The album that killed Music Theory

The album that killed Music Theory.

more like the album that got killed by music theory

Okay.

Computer.

wow we both got dubs there.
pretty cool, right?

The ending of Veterans Day Poppy in particular would disagree

pre-post rock

Do you mean music theory in rock music? Cause this came out in '61, Lennie Tristano was playing free music as far back as the early 50s/late 40s and there were plenty of deconstructionists classical music before that too.

Rec?

It's some old dad rock wannabe horse throat fat man spouting random, nonsensical, often incoherent babble over
Music that seemingly has no structure . What's so good about this shit?

I like music withas recognizable structure and relatable vocals. Do people only like this because a few faggots on this site like it? Seriously people who like this surely don't know anything about music and like it because it sounds "Avante garde".

Pathetic really

literally the entire album is composed and structured

Looks like the work of an enemy stand to me

Sure .poorly

>it doesn't fit into the model I expect
>I don't get it
>Therefore no one actually likes it

I'm not big on TMR but your assumptions are pretty out there

Nah. It definitely follows theory, but everything's played sloppily so it's hard to realize it.

OK. Then explain it to me. It's people making noise that sounds average with a vocalist spouting over the top cryptic nonsense. Lyrics are meant to be meaningful, seems like a rushed together, split up overlong piece of 60s acid physcidelic junk..

Who know though I only got to track 11 theb shut it off when clips of random sentences started playinh. maybe he turned it around the last half.

...

Would I rec Ornette Coleman's Free Jazz? Yeah, if you don't get deterred by dissonance or rhythmically free music. I didn't like it when I first heard it but after listening to a lot more jazz and I found it much more palatable.
That was just my experience though. A lot of people who know very little about jazz like this stuff because they just like crazy sounding music.

that doesnt make any sense

>are meant to be
no.

>relatable vocals

how do i know this is bait? simple -
>writes like he's older than 20 and not retarded
>makes childish retarded post

obviously he's pretending, although he can't be too smart because then he'd pretend better

music theory is fucking boring anyway

I get someone not liking this album, but do you actually think that Beefheart set out to make a conventional album and just fucked up that badly?

>TMR vocals
>not relatable
All these fucking mentally healthy normies are fucking ruining this fucking board. Go back to listening to your shitty pop punk you faggot.

>(1)

...

Rolling Stone magazine called it one of the 100 greatest albums of all time. No one pretends to like it. It's actually good.

A love supreme

I feel like none of you guys actually know any music theory. TMR is not even close to breaking music or anything like that.

It is. Idiots should please leaves this thread.
Like you.

Such convincing arguments.

...

here´s a theory you need to get laid

I hope you die.
Idiots like you think theory is good when it take creativity out of music lol you idiots wouldn't understand

everybody dies

DUR FUNNY D
Shit up you faggots. Kys.
Like leafy said.

bait

Dude, they recorded in one well rehearsed session. It's definitely not sloppy in the technical aspect.

Why does Sup Forums pretend to know anything about music theory or history? Stay in school kids.

Because we're a music board.

I'm not sure what part of that post lead you to believe I'm in favour of either position. I'm just pointing out that you're both not giving convincing reasons or evidence and that your posts have about the nuance of two six year olds having an "Am not, Am too" back and forth.

But that doesn't mean "Now I can be a pretentious pseudo-intellectual about something I don't know anything about"

Please explain to me how I'm wrong.
Oh wait. You can't because you're a special needs kid with anger issues who need to get beaten His father more often.

>Because we're a shit board.

ftfy

I suppose you're the only well informed person on here? What's it like being so smart?

but you are the one being pretentious when you made that post: Stay in your circlejerk of a school, you're all cancer. Your retarded theories only have value there, not on the real world.

I guess?

You just contradicted yourself green texting. Ever consider you are the pretender?

It's pretty good to be passionate about music and actually care about it enough to do some studying.
I'm being pretentious by calling out how you all were:
attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed?

I know you're still baiting, but music theory doesn't stifle or drain creativity.

Theory gives a musician an avenue to think outside of the box. Everybody, for their whole lives, has been surrounded by the conventions of western music, and without actually knowing those conventions, it'd be difficult to break those conventions.

If you want to break the rules of music, you have to know the rules of music

>It's pretty good to be passionate about music and actually care about it enough to do some studying.
You may want to check that egotism there if you actually think you're the only person on this board who studies and is passionate about music.

This thread is worse than the album

In this thread, I am.
I know there are at least two other people on the board who studies music.

yeah and that means it's pretty fucking bad

It's not hard to break music.

the gerogerigegege
Or Shaggs
B8/10

Are you kidding me? You know that only further shows that this is kinda sloppy right? One take doesn't always equate to meaning technical perfection, especially with how this album is recorded and mixed.

I for sure know more about the Magic Band than you do if you think this album wasn't being sloppy especially if you give something like Lick My Decals Off, Baby a listen.

>if you think this album wasn't being sloppy
The individual instruments all play in time without issue, they were purposefully put together in collage-like fashion. Calling it "sloppy" implies unintentional de-synchronization. It's like calling Ornette Coleman sloppy.

>gerogerigegege
>the shaggs
>"breaking music"

Christ you're embarrassing yourself.

nice quads

>In this thread, I am.
Yeah, see there's that egotism again. What exactly qualifies as "studying music" to you?

I know you're still baiting. But the Shaggs didn't know how to play a instrument yet made a breaking album loved by zapa and Cobain.

That's not what I am talking about though. Again, Lick My Decals is even more weirder and pulls crazier rhythm fuckery, but it's nowhere near as sloppy as TMR. TMR's definitely sloppy; it's not as easy to pick up due to how shit the mixing is.

>Frank Zappa and Kurt Cobain like it so it must be groundbreaking
Sure it might be interesting, but in the end it's just an out of time, out of tune "so bad that it's not that bad" record of sort of outsider rock music

LMD is not weirder, does not have crazier rhythms. It's in every way more conventional than TMR.

I have no idea why would someone find difficulties listening to this collection of modernist rock music.

What? No it's not. The most complex of LMDO,B is far more so than TMR. TMR is mostly just baby tier chords, LMDO,B does far more stuff and takes the angular ideas introduced on TMR to the next level.

>rolling stone says its the in the top 100
>it must be true = this album is superb

Don't you have your own brain? This album is considered good only because it a broke all the rules back then in popular music. Classics did such things years before, but there were only a few that actually listened to avant-garde classical music.

You're stupid.

...

I contradicted myself? Are you actually retarded?

>It definitely follows theory
but music theory is descriptive, not prescriptive

it sure did.

The album that proved music theory. #troutmask