Opeth - Hessian Peel: The Mysterious Wrong Note
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Recommendations/Featured albums
Forum Description: Make or seek recommendations and discuss specific prog albums
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49617
Printed Date: June 23 2025 at 01:43
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Opeth - Hessian Peel: The Mysterious Wrong Note
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Subject: Opeth - Hessian Peel: The Mysterious Wrong Note
Date Posted: June 21 2008 at 09:20
Let me quote the relevant bit of Certif1ed's recent review of Opeth - Watershed. It's about the track Hessian Peel. My comments in blue:
So ... what are your thoughts, is this note wrong or right - or at least "acceptable" to your ears? ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to: 
|
Certif1ed wrote:
Replies:
Posted By: WinterLight
Date Posted: June 21 2008 at 11:18
| His reasoning sounds like the rationalization of personal prejudice. How is a note "wrong" if an artist decides to use it? Many baroque and classical composers used incidentals in their music (almost random examples: some of JS Bach's mirror canons or the fast motif in the 2nd Movement of Beethoven's 9th). |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 21 2008 at 13:46
|
As someone famous (Miles Davis?) once said ~ there are no bad notes, just badly resolved ones - I'd take that one stage further and say a wrong note is one the composer never wrote or intended.The rules of music composition are not cast in stone.
Mark says the note is unresolved and the repetition is a clumsy attempt to force a resolution - perhaps that is true for him, but for me it doesn't stand out like a sore-thumb (since my ears are far less tutored) as its effect is so minor - it doesn't even qualify as a passing note because it isn't part of a modulation - it just isn't going anywhere to need resolving. ------------- What? |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 21 2008 at 14:43
|
Well, in fact it is resolved by the following passage. It's in C# minor, to which G# is the 5th position. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: salmacis
Date Posted: June 21 2008 at 15:14
Am I the only one who hasn't noticed this at all? I'm really loving this album, BTW...
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 21 2008 at 19:46
|
As I said in my review... I don't like it. Period. It's an experiment didn't quite work. Nothing "wrong" about it per se. Akerfeldt tried to dazzle us, and he failed. But I don't think is "poor musicianship" or something like that as Certif1ed said...It's just a bad idea. ------------- 
|
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: June 22 2008 at 02:00
|
Don't know the tune, but am interested to hear it now.
Also the "Hendrix" chord was an E7#9, not b9. Both are good chords though. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 22 2008 at 03:57
^ of course you're right! 
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Dominic
Date Posted: June 22 2008 at 06:56
Silly, don't you now that there are rules in any art form.... if artist's just went all willy-nilly; shared their music based on their foolhardy and bias opinion of what they think sounded good, we'd never be graced with such great classics as Green Day's "American Idiot", to name just one. I actually hadn't noticed the error till i read Certif1ed's review, then i immediately threw my disc away. I mean, what would my musician friends think if they heard me listening to such chaos? It seems that some folks are so audacious that they believe it's ok to turn away from proper training/derivative ideas and think for themselves. |
Posted By: Zitro
Date Posted: June 22 2008 at 10:13
|
I didn't find anything wrong with that note. I sometimes write music that might have a bit of dissonance, but from your detailed technical viewpoint, I don't see it as a 'bad' note and less like an example of bad musicianship. |
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: June 22 2008 at 10:36
No, havnt a clue what this lot are on about either. ------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005 
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 22 2008 at 19:16
|
I thought of this recently. There is no such thing as a wrong note, IMO. Just because it doesn't conform to general theory doesn't mean it's wrong. I guess a f**king lot of avant garde music would be wrong then too.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 03:30
I was reminded of the track - that's enough!!!
I don't see any problem with this - I'm not saying "It sounds exactly like", I'm saying it "seems to reference", which is kinda saying that there may or may not be a little influence, that's all.
YOU fail to see it, I don't. That's what it reminded me of - similarly to above, what on earth are you arguing about this for?
You cannot argue that my opinion is wrong - it's just MY opinion. You don't have to share it if you don't want to.
Perhaps...
I could get all smartass and show off my perfect pitch or other legendary, near-mystical talents if you like.
I hear the alteration, and it doesn't work for me - it draws attention to itself like an ink blot in an excercise book. Maybe it's an inkblot that the band and fans like, but I do not like it. You might have noticed.
I'm not going to listen to it again - I'll take your word about the modes - but don't take the acoustic guitar's notes literally - there is always implied melody, harmony or mode other than the mode you see on the page (or hear).
That passage implies pretty standard stuff to me, I get no "feel" of modality.
There is no G# in either D major, or E minor - and the note does not imply the Hendrix chord - G# is not a sharpened 9th, it's a sharpened 10th in E, and 11th in D.
If it's a G#, then it's not a diminished 5th in D or E, is it.
Please note the absence of a question mark
That's like saying "I don't mean to insult you, but you are a complete t**t".
I think I've made that clear...
And I think your analysis needs work - 3/10.  ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 03:31
|
^ Of course in Avant-Prog there are many "wrong notes" ... I guess what irritated Certif1ed was that the part which this note occurred in was very "orderly" - only diatonic notes were used, notes which belong to the correct scale - except for this one note. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 03:33
|
^Indeed - all this stuff about modal and Hendrix chords is just misleading.
The implication of simple diatonic harmony is very strong. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 04:13
|
btw: I just noticed that I was off by one guitar string ... of course the offending note is not G#, but D#. Sorry for this, it's been a while since I've written down music, normally I think in guitar tabulature. So D# over the chord played by the acoustic guitar ... I've listened to it again and actually it doesn't even play a full D major chord but only D5. The added note results in a dissonance: D5b9, which isn't all too horrible, considering that the D# is also the melodic/harmonic minor 7th position in respect to the following E minor. And the next part (after the E min / D5 change is repeated) is indeed in C# min, to which the D# is a diatonic note. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Reverie
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 04:30
|
I can't say it ever bothered me, at all. Mind you, i'm really not that picky about stuff like that. It never even stuck out to me. I mean, sure, you can hear he's played a different note when you listen to it, but it doesn't throw you off guard or anything, and it doesn't sound like it shouldn't be there. Obviously, being art, it can't be a "wrong" note. To my ears at least, it's not inappropriate or out of place in the least. It just is.  |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 04:42
|
D# is the second note of the C# scale.
It's a tentative relationship, as II is one of the weakest chords, and typically used to imply that a cadence is on its way (if you add a 7th to chord II and invert it such that the 7th becomes the bottom of the chord, or II7d, it's a powerful tool for momentum in a cadential passage).
D5 isn't a "proper" chord - this is a term made up by guitarists to describe the power chord, which has neither major nor minor implications. Major and minor are established by the 3rd and implied by both the 6th and context. The 7th is only ever flattened in the melodic minor scale - D# is present in both E major and E minor - there is nothing esoteric about its' use with an E chord.
D# is not a flattened 9th in a D chord - that would be Eb, which exists in neither key - incidentally, of the two, only D can boast both sharps and flats in common usage.
D# and Eb are not the same note, as proven by Bach in the 48. This kinda underlines my feeling of a "wrong" note, since Eb does not belong in either scale - it would have to be treated as an accidental, which would need to be resolved somehow.
At the end of the day, analysis only backs up stuff you want to say about music - it doesn't really prove anything about the character of it.
You like it or you don't.
Guess where I stand on this?
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 04:58
|
^ Call it what you will - D# and Eb may hint to different usage but are the same note on the keyboard - but I think the note is resolved. The final notes of the lick are E Eb B. Now if you put this in the context of the Db min chord that follows and extend the lick with an imaginary Db note, you get this: E Eb B Db Those notes are all from the Db natural minor mode. So in essence, if you take the wrong note Eb as an hint of the upcoming Db minor chord, it all makes sense. BTW: This may sound a bit too theoretical, but if you play the lick along with the record, extending it with a Db feels very natural. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 08:04
|
^So is it Db or C#...?
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Trademark
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 08:57
|
To resolve properly according to any underlying diatonic harmony a non- diatonic D# would have to resolve to an E natural and a non-diatonic Eb would have to resolve to D natural. If this is not the case (and admittedly I have no interest in hearing the tune) it is not resolved correctly. You can like it or not as you see fit. D# in a D chord is NOT a b9 it is a #8 and is NOT diatonic in any way to the chord or the key. Thus it should resolve up by half step since the accidental used is a sharp. I'd need to see more than just the two chords to give a good analysis of the underlying harmony, but unless there is a change of key at the E minor chord you can't call the D# the 7th. It is only the 7th if the key actually changes and the non-diatonic note can be looked at as a pivot note in the key change. Also while not a "rule" of diatonic harmony it is rather unusual to use a 7th as a pivot note. The leading tone is too "active" harmonically (especially in the melodic minor). |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 09:01
You're the sharp guy ... you tell me! ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: WinterLight
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 09:13
| It's important to recognize that music theory is not a collection of rules to which musicians must adhere, but rather it is a set of guidelines of ideas and principles that generally work in occidental music. Notice also that many classical composers did not restrict themselves to these principles. |
Posted By: Zitro
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 09:26
|
the problem listeners some listeners seem to be having is that there is dissonance in a melodic section where nothing except that note fails to follow music theory. I can see why the note might be wrong, but it never bothered me. I never noticed it until Certif1ed mentioned it. |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 15:51
|
Reading Cert and Mike's argument makes me feel very ignorant. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 16:11
|
^ don't feel so bad ... Trademark and Cert could both run circles around me when it comes to musical theory, so in the words of a famous Jedi knight: "There's always a bigger fish".
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 23 2008 at 23:41
I aqgree.... And in the end... we all enjoy our music... and we'll all die... (I don't know what this has to do with anything but seemed like a good place to say it...)
This is also what PA's all about.. learning! Finding out that every day you're actually not wiser, but more ignorant, because when you open new doors to new knowledge, you just have a LOT more to learn.....
In the end my argument is the best: the note sounds bad, therefore it was a bad idea. -------------
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 06:36
I know how you feel
I know a little about music theory and they quickly lose me, but I do enjoy reading their discussions and sometimes I manage to learn something new (...which is a bonus )nb: for those who have no idea what this discussion is about:
The essence of what's being discussed is simple enough - when there is a key change in a piece of music the musicians go from playing all the right notes to playing a few 'wrong' ones because the new key contains some notes that were not in the original key. The trick is to make all these wrong notes sound right and this can be done in several ways, one of which involves playing a note or chord from the new key that doesn't appear in the old key during the final bars of the old key. On hearing this note it may initially sound wrong, but becomes right (ie is resolved) when you hear the first bars in the new key. The actual mechanics of this can be found in any music theory book, but at the end of the day it is what sounds right to the composer that matters. ------------- What? |
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 08:57
|
I've listened to this song a bunch of times specifically looking for this note you're talking about, but I just can't hear it.
someone is making it up. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 09:10
|
Emin D5 Emin D5 -------------------------------------12-------- ----------------------------------12----15-12-- -12-14-12-11-------11-12/14-12-14-------------- -------------14-14----------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- Emin D5 Emin D5 -------------------------------------12-------- ----------------------------------12----16-12-- -12-14-12-11-------11-12/14-12-14-------------- -------------14-14----------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- This is the lick we're talking about. I marked the offending note ... ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 09:33
|
about what time into the track does it occur? ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: N Ellingworth
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 09:34
| I just grabbed a guitar to play that, I can't see any problem with it at all, a little variation in a lick never hurts. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 09:39
|
^^ according to Certif1ed the wrong note first appears 51 seconds into the song.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 10:01
WOW, really? It's called a melody, dude. No wrong notes here. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean the note is wrong.
thanks for helping me out Mike ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 10:07
|
What exactly IS a wrong note? Wrong on whose terms precisely?
------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 10:09
|
^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_theory - Music Theory .
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Statutory-Mike
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 10:21
|
I heard what everyone was talking about, but I have to agree with GoldenSpiral..it was intended on Mikaels part most likely. It's just a melody. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Trademark
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 12:10
|
This is gonna be a long one. There seem to be some misunderstanding here in terms of the use in this context of the word "wrong" and how it relates to the concept of music theory. First; music is theory is not, never has been, and hopefully never will be a set of "rules" that are used to create music. This concept runs contrary to the very nature of music. What music theory is and always been and hopefully always will be is an important and useful tool we can use to understand and then explain what composers have done. Composers and songwriters from every era in history share a certain set of "tendencies"; that is, they tend to all use many of the same techniques for changing the key or progressing from one chord to another, or ending a musical phrase, etc.. Music theory identifies these patterns and tendencies and creates a kind of list that can be used to help categorize music by historical period, to help see how a composer is different from his contemporaries, or to just plain understand the music at a deeper level than can be done with the ears alone. Seen in this light there are no wrong notes, only unexplained ones. The list of categorizations for notes is long The rules for using notes are not rules, rather they are explanations of what has almost always been done in the past. Over the past 4 centuries or so of musical study a vast number of tendencies in music have developed that are very seldom not observed (other than in serial or other deliberately atonal music which falls outside this discussion). For example, when a note outside the key is used if it is a sharp (#) it will resolve up, if it is a flat (b) it will resolve down. Certain chords are reserved for very specific purposes such as key changes and other special effects, etc.. This does not mean they cannot be used for other purposes, only that 95% of the time they are not. Darqdean's explanation above is one of the clearest and most concise I have ever read annd I'll probably borrow it for use in my Music Appreciation class.  The following needs to be added to the idea though. Tonal music is "goal oriented". That is, we expect certain notes of chords to follow others. We probably are not even aware of our expectations, since composers and songwriters follow the established patterns so strongly that they become subconsciously ingrained in all of us. Part of the beauty in music is the composer's ability to surprise us by occasionally NOT meeting our expectations. This can be done in a number of ways, one of which is the "wrong note" that is being discussed here. Adding a note or chord that is outside the prevailing harmony surprises us and makes us sit up and pay attention to the music because we now wonder what else new might be coming next, like a plot twist in an Agatha Christie mystery. You say "Wow, I did not see that coming." However, as with any literary reference there must be a satisfactory resolution to the twist. If I, as a writer, were to suddenly introduce a fire-breathing dragon or an alien space ship into a political thriller about unrest in Zimbabwe I'd have to give this unexpected new character a thorough explanation or my story would lose all credibility. It is not wrong for me to introduce this new element in my story, but it could make the story lose focus and confuse my reader rather than helping him follow the plot. Wrong note dissonances in music carry the same responsibility. They must resolve in a manner than does not leave the listener wondering why the hell that note was stuck in there. It needs to make sense when taken in the context of the whole. The musical concept of "wrong note dissonance" is not new. Listen to any of Charles Ives' music and there are so many examples it makes the head spin, but they all resolve into the whole in a way that makes sense. With all this in mind how can the wrong note in this case really be wrong? The question here is really not one of wrong or right, but of how it resolves into the whole, and as Cert,The T, myself and others have repeatedly pointed out, you can either like it or not like it as you own personal tastes, or biases dictate. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 12:18
|
^ awesome post! Maybe we'd be getting somewhere if we called it "odd" instead of "wrong" ... "odd" in the sense that there are no established rules/principles of music theory which explain the note. I offered an explanation of how the note is resolved, but I'm aware that it might be a little bit far fetched and not a resolution as defined in music theory. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Trademark
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 12:44
|
Mike, This passage would appear to be in either a natural minor or dorian mode based on E as the tonal center. It cannot be either harmonic nor melodic minor. In the harmonic minor mode you'd have the D# as a permanent part of the scale and it would nearly always resolve UP to the E which it does not do here. (I'm assuming that the lick repeats itself here taking the B played over the D5 chord into the B which is part of the Em chord at the beginning, a "prpoer" resolution of that dissonance by the way.). This could lead us to question which note is non-diatonic, the D natural in harmonic minor or the D# in melodic or natural minor? Usage here dictates that the D natural is diatonic and the D# is not and that it is not given a satisfactory resolution. In fact, it resolves to another non-diatonic note. Doing this REALLY cries out for a strong, stable resolution which it just doesn't get. In melodic minor the D# leading tone would only be used in a melodic pattern that is ascending and this one is descending (and descending by an augmented interval, another situation that demands a strong, stable resolution). This passage is most likely in the natural minor or dorian modes as there are several F#'s which imply the D5 chord is really D Maj and not D5 . D Maj is the VII (subtonic) chord which is diatonic to both those scales. There is no leading tone used melodically or leading tone chord in this passage. The leading tone of D harmonic minor or the ascending melodic minor would HAVE to be followed by E or they are not "leading" to the tonic as a leading tone must do. This marks out the D# clearly as the non- diatonic tone and, again it has no logical resolution. It simply sticks out like a turd on a truffle and leaves you wondering what the hell they were thinking putting it in there for in the first place. If that melodic idea is used in an altered (more harmonically logical) form later in the song it would help give a delayed resolution (a type of "foreshadowing"), but I don't know if this is the case. It would have made more sense to save that really crispy dissonance for a true change of key or mode where its surprise would have had a purpose. In other words repeat the basic lick (as is in line one of your transcription) until the very last time before it changes key or mood or tempo, or whatever else and give that interesting dissonance a practical use. As it is its like listening to Howard Stern swear; there's no purpose other than shock and shock quickly wears itself out and becomes offensive and/or tedious. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 14:35
|
^ I'm with you here. As I was saying a couple of posts above, the lick is repeated 4 times (alternately playing D and D#) and then a different section begins (a verse, technically) in C#min (actually alternating between C# minor and A major). The D# could be seen as part of a melody line in C# natural minor: E D# B C#. The C#min IMO provides the required "relief" for the "shock" of the - for the E minor / D major situation - offending note. In a way the D# could really be seen as a hint of things to come ...
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 14:40
|
Please everyone go listen to some Merzbow and let's get over this. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:11
^ at least when listening to Merzbow you immediately identify the wrong note(s) ... 
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: N Ellingworth
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:14
| The challenge with Merzbow is finding a 'right' note. |
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:15
|
So there are notes in Merzbow? This is actually a serious question... though probably a seriously stupid one as well... |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:16
^ or indeed any note (as such) to begin with ...  To give those who may not know Merzbow some idea of what we're talking about: http://www.myspace.com/merzbow777 - http://www.myspace.com/merzbow777 ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:27
|
Ah! That's the answer - the D# is the right note - all the other's are wrong - that's why Cert doesn't like the album ------------- What? |
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:39
|
some Merzbow material indeed has notes
sampled progressive rock or else perhaps violins(?) in the days when Merzbow had more than just one member some of the loops he uses more recently might accidentally give rise to a "key" of sorts too, and devout fans of his early work despise his digital stuff for that reason... ------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL |
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 15:46
| ^ Well yeah, given the fact that he has some 86509685065923435 releases out, there's bound to be a note or two out there, |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 16:01
Oh well put, sir!!!!
Very sharp
Actually it was because the whole album feels a bit flat to me
 ... I'm not sure about diatonic - more like dire-tonic  . Can I suggest it's barred  ? Or is that not an acceptable resolution?  Still, it's got people discussing the album and listening to it loads of times - which is ALWAYS good news for a new release.  ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 16:12
|
Just trying to put things in perspective. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 17:16
I can think of a hundred songs that disobey music theory, but that doesn't make them "wrong" as such. If the artist meant to put that particular note in then it's nothing but "right". ------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value." Arnold Schoenberg |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 17:56
My ......
Long Live tonal music! -------------
|
Posted By: Trademark
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 20:28
|
^^ He'd fail my electronic composition class.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 24 2008 at 20:32
He would probably fail a pancake-baking class....the guy thinks he's making good music.....how much more delussional can one get? -------------
|
Posted By: A B Negative
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 04:39
|
Some people prefer Merzbow to (insert name of your favourite band here). ------------- "The disgusting stink of a too-loud electric guitar.... Now, that's my idea of a good time." |
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 04:54
|
Kibble_Alex - artists can disobey music theory all they want, as long as they follow logic (see Trademark's posts on the previous page) The_T - it's hard to tell what Merzbow thinks about his work, especially whether he considers it music or not. From what I've read in his interviews, he just doesn't seem to care. Now, a Merzbow pancake would be something else entirely |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 05:07
Oh dear - I don't think that was accidental, to stave off more puns and to stop people getting crotchety, (which is only natural since they are bound to pitch in, which may lower the tone), I'll give it a rest so this topic can breve and not slur my character. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kathune
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 12:36
|
Hiya, I recently read an interview in a magazine with Mikael, and there was a quote that I found interesting that might explain slightly. "Some things sound like sh*t, but it's the right sh*t! On the song Burden on our new album Watershed, I came up with the idea of Fredrik slowly detuning my acoustic while I played the outro, for example. Sometimes these things add to the song, so we did it - it was funny and ended the song in a nice way. It was a lovely melodic kind of song, and I love to destroy things like that." He's basically saying he likes to... destroy lovely melodic songs which explains that odd note, it does stand out and is a kick in the face for the traditional melody but I kind of like the unnerving edge that note gives. That unwelcoming evil touch if you like. :P Oh by the way, I see somebody posted the tab for the intro a page back or so, thanks for that. Does anybody have any tabs/guitar pro tabs for the rest of the song or anything else from Watershed? Thanks in advance. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 14:01
We can't post full tabs here - excerpts are okay for educational/discussion purposes. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 15:11
I would have bet my life that you of all people could appreciate Merzbow. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 18:22
Even I can't appreciate Merzbow, and I like atonality and venetian snares. Merzbow and the whole Japanese noise/"noize" scene is so out there I don't even know what to call it. Can people actually enjoy listening to Masonna? I don't know. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 23:29
Not really.... I mean... i can take some music with no big melodies.... but music with no big NOTES????
Noise can be interesting.. but it wear out quickly... it's like a gimmick or a novelty thing... First time you say "oh god this is pure genius!", second time "yes... it's very interesting".... third time "mmm.... OK... It's a new thing but I want to hear something else now.." Fourth time "Please hand me that Justin Timberlake CD man... at least it has notes"... -------------
|
Posted By: WinterLight
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 23:41
| Of some interest is Mr. Akerfeldt's http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/opeth/402284-watershed-you-disapointed-9.html#post7349944 - response to the review in question. |
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 23:41
|
i've been listening to Merzbow's "Hybrid Noisebloom" extensively on my mp3 player for months and I have not yet memorized it. maybe it is impossible to.
I am going to get back into Masonna, Gero, CCCC, Incapacitants et. al because I am so frustrated with moderm music right now. To answer whoever's question, yes, this is enjoyment in the form of relief - most music is light entertainment, noise is something different that I can still appreciate. Maybe I'm brainwashed by it or the noise stance simply lines up with some of my philosophies but it still works for me. I really wish Opeth would have experimented a little more with Watershed and stripped out some of the old formulaic parts. I appreciated the few, small moments where they were doing something out of the ordinary, but doesn't it frustrate to know that they can do something more than mine the same seam, yet hardly ever do? ------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 25 2008 at 23:56
haha. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: June 26 2008 at 00:21
Haha, I didn't know people cared about us!
laplace, you don't have to start listening to things that aren't music just to get away from modern music. :P I can't bring myself to call Merzbow music yet, especially since he doesn't seem to care whether or not it is music. I would ask how you can possibly enjoy it, but I know it's not something you can explain. I can't explain to an unbeliever why I like free jazz, and I'm sure it's the same for you.
But I do have one question: by what metric do you consider noize music? Is it a "The only thing required for music is for the player and the listener to call it music" thing, or is that not even something you care about? ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 26 2008 at 02:40
|
All the discussion about Merzbow is indeed off topic here, since his recordings consist primarily of noise, not music. Of course the music contains drums/rhythm which *is* an element of music, but whether to call Merzbow a music artist or not should really be discussed in a separate thread. The comments at www.ultimatemetal.com about Cert's review were also already discussed in a different thread ... so please let's continue to use this thread to discuss the mysterious wrong note. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls Listened to:
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 26 2008 at 03:09
That's not Akerfeldt - it's just some snotty-nosed kid using his name as a login ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 26 2008 at 03:09
Sounds OK to me - not my sort of thing, but I can appreciate the musicality in it. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: June 26 2008 at 04:44
| That note doesn't seem "wrong" at all to me. Not out of place or anything |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: June 26 2008 at 12:24
I was being sarcastic. I like noise, but Merzbow's catalogue is so hit and miss that its frustrating to sort through. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: July 08 2008 at 02:54
|
i like the "wrong" note - it sounds unexpected and creative. -------------  Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: July 08 2008 at 10:00
|
"You're playing all the wrong notes!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP8TUe993uo - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP8TUe993uo ------------- What? |
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: July 08 2008 at 15:08
..but not necessarily in the right order...
------------- Prog Archives Tour Van
|
Posted By: A B Negative
Date Posted: July 09 2008 at 06:48
I need to have my eyes tested, I read that as "Can people actually enjoy listening to Madonna?" ------------- "The disgusting stink of a too-loud electric guitar.... Now, that's my idea of a good time." |
Posted By: el böthy
Date Posted: July 09 2008 at 22:10
|
WHERE ARE ALL THE AVANT GARDE FANS!?!?! They will tell you how stupid this really is... it is pretty stupid.  ------------- "You want me to play what, Robert?" 
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: July 28 2008 at 12:42
|
It is not even vaguely a wrong note. Jeez. Hacket(t?) used that tension frequently. I get someone not liking deliberately "outside" notes but this is metal, it's chromatic. Putting in random chromatic tensions that sound cool but don't necessarily follow theory rules is such an old technique in metal, it's practically a cliche. It's also where some of the cooler riffs come from, letting your ear say "I like that sound, and I don't give a sh....t" instead following any preconceived rules.
OTOH, if your ear doesn't like it, cool. Mine does. It liked it on Selling England too.
|
Posted By: heyitsthatguy
Date Posted: July 29 2008 at 00:43
|
HOLY sh*t WHY IS THIS A THREAD
------------- 
|
Posted By: King of Loss
Date Posted: July 29 2008 at 00:55
|
I enjoy reading this thread.
|