> 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.
I know the trope. My first guitar teacher taught me how to play songs but didn’t know the notes on the fretboard. It’s a bit like being able to drive a car without understand what the clutch and gears actually do.
But personally, I couldn’t handle not knowing why the clutch needed to be pressed, or why a chord shapes is the why it is.
I put it to you that seeing a chord: on paper, or in math or in chord notation, (eg. FminSus4) is something you should only master once you are able to hear that chord.
Otherwise you are (that's a quote) "dancing about architecture" and hurting your ability to understand sound.
I like to think about it as an opinionated framework. Once you have the basics, you can take an unpredictable sounding song and deconstruct it to understand why it sounds so good.
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