Live data from Hacker News

Music Theory for Programmers

runjs.app

21–30 of 259 posts

Re: Music Theory for Programmers

#22
post #5

I learned to play guitar by my own when I was around 12. You don't really even need to know music theory to play guitar, as long as you understand the shapes etc. Over time, I developed shorthands for understanding theory like i can easily look at a fretboard and know which note it is. But what bugged me is that you seem to imply the reason why you couldn't learn a instrument was because you did not understand the wh…

It's funny though how different people respond to learning music theory differently. I started on guitar when I was 19. I played for a long time at campfire level. When my kids started learning music I also learnt a lot, and now I know scale shapes and modes on guitar, so I can reasonably play to a song I'm hearing for the first time, then figure it out by ear. But I just cannot make the leap to knowing the notes at…

I think it gets significantly harder to learn new things as you age. It could make sense though like its significantly easier to learn a new language as a child than an adult, something simillar could apply to sheet music also i guess where they are naturally more intuined with its language vrs you who has to kinda use a dictionary for time to time because the "normal" way for you to speak has been so different for so long. But for your child, its another form of expression almost. Its really good to get kids into music while they are young imo

Re: Music Theory for Programmers

#23
If tasked with this, I would start with an image of a piano keyboard and ask: Why the hell does it look so weird ? Black and white keys in some infernally strange layout ? WHY ?

Which takes you very quickly to equal temperament and perfect fourths and perfect fifths. This tells us where the notes C and F and G are located on the chromatic scale, but then the rest are pretty arbitrary eh. Semitones from C to C go 2-2-1-2-2-2-1, but there is nothing heavenly ordained by this particular arrangement. E-to-F and B-to-C are a collective choice.

If I had been presented with this kind of explanation fifty years ago, I might have been less skeptical of the entire enterprise.

Re: Music Theory for Programmers

#26
> Which is a strange way to teach a system that essentially comes out of physics and arithmetic. There are twelve notes for a reason.

There is of course a lot of physics involved. But there is at least as much convention at play. So imho this is a very one sided way of looking at it.

There is a physical reason the 12 notes are those 12 notes (though the exact frequencies assigned are influenced by culture as well), but lots of different cultures use less notes, or more, or extra notes inbetween.

So 'Because that is the convention.' is imho at least a good an explanation as the physics one.

Re: Music Theory for Programmers

#28
post #15

I want to read it, because it’s interesting. And yet. https://bcantrill.dtrace.org/2026/09/05/the-revolt-of-the-re...

I did read it, found it mildly informative/interesting, then saw your comment, read the link, and pasted in two paragraphs into Pangram 4... ouch! I guess I'm not LLM-weary enough? https://www.pangram.com/history/25773627-adfa-4efb-8c10-f4fd...

When you read something like this

> Change it to 300 and run it again. You get a different pitch and nothing breaks, because at this level there are no notes yet, just a number.

does it make sense? Or perhaps it just seems like something easy enough to skim past without worrying about whether it makes sense?

Before LMs, I would have assumed that a person intentionally wrote that sentence, and perhaps spent some time trying to understand what could possibly "break" if there were "notes" rather than "just a number." Now there is a simpler explanation: the sentence actually doesn't mean anything.

Re: Music Theory for Programmers

#29

Let us try an experiment shall we: listen to any music you like and try and match the information the article provided to the complexity of what you are hearing. How much do you see a path from A(rticle) to S(ound in your ear). This article is trivializing music down to a few not-so-important facts and mistaking some math for anything that would help `programmers` (?) understand music. Maybe start by rewatching "This…

> How much do you see a path from A(rticle) to S(ound in your ear).

Very clearly. The author constructed a melody from first principles in the article. You can take any song, deconstruct it using the information in there and begin to see why it sounds nice.

> This article is trivializing music down to a few not-so-important facts

This is a music theory lecture with code examples. Hardly “not-so-important”.

> mistaking some math for anything that would help `programmers` (?) understand music.

Compared to the lessons on https://www.musictheory.net this is definitely programmer/engineer friendly. It’s better than my old go-to at https://www.lightnote.co

Re: Music Theory for Programmers

#30
post #10

This article is quite well done, especially from a programmer's perspective, but falls flat (no pun intended) for me because of my terrible ear for pitch. > Here are five notes. Every one is double the frequency of the one before it. [...] They are different pitches, and yet they sound like the same note. Nothing about these notes seem similar to me. You could play pretty much any sequence of rising notes and (falsel…

I thought the same for a long long time.

At least for me the solution was to grind ear training for a few weeks/ months 10 minutes a day.

I'll certainly never reach the heights of this skill but a bit of persistence to overcome lack of natural talent did propell me forward.

Post reply on HN