Re: On the Grammar of Music (Martin Braun )

Subject: Re: On the Grammar of Music
From:    Martin Braun  <nombraun(at)POST.NETLINK.SE>
Date:    Fri, 27 Apr 2001 11:39:59 +0200

Steve, you may huff and puff, and do damage to your house, as it pleases you. But before writing "patent nonsense", you might as well go to the library and read at least one paper of Ed Burns. I know all major publications of him very well; on music theory, on psychoacoustics, and on auditory physiology. Nowhere did he even mention the possibility that a grammar of chord progression in music could exist in a similar way as a grammar in human languages MUST exist. Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen McAdams <Stephen.McAdams(at)> To: <AUDITORY(at)LISTS.MCGILL.CA> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 12:08 AM Subject: Re: On the Grammar of Music > > There are no such rules. > > Since Ed Burns isn't on this list anymore, I guess someone else has to > huff and puff and blow the house down and say "Stop the patent > nonsense!" > > Anyone who truly believes there are no rules in music would give up > working on the neuroscience of music and become a roofer. At least > there the basic rule is, water flows down hill (unless you don't believe > there are rules concerning gravity and water flow). > > -- > Stephen McAdams > Equipe Perception et Cognition Musicales > Ircam-CNRS (UMR 9912) > 1 place Igor-Stravinsky > F-75004 Paris, France > tel: +33.1.4478.4838, fax +33.1.4478.1540 > > >

This message came from the mail archive
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University