bathory Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanadu Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 True, but often the moments that sound really cool turn out to be the moments when there was a time signature change. If you don't know what they are, you wouldn't think twice about it, but if you do, you recognize the briliiantly-placed time change. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc Well, when someone attacks one of the most interesting things about Rush, on a Rush fan forum no less, then yes, I don't have much patience for ignorance. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bathory Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc Well, when someone attacks one of the most interesting things about Rush, on a Rush fan forum no less, then yes, I don't have much patience for ignorance. I think he just means that music doesn't have to have odd time signatures to be good. but I didn't read the entire thread so who knows 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc Well, when someone attacks one of the most interesting things about Rush, on a Rush fan forum no less, then yes, I don't have much patience for ignorance. I think he just means that music doesn't have to have odd time signatures to be good. but I didn't read the entire thread so who knows Yeah I know what was meant. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 (edited) This thread could've had a better basis than just your opinion and "that's it." Using your logic from one of your replies, this thread shouldn't even exist. Damn it man, you have your OWN thread just for yourself but nope, you just litter everywhere else. Edited August 30, 2015 by Polaris 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraroc Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc Well, when someone attacks one of the most interesting things about Rush, on a Rush fan forum no less, then yes, I don't have much patience for ignorance. I think he just means that music doesn't have to have odd time signatures to be good. but I didn't read the entire thread so who knows That's exactly what I'm getting at. A song doesn't have to be 345254852/4 or whatever to be a good song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraroc Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 This thread could've had a better basis than just your opinion and "that's it." Using your logic from one of your replies, this thread shouldn't even exist. Damn it man, you have your OWN thread just for yourself but nope, you just litter everywhere else. Polaris, be honest with me. Do you think I could be serious in a joke thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc Well, when someone attacks one of the most interesting things about Rush, on a Rush fan forum no less, then yes, I don't have much patience for ignorance. I think he just means that music doesn't have to have odd time signatures to be good. but I didn't read the entire thread so who knows That's exactly what I'm getting at. A song doesn't have to be 345254852/4 or whatever to be a good song. Nobody is saying it does. A crappy song is a crappy song regardless of what time signature it's in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cygnify Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Nobody is saying it does. A crappy song is a crappy song regardless of what time signature it's in. +1. However, for me, it boils down to disliking predictability. I guess I just don't care for the over-used. ultra cliched, hackneyed rhythms, chord progressions, and song arrangements that are all too prevalent in modern corporate rock (if there is still such a thing - I think there are radio stations still playing this type of crap in my area... lol) There can be great songs in 4/4, but one has to be more creative, more original with it and go outside the box to gain my interest. There will always be people that enjoy the ultra-predicable, just as there will be lines at McDonalds and at the summer blockbusters... that's fine for them. For those that want to dig deeper, I hope there is something more. The last two bands that I have recorded with were a sort of "progressive" pocket music - some songs were straight up 4 or 6 - but other had sections of 5, 9, 15, and even 21. My job was to construct grooves that grooved, regardless of the time signature. The feedback we got was that it worked. It is possible, and there is an audience beyond other musicians! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Nobody is saying it does. A crappy song is a crappy song regardless of what time signature it's in. +1. However, for me, it boils down to disliking predictability. I guess I just don't care for the over-used. ultra cliched, hackneyed rhythms, chord progressions, and song arrangements that are all too prevalent in modern corporate rock (if there is still such a thing - I think there are radio stations still playing this type of crap in my area... lol) There can be great songs in 4/4, but one has to be more creative, more original with it and go outside the box to gain my interest. There will always be people that enjoy the ultra-predicable, just as there will be lines at McDonalds and at the summer blockbusters... that's fine for them. For those that want to dig deeper, I hope there is something more. The last two bands that I have recorded with were a sort of "progressive" pocket music - some songs were straight up 4 or 6 - but other had sections of 5, 9, 15, and even 21. My job was to construct grooves that grooved, regardless of the time signature. The feedback we got was that it worked. It is possible, and there is an audience beyond other musicians! I agree with you. Different time signatures can keep the music from getting boring. Music like anything else shouldn't fit in a narrow minded box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod in Toronto Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 On the other hand, AC/DC and The Ramones with weird time signatures would sound rather strange... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) This thread could've had a better basis than just your opinion and "that's it." Using your logic from one of your replies, this thread shouldn't even exist. Damn it man, you have your OWN thread just for yourself but nope, you just litter everywhere else. Polaris, be honest with me. Do you think I could be serious in a joke thread? Nobody set that in stone. I'm pretty sure the forum has had enough of your dead-end threads clogging up the forums so that thread is the be-all end-all for your rants. Just put the link in your sig and update it with a line of text about a new post if you want people to see it. I certainly know you want everyone to know what you're thinking. Edited August 31, 2015 by Polaris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 On the other hand, AC/DC and The Ramones with weird time signatures would sound rather strange... That's because they wrote great songs ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I think all of this is fun discussion, and to use broad strokes to cover wide swaths of music is unfair In fact, "broad strokes" was one of my recent "A to Z Dislikes" Anyways, one of the greatest, most respected pieces in rock music - esp with the guitar/prog listeners - is Steve Howe's acoustic masterpiece "Clap" . . . it is in 4/4 and is about as impressive a piece of work as you'll find . . Steve Howe is a musical genius - albeit a cranky one nowadays :) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue J Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I think all of this is fun discussion, and to use broad strokes to cover wide swaths of music is unfair In fact, "broad strokes" was one of my recent "A to Z Dislikes" Anyways, one of the greatest, most respected pieces in rock music - esp with the guitar/prog listeners - is Steve Howe's acoustic masterpiece "Clap" . . . it is in 4/4 and is about as impressive a piece of work as you'll find . . Steve Howe is a musical genius - albeit a cranky one nowadays :) I love Steve Howe...I only got to be a big fan of Yes a little more than a year ago, but Howe quickly became one of my favourite guitarists...he's a genius. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I think all of this is fun discussion, and to use broad strokes to cover wide swaths of music is unfair In fact, "broad strokes" was one of my recent "A to Z Dislikes" Anyways, one of the greatest, most respected pieces in rock music - esp with the guitar/prog listeners - is Steve Howe's acoustic masterpiece "Clap" . . . it is in 4/4 and is about as impressive a piece of work as you'll find . . Steve Howe is a musical genius - albeit a cranky one nowadays :) I love Steve Howe...I only got to be a big fan of Yes a little more than a year ago, but Howe quickly became one of my favourite guitarists...he's a genius. I completely agree - his parts and additions to those classic YES songs are amazing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Not Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 This thread could've had a better basis than just your opinion and "that's it." Using your logic from one of your replies, this thread shouldn't even exist. Damn it man, you have your OWN thread just for yourself but nope, you just litter everywhere else. Was just going to mention this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Not Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc Well, when someone attacks one of the most interesting things about Rush, on a Rush fan forum no less, then yes, I don't have much patience for ignorance. I think he just means that music doesn't have to have odd time signatures to be good. but I didn't read the entire thread so who knows That's exactly what I'm getting at. A song doesn't have to be 345254852/4 or whatever to be a good song. Everyone already knows this. No one here has ever suggested otherwise. It's been cool to see what others have been saying about time sigs in this thread, so at least it's been serving that purpose. As for you though, you haven't really done anything other than spout truisms and present your ignorance surrounding time signatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Not Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 This thread could've had a better basis than just your opinion and "that's it." Using your logic from one of your replies, this thread shouldn't even exist. Damn it man, you have your OWN thread just for yourself but nope, you just litter everywhere else. Polaris, be honest with me. Do you think I could be serious in a joke thread? Nobody set that in stone. I'm pretty sure the forum has had enough of your dead-end threads clogging up the forums so that thread is the be-all end-all for your rants. Just put the link in your sig and update it with a line of text about a new post if you want people to see it. I certainly know you want everyone to know what you're thinking. Nope, it's definitely a joke thread, and it's about as set in stone as anything can be set in stone around here. The thread's title itself guarantees it as a joke thread, it's direct a reference to TOST which is somewhat infamous around here for being a mindless madhouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraroc Posted August 31, 2015 Author Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) You know, this is exactly what I was talking about...time signatures, unless you're a musician yourself, are not important. JUST LIKE WHAT YOU LIKE. Why would you really care what other people think anyway? Leave the music-making to the musicians. What an inane topic of conversation. I see you've reached your boiling point with fraroc Well, when someone attacks one of the most interesting things about Rush, on a Rush fan forum no less, then yes, I don't have much patience for ignorance. I think he just means that music doesn't have to have odd time signatures to be good. but I didn't read the entire thread so who knows That's exactly what I'm getting at. A song doesn't have to be 345254852/4 or whatever to be a good song. Everyone already knows this. No one here has ever suggested otherwise. It's been cool to see what others have been saying about time sigs in this thread, so at least it's been serving that purpose. As for you though, you haven't really done anything other than spout truisms and present your ignorance surrounding time signatures. I don't know about time signature, I mean I know what they are, I just never took the time out to figure them out and I don't feel as if I need to. I just like music. Edited August 31, 2015 by fraroc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick N. Backer Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I just think that people who would go out of their way to say that if a song doesn't have a weird time signature that it automatically sucks are being really shallow and close minded.I've literally never seen that here I do think people here place a bit too much emphasis on technicality and sounding squeaky clean. I haven't seen anyone say that you have to be technical to be good, but I've seen people who criticize KISS for being simplistic and it's clear that they're so obsessed with 12 minute songs about elves that they miss the point of rock n roll entirely. Don't forget 14 minute keyboard solos. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue J Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I think all of this is fun discussion, and to use broad strokes to cover wide swaths of music is unfair In fact, "broad strokes" was one of my recent "A to Z Dislikes" Anyways, one of the greatest, most respected pieces in rock music - esp with the guitar/prog listeners - is Steve Howe's acoustic masterpiece "Clap" . . . it is in 4/4 and is about as impressive a piece of work as you'll find . . Steve Howe is a musical genius - albeit a cranky one nowadays :) I love Steve Howe...I only got to be a big fan of Yes a little more than a year ago, but Howe quickly became one of my favourite guitarists...he's a genius. I completely agree - his parts and additions to those classic YES songs are amazing He is one of the most versatile rock guitarists I've ever heard. He has so many different styles up his sleeve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWatchMaker97 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Time signatures are rad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Not Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I think all of this is fun discussion, and to use broad strokes to cover wide swaths of music is unfair In fact, "broad strokes" was one of my recent "A to Z Dislikes" Anyways, one of the greatest, most respected pieces in rock music - esp with the guitar/prog listeners - is Steve Howe's acoustic masterpiece "Clap" . . . it is in 4/4 and is about as impressive a piece of work as you'll find . . Steve Howe is a musical genius - albeit a cranky one nowadays :) I love Steve Howe...I only got to be a big fan of Yes a little more than a year ago, but Howe quickly became one of my favourite guitarists...he's a genius. I completely agree - his parts and additions to those classic YES songs are amazing He is one of the most versatile rock guitarists I've ever heard. He has so many different styles up his sleeve. I've always found Howe to be something a little opposite - distinct and recognizable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now