Music Theory

Unfortunately, characters like Neely exist because of a general lack of knowledge and interest on the part of the public that also props him up. He's like any of these other TED Talk infotainment guys, circulating shallow, inaccurate, harmful ideas with absolutely no accountability.

Occasionally he's on the money. There's a video about tritones that I really don't object to. From a musicology/history of theory perspective, there's nothing controversial about it and I appreciate that he's pushing back on a common myth.

Other times, he says some really dubious stuff. There's that video about some modulation in a Celine Dion song that pieces together its argument from another feel-good edutainment music theory work that nobody examines critically, Harmonic Experience by W.A. Mathieu, and some idealistic embodiment stuff (vulgar though; he doesn't cite Arnie Cox or anyone like that, not that I think that would make it any better). The experienced analyst really has to suspend their disbelief. The harmonic dualism he draws from Mathieu was called out as nonsense back in the 19th century, for fuck's sake.

Then, there's another video on that Recorder Team lady's channel where we learn that Neely has never before heard of red notation or the rhythmic craziness of Ars Subtilior/Trecento music. Do they not teach music history at Berklee?

When I watch his videos, I get the pervasive sense that he only first encounters the concept at hand a few weeks before, and his familiarity with said topic is limited to what he researched for that specific video. He basically makes undergraduate research essays with a budget. And people pay him for it and take it for gospel.

Looks like I'm a little late to the party (also, hey, it's me!) but I couldn't help but check out a post slamming Adam neely.

That said, my specific gripe has always been that he handles classical music badly. He thinks he’s an expert on it but he really isn’t.

This is also my primary gripe with Neely, and while the videos explicitly focusing on classical music are the most obvious offenders, that kind of attitude pervades a lot of his content, whether it's him dismissing "academic" theorists and music, making digs at classical musicians, or committing the r/musictheory special of assuming that all music is jazz.

His "music theory and white supremacy" video is also riddled with inaccuracies and misrepresentations any time classical music and institutions are discussed. He even frequently misrepresents or overstates Ewell's points, which are presented more accurately (and more reasonably) by Ewell himself later in the video. It's a shame, because it's a video with (at present) 2.4 million views on a topic that's worth discussing. But the thesis gets muddled because Neely can't help but use it as an opportunity to shit on classical music, so it's presented through that lens.

Fully agree with your points on the second and third parts of the video.

Finally, I wish the author had done a segment on Neely’s video about the cult of sheet music (or some such similar title). Once again Neely completely misrepresented how classical music works this time relative to sheet music.

Oh, my. I hadn't seen this video before, but I'm watching it now and it's so bad. His arguments are on par with the average r/classicalmusic user decrying "modernism" and the "avant-garde."

Maybe the worst part of Neely's video:

I call this the cult of the written score, and it's pervasive in all forms of academic and collegiate thought^[citation needed]. At its most extreme, the cult of the written score gives us music that is really boring. Extremely boring. More interested in the mathematical thought and the processes necessary to make 12-tone composition or [indiscernible] composition, people in the musical ivory tower genuinely forget to make...music^[citation needed]. Most of it's totally boring with no sense of drama or arc or texture or anything^[citation needed]. The process of writing the music and how they can connect the dots is given way more importance than the actual act of listening to music and creating music that's exciting or interesting^[citation needed].

Neely goes on to discuss how he notated some electronic music so that the "entrenched elite" could understand it, and seems not to have realized that electronic music's biggest pioneers were classical composers, that classical composers have been writing scores for electronic music (both fixed and live electronics) for decades, or that plenty of electronic music written by classical composers doesn't have a score at all, or that the "entrenched elite" probably know what FM synthesis is. He genuinely seems to think that he invented a totally new way of notating electronic music that no one else has ever thought of before and suggests it might become mainstream in the next 10-15 years.

I have to admit, I didn't expect the video to be that bad.

Hey, cool to see you here. Sorry for making the first post here a call-out video.

The guy has a bachelor's degree in performance from what amounts to a trade school. He's a reasonably competent musician, but just like I wouldn't expect a plumber with the same education attainment to be an expert in materials science and the history of municipal engineering, I wouldn't expect a bass player with a performance degree to be an expert in music theory, music history, conducting, linguistics, or any of the other fields Neely comments upon when he has an agenda.

I don't know if I'd go that far.