Vocal Editing and such

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kingofpain678
  • Start date Start date
C'mon Greg...you need to calm down some more...there's just too much bitterness in those comments.

Breathe deep......have a brew. :drunk:


:)
 
C'mon Greg...you need to calm down some more...there's just too much bitterness in those comments.

Breathe deep......have a brew. :drunk:


:)

Dude, I literally just woke up from a 3 hour nap. If I were any calmer I'd be in a coma. :D
 
Dude, I literally just woke up from a 3 hour nap. If I were any calmer I'd be in a coma. :D

Aaaahhhh.....I love my naps. I work from 6:30am to about noon. I always come home and take a 2-3 hour nap. Couldn't live without it.
 
Aaaahhhh.....I love my naps. I work from 6:30am to about noon. I always come home and take a 2-3 hour nap. Couldn't live without it.

Fuck yeah. We should take a nap together sometime. :D
 
And lord knows...he's said a LOT of idiotic things!!! :laughings:

How the heck did you manage to find the one "less idiotic" thing??? :D

I had to look really hard, but I got there eventually :D

And no Greg, I haven't flip flopped. I stick to my guns.
 
C'mon Greg...you need to calm down some more...there's just too much bitterness in those comments.

Breathe deep......have a brew. :drunk:


:)

The dude is gettin crazy defensive because he can't wrap his head around theory :laughings::laughings::laughings:
 
I had to look really hard, but I got there eventually :D

And no Greg, I haven't flip flopped. I stick to my guns.
Yeah, okay. Your guns are two-sided. :laughings: :laughings:

The dude is gettin crazy defensive because he can't wrap his head around theory :laughings::laughings::laughings:

Theory is not difficult. It's just unnecessary. That you think it's this magical phenomonon is pretty naive and hilarious. :laughings: :laughings:
 
It depends on what type of music your talking about. A 60 piece orchestra with no music paper and no one who can read or knows theory wouldn't probably sound the way the composer intended. :(

The vast majority of musicians I've known that are school taught (know theory) can't play for shit. There's an expression I've heard that "so and so can play despite the fact that he went to Berklee".

But I really believe that anybody that can play a musical instrument, though they might not realize it, actually knows quite a bit of theory. :)
 
Theory is not difficult. It's just unnecessary. That you think it's this magical phenomonon is pretty naive and hilarious. :laughings: :laughings:

I think you're getting me all wrong here. I'm not talking about canons and cadences n shit. I'm talkin about knowing what I'm doing and not just guessing until it sounds good.

In other words, not having a strict rule book that I've to stick by and never break, just having a game plan. As I already said, I mainly use theory to break it.

Yeah, okay. Your guns are two-sided. :laughings: :laughings:

As long as you get shot, it's so worth it :laughings:
 
Lol @ more and more twists and disclaimers. Keep going and you'll be fully on my side in no time. :D
 
You guys going to break for lunch...or should we get some take-out delivered? :D

Italian...Thai...Chinese...Mickey-D's...???

PIZZA AND BEER!!! :drunk:
 
It seems like the main use of music theory is for those who know some to lord it over those that know less.

My opinion: For most people outside of jazz and classical music, the level of theory that has any value IMO is just simple ear training to know in the "mind's ear" several types of commonly used scales/modes, a few common chord progressions and metric/rhythmic patterns. A musician with a lot of experience will have these in their ear already cause they've played them thousands of times, and learning "theory" is just learning the terms that apply to what's already in their ear. That might or might not be useful to them. Learning the academic stuff should always come after the person already knows it by sound. Switching that order tends to kill the motivation of creative people IME.

Music theory is just the study of how music works. The history of the development of music theory has gone in this endless cycle:
1) musicians come up with musical ideas that they, and others, like
2) those musical ideas are analyzed and terminology created to describe how it works. This is rarely done by the musicians coming up with the creative ideas. For example, listen to a Beethoven piano sonata, then read an essay dissecting it that uses Schenkerian analysis.
 
It seems like the main use of music theory is for those who know some to lord it over those that know less.

My opinion: For most people outside of jazz and classical music, the level of theory that has any value IMO is just simple ear training to know in the "mind's ear" several types of commonly used scales/modes, a few common chord progressions and metric/rhythmic patterns. A musician with a lot of experience will have these in their ear already cause they've played them thousands of times, and learning "theory" is just learning the terms that apply to what's already in their ear. That might or might not be useful to them. Learning the academic stuff should always come after the person already knows it by sound. Switching that order tends to kill the motivation of creative people IME.

Music theory is just the study of how music works. The history of the development of music theory has gone in this endless cycle:
1) musicians come up with musical ideas that they, and others, like
2) those musical ideas are analyzed and terminology created to describe how it works. This is rarely done by the musicians coming up with the creative ideas. For example, listen to a Beethoven piano sonata, then read an essay dissecting it that uses Schenkerian analysis.

Translation - Greg wins, again.

/thread.
 
My opinion: For most people outside of jazz and classical music, the level of theory that has any value IMO is just simple ear training to know in the "mind's ear" several types of commonly used scales/modes, a few common chord progressions and metric/rhythmic patterns. A musician with a lot of experience will have these in their ear already cause they've played them thousands of times, and learning "theory" is just learning the terms that apply to what's already in their ear. That might or might not be useful to them. Learning the academic stuff should always come after the person already knows it by sound. Switching that order tends to kill the motivation of creative people IME.

^^^^^This^^^^^
 
Generally I can see how theory is important, Like I tried to say previously, Its not how I work, I love working out some chords for song in which I intend to be a minor, slow song, and then just by the course of writing, and recording it turns into somthing I love even more.
I suppose I like that romantic image that the music just flows from my fingers/lips. opposed to the process of knowing to play an E to get one sound judging the chord that is being played etc. I kinda like not knowing. Thats not to say I dont respect music theory as a method, and its not to say I don't know it, because I do know a bit of theory.
One of the reasons related to me, I got alot of shit from posh kids who grew up being made to play classical music knowing all the theory in the world. And things people said to me nearly made me quit music, I struggle on learning more and more each day, and that is the method that works for me.

I think that music generally is very competative over how much theory you know. Just like recording, maybe not conciously. but when you post a song on here do you not work your ass off because you want to be seen as a good engineer by your colligues? Its the same with music, patially why im scared to post anything, the fear of being ripped down for doing something I love more than anything.

More on topic. . .
The theory of harmonies is relativly strightforward. the problem I have with it is keeping the note, If im trying to sing a harmony to a lead vocal I find myself straying back to the note of the lead vocal rather than staying on the 3rd/5th etc.
 
Back
Top