Talk:Music theory/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Music theory. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
I suspect this could get fractured very quickly.
Perhaps this would best be organized by dividing music theory up into a number of major disciplines:
- Melody
- Harmony
- Rhythm
- Timbre
Within a 'melody' page, we could lead quite naturally into counterpoint in its various species, scales (diatonic, modal, chromatic, and microtonal), and so on.
Within a 'harmony' page, we could lead easily into chords, harmonic progressions, some additional discussion of scales, and so on.
Within a 'rhythm' page we could discuss the hemiola, syncopation, and so on.
Within a 'timbre' page we could discuss musical instruments, 'beating' of frequencies, elements of electronic musical instruments (oscillators, MIDI gear, etc), and so on.
--Fleeb
Started change by breaking existing page into four subheads: time will tell if subpages are necessary when there's enough material...
/ about analysing popular music...try http://www.theblackbook.net/acad/tagg/texts.html#1980-1989 /
Should this page be renamed 'Western musical theory', and other similar pages be built up for other traditions? Or perhaps the basic western concepts could be used in explaining other culture's music (as western music has the most sophisticated *written* scheme,) meaning that a lot of the existing articles could stay here as they would be culture independent. -- sodium
I see that the terms 'musical theory' and 'music theory', 'musical notation' and 'music notation' etc. are both being used. I feel the 'al' is incorrect and should be deleted. Does anyone else care? And how big an undertaking would it be? Would it be worth the effort? JMJ