Viewing Thread:
"Punk vs. Metal"

Well?

Theory opens up *a lot* of doors.

bet your writing and improv skills aren't quite spectacular though :wink:

Bob_The_Moose wrote:
> Very_Metal wrote:
> Bob_The_Moose wrote:
> Ooh, I remember seeing some maths related genre in another forum; I
> think it's more about technicality than theory.
>
> surely theory equates technicality?
> how do you seperate them?
>
> Well I always thought of stuff like time changes (and signatures),
> rhythm patterns and all that stuff as being the technical side, or
> stuff that's technique heavy... ie you need to be skilled to be able
> to play it. Not necesserily reliant on any or much theory. If you see
> what I mean.

I've never thought theory really comes into the actual performance. Obviously if you want to produce it the way you want it to sound then a knowledge of the technical side of things is needed, but you don't really need to know much about the technical stuff to hammer on some strings.

I know next to nothing about the technical side of music, but I can still play my guitar to a decent standard.

Very_Metal wrote:
> Bob_The_Moose wrote:
> Ooh, I remember seeing some maths related genre in another forum; I
> think it's more about technicality than theory.
>
> surely theory equates technicality?
> how do you seperate them?

Well I always thought of stuff like time changes (and signatures), rhythm patterns and all that stuff as being the technical side, or stuff that's technique heavy... ie you need to be skilled to be able to play it. Not necesserily reliant on any or much theory. If you see what I mean.

Very_Metal wrote:
> Chr1s wrote:
> math-core, which is quite possibly
> the stupidest name I've ever heard.
>
> i concur.
> i assume that's the name given to metal with tight time changes and
> application of music theory?

Listen to some Meshuggah. They're supposedly a 'math-core' band. They do have some pretty tricky time changes, which makes it all the more entertaining when you watch them. Just as you've established a rhythm and you're head-banging away like a nutter, they hit you with another time change and you're completely thrown out unless you know the song quite well.

They still pwn pretty much everything else though.

Bob_The_Moose wrote:
> Ooh, I remember seeing some maths related genre in another forum; I
> think it's more about technicality than theory.

surely theory equates technicality?
how do you seperate them?

Magical Trevor wrote:
> Yeah, you can get some weird sub-genres like
> post-grindcore-grunge-hardcore-death-black-power-hair-metal or
> something.
>
> That's what i'd call my band, anyway...

Then you'd have to incoporate all those genres and hair and grindcore are pretty much polar opposites. Unless you wanted a huge-ass shred solo in the middle. But then that's anti-grunge isn't it?
Be quiet, trevor.

Emo's a lazy media term for a bunch of bands.

Same goes for Nu-metal which apparently includes both POD and Chimera.

Just goes to show what a joke the newer genres are.

As Sibs said.

Pumpkins (or Billy Corgan) took influence from Sabbath, Van Halen and Queen etc, as well as other stuff like Cheap Trick.

And Emo can be Elliott (talented, clever, wonderful, not crap) or FFAF (loud, noisy, Welsh, crap, awful, angsty)

etc.

Ooh, I remember seeing some maths related genre in another forum; I think it's more about technicality than theory.