YTSEJAM digest 3848

From: ytsejam@ax.com
Date: Wed May 06 1998 - 13:38:09 EDT

  • Next message: ytsejam@ax.com: "YTSEJAM digest 3849"

                                YTSEJAM Digest 3848

    Today's Topics:

      1) Re: Yes, Vito Bratta, Lisa Marie's identity crisis
     by Lisa Marie <ytsegirl@pacbell.net>
      2) Re: Theory 2
     by KEZCOM <KEZCOM@aol.com>
      3) Iced Earth show this Saturday near Chicago
     by Robert Taylor <rctaylor@students.uiuc.edu>
      4) Heavy prog metal
     by Robert Taylor <rctaylor@students.uiuc.edu>
      5) Re: De Plane!
     by KEZCOM <KEZCOM@aol.com>
      6) Apology
     by someone@enteract.com
      7) Re: Lie Single
     by KEZCOM <KEZCOM@aol.com>
      8) Mike Portnoy on LTE and DT
     by "Heavy Metal at The Mining Company" <heavymetal.guide@miningco.com>
      9) Re: YTSEJAM digest 3847
     by ujonegr@psf220.lexis-nexis.com (Greg Jones)
     10) Empty Tremors
     by "Juan Fco. Quintero" <jfquintero@sysop.com.mx>
     11) Hope
     by someone@enteract.com

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 08:55:32 -0700
    From: Lisa Marie <ytsegirl@pacbell.net>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Re: Yes, Vito Bratta, Lisa Marie's identity crisis
    Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980506085347.0076a6b8@postoffice.pacbell.net>

    At 06:24 AM 5/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
    >> From: Jon Parmet <ytsegirl@pacbell.net>
    >
    >Okay, I'm officially confused now. (No, Lisa Marie, we're not gonna let
    >you forget this). :)

    I wouldn't expect any less from you guys... I love you all, really. :oP

    Okay, time to fess up... here's the real story:

    Jon Parmet does not exist. He's someone I made up so I could post long
    rambling observations, and not be slammed for simply being a girl.

    For your reference: all of the intelligent, thought provoking posts
    by "Mr. Jon Parmet" were actually made by me... all of the idiotic,
    meaningless, "what the hell is he smoking" kind of posts by Jon were
    actually made by Carol Dellinger.

    Obviously most of them were made by Carol.

    ;o)

    Lisa Marie (ducking and running)
    ytsegirl@pacbell.net
    http://home.pacbell.net/ytsegirl
    _____________________________________
    THOUGHTS - Spock's Beard Mailing List
    http://www.dreamt.org/spocksbeard
    _____________________________________

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:06:46 EDT
    From: KEZCOM <KEZCOM@aol.com>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Re: Theory 2
    Message-ID: <48a5485b.35508a97@aol.com>

    In a message dated 98-05-05 14:38:57 EDT, you write:

    << > Musicians don't have to be university trained either, but they do
    > need to know their shit, you mention Vai, Petrucci, and Portnoy, as
    > musicians who never graduated, that's true, but I'm sure they still
    > know and respect the idea of music theory.
     
      What about those who don't know their shit, but are respected by
     everyone as master musicians? I bet you YOU even admire some
     musicians who don't know JACK SHIT. Wouldn't THAT make you a
     hypocrite! Well, we'll just forget to pursue that thread, since I
     really have no gripe with you, and no reason to attack you on a
     personal level.
     
    >You say that music came before rules,
    > well, that may be true, if you're talking about ancient tribal
    > music, but, Western music as it has become is based around certain
    > tonal principles that should never be forgotten,
     
      Who dictates "should" and "shouldn't" within the confines of art?
     You impose laughable limitations upon music, which, had they been
     observed and adhered to, would have prevented music from EVER reaching
     beyond the church modes and tribal music of individual ethnicities.
     There would be no odd time signatures. There would never have been
     orchestras. There would be no *gasp* guitar! Shred wouldn't be
     dead... it'd be unborn! Oh the horror!
      One of my favorite counter examples to your proposed rule of music
     above is Arnold Schoenberg, the early 20th century composer. He
     developed an alternate system of tonality called Dodecaphony or 12
     tone serialism. Within this system, the composer creates a
     hypothetical rhythmic scheme, and then takes all twelve western tones
     and arranges them into a tone row, (which, by nature is almost always
     atonal) without repeating any one note until every other note has been
     played. He wrote orchestral music in this style, and inspired
     enumerous composers to venture into realms of atonality. Two
     favorites of this list who now implement this massive and disturbingly
     cool concept are Michael Romeo and Ron Thal (who introduced me to the
     concept of Dodecaphony when I asked "how did you come up with that
     sick solo line!?").
     
    > and someone who wants to
    > learn about music needs to learn these principles before thinking
    > they are any kind of "musician"
     
      I've already offered my reasons why I believe this statement is
     dangerously false You would exterminate half of all the prog
     rockers, shredders, jazz musicians, classical composers, etc whom
     you've ever heard.
     
    > Sorry for my ramblings, but I get really peeved at the idea that
    > music should be just some thrown together mess,
     
      What about the absence of theory knowledge implies that the product
     of such a musician's labor would be a "mess"?
     
    > that's why I'm into more
    > progressive metal and jazz, because most of them know what they're
    > doing,
     
      That's why you're an elitist, because you seem to put the music you
     favor on some kind of higher level than other forms of music. Music
     as art, is expression. If something is best expressed with a
     distorted scream over a simple rhythm in 4/4, what makes that any less
     artistic or musical than something expressed best with a flurry of
     16th note triplets over a complex progression with several key
     changes? I'd contend that each are equally musically viable, and each
     is equally artistic.
      Further, art is expression for the artist, to be sure, but what is it
     to the viewer, listener, experiencer, etc? It's Entertainment. It
     may be deep and profound, but at some level, it is entertainment.
     Whether you rap well, or shred well, or compose well, you're an
     entertainer.
     
    > if you want no rules, or think that "anything goes," then go pick up
    > the latest #1 CD or some other shit that some popular band comes out
    > with.
     
      At what point does popular become a criterion for judging the
     relevance of a musical form? If DT sold a million copies of FII,
     would they be less musical? Foo Fighters are selling well. Are they
     amusical? The ABSOLUTELY have a great grasp of melody and harmony,
     and I certainly detect rhythm. There are times at which I would
     definitely listen to Foo Fighters over Metropolis or Giant Steps...
     and look at me... I'm a guitarist of almost 10 years, studying jazz
     theory and aspiring to become the best artist and entertainer I can
     be.
     
    > There's some simplicity for you, where the guys think they can
    > pluck anything that "feels good"
     
      And I conclude on this: Never pluck anything that doesn't feel good.
     :)
     
     
     Go Home and Practice!
     
     Chris Ptacek
     someone@prognosis.com
     http://www.prognosis.com/madsman >>

    Sorry to repost this whole thing, but I had to so that I could say the
    following:

    Chris, you bore me.

    ;~)

    Speak up, I can't hear you.
    Kez

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:09:01 -0500 (CDT)
    From: Robert Taylor <rctaylor@students.uiuc.edu>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Iced Earth show this Saturday near Chicago
    Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980506110417.2947A-100000@ux9.cso.uiuc.edu>

    FOR ANY ICED EARTH FANS IN THE CHICAGO AREA:

    It turns out Iced Earth is playing a last minute show this Saturday at JJ
    Kelly's in Lansing, IL. Lansing is south of Chicago. I'm not sure
    where JJ Kelly's is, though. Also, it's a 21-and-over thing, so that
    excludes some people too. I won't be able to go because I am not 21 yet
    (still one more year to go), but I figured there has to be a few people
    here who are interested. So go show your support!!!

    Robert Taylor
    rctaylor@uiuc.edu
    http://www.students.uiuc.edu/~rctaylor

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:19:05 -0500 (CDT)
    From: Robert Taylor <rctaylor@students.uiuc.edu>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Heavy prog metal
    Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980506111046.2947B-100000@ux9.cso.uiuc.edu>

    To the guy looking for some heavy prog metal a few days ago (I deleted the
    original post):

            One band that I just found out about that fits the bill is
    Magnitude 9. The remind me of a great blend of Symphony X, Dream Theater,
    and Fates Warning without sounding like a clone of any of them. They have
    plenty of crunch in there (I'd probably put them at the heaviness level of
    Symphony X). There web site is http://members.aol.com/magtude9/ (if I
    remember correctly). So anyone interested in this new band, check out the
    site. The vocalist is Corey Brown from Psycho Drama and the bassist is
    Kevin Chown from Artension. Both bands are still together, though. This
    is a project to keep all the band members busy in their off time.

    Robert Taylor
    rctaylor@uiuc.edu
    http://www.students.uiuc.edu/~rctaylor

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:20:13 EDT
    From: KEZCOM <KEZCOM@aol.com>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Re: De Plane!
    Message-ID: <68216bdf.35508dbe@aol.com>

    In a message dated 98-05-05 19:29:47 EDT, someone wrote:

    << Wow! Is it the whole song, or did you wimp out and just get the
     opening riff? >>

    I was going to ask if it was digest or ack mode.

    <<Seriously though, it should be cakewalk. Just get there early or
    stay late. You're gonna bump into em.>>

    This is the truth. I did it. All the rumours about them being the nicest
    guys in the world are true.

    Chris, thanks again for the advice. Worked like a charm.

    I still can't hear.
    Kez

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:59:46 +0000
    From: someone@enteract.com
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Apology
    Message-ID: <199805061655.LAA27283@wheat.farm.niu.edu>

    On a wholely different note, I apologize to Adam Cook for going off
    on you in my last post. I could have said what I needed to say
    without stooping to that level, and I realize that you may not have
    been attempting to insult me, and I may have been wrong in my
    interpretation. In any case, there's no need for me to attack you,
    since we've always been cool in the past, and I do respect you.

    Go Home and Practice!

    Chris Ptacek
    someone@prognosis.com
    http://www.prognosis.com/madsman

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:56:07 EDT
    From: KEZCOM <KEZCOM@aol.com>
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Re: Lie Single
    Message-ID: <71a58ea.35509628@aol.com>

    In a message dated 98-05-06 04:51:38 EDT, you write:

    << I tried to order the Lie single from Vinyl Tap but they said they had
     sold out
     but would put me on the waiting list for it. I'm not holding my breath. >>

    I got the exact same response, but I AM holding my breath, and boy am I
    lightheaded.

    Did someone on the'Jam snag this up, and isn't telling? C'mon, spill the
    beans.

    If anyone owns the Lie single, and would like to part with it, please e-mail
    me.

    Ears still ringing,
    Kez

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 13:14:00 -0400
    From: "Heavy Metal at The Mining Company" <heavymetal.guide@miningco.com>
    To: <ytsejam@ax.com>
    Subject: Mike Portnoy on LTE and DT
    Message-ID: <024d01bd7912$5d695bc0$afc229cf@default>

    Hi All-

    I will be doing an interview with Mike next Monday mainly to discuss Liquid
    Tension Experiment, but also current DT happenings. If anyone has questions
    to suggest, please feel free to do so by e-mail. I'll do my best to work
    them in.

    Matt
    Heavy Metal at The Mining Co.
    http://heavymetal.miningco.com
    heavymetal.guide@miningco.com

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 13:03:18 -0400
    From: ujonegr@psf220.lexis-nexis.com (Greg Jones)
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Re: YTSEJAM digest 3847
    Message-ID: <199805061703.NAA18980@psf220.pclprod.meaddata.com>

    Sorry but when you hear David Gilmore or any musician play music,
    whether the musician has a technical knowledge or not, you are hearing
    music theory.

    Gilmore's music complies with the rules of music theory. That's why you
    like it. I think what you are really talking about is the difference
    between a guitarist is technical vs. one that is into "feel".

    Many musicians see the "technical" vs. "feel" argument to be an either
    or argument.

    I contend that a musician can be both.

    Why can't a musician know music theory and play with feel? What would
    prevent him/her?

    Read my article on this for a deeper insight.
            http://www.geocities.com/sunsetstrip/palladium/6197/intro.htm

    Music theory will enhance anyone's playing no matter what the genre or
    goal of the musician.

    Greg

    5 days from seeing DT in Cincinatti!
            
            ------------------------------
            
            Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 10:13:23 -0400 (EDT)
            To: Multiple recipients of list <ytsejam@ax.com>
            Subject: Theory Theory..yadda...
            Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.94.980506100541.7681B-100000@thunder>
            
            
            My personal oppinion is that music theory IS interesting.. but MAY get in
            the way of true art... It may polute the true emotion running out of the
            musicians/artists head. Many of my favourite artists were those who knew
            no musical theory, but had feelings and emotions to convey, and did that.
            Yes, knowing HOW to play an instrument is a DEFINITE bonus since it will
            make life easier on the artist. One of my favourite examples is
            listening to David Gilmour guitar solos.. I dont hear theory.. i FEEL his
            emotions directly communicating through his guitar. Nothing technical,
            nothing intricate. There is something magical about that.
            
            Also, if everyone stck to theory.. the realm of music would stagnate. It
            is those with the new sounds that survive and expand musical boundaries.
            And besides.. all art should exist. If someone wants to communicate -
            there is nothing wrong with it. If no one listens.. then i guess.. welll.
            no one listens :). I think the only thing in the music industry which is
            bullshit.. which deserves to be bashed - which is evil and WRONG and
            SUCKS, is the INDUSTRY itself! All the bastard critics shoving their
            ideas down our throats, all the music stations and record lables who force
            feed us what they feel should be the popular music.. they are the ones who
            SUCK.. not the musicians themselves.
            
            Though.. I really dont enhjoy most of today's music... I bless the jam for
            introducing me to loads fo music that I do enjoy :)
            
            
            -Ponte
            
            DT in 33.5 hours!!!!!!!!!
            
            
            YIPPY!!!!

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 12:12:09 -0600
    From: "Juan Fco. Quintero" <jfquintero@sysop.com.mx>
    To: "ytsejam@ax.com" <ytsejam@ax.com>
    Subject: Empty Tremors
    Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980506121207.0069fa28@sysop.com.mx>

    Hi!

    Yesterday I got my Empty Tremors CD from The Laser's Edge. After listening
    to it very carefully I wouldn't say it is a clone of DT's I&W. There are
    some elements of DT but not in all the music. Nevertheless, it is a good
    CD. Thanks to Arash Ashouriha for recommending this CD

    ------------------------------

    Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:25:05 +0000
    From: someone@enteract.com
    To: ytsejam@ax.com
    Subject: Hope
    Message-ID: <199805061720.MAA27973@wheat.farm.niu.edu>

    > From: Kevin Carmouche <khc@bellsouth.net>
    > Well, after the many attacks on ME, you present yourself as pretty
    > much a hypocrite.

            The only thing I called you is "elitist" on the grounds of the
    statements you made. That's not an attack. That's a description of a
    problem I have with your reasoning.

    > Let me say this, I don't need you to lecture me on jazz, I've grown
    > up my whole life listening to jazz, I know, I'm sure, quite a bit
    > more about that subject than you do.

            I'm sure you're not impressing anyone. Seriously now. I'm not
    trying to tell you anything about jazz. I'm establishing something I
    have been taught by people who have spent more time, and likely
    established much higher degrees (in the scholarly sense) than you have
    in the field of jazz. If you have your doctorate and want to disagree
    with my professors on the grounds that you grew up on jazz, then go
    for it. If you think I care how long you've been on this planet or
    any other, you're wrong.

    > You don't REINVENT the song, you take the song, you
    > go through the melody, then you improvise around that melody

            To improvise a song, in bebop jazz, you reinvent the song every time
    you play it. This is why the same standard (such as All the Things
    you Are, or Stella) sounds completely different when heard performed
    by different musicians. I'm not saying that it can't sound similar,
    or can't sound the same or whatever. I'm not saying that improv is
    absolutely necessary. I am saying that in the absolute majority of
    performances, a standard will sound different each time it is played,
    which goes against your idea of musicians "wanting to play other
    people's music" since they're making it their own.

    > Yeah, I guess having standards is elitist.

            Yeah, I guess I said that. (not)

    > There is a difference between entertainment and music.

            Agreed. But at some level ALL music and ALL art is entertainment.
    Entertainment is like a blanket term to encompass many seperate
    things.

    > music, to paint, to write, or to speak. There is a serious problem
    > with today's society not being able to just say what is good and
    > what sucks.

            This is interesting. I don't think I've ever seen evidence of this
    problem. In fact, I don't watch MTV, but I have certainly caught a
    glimpse or two of a show called 12 angry viewers, in which this is
    ALL they do. The funny thing is, I think THIS is a problem. I think
    it's a problem for someone to go off as though they are more
    justified for liking their music than someone else is for liking his
    or her music. These standards do not, should not, and must not hold
    true for all people, other wise there would be no variety or growth
    in music.

    > And when you do, you're viewed as a close-minded elitist.

            You're viewed as an elitist when you place your standards above
    those of others. You may counter by saying that "I never said that
    my standards are above anyone else's!" but in fact, when you put down
    rap as a whole unit, and put down Prodigy even though they satisfy
    ALL of the criterion you issued as the definition of "music" you are
    doing just that.

    > personally think that a close minded person is a person who refuses
    > to take the effort out to look for quality. The "Anything is Art"
    > mentality is what continues to tear down our culture.

            In what sense? And wouldn't someone who puts forth an effort to
    look for quality, have to put in time to look into things that he
    might normally pass up, such as ... maybe... the whole genre of Rap?
    You're not putting any effort into that... you're just marking all of
    rap as "not music" and moving along. Now by your own definition,
    you're not only elitist, but also closed minded. Keep in mind that I
    am not attacking you... I'm just following through on the logical
    conclusions that your arguments pose. If you get hurt, it's your
    fault for tossing thumbtacks out in front of your path. I have not
    thrown a single insult at you.

    > Where is the melody in Prodigy and Coolio??? Can you take their
    > music and play it on a saxophone for instance???

            Yes. You can. I can do it on guitar. Do you need a special
    demonstration, or are you willing to open your ears and just listen to
    the music, without disqualifying it beforehand?

    > Where is the harmonic complexity of it??

            I didn't see anything in your definition about things having to be
    harmonically complex. The Beatles lack harmonic complexity. Are
    they music?

    > (and I never said that I think it's the final word, you never even
    > try to give any of your own definitions, you only attack mine)

            I accepted your definition for the sake of argument. If I merely
    offered an opposing definition, it would all boil down to "I'm right,
    you're wrong, because your definition sucks." I'm using your
    definition because that should be all anyone needs to show you the
    faults in your argument.

    > What is Coolio, and most rapper's claim to
    > fame??? Taking other people's hits, ripping off their background,
    > and rapping over it. You're saying that that's being a musician???

            Yup. And even that is only a tiny minority of the rap music I've
    heard, which is limited in scope as it is.

    > I agree about Style, it can't be argued, and if you read the rest of
    > my message, you would have realized that.

            Come now. I not only read your entire message, I pretty much QUOTED
    the whole damn thing.

    > When you play a melodic or improvised line, you need to have it
    > match the chords in the background, which is all theory.

            You need? Okay... you "need" to have it match in exactly the way
    you WANT it to match. If you're taking a sight reading exam, or
    you're in any other situation where you are playing someone else's
    music note for note, then yes, there is something at stake having to
    do with playing the notes in a certain order. But in creating music,
    you have no "need" do do anything in any way.
            Furthermore, it's not all theory. It can be all "ear." It can be
    all "mood." Think of music, just for a second, as the Vic Theater in
    Chicago. You can get there by means of 3 different expressways, or
    any of several hundred side street routes. There are multiple means
    to the same ends. Don't discount that! (And yes, you ARE
    discounting that, when you say "it's all theory.")

    > Give me some specific examples...you can't exactly do that can
    > you???

            Sure I can. Miles Davis and Coltrane, among others did not approach
    theory in the sense that you're bringing it up. They developed their
    theory off of practice. They sat down and played for hours on end,
    playing everything that they could over a single chord, or tone. They
    didn't then approach music as "this scale works over this chord
    because it has a natural 3 and a minor 7." They expounded on common
    progressions (VI II V I, etc) and found which things work over which
    by ear, and learned to make what they hear in their heads match what
    they hear with their ears.
            The example of someone not being able to play an Eb Phrygian scale
    came directly from Professor Fareed Haque, whom I will just blindly
    accept as more informed than you, by nature of his position at NIU.

    > They all knew Theory. They knew their instruments, knew chordal
    > structures, so you can take what you said there and shove it till
    > you give me some more concrete names or something.

            They didn't apply theory. They applied what they learned by ear, in
    most cases, just like I may apply a harmonic slide into a guitar solo,
    even though the majority of the harmonics statistically may fall
    outside of the key I play in, because I learned by ear that it still
    sounds good to me.

    > I don't put my opinion above all others, just as I don't put mine as
    > a "Better" opinion as yours, although you seem to think yourself as
    > being better than me because you're so "open-minded."

            No. First off, IF you don't put your opinion above others or call
    it "better" than others, then you have misrepresented yourself in the
    last post or two by EXACTLY putting your opinion above others. Second,
    I do not think of myself as better than ANY human being for ANY
    reason, but I do think I have reason and right to attack a poor
    argument, so as to eliminate problems. If we're to accept what
    you're saying at all, we have to agree that rap is not music, that
    jazz is all theory, that prodigy is entertainment, not music, that
    you can't write music without theory knowledge and any number of
    other incommensurables.
            Art will ALWAYS be and always has been different things to different
    people. That has no negative societal implications as you insist.
    The negativity is only present when one person insists that his
    opinion is not just his opinion, but is the "right standard" by which
    to judge art.

    > As I said before, I don't expect ANYONE to
    > agree with me, since most people have the same opinion as yours,
    > that anything is musical art, and should be recoginzed as that,
    > instead of having standards and trying to bring up the better
    > aspects of music. I'd rather be elitist than be like you.

            That is a cheap shot. And it's glaringly non sequitur. You won't
    find a member of this list who does not have standards to what they
    like. It does not follow that because one does not insist that his
    opinion of what is "good music' must hold true for everyone, that he
    doesn't have standards. And "better aspects of music" is yet ANOTHER
    portion of your problem. To be "better" there must be an objective
    standard to music. For such a standard to be dictated by YOUR
    opinions and not fall in line with everyone else's understandings
    further establishes you as an elitist. Just think about it.

    Go Home and Practice!

    Chris Ptacek
    someone@prognosis.com
    http://www.prognosis.com/madsman

    ------------------------------

    End of YTSEJAM Digest 3848
    **************************



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 18:08:58 EST