All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Yesterday
  2. That's really stretching it, I think. (The opening of Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 is an example of stretching things to the limit!) Birds don't sing in human scales. Musicians may adjust and incorporate the odd couple of characteristic notes, or leave the whole thing "out of tune", as with some nightingale accompaniments. Even the cuckoo's "two notes" are approximated/adjusted in examples that I recall. But if you do have a good source demonstrating a bird singing "in tune" from any known human perspective, that would be very interesting.
  3. I see people busking on the streets for hours on end One guy rapping to backing track all morning, but I would hardly class this as singing
  4. I'm not sure if the case will ever be rested. When you elicit a response, good or bad, you take notes and incorporate them in future situations. Why the response is the way it is may depend on the immediate situation but it could also be something deeper or a natural response rather than a conditioned response. There are plenty of musical phrases and compositions based on Bird calls. Beethoven's fifth is one example. I do not think that birds have studied musical theory but some of them use it well enough. Fingernails scraping a chalkboard makes me cringe, I am not sure if that is a Pavlovian response or not. A bow scraping an out of tune violin gives me the same response. Pavlovian?
  5. Last week
  6. They are comments on Youtube to a musical joke that is meant to draw criticism. Almost like a Pavlovian response. I only saw a few comments that implicated a musical background from the author. If he really wanted to make the "Joke" work, he would have sang the whole song in the other key, not just that one note. On the other subject about what I find cringeworthy about certain genres is not the style or certain elements, It is the overuse of effects that signify the genre. The songs that started the genre I may find highly enjoyable. Then they started using the elements as a formula. Like mixing well known songs with a reggae beat. One of the first I remember was "Red, Red, Wine'" a Neil Diamond song. That particular mix was pretty cool but then you started getting others mixing songs with Reggae beats. Guess what? They used other Neil Diamond songs...Come on. One was enough. Then they took that Neil Diamond song with the Reggae beat and added Rap to it.....Come on. Leave well enough alone. It was not about self expression any more it was about a formula that worked once. To my ears(I know, My own opinion again,) what was unique and special that made the song "Red, red, Wine" work in its original form was lost by the beat and the rapping that did not enhance the meaning of the song. It is either an over use of subject matter...Like cars, trucks and Beer for Country....or a particular tone or inflection, example again with country...The southern draw or twang even from people who are from Canada or England or Ireland etc. Then you had someone who would occasionally use melisma or maybe a bit of a growl here and there to enhance a meaningful phrase, to nothing but melisma where the inherent melody is lost because of the vocal theatrics or the growl is continuous throughout the song.
  7. They say so -- "trust me, I am a musician..." -- "as a qualified sound engineer, trust me..." -- "trust me, I do this for a living"... There doesn't appear to be a "don't trust me" option.
  8. How can a comment section on Youtube suggest they were musicians? There are a lot of genres that I would describe as cringeworthy. I also know that it is only my taste in music. I have not listened to any particular radio station for more than a few minutes in the last 30 years because I find what is being played as cringeworthy. And that covers most genres at this point in time. A new style that is created and sounds good at first becomes overplayed and annoying to me.
  9. Which rule? State the rule or rules, so that we can be clear what you are saying. Sorry, It was on reddit some while ago.
  10. Different? Very probably. Odd? Not necessarily. I certainly doubt I would be describing it as torture. I like traditional sounds from around the world. The first time I hear a new genre, my most usual impression is that it sounds different or has a new quality. I am rarely cringing. Organizing music into genres is fine. I just find extreme reactions (like the ones in the comment section of the video) to be a sign of narrow-mindedness, not musicality. Being able to hear the difference is one thing. Becoming nauseous over it is another.
  11. By stating that pitch is such a crucial factor you are using a rule and you even complain that something is getting in the way of you hearing it. And the link to the thread?
  12. I wrote this before your last post: But, Yes I do see music theory and genres and such as Guidelines. Not rules. Basics are basics. A foundation on which to build. Not a static rule. You must do this if singing or playing in a certain genre. Still, there are elements that put music into certain categories and those elements can be interchanged and "Mixed" beyond certain points they either become there own Genre or they are in a different catagory all together. Because the majority of "audiences" are influenced by their own musical environments. The BASIC difference between Jazz, Gypsy Jazz, Blues, Country and Rock are the extended chords used. These are the BASIC 3 note chords plus other notes in the scale added to the 3 notes so you can have 4 note chords or 5 note chords. A chord is 2 or more notes played at the same time. A Chord progression is a series of chords played in a certain pattern. You can have a basic chord pattern lets say 4 bars of the 1 chord. 4 Bars of the 4 chord 2 bars of the 1 chord and 2 bars of the 5 chord. A "Country" song uses mainly Basic Chords based on 3 notes. In the key of G your progression would be G, C, G, D . These would be for the background rhythms. Jazz would add the Major 7 so you would have Gmaj7, Cmaj7, Gmaj7 D7 . Gypsy jazz uses the 6th as an extended chord. G6, C6, G6 and D7. Rock uses what is known as Power chords and used 2 note chords instead of 3 note chords Chords made of a Root note and the 5th note. it would be noted as G5, C5, G5 and D5. These different alterations give a different feel to the over all music. These patterns are made from the various scales and scale degrees used. If all you ever heard was the basic "Country" chords then the Jazz Gypsy and Rock would sound odd to you. The same for the other styles, If used to Jazz the country gypsy and rock styles sound odd. But they are still using the same basic progression that is part of a common scale and "Guideline" of how to make the music flow....
  13. Yes. Didn't say he wasn't. Just read the comments -- "cringe", "torture", "hilarious", "tone deaf" etc. etc. + a heap of analysis about the keys. That suggests that a lot of "musicians" think it is more than normal "dissonance". Are you saying that this particular dissonance is common in some forms of music? Why then all the extreme reactions?
  14. But, He was still singing in "F Major" until he said F "Sharp". You had 1 dissonant note throughout the whole thing, only when he sang the word "Sharp". And F# is a Minor 2 or "Flat 9" in the key of F Major. It is not ''''Breaking any Rules". A Flat 9 is common in some forms of music.
  15. In the comments section you have a bunch of self-professed musicians boasting about how they are so "musically" aware, that this makes them cringe. And others saying how "hilarious" it is. Right. That reminds me of folk who say they find Shakespeare funny. "A trade, sir, that, I hope, I may use with a safe conscience; which is, indeed, sir, a mender of bad soles." --- wooahahahahaha-ha! A handful of people didn't hear anything particularly amiss. (Why should they? They didn't buy the rule!) A couple of people said that "after a while" it sounded fine! <---- basically what happened with me. Easily by the end, my ears had tuned in with the F#.
  16. But these are not rules. You can speak and produce all those things. Syncopation is even the opposite of a rule.
  17. Basics. Tone, Pitch, harmonic intervals and syncopation. Meaning there was structure that could be followed by individuals.
  18. Sounds like fewer rules/boundaries. From what I have read, ABBA, wrote songs "by ear", neither Benny nor Bjorn being able to write musical notation. They jammed backward and forward on a guitar and "out-of-tune piano (as Bjorn put it)" until something sounded good to them. Benny was the "keyboard wizard", and I get the impression that he didn't stick to rules. When they transcribed his keyboard music for the ABBA musicals, that was a problem they had to overcome.
  19. It helps when you have super tight harmonies, good looking men and women, syncopated rhythms and pleasing melodies that cross genres. Not to mention universal subject matters.
  20. (People can produce their own music these days, so the influence of record companies is not so strong). Even so, it all depends on the cachet of the artist as to how much of his original idea gets through. The listener will also gravitate towards what he likes. He is not totally at the mercy of the whim of marketeers. There are artists of all kinds who don't even care about maximizing the size of their listener base. Some are quite happy to be niche artists. And then you get groups like ABBA who were able to do both. They only published what they liked, and they were successful at the same time. Despite all those fickle measurements like "cool factor" and "aura", what mattered actually stood the test of time, and that was generation-proof music. Yeah... that "uncool" clean image didn't change the music. It only changed the experience for those who were into fandom. The music pretty much remains what it is.
  21. Hearing a difference, interpreting a difference and saying whether the difference is good or bad are three different things. for example, someone into heavy rock could ask, "can you hear a difference", and even if I am not into heavy rock, I could say, "yes" or "no". I may then describe the physical quality of the difference as I perceive it, e.g "it's more gravelly/it's shriller/it's more distorted". That could still be useful information to the rock singer even though kickingtone hasn't a clue what the difference is supposed to signify, or whether it represents an improvement. Or, in some situations, someone may want to be reassured that there is NO significant audible difference in a change of placement -- that they can make the same sound two different ways, each being useful in the dynamics of different situations.
  22. Actually....scratch that whole last post. What you hear on the radio and is recorded by record companies has nothing to do with what you the "artist" or the you the "listener" has in mind. It is what they want you to buy and what they want to promote. You conform to what is required by the studio if an artist and what is available to the public if a listener.
  23. Then why even ask? You could hear a difference and you could feel a difference. The response of other listeners is irrelevant. You have in mind what you want to do and what effect you are looking for and that effect would be different from the effect it has on anyone else. If you are looking to invoke or provoke an effect on others you would be confined to their relative sensibility . Even though singing is an individual expression it is usually meant to elicit or provoke a response in other people. An audience, even if that audience is yourself or like minded people. If you are singing for your own enjoyment, then it does not matter what anyone else thinks about it. But if singing for the enjoyment of others then it is a good thing to have some idea of what their tastes are and how to express those tastes.
  1. Load more activity