A discussion On What Constitutes Abuse And What Should Be Done About It
-
Calexico isn't Rock, in the same way as rock and roll isn't. The first rock music is by the Kinks, You Really Got Me, and All Day and All Night. The Who are very close on their heels with Cant Explain and My Generation. In fact so far ahead were they that they were almost the first Punk band with Anyway Anyhow Anywhere. Just watch it, its amazing[^] Yes there are the Beatles, Stone, Yardbirds, but they are all blues or RnB based. These two bands were the first to totally distance themselves form the Blues chord progressions and thus to me are the true founders of Rock.
She Loves you ends on a 6th!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
My apologies, I had read your statement as claiming that modes "weren't used" elsewhere. This particular sub-thread started by me poking fun at Matt for his incidental claim that Punk (given to the world by his generation) had destroyed "pretentious prog rock" and Disco. I think Matt sees himself in a super-hero cape ridding the world of evil which apparently includes Genesis and ELP. I'm still not sure where he stands on Yes, King Crimson and Curved Air. I certainly wouldn't want to deride folk music in any way. I was once both a member of the English Folk Dance and Song society and a Morris Dancer! (don't let Griff see this!) :) Of course, most (all?) modern popular music has come from folk roots. Much, of course, has come from Afica, via the US and Blues. Jazz and some classical music can be the furthest away from traditional music. The use of dissonance and "breaking the rules" is what moves these genres away from traditional modes. Of course modes are, and always have been around us. The "modern" major key is the Ionian mode. While simple melodies might be expressed in modes, it's subtle and, at times irrelevant and hard to detect (hard-line theorists will probably disagree!). As soon as we move into harmonies (without dissonance) we are very much in modal turf. I've never played the Pipes, although I believe they can be chromatic. The Apalachian dulcimer is definitely (I had/played one of those which got lost in my move from the UK to Canada), but both are played using a drone (drones) and a melody. It is the relationship between the drone and the melody that most simply defines and identifies the 7 modes, although reading up music theory on the subject can very quickly cause blood to ooze from your ears!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
Haha, you were a Morris Dancer? I'll try not to picture that :)
PhilLenoir wrote:
I've never played the Pipes, although I believe they can be chromatic.
Certain kinds can be, for instance the uilleann pipes with the addition of a chromatic key. But mostly not. The theory is actually a lot easier to understand than it may seem. Suppose your instrument can only play in one key. To vary the scale you can simply move the base note (tonic) and voila, you have a different scale with a different sound, while staying within the notes your instrument can play. Hence modal music, where you vary the note the tune resolves on based on the mode (drones are usually related to the tonic as well). Anyway, back on (much-needed de-rail) topic: I agree with you that Matt is a bit mistaken about punk rock. First of all, when he says his generation gave us punk I hope he means he's Generation Jones and not Gen X. Also, the original point of punk was not to kill other genres, although it did turn its back on complex, over-produced music in favor of bare essentials. But that was mainly to facilitate the idea that anyone could play and get their voice heard, not so much a rejection of other forms of music. The real point of punk was this message: the youth have no future, and they're angry about it. Once that was said there wasn't anywhere else to go except evolve, and so punk gave way to New Wave, post-punk, alternative music, etc.
-
Anyway, is my new sig acceptable?
No I do not think your signature acceptable. And the reasons I explained in http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4987207/Re-A-discussion-On-What-Constitutes-Abuse-And-What.aspx[^]: Repeating them here: Providing a link to an anti-Jewish hate site is clearly political. We do not want have Arab-Israeli massacres at this web-site. We want everyone to feel comfortable. I am a geek and came here to communicate with other geeks about software - not about politics. The value of the web-site is primarily not in the lounge but in the published articles. I do not want to publish my political opinions here because I want people of other political persuasion to be comfortable here too discussing and sharing software. Munchies_Matt has not published a single article here but was providing anti-Israel messages for several years. I do not think it is fair. If I noticed it before I would have raised the question earlier.
Nick Polyak
-
Haha, you were a Morris Dancer? I'll try not to picture that :)
PhilLenoir wrote:
I've never played the Pipes, although I believe they can be chromatic.
Certain kinds can be, for instance the uilleann pipes with the addition of a chromatic key. But mostly not. The theory is actually a lot easier to understand than it may seem. Suppose your instrument can only play in one key. To vary the scale you can simply move the base note (tonic) and voila, you have a different scale with a different sound, while staying within the notes your instrument can play. Hence modal music, where you vary the note the tune resolves on based on the mode (drones are usually related to the tonic as well). Anyway, back on (much-needed de-rail) topic: I agree with you that Matt is a bit mistaken about punk rock. First of all, when he says his generation gave us punk I hope he means he's Generation Jones and not Gen X. Also, the original point of punk was not to kill other genres, although it did turn its back on complex, over-produced music in favor of bare essentials. But that was mainly to facilitate the idea that anyone could play and get their voice heard, not so much a rejection of other forms of music. The real point of punk was this message: the youth have no future, and they're angry about it. Once that was said there wasn't anywhere else to go except evolve, and so punk gave way to New Wave, post-punk, alternative music, etc.
I have no issue understanding the theory, although make a quick search on Dorian mode and you'll find variations (which genus!!!!) When I learned this stuff, Dorian in D was DEFGABCD. My point about simple melodies being esoteric still stands. If you say a given melody is in E Major and wanted transposed to E Dorian, I can do that, but to say what mode any given melody is in .... sure if a melody is all white notes and As and Ds predominate you'd say it was Am and if Cs and Gs predominate it's CM, but with good coverage across the whole scale ...? To demonstrate this concept I once took Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star and transposed it to Dorian. It's remarkably sinister sounding :) I did a concert at Christmas, with my wife on cello, which included Carol of the Bells. The original key was Em and pretty much features a "drone" on E all the way through My wife contradicted me when I mentioned it being in Em to someone ("no it was in G"). For her there is no difference, she doesn't compose and she only needs to know enough theory to follow a musical score and one sharp to her means G. She plays a pretty mean cello, but she can't tell minor from major (yet alone Dorian from Aeolian) nor does she need to!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
I have no issue understanding the theory, although make a quick search on Dorian mode and you'll find variations (which genus!!!!) When I learned this stuff, Dorian in D was DEFGABCD. My point about simple melodies being esoteric still stands. If you say a given melody is in E Major and wanted transposed to E Dorian, I can do that, but to say what mode any given melody is in .... sure if a melody is all white notes and As and Ds predominate you'd say it was Am and if Cs and Gs predominate it's CM, but with good coverage across the whole scale ...? To demonstrate this concept I once took Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star and transposed it to Dorian. It's remarkably sinister sounding :) I did a concert at Christmas, with my wife on cello, which included Carol of the Bells. The original key was Em and pretty much features a "drone" on E all the way through My wife contradicted me when I mentioned it being in Em to someone ("no it was in G"). For her there is no difference, she doesn't compose and she only needs to know enough theory to follow a musical score and one sharp to her means G. She plays a pretty mean cello, but she can't tell minor from major (yet alone Dorian from Aeolian) nor does she need to!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
Yes I see what you mean, the key or mode can be ambiguous depending on which notes are and aren't included in the tune. I've seen lots of arguments happen about this, but the fact of the matter is that a simple melody often doesn't have a fixed key or mode, at least until you start harmonizing. It's worse with written music, because you can write anything in any key with accidentals and not change a thing, something people tend to forget when they look at a key signature (it's there for convenience in reading/writing, not to "tell" you what key it is). This is why melody players like cellists don't have to care much about keys/modes, but harmony players do :)
-
She Loves you ends on a 6th!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
Yeah, the Beatles then went into pop music.
-
No I do not think your signature acceptable. And the reasons I explained in http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4987207/Re-A-discussion-On-What-Constitutes-Abuse-And-What.aspx[^]: Repeating them here: Providing a link to an anti-Jewish hate site is clearly political. We do not want have Arab-Israeli massacres at this web-site. We want everyone to feel comfortable. I am a geek and came here to communicate with other geeks about software - not about politics. The value of the web-site is primarily not in the lounge but in the published articles. I do not want to publish my political opinions here because I want people of other political persuasion to be comfortable here too discussing and sharing software. Munchies_Matt has not published a single article here but was providing anti-Israel messages for several years. I do not think it is fair. If I noticed it before I would have raised the question earlier.
Nick Polyak
Nick Polyak wrote:
anti-Jewish hate site
What a joke.
Nick Polyak wrote:
anti-Israel messages
This is what you told Maunder is it? Why did you tell him its anti Israeli, and here say its anti Jewish? Did you think Chris would think you a fool for calling it anti jewish when it clearly isn't? Well guess what... (And in fact its not even anti Israel, its anti Israeli right wing; many Israelis think Israel should return to 67 borders too.) The fact is you only objected because you disagree with the content of my sig, not the fact its political. Its obvious to us in the way you call it as anti semitic when it isn't.
-
Nick Polyak wrote:
anti-Jewish hate site
What a joke.
Nick Polyak wrote:
anti-Israel messages
This is what you told Maunder is it? Why did you tell him its anti Israeli, and here say its anti Jewish? Did you think Chris would think you a fool for calling it anti jewish when it clearly isn't? Well guess what... (And in fact its not even anti Israel, its anti Israeli right wing; many Israelis think Israel should return to 67 borders too.) The fact is you only objected because you disagree with the content of my sig, not the fact its political. Its obvious to us in the way you call it as anti semitic when it isn't.
I am not an Israeli and a supporter of the two state solution. Your obsession with Israel, the fact that you put your political anti-Israel, anti-Jewish message in your signature (thus factoring it out of any discussion), the fact that you are not participating in any software forums or write any software articles makes me wonder if the only reason for your presence at this site is to spread anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda.
Nick Polyak
-
I am not an Israeli and a supporter of the two state solution. Your obsession with Israel, the fact that you put your political anti-Israel, anti-Jewish message in your signature (thus factoring it out of any discussion), the fact that you are not participating in any software forums or write any software articles makes me wonder if the only reason for your presence at this site is to spread anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda.
Nick Polyak
Nick Polyak wrote:
Your obsession with Israel
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: You should really have researched things a bit better. :)
Nick Polyak wrote:
anti-Jewish
It isn't. Its anti Israel. There is a difference you know. Perhaps if I repeat it enough times you might get it.
Nick Polyak wrote:
you are not participating in any software forums
Again, you should research this a bit. Why not find out what my previous pseudonyms were. Why not find out what I do in IT. Why not then find out what questions are relevant before making judgements. But no, you know it all don't you. You take one look and decide, in your profound ignorance, to condemn me. What a berk you are. Now, ask away and lift your ignorance....
-
I am not an Israeli and a supporter of the two state solution. Your obsession with Israel, the fact that you put your political anti-Israel, anti-Jewish message in your signature (thus factoring it out of any discussion), the fact that you are not participating in any software forums or write any software articles makes me wonder if the only reason for your presence at this site is to spread anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda.
Nick Polyak
Nick Polyak wrote:
the fact that you are not participating in any software forums
You didn't look very hard did you: http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4912834/Re-specifications-on-atomic-memory-operations.aspx[^] jackass.
-
I am not an Israeli and a supporter of the two state solution. Your obsession with Israel, the fact that you put your political anti-Israel, anti-Jewish message in your signature (thus factoring it out of any discussion), the fact that you are not participating in any software forums or write any software articles makes me wonder if the only reason for your presence at this site is to spread anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda.
Nick Polyak
Feeling pretty embarrassed eh? You have made an utter fool of yourself and don't even have the good manners to apologise. And you want me kicked off CP?
-
Nick Polyak wrote:
Your obsession with Israel
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: You should really have researched things a bit better. :)
Nick Polyak wrote:
anti-Jewish
It isn't. Its anti Israel. There is a difference you know. Perhaps if I repeat it enough times you might get it.
Nick Polyak wrote:
you are not participating in any software forums
Again, you should research this a bit. Why not find out what my previous pseudonyms were. Why not find out what I do in IT. Why not then find out what questions are relevant before making judgements. But no, you know it all don't you. You take one look and decide, in your profound ignorance, to condemn me. What a berk you are. Now, ask away and lift your ignorance....
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Its anti Israel
And hence its political. That is what Mr. Maunder(And many others) stated before. Even now you,your self accept that its anti Israel.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Its anti Israel
And hence its political. That is what Mr. Maunder(And many others) stated before. Even now you,your self accept that its anti Israel.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
Well, specifically its anti Israeli right wing, many Israelis also want a return to 67 borders. Anyway, of course its political. I never claimed it wasn't. The point is that signatures have been exempt from the rules in the past, for example swear words are allowed in signatures, but not in posts, in the lounge. Chris has actually stated this himself. Also, is a signature a discussion? No it isn't. And its only political discussions that are not allowed. Many other people have stated exactly the same sentiment, so I don't see what all the fuss is, especially when the original objector, Nick Polack, has been shown to be incorrect and to have made false assumptions.