Keith Emerson and music theory - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 28 2012 at 11:29

Will you ever stop presenting your opinions as fact?

What?

richardh

Prog Reviewer

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26171

Posted: January 28 2012 at 12:13

The_Jester wrote:

I never heard the album Trilogy but I'll try it and see if he evolved. But I sure know that in Tarkus and the albums before that he does things that have a little connection with the scales they are in but that still does a dissonance because he doesn't consider chord change or the note he should play, etc. In Brain Salad Surgery I couldn't believe he doesn't know his musical theory. He evolved but it wasn't always like that.

I think you should also consider that Emerson had to adapt his music to the requirements of the band. Tarkus was composed on the piano and famously Lake didn't want anything to do with it at first. It then evolved into something different.Thats not to say I agree with your general comments but just to make the point that ELP was not 'The Keith Emerson Band'.

2dogs

Forum Senior Member

Joined: December 03 2011
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 705

Posted: January 28 2012 at 15:18

I can't say I'm looking forward to hearing Jester's corrected versions, but maybe they'll create some interest in academic circles Geek

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:09

Dean wrote:

Will you ever stop presenting your opinions as fact?

I am not presenting my opinions as facts I present it as opinions. I did not made this thread with intentions of starting up everyone I only wanted to offer my view on this situation and trying to get my opnion evolving. I wanted to hear about others to know what you find and why. I also want to make you think of the situation and get your opinions evolving. I offer arguments wich are my convivtions but if you prove my arguments aren't good I'll change my mind (like for Toccata) and admit things. I only wanted a serious debate.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:15

The_Jester wrote:

Dean wrote:

Will you ever stop presenting your opinions as fact?

No sunshine, you present them as fact, for example: "but that still does a dissonance because he doesn't consider chord change or the note he should play" - that is indeed your opinion, but you are stating it as a fact, which is certainly is not - you cannot possibly know what he does or does not consider nor can you even speculate.

What?

Angelo

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13239

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:33

Did you notice your 'comma' key is broken? Wink

ISKC Rock Radio
I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:36

For this one, I totally agree with you but everyone does errors. In fact, I was saying this because it is a fact: he doesn't consider the chord changes in the beginning of Tarkus, and the notes he should play (if it was by the book), he does not play them. He makes dissonance in all Tarkus. I've seen the scores, I analysed it and this is my conclusion. There's a key change in the riff and he does not consider it. He continues to play like if he was in the first chord. I sure omitted some things in the statement like ''in the beginning of Tarkus''. I'm still sorry, I can't say I'm right but please, let me have my opinion too.

Edited by The_Jester - January 28 2012 at 16:59

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Angelo

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13239

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:42

Interesting... what makes you so sure he didn't do this on purpose?

ISKC Rock Radio
I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:48

It maybe was but even if it was he still didn't consider it. You can unconsider something on purpose.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:50

The_Jester wrote:

For this one, I totally agree with you but everyone does errors. In fact, I was saying this because it is a fact: he doesn't consider the chord changes in the beginning of Tarkus, and the notes he should play (if it was by the book), he does not play them. He makes dissonance in all Tarkus. I've seen the scores, I analysed it and this is the conclusion. There's a key change in the riff and he does not consider it. He continues to play like if he was in the first chord. I sure omitted some things in the statement like ''in the beginning of Tarkus''. I'm still sorry, I can't say I'm right but please, let me have my opinion too.

I repeat - 'you cannot possibly know what he does or does not consider nor can you even speculate' - if he does not play the "right" note "by the book" it does not mean he did not consider it - you don't know whether he considered it or not, I don't know that, my pet cat does not know that and the man in the moon does not know that, only Keith Emerson knows that.

Also playing "by the book" is not the golden rule that's never to be broken - Music Theory, as I have said before, is a means to describe what has been used, not a means of restricting what can be used.

By all means have your opinion, but phrase it as opinion not fact:

"I analysed it and this is the conclusion" is opinion presented as fact

"I analysed it and this is my conclusion" is opinion presented as opinion

and consider the possibility that what Emerson composed was what he wanted to compose and the dissonance are deliberate and planned..

What?

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:52

Also playing "by the book" is not the golden rule that's never to be broken - Music Theory, as I have said before, is a means to describe what has been used, not a means of restricting what can be used. And that's not an opinion?

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Angelo

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13239

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:58

The_Jester wrote:

It maybe was but even if it was he still didn't consider it. You can unconsider something on purpose.

You're writing nonsense - have you been drinking? Unless he told you personally, you will never know whether he considered it. The difference is that when he 'did something', it will show in the scores you looked at, whether he 'considered doing something' is unknown to you, unless he told you he did or he wrote that down somewhere and you read it.

ISKC Rock Radio
I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 28 2012 at 16:58

I'm done.

What?

Angelo

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13239

Posted: January 28 2012 at 17:04

con·sid·er

v. con·sid·ered, con·sid·er·ing, con·sid·ers

v.tr.

1. To think carefully about.

2. To think or deem to be; regard as. See Usage Note at as¹.

3. To form an opinion about; judge: considers waste to be criminal.

4. To take into account; bear in mind: Her success is not surprising if you consider her excellent training.

5. To show consideration for: failed to consider the feelings of others.

6. To esteem; regard.

7. To look at thoughtfully.

Source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/consider

All 7 of these are things for which you cannot judge whether they have been done just by looking at a music scores - unless they are annotated to indicate this..

Edited by Angelo - January 28 2012 at 17:06

ISKC Rock Radio
I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 28 2012 at 17:06

Maybe I'm wrong with defining ''consideration'' because I tought that not considering something was like not taking care of an element (in this case not taking care of the chord change) and could be wanted or not.

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

The_Jester View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: September 29 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 741

Posted: January 28 2012 at 17:14

Well, this time I clearly lost. You win, I did make a big argumentative error and I'm sorry to have done it. What I wanted to say is that he continued playing on the same chord while the chord changed that's all.

Edited by The_Jester - January 28 2012 at 17:15

La victoire est éphémère mais la gloire est éternelle!

- Napoléon Bonaparte

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 28 2012 at 17:15

"consider" has the latin root considerare meaning "to look at closely or to observe". Often in English to say that you considered something is used in context for not doing something - for example, "I considered going to the cinema, but it was raining so I stayed at home."

What?

tamijo

Forum Senior Member

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 4287

Posted: January 28 2012 at 17:18

The_Jester wrote:

Mr. Emerson only does what he thinks ''sounds good''.

What do you think?

I think everybody does what they think sounds good. Unless they are payed to do diffrent.

Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours

Angelo

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13239

Posted: January 28 2012 at 17:23

The_Jester wrote:

Well, this time I clearly lost. You win, I did make a big argumentative error and I'm sorry to have done it. What I wanted to say is that he continued playing on the same chord while the chord changed that's all.

That's fine, no worries. What triggered me initially was not the word 'consider', but rather the fact that you wrote ' I couldn't believe he doesn't know his musical theory'. It's related: you don't know whether he did not know is musical theory when he decided to continue playing on the same chord. In my opinion he did know his theory, otherwise there's a big chance he would never have reached the heights he did. For one thing, some of his pieces have been, and still are, performed by classical orchestras. The musicians that play in these are not the most open minded when it comes to violating the 'laws' laid down in music theory, so he must have done something right.... Wink

ISKC Rock Radio
I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]

Dean

Special Collaborator

Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575

Posted: January 28 2012 at 17:26

The_Jester wrote:

Maybe I'm wrong with defining ''consideration'' because I tought that not considering something was like not taking care of an element (in this case not taking care of the chord change) and could be wanted or not.

I don't see how playing the same chord while the underlying melody changes key is an error - it's called polytonality, or in this case bitonality, it can be harmonised or it can be dissonant - that's covered in music theory too.

/edit - many 20th Century composers used bitonality, for example Aaron Copland... and we all know that ELP covered his music.

Edited by Dean - January 28 2012 at 17:37

What?