Does analyzing miss the point in music?

[ksjazzguitar]

Kevin for someone who is so pedantic, you really should choose your language more carefully. Regarding your emphasised point, I am not wrong. Please tell me how the ODO quote below differs in any marked degree from these two quotes of mine, "Yes, of course forums is common usage..." & "To be honest, very few people use fora now..."

No, you are not wrong (ar at least much less wrong) now. But this is how you started out:

...the correct plural is fora, by the way — it comes from Latin...

Yes, no one is denying that you are a good back-peddler. Yes, you started out with a ridiculously definitive statement and then in subsequent posts tried to add qualifications and stipulations to try and "spin" what you'd said, like a true politician.

We can trace through your posts a gradual softening of you position.

...Yes, of course forums is common usage, brought about by those too lazy, or ill educated, to use the correct term. Similarly stadiums instead of the perfectly good and correct stadia....

You are tying to say that "forums" is OK, but is the product of being "lazy, or ill educated."

You are a master waffler and back-peddler. That's bad dialectic. It's good if you're a lawyer, bad if you're and intellectual. A real intellectual would have admitted the mistake, apologized and thanked us for the correction. I will concede - you are the best waffler and back-peddler I know. But for that exact reason (among others) I don't take you seriously as a scholar.

Your acceptance of defeat was a gradual one. However, you still keep trying to cling to a thread (we'll skip over a few steps in your evolution here)...

The quote from the ODO to which you refer is:
"Spelling help
The plural of forum is usually spelled forums; the plural fora (as in the original Latin) is chiefly used when talking about a public square in an ancient Roman city." (my emphasis)

Yes, we are talking about spelling. Did you not think we were talking about the spelling of the plural? We are talking about spelling, not grammar, not meaning. What would be the point of emphasizing that word, unless you thought it reduced the relevance of the section? It doesn't, it actually puts it right on task.

The fact that "forums" is chiefly the accepted plural is consistent with what we had said but is diametrically opposed to your original statement. True, it is consistent with your subsequent waffling and back-peddling, but so what.

My larger point is that you like to make definitive statements on subjects on which you are not informed (a common disease on the internet.)

Whilst Merrian Websters Collegiate Dictionary quotes both forums and fora as acceptable plural versions of the word, with forums being the more common form.

Wow! What an evolution in your position! Trying to take a more moderate position now doesn't change what you'd said before. Although you still conveniently neglect to mention that even there (I checked) "forums" is still preferred, listed first. If they were of equal acceptance, they would have been separated by a comma. The presence of the "also" for the "fora" indicates that it acceptable but not preferred. (Hmmm, that's what we've said from the beginning.) There is a difference between saying that it is "more common" and "preferred." (Although in linguistics they are roughly the same since to them usage defines the rules - the idea of an uncommon usage being the "correct" one is purely a social construction.)

To me, that is intellectual dishonesty. If I turned in a grad paper like that, it would be thrown into the trash bin and I might be dismissed from the program. Only on the internet or in congress is that acceptable.

But ultimately, who cares what the spelling is in Latin. I don't speak Latin, I speak English. When words come into other languages, their spellings change. There are many English words that come from Latin (sometimes via French) that no longer have their original spelling, so what! Why Latin? Maybe we should spelling things the way the Greeks did? Or maybe we should take everything back to the proto-Indo-European? Actually, my linguist wife says that Norman-French had a greater affect on modern English than Latin, why don't we all speak that? Or at least spell like them?

No, English spells differently than Latin. That's one of the reasons why they are different languages.

This is just too silly.

"Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in."

Peace,
Kevin

[docbop]

*Sigh*

Waiter, the bill, please.

That's why I like the Ignore list feature of the site.

[musicalbodger]

....Similarly stadiums instead of the perfectly good and correct stadia. Anyway, I really don't give a shit, I was only pulling dear Kevin's giant intellectual tail.

You really shouldn't take yourself so seriously, Kevin. It really is sad to watch, but quite fun. Oh and you ought to check your spelling you know, there are numerous mistakes in your post.

ps I've never purported to be a scholar, I'm a successful artist and thanks for the compliments.

[ksjazzguitar]

Once again, nice job avoiding the issues raised and changing the subject. Having a discussion with you is like playing whack-a-mole.

You really shouldn't take yourself so seriously, Kevin.

I only take myself seriously in comparison to others, judging them by what they say.

Oh and you ought to check your spelling you know, there are numerous mistakes in your post.

I'm sure a misspell a word here and there, etc. (But I do think that I'm better than most on this forum, even received a kudos or two, not that it matters much.) But I'm talking about content, and you're talking about form. I'm saying that your boat has a gaping hole and is sinking and you're saying that the wallpaper on my boat needs to be changed. I'm saying that you are making factually incorrect statements and bad logic, and you're complaining about my spelling? You're just trying to avoid the subject with an ad hominem attack.

I see many misspelled words on here, bad grammar, incorrect word usage, etc. And (with the exception of where someone was difficult to read because of confusing sentence structure and sentence fragments and terms that seemed to have no meaning) I have not complained. This is just a forum, it is not a term paper. It is the content that is important.

I've never purported to be a scholar,...

Anyone who makes definitive statements is making an implied statement about their knowledge on the subject. If I say, "The Incas had a writing system," then there is an implication that I know what I'm talking about. Even, "I think the Incas had a writing system," has implications. In order to remove that implication, I would need to add the qualifier, "I really ahve no idea what I'm talking about, and I'm really just kind of making this up, but I think that ..." If you would have added that before all of your uninformed statements, we could have just corrected you and moved on. But you didn't qualify them and you kept defending them (or change the subject.)

Everyone who makes a definitive statement on a subject is purporting to know what they are talking about, IMHO.

This is why you don't hear me speaking on subjects on which I am not informed. If I do, I try to make it clear to the listener what my level of competence (or incompetence) is. I think that that is how I show respect to my audience and fellow debaters. To not do so would be disrespectful. That is how I treat others and I get offended when I am not shown the same courtesy.

If our goal is not to have an intellectual discussion, then what is it? To throw false facts and bad logic back and forth? I realize that we all come to this with different backgrounds, but the goal of dialectic is get at truth, or at least share and increase understanding. It is not to see who can build the best specious argument.

Peace,
Kevin

PS

"Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles *Sigh* Waiter, the bill, please."
That's why I like the Ignore list feature of the site.

I don't blame ya, but I gotta see this through. Maybe it is a character flaw, but I can't help myself. Maybe I should look into the ignore feature. Does it ignore threads or people?

[musicalbodger]

I can keep pulling your tail for as long as you like, Kevin. It's quite fun pricking the pompous and self-important. Bet your Mum was really thrilled at the "kudos or two, you've received".

You really ought to lighten up though, otherwise you'll end up with heart trouble. Stress can really damage your health, you know.

[ksjazzguitar]

Once again, you avoid any real issue raised and have just resorted to name calling and general trolling.

But since you've stopped discussing anything substantive (I'm interested in intelligent debate and discussion, not "I know you are but what am I") I guess I've finally have to look into that "ignore" function.

For me the whole point is the interesting discussions of interesting topics. Just being the foil of your trollage is boring.

Peace,
Kevin

[bako]

Consider the possibility of more musical substance and less name calling, maybe even arguing the question raised by Mike Walker.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Consider the possibility of more musical substance and less name calling, maybe even arguing the question raised by Mike Walker.

He forgot to define his terms. Does music even have a point? Not for me.

[docbop]

I don't blame ya, but I gotta see this through. Maybe it is a character flaw, but I can't help myself. Maybe I should look into the ignore feature. Does it ignore threads or people?

You see a header that they posted, but not the content. you still see everyone else's posts in full in a thread.

[Dad3353]

He forgot to define his terms. Does music even have a point? Not for me.

Good evening, BD...
I don't wish to start a row, but what exactly do you mean by 'terms'? And the 'point' (or 'dot'...) in music extends a note by half its value more. Easy peasy.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Once you explain it, it's all so easy! I should show you my 20 page-long phone bill, next.

[Dad3353]

Quite so; Quondam vos persolvo is , is est totus sic securus.
(Sorry, hijacking again... Back to the scales...)

[ksjazzguitar]

I think this thread is descended into troll-vile, maybe if we want to discuss any real issues, we should pick one and start a new thread.

Peace,
Kevin

[Robertkoa]

Very valid questions indeed.

Especially the proces of music 'growing' on people interests me also, since I have waisted many years disregarding all music that was not 3-chord blues. I was so stuck in the pentatonic minor scale that I just could not solo on something in a major-key. I just didn't feel that sound....

And my girlfriend - who's not a jazzmusician - still thinks I am playing out of key when I'm playing a diminished scale or a half-tone-whole-tone scale ;-). I guess that's what makes jazz sometimes music for insiders only.

Interesting phenomenon: I bought this very cheap toy-xylophone for my 1-year old daughter (she loves it and plays it over and over). It has 8 bars with approximately a major scale. Approximately because it's horribly out of tune! But... after some weeks apparently my "inner ear" got used to it and it didn't sound out of tune to me anymore, just different.....

Jay that IS interesting about the toy xylophone-cool story.

[mike walker]

I just read this thread.

I don't play for an audience. I play because music is a beautiful thing in itself.

A door to let thoughts through.

That it pays the bills and makes people happy is a bonus, but has never been the reason I play music.

Dictionary won't let me put analyse without putting a horrid red line underneath it, so analyze it is. Otherwize i'm bouncing back and forth between English and American-English and I really cannot be arsed with such tittle tattle.

I see no trolls here.

Hot heads maybe. Bait repeatedly taken, with promises of fond farewells after scatter gun epithets, only to return as the burn smoulders (smolders for others).

Some people said it misses the point and some people said no it didn't miss the point and others said what is the point and others said Van Gogh was crazy.

Go figure.

[tele jazz]

i dunno if it misses the point, but sometimes when i learn a tune i have loved for a while it take the magic out of it

[mike walker]

i dunno if it misses the point, but sometimes when i learn a tune i have loved for a while it take the magic out of it

An interesting point worth a little discussion.

I find the exact opposite.
The more i uncover, the deeper i go, the more I start to hear, the more the magic happens.

[tele jazz]

i think it is the thinking. when i know a tune and i hear it i automatically am thinking how it is played, rather than just letting it float over me. i think that is what gets me. but knowing it sometimes can be cool. really getting into it and dynamics, timbre etc.

but being able to play stuff that i heard when i was a kid has taken the magic out of it a bit, you know when you hear something and it's like "what the hell is that guy doing!?" and you are blown away, then you find out it's just an oddly played minor 7th arpeggio, kinda kills the thrill a bit - but maybes that's all sentiment!

[JohnW400]

I'm the same as Tele Jazz on this. It's like when you see a magician perform. Once you figure out how he does and can do it for yourself , it's like some of the magic is worn off.

I'm not the type who listens and anylizes "oh heres Bb7 going to Bma7. What voicing is the piano playing?"

I just take the whole thing in as if I'm a non musician that couldn't play the tune anyway.

[a22]

I get what you guys mean. I don't think I would've come to jazz in the first place had I now grown bored of the sounds I was used to. I just try to switch my brain off when I'm listening and most of the time it works, but the ear gets hungry for something new regardless of having analyzed it more thoroughly or not.

[Jazzaluk]

At some point the analysis has to give way to feel. Once I figure out a tune I stop thinking about theory a just focus on phrasing and rhythmic feel until I finally get a sense that ..."this is the way i like to hear it"... Then I never get bored with the tune.

I figure If I don't enjoy how a tune feels then others probably won't either.

[Jazzpunk]

I read or heard this somewhere. And i really don't understand it.

I sometimes feel, that instructions are given, but these instructions are not followed by the instructors.

I see it with many issues. You don't need this, you don't need that.

How do they know what i need?

What they mean is, 'this doesn't seem to work for me, therefore you should leave it too'.

This is more like 'If i don't understand it, you shouldn't use it'.

I understand this is delicate, but i have my flame suit on.

Excellent points Mike.

Ultimately, I think the responsibility is on the 'student' to vet the 'instructor' and determine for themselves if the information they are getting should be taken seriously or not.

That's really the best one can do when seeking instruction on the intraweb.

[Jazzpunk]

I'm done with this thread.

How many threads have you been involved in that end like this? You should just make that your sig so you don't have to keep retyping it lol.

[mike walker]

i think it is the thinking. when i know a tune and i hear it i automatically am thinking how it is played, rather than just letting it float over me. i think that is what gets me. but knowing it sometimes can be cool. really getting into it and dynamics, timbre etc.

but being able to play stuff that i heard when i was a kid has taken the magic out of it a bit, you know when you hear something and it's like "what the hell is that guy doing!?" and you are blown away, then you find out it's just an oddly played minor 7th arpeggio, kinda kills the thrill a bit - but maybes that's all sentiment!

Right, i see. Kind of a taking the mystique out of it. Yes I get that.
I tend to play standards differently each time I play them. This is true also of my own stuff. Always keeps it fresh. I follow a line of harmony, melody and it takes me to new places....coupled with interaction from other players..... it never ceases to fascinate me.

We have had 3 blue sky days in England. People are pointing to the yeller thing in the sky....... terrified.

[mike walker]

Excellent points Mike.

Ultimately, I think the responsibility is on the 'student' to vet the 'instructor' and determine for themselves if the information they are getting should be taken seriously or not.

That's really the best one can do when seeking instruction on the intraweb.

Yes. I do feel tho that sometimes a student often wants to be in a place they just arn't ready for. The teacher has to get his point across by trying to get the student to experience, in a very simple way, the difference between what he can do, right now, and what he wants to be able to do.