Jompa's Compositions/Non-Video Game Related Arrangements/Performances

[Ricky]

If I were to start doing what you are doing, then I wouldn't be able to play music with other people -.- Nor would I be able to make music for others.
You stated that I'm not alone, and no, I'm not alone - I have the majority of the musical world on my side, Ricky - because your only argument is about your personal preference, and most people choose music theory over that.
Those sites aren't much proof, they are just a way to explain the theory, after all.

See, taking things out of context and coming up with your own (wrong) interpretation. "You stated that I'm not alone, and no, I'm not alone - I have the majority of the musical world on my side" I've never said I've discussed this topic with someone else, I said I've met someone on another forum who acts the same way as you in discussions. I've never said I've discussed any music with that person, in fact the discussions were about more serious issues and not related to music AT ALL. So please before you start taking things out of context read what I wrote and think about it twice if you have to.

"If I were to start doing what you are doing, then I wouldn't be able to play music with other people -.- Nor would I be able to make music for others." Do what, claim that not all music is written in ionian or a modified aeolian? Most music (at least after reneissance) is in fact written in ionian or a modified aeolian (basically going inbetween natural, harmonic and melodic minor). So in most cases you would have two choices (once you find which tones seems to be the ones used), either major or minor. But, you have to understand that not all music is major or minor. Some is chromatic or even "atonal", some is polytonal, some is in whole tone scale, some is octatonic, some is even using microtonal intervals and the most obvious one, some is modal, in many cases a western church mode other than ionian or aoelian, such as dorian, lydian or mixolydian. So by confirming to the ionian or modified aeolian scales you surely you would be able to "able to play music with other people and "be able to make music for others". But obviously you don't seem to want to stay ionian or modified aeolian which is ofc fine but I'm just saying your breaking of music theory seems to suggest something else. Basically in the C Mixolydian piece you suggest by the key signature and emphasis on C as tonic that it's in C ionian, maybe while you're at it make sure to flat all the B's to make things clearer.

"because your only argument is about your personal preference, and most people choose music theory over that." I'm sorry but you got it wrong, I'm the one choosing music theory rules, you're the one with an odd personal preference. And who the klobb is "most people"? Most people who write music do it in ionian or modified aeolian. Does that mean that you're in fact not allowed to write a piece in for instance dorian or lets say hindu scale (just for the sake of argument) and make sure the key signature explicitly shows (together with the tonic) that it's this mode or that AND NOT simply major (ionian) or minor (aeolian)?

"Those sites aren't much proof, they are just a way to explain the theory, after all." What is a proof in this context? Where is your proof of your odd conception of modes/scales/key signature use? Should we ask a musicologist (I know one I can probably ask)?

[Jompa]

Wow that's a load of text with no progress at all -.-
I don't care about ionian, I care about major - you've been confused about this for some posts now.

What's the point anyway; if I show you a sheet you'll just call it wrong.
When it comes down to it, you don't want to accept that the way you think is the simplest (at least in accordance with the church modes) is not the one widely accepted in the world, and I don't want to accept you purely shooting down my and the majority of actively arranging musicians' reasoning (you know, that whole part about specifying the tonic. That's some really important stuff you know).

[Ricky]

Well, asked the musicologist I've been thinking about and hopefully he will respond soon (if he's not too busy). Either way I think of modes/scales as that, not modifications of two basic formulas (you could think of it as modificaton of the chromatic scale and thus all scales within our western music system are "chromatic" modes). And thanks for ignoring most of what I said once again, makes writing replies trying to explain such basic things with as much common sense as possible so much fun (because common sense is so hard to grasp). If you didn't notice (which in some previous cases you haven't), the previous sentence was sarcastic.

[Jompa]

I didn't reply to most of it because most of it is totally basic (even I have written some of those things).

I have an argument though:
Your way barely even works! Just look at how you solved the Phrygian Dominant problem..

[Ricky]

I have an argument though:
Your way barely even works! Just look at how you solved the Phrygian Dominant problem..

I solved it the way of not overcomplicating stuff by throwing one completely unnecessary sharp (F#) and having to flat the A instead of just using the C minor key signature and raise the Bb to B. Simplier, clearer, cleaner, more logical. And the other option was using a custom key signature which isn't so hard to do (at least not on paper).

[Jompa]

Simplier, clearer, cleaner, more logical.

Well you end up with the tonic chord being with accidentals - even if I were to support your view, I would still think that having to naturalize the major third is just totally wrong.

[Ricky]

Ok, use Ab and Eb in the key signature. Problem solved. All the right tones are there without any accidentals, just like using one flat (Bb) key signature does when writing in C Mixolydian.

[Jompa]

So when it comes down to it, this discussion is about why we use key signatures?

And I believe one has to use either major or minor out of what the tonic is, and wether the third is major or minor.
And you believe that one can use anything (even customized) as long as it is for the purpose of getting rid of accidentals.

Am I right?

[Ricky]

So when it comes down to it, this discussion is about why we use key signatures?

Or rather how they are used.

And I believe one has to use either major or minor out of what the tonic is, and wether the third is major or minor.
And you believe that one can use anything (even customized) as long as it is for the purpose of getting rid of accidentals.

Am I right?

If you believe it's only for minor or major then you should use no key signature (no sharps, no flats) for every piece that isn't major or minor, including modal ones. What you're saying is that it's better to use no key signature to notate something for instance in C locrian where you have quite a few flats.

What I'm saying is that key signatures should be used to make things clearer, especially when intending to do so by explicitly including the complete key (as in C Mixolydian). It's not like you would for instance use a key signature of no sharps or flats to notate a piece in A major and mark all the accidentals (which actually belong to the scale by default) by hand yet you treat the the non aeolian and non ionian modes that way. The solution is simple, use the right key signature to signify which of the tones should be flatted or sharped and make sure your intended tonic functions as a tonic.

Either way, my message to the musicologist and his response:


"Anyways, I've got an unrelated question/topic I hope you can explain to me. Basically I've been having a discussion about modes and key signatures on a forum with another forum member. The thing is that he composed a piece which he called "C Mixolydian Blues March" and what got my main attention was that he was using the key siganture of no flats and no sharps although C Mixolydian has the tones of C, D, E, F, G, A, Bb and thus should in my opinion using what I think is common sense music theory rules use the key sigature of one flat. He however claims that the key signature of no sharps and flats is required to make sure it shows that C is the tonic, basically using C major but modifying by throwing in redundant accidentals because he thinks that all scales/modes that have a major chord on the tonic should be treated as "major", same principle for "minor" scales/modes (thus treating for example D Dorian as D minor but raising the 6th throwing in extra naturals instead of letting the key signature handle it). Either way his way of thinking doesn't make much sense to me as the key signature typically tells which tones the piece will mostly consist of and the tonic of the piece then is made more or less clear and can often be found (unless it's for example moving inbetween modes alot, polytonal, modulating alot or simply being atonal and so on, then the key signature maybe isn't so helpful). So, in summary if a piece isn't major or minor but in fact is modal which of the two approaches to the key signature is more correct (when looking at it from a theoretical point of view)?"



"Now as to the other issue: not having access to the comments on the other forum, my remarks can only be about what you have written. I think part of the confusion may come from the fact that key signatures were developed for and have a function only within the tonal system. In a modal system, their use, while practical, is a bit problematic. Yes, C mixolydian should have a key signature of one flat, but it's not actually a 'key', but a mode. Our system of notation is highly developed and incredibly useful, but it has certain quirks because of its history. For example, if you are writing whole-tone music the choice of what accidentals to employ is completely arbitrary because the notation was developed specifically for tonal, not whole-tone, music.

Similarly, some music written in the transition between the modal and tonal systems looks odd to us because it uses the 'wrong' key signature and even seems to end on the 'wrong' harmony. This is a big topic and there is an excellent discussion of it in the Journal of the American Musicological Society, vol. 51, no. 2, Summer 1998: "Modal Theory, Church Keys, and the Sonata at the End of the Seventeenth Century", by Gregory Barnett."

[Jompa]

Or rather how they are used.

Yeah, sorry I said wrong.

If you believe it's only for minor or major then you should use no key signature (no sharps, no flats) for every piece that isn't major or minor, including modal ones. What you're saying is that it's better to use no key signature to notate something for instance in C locrian where you have quite a few flats.

Nope. This is what I said:
"And I believe one has to use either major or minor out of what the tonic is, and wether the third is major or minor".
C'mon, you know this, you even wrote it to the musicologist.

key signatures should be used to make things clearer, especially when intending to do so by explicitly including the complete key (as in C Mixolydian).

I disagree with this^ I don't believe key signatures are meant to make things clearer - but they are a convention in pieces that are in ionian or aeolian, basically, as they definitely make things clearer in those cases. Even after I've read the musicologist's response, I disagree.
I guess we can conclude with that.

[Ricky]

Fine lets end it there, it's another of those discussions that could go on forever as none of the involved in it will change their mind.

[Ricky]

Alright, as for the music itself it sounds pretty good. I especially like the constrasts between the lower and higher parts of the ensemble that appear and it seems more thematically integrated (basically good structure and quite good balance between repeition and variation) than your previous march.

[Jompa]

Glad you think so actually, as this song was more of an experiment to try to achieve just that:)
Thanks

[Jompa]

I made a short little piano jingle, which I think turned out good. I'm thinking about adapting it into a Big Band piece, but I don't know if I'll make it bossa or swing yet

"Untitled (Piano F-dur 14.09.13)"
PDF
MIDI

[FireArrow]

Sounds like something straight out of D/P/P.