acutally love Jazz Fusion harmony) and the instruments playing faster than Paganini. I guess I'm trying to say sometimes I can listen to everything at once eaisly and others it's hard to discern even one thing.

[Chazamatazz]

I just meant that if you try to listen to a chord in your head, you may get the QUALITY of the chord (I have perfect pitch so I get the quality and the notes and the spelling of the chord but, my mind can only percieve one THING at a time. I believe its how the mind works. It's not exactly relative to the question though and I apologize.

[engelbach]

Art is a sophisticated activity, which one can learn to appreciate on more than one level. That's the goal of studying art, music, literature, and so on.

If one doesn't want to learn, that's their loss. The notion that knowing more about an art — or about anything else, for that matter — can "spoil" one's appreciation for it is nonsense.

I can't begin to understand why someone might think Mozart is "boring." His Requiem, for example, is one of my desert island disks. I suggest that dissatisfaction with his sublime music is not a result of knowing too much, but of not knowing how to listen to it.

For the record, Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra is also on my desert island list.

[ExSaint1379]

Originally Posted by engelbach

If one doesn't want to learn, that's their loss. The notion that knowing more about an art — or about anything else, for that matter — can "spoil" one's appreciation for it is nonsense.


For the record, Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra is also on my desert island list.

Most of the time learning about an art increases appreciation. In most of the cases with Mozart (like his 41st symphony's 4th movement, where he brings back all the themes throughout the symphony in one huge perfect contrapunctual theme) he turns out to be a genius that no other human could truly comprehend. But in some cases, learning about one of his pieces dimishes my interest in it. For example the first movement of his 16th Piano Sonata ends up being boring compared to most of what else he wrote when you analyze the piece. One of the examples of things like this.

[sparqee]

Originally Posted by ExSaint1379

For example the first movement of his 16th Piano Sonata ends up being boring compared to most of what else he wrote when you analyze the piece. One of the examples of things like this.

Is this perhaps an example of how education can lead to expectation? It is expectation that leads to disappointment. I sometimes have difficulty with "hope" slipping into "expectation". It's a kind of laziness I suppose.

[brandondrury]

Anybody who plays a chord that anybody else has played is using music theory.

Well, I guess THIS is the most complex music theory I've ever learned. It's called "G" chord.

I have a personal bias against having to learn anything to enjoy a piece of music.

Me too. I can't think of any time where I've ever looked to music for cognitive stimulation. That's what books are for. Music is about mood and that to me has nothing to do with cerebrally based activities.

If knowing more will cost me my love of Mozart, then perhaps ignorance is bliss.

This is a fight I'm always engaged in more on the audio engineering / producing end. It's the main reason I've not put any energy into music theory.

If one doesn't want to learn, that's their loss. The notion that knowing more about an art — or about anything else, for that matter — can "spoil" one's appreciation for it is nonsense.

Sorta. I don't believe a person can have an intense musical experience (goosebumps) while using the left brain. I find the more I research a topic, the harder it is to stay on the right brain.

According to here:
Funderstanding - Right Brain vs. Left Brain

Left Brain
Logical
Sequential
Rational
Analytical
Objective
Looks at parts

Right Brain
Random
Intuitive
Holistic
Synthesizing
Subjective
Looks at wholes

not knowing how to listen to it

I don't believe you have to learn how to listen to anything. A piece of music is either capable of exciting you at a given moment in time or it isn't. I don't think "knowing" has anything to do with it.

Most of the time learning about an art increases appreciation.

"Appreciation" is something they teach you in school. I couldn't care less about appreciating a song. That's not why I've essentially given my life to this craft. I'm looking for a song that knocks me on my ass. Respecting a person for their accomplishments and falling in love with them are entirely different things.

[engelbach]

You're entitled to your opinions, of course.

But nobody lives in a vacuum, and the arts didn't develop via some mysterious intuitve assimilation. The G chord wouldn't even exist if Western music hadn't been pushed from monophony into polyphony, by musicians who studied all that came before and built upon it.

The left-brain-right-brain division is simply an indicator of where cognitive functions are located. These functions don't work in isolation. Complex human activities utilize both sides of the brain. A person studies how to play a musical instrument and practices in order to acquire the skill, and then forgets the lessons and just plays.

It's the same with "appreciation," a term that means more than your schoolhouse definition. Mood is cognitive stimulation. It all happens in the brain. I think you're confusing learning to appreciate music with thinking about music. Once you learn to "get" what's happening, you don't think about it any more, you just ... well, "get" it, enjoy it, dig it, become transported by it.

Afficionados derive a lot more pleasure out of their areas of interest than any lay person.

But not everyone wants to expand their horizons. Chacun à son goût.

[Chazamatazz]

Why did someone start out with "What is the most complex music theory concept you ever learned"? Why not, What is the most interesting thing about songwriting you ever learned. Can you imagine how much more productive and less devisive the query would be? Who asked that question and where are they now as we battle around the concept, is theory profound or is it garbage? I think it's diminishing returns. Does anyone have the idea that the thread could just be closed? I feel like its the Iraq war. the concept was misleading.