next »

[J. R. Hill]

Do you mean me or the physics article?

[baconman]

I disagree with both it being "more emotional" and "less technical." Music is easily one of the most finely structured sciences out there, if one really pays attention to it. Music just happens to be able to create and inspire emotional responses more easily than other art forms. It's hard to look at something and "feel moved," but the right groove will sink into your brain without it even knowing it's paying attention.

Speaking of mood/setting, if there's gonna be compos, and in the direction of being inspiring; it's probably best to pick some kind of setting/mood that relates to gaming and write based on that, moreso than covers and remixes (which are already EVERYWHERE). The difference between a cover/remix and an "influence" is that you're able to dissect what part of the song gives it it's fitting groove.

[1982]

I disagree with both it being "more emotional" and "less technical." Music is easily one of the most finely structured sciences out there, if one really pays attention to it.

Also studies about human colon functionality are very finely structured sciences. Still you don't give a shit about your crap.

I never said it is less technical than what it is. But from many art mediums, together with for example painting, it is something that is able to be produced through very direct artistic input. Creator then can be either emotionally or technically driven, or both. Both mediums have their strength in that emotional possibility, and it is sad that this sort of technical crap is diminishing it in discussions and in practice.

But if you insist, I ask you to compare playing piano and coding a java-demo. Which one is more technical?

[baconman]

But if you insist, I ask you to compare playing piano and coding a java-demo. Which one is more technical?

Having done a little of both, I'd say the piano is. When you have basic principles and musical beats down (and a sense of rhythm that can carry them), it's just a matter of sticking to them and following the pitch you're going for. A java-demo winds into "what's it a demo of" and if it's anything more complex than "Hello World," it takes a bit more foresight.

Being creative with them is another ballgame. I would think successfully experimenting with the coding would result in more hits than experimenting with musical structure does. If anything, this amounts to being creative in composing music actually being more difficult than being creative in writing coding.

Plus, to the untrained eye, coding is at heart technical, but it's never about the code itself, it's about the sensation of the output it creates; like comparing the robotic precision of MegaMan physics to the rollercoastery flow of Sonic physics; the tactical pacing of Dark Souls' combat compared to the frantic lockdown-inducing combat of Marvel vs. Capcom 2/3; or the slap-happy level design of a Kirby game vs. the tense, you-versus-the-level feeling of Ninja Gaiden.

They're WAY more similar than one would ever think, until you're exposed enough to both.

To that, I also inquire:

But if you insist, I ask you to compare playing piano well and coding a good java-demo. Which one is more technical?

I'm not diminishing the value of either one, nor am I saying either of them are easy.

To give a little perspective:

-I'm pretty familiar with differing beats and musical structures (pop/rock, jazz, blues, folk, tropical, rave, waltz...). I can play melodies or chords just fine. Doing them both at once kicks my ass. Also... singing! >.<' (Even though I can hum terrifically, and keep drum beats in my teeth at the same time. That can't be too healthy. lol)

-I'm familiar with many genres of gaming and their underlying fundamental structures (musical games, fighters, adventure games, 90s-era FPS...) I can edit and script game content fairly well. Writing a game (or engine) from scratch is presently murdering me.

[MoritzPGKatz]

I never said it is less technical than what it is. But from many art mediums, together with for example painting, it is something that is able to be produced through very direct artistic input. Creator then can be either emotionally or technically driven, or both. Both mediums have their strength in that emotional possibility, and it is sad that this sort of technical crap is diminishing it in discussions and in practice.

Which "technical crap" now? This article?
http://io9.com/5883406/the-physics-behind-your-favorite-science-fiction-theme-songs

I assure you this is very far from technical. There are countless musicians who I personally admire, know much much more about the maths of acoustics, synthesis, orchestral arrangement, etc. than I will probably ever know and who are still able to convey some serious individual emotional content.

Should you be worried that music might become a puzzle game of existent motives and clichés: well, that's how music basically works and it's not a bad thing. You get inspired, you (subconsciously) copy ideas, you combine it with everything that you've heard so far and come up with something new that way, playing your part in this musical evolution.
Interestingly enough, the driving force behind the avantgarde (the notorious gang of superheroes who boldly go where no one has gone before with their music), has always been some kind of technology. Just to name a few:

• Bach's "Well-Tempered Clavier"
• The technical evolution of the piano itself (fascinating stuff)
• Schönberg's 12-tone system
• The invention of guitar pick-ups
• Analog, and later digital, synthesis
• Affordable portable computers!

And when we take a look at the musicians at the very front of all this, you'll see that they were usually people with great technical proficiency: I mentioned Bach and Schönberg, but then there's Karlheinz Stockhausen and later "Kraftwerk", "Can" or "Neu!", and (moving away from Germany) there are Richard D. James/"Aphex Twin", Charlie "Bird" Parker or, say, Béla Bartók, who couldn't have enriched orchestral music with almost-forgotten middle-European motives if it wasn't for his profound understanding of ethnomusicology.

So how exactly is reflecting on all this awesome stuff diminishing emotional possibilities in discussions and pratice?

[1982]

You both just ignored what I said. I am not talking about technicalities, you are. I don't mind talking about technicalities. I want to see discussion and appreciation towards the emotional part of music which is unique for music as a art form.

I don't know shit about music theory, but I have ear for tone and I can compose. And I do that completely through whatever the emotional state is, because I don't have any technical knowledge to back anything up or give me directions.

And then I see "music discussion" full of technical babble while 90% of music listeners convey music through emotion. What I see now, is that 99% of composers just enjoy technicalities. Such a loss.

[baconman]

OH! Okay, that makes more sense. And knowing supposedly nothing about music theory (which on some subconscious level I think is entirely impossible), I'm curious as to what kind of raw outputs you come up with.

But what I see is that 90% of musicians use the technicalities like pitch, tempo, beats simply to *express* them. Sadly, 90% of the music PLAYED EVERYWHERE is either about desiring love/acceptance, being all "Oh Gee", or being angry about shit. (At least it's a step up from alcohol-worshipping whiny honkytonk.)

Maybe that's why I love gaming music so much.

[1982]

Sadly, 90% of the music PLAYED EVERYWHERE is either about desiring love/acceptance, being all "Oh Gee", or being angry about shit. (At least it's a step up from alcohol-worshipping whiny honkytonk.)

You need to switch channel :D

[MoritzPGKatz]

You both just ignored what I said. I am not talking about technicalities, you are. I don't mind talking about technicalities.

Well, you wrote that the "technical crap is diminishing it in discussions and in practice", so I gathered something else from that - and apparently I'm not the only one who did.

And then I see "music discussion" full of technical babble while 90% of music listeners convey music through emotion. What I see now, is that 99% of composers just enjoy technicalities. Such a loss.

I know what you mean now - and this problem might arise from the fact that we can't really put emotional impressions into words that easily. Even if we do write something like "this particular piece makes me feel warm and cozy", how can we be sure that others, even though they agree with that statement, really share the exact emotional experience?

I don't want to get into this age-old philosophical debate here, but: what do you expect from a thread in an internet forum?
Talking about the emotional aspects of music will only get us to subjective opinions, which is cool - but it will inevitably lead us to the conclusion that everyone has different tastes, preventing any real composition discussion (like this one) from happening.

In my opinion the afore-mentioned article and J.R. Hill's ideas about guitar arrangement are just the right thing for a thread like this. Keep it coming.

By the way, mentioning Béla Bartók made me listen to some of his compositions again.


I wish video game music had more music like that, it's quirky yet down-to-earth and folky.

[1982]

I know what you mean now - and this problem might arise from the fact that we can't really put emotional impressions into words that easily. Even if we do write something like "this particular piece makes me feel warm and cozy", how can we be sure that others, even though they agree with that statement, really share the exact emotional experience?

Point is to not talk about emotions experienced, it is too subjective. What would be nice, is to share thoughts and experiences about music making through artistic, emotional process instead of talking about music theory and technicalities. But then again this is - like you said - internet discussion and so just fjuck it.

<-

[MoritzPGKatz]

Point is to not talk about emotions experienced, it is too subjective. What would be nice, is to share thoughts and experiences about music making through artistic, emotional process instead of talking about music theory and technicalities. But then again this is - like you said - internet discussion and so just fjuck it.

You mean like these threads on Gamedev.net, for example?

The Creative Process
Listen to your song with a fresh perspective?

[medieval]

On the topic of 'programming vs. music' as to which is more technical;

I don't think one medium is more technical than the other, but one must keep in mind that both media require a totally different form of technique. Programming requires the ability to create complex systems of code that interact with one another in such a way that something cool happens. It is mostly a question of achieving a level of complexity and maintaining oversight nonetheless.

Music, however, is different. Playing the piano, for example, you need very precise hand-eye coordination and developed fingers to hit the right keys. But music is heavy on the mind too. Piano players often play at least two melodies at the same time, different melodies, sometimes with different rhythmic patterns too. Memorizing, let alone playing this kind of pieces is extremely challenging to the mind. Not to mention the realm of improvisation, where you have to hit the right notes before you even know what the song is supposed to sound like.

[1982]

You mean like these threads on Gamedev.net, for example?

The Creative Process
Listen to your song with a fresh perspective?

Yes like that.

[medieval]

Gah, I need to write more coherently.

[1982]

Music, however, is different. Playing the piano, for example, you need very precise hand-eye coordination and developed fingers to hit the right keys. But music is heavy on the mind too. Piano players often play at least two melodies at the same time, different melodies, sometimes with different rhythmic patterns too. Memorizing, let alone playing this kind of pieces is extremely challenging to the mind. Not to mention the realm of improvisation, where you have to hit the right notes before you even know what the song is supposed to sound like.

You can make a monkey to play piano, but its not very easy to make it code working java demo. My original point was, that playing piano for example allows much more direct artistic input than compared to coding. In some cases, direct artistic input leads into great art. Like some expressionistic paintings. Like music (playing instrument), painting has also very direct creator input. There is some expressionistic music I guess.

(Damn I mixed expresso and impresison again)

[baconman]

Gah, I need to write more coherently.

I understood that perfectly, and now I'm seeing where you're coming from too, 1982. Although philosophically resonating with Rush, Boston, and in my crankier days Linkin Park (90% of that one is in singing/percussion), I really don't know if I'm one to talk with about that. For one thing, I don't actually compose, so...

[J. R. Hill]

1982...  I don't get why you don't just make another thread about the emotional side of music composition, or I don't know, actually contribute something in this thread about the emotional side of it, instead of whining like a spoiled brat that two of the major things said in this thread before you looked at it aren't taking you to a higher plane of consciousness.

Just...stop trying to derail a thread that has no real point other than to talk about music composition.  You're being stupid.

[1982]

Just...stop trying to derail a thread that has no real point other than to talk about music composition.  You're being stupid.

And you're being J. R. Hill.

[MoritzPGKatz]

Just...stop trying to derail a thread that has no real point other than to talk about music composition.  You're being stupid.

And you're being J. R. Hill.

To be frank, I wouldn't put it in the same strong words but I was thinking kinda the same as J.R. - how about some actual contribution to the topic instead of smart remarks?

[1982]

Just...stop trying to derail a thread that has no real point other than to talk about music composition.  You're being stupid.

And you're being J. R. Hill.

To be frank, I wouldn't put it in the same strong words but I was thinking kinda the same as J.R. - how about some actual contribution to the topic instead of smart remarks?

I cant, you guys are way too technical.