Hi guys - Rok has provided over the last day or so a perfect example of what I was talking about with O-10....sigh, indeed. Frogman, this is reminding me of a certain John Cleese video from about a year ago.
O-10, I generally visit this site once a day, usually late in the evening after I get home from work. Sometimes two or three days will go by, but I have been an avid follower of everything on this thread even when not posting. The reason I hadn't responded to all these posts today is that I hadn't seen them until late this evening. All I have to say about this: "Rok, no matter what you say they will never get it." is that I think it is abundantly clear from all of the posts from others on this thread is that it is you and Rok that will not ever get it. Like I said, I will give up on my appeals for you guys to actually study music a little, but I will not stop correcting things that are just flat out wrong.
Though I will add in response to Rok's post that there are plenty of great music history books out there that will answer all of his questions. There is a very popular one by Joseph Kerman called Listen, that comes with a big record set, though it is probably on CDs nowadays. It is a very basic overview of the entire history of music all the way up to jazz and the Beatles, and may have had subsequent updates from when it was my Intro to Music Lit text my freshman year, in the mid 80s. Very readable, with great musical examples.
The only specific I will answer here is that I do not see how one can truly separate the structure of music from the artistic part of it - form is part of the artistry, part of the craft. This is true, by the way, of improvising as well - improvisation must have structure to be understandable. Something that must be PRACTICED. :)
O-10, I generally visit this site once a day, usually late in the evening after I get home from work. Sometimes two or three days will go by, but I have been an avid follower of everything on this thread even when not posting. The reason I hadn't responded to all these posts today is that I hadn't seen them until late this evening. All I have to say about this: "Rok, no matter what you say they will never get it." is that I think it is abundantly clear from all of the posts from others on this thread is that it is you and Rok that will not ever get it. Like I said, I will give up on my appeals for you guys to actually study music a little, but I will not stop correcting things that are just flat out wrong.
Though I will add in response to Rok's post that there are plenty of great music history books out there that will answer all of his questions. There is a very popular one by Joseph Kerman called Listen, that comes with a big record set, though it is probably on CDs nowadays. It is a very basic overview of the entire history of music all the way up to jazz and the Beatles, and may have had subsequent updates from when it was my Intro to Music Lit text my freshman year, in the mid 80s. Very readable, with great musical examples.
The only specific I will answer here is that I do not see how one can truly separate the structure of music from the artistic part of it - form is part of the artistry, part of the craft. This is true, by the way, of improvising as well - improvisation must have structure to be understandable. Something that must be PRACTICED. :)