SiLeNTScReAM

Yah. Sucks to be owned .

Anyways, this research thing is rubbish . The so-called bright teens aren't that bright, I was asked to be one of them . Never got around to filling in the paperwork *cough*. Plus, so what that a few of them listen to heavy metal, it's a fashionable thing to listen to at the moment, I'm sure it can be proven that Indie is good for bright teens in the same way

Ok, I hate to be a prick, but I've got to be for this post.

First of all, learn to spell ideology, exclusively, and genre. Now that we've got the erroneous part out of the way, on to music theory!

First, we must establish that there is no credible link between intelligence and the creativity, complexity, or harmony of a band/song, nor does it mean that an intelligent person can compose or write music. Saying that someone is intelligent simply because they use odd time signatures is nonsensical and a misuse of logic.

Second, we can see that with the technology available today, its fairly easy for anyone to upload a song to Sibelius or Cubase, change some stuff around, and print out sheet music thats in 15/16 time signature.

Third, we should take a look at classical music for a second. This is more of an aside, but nevertheless, its been proven time and time again that children turn out more intelligent the more they're played classical music as a child. Perhaps we should pay more attention to those kinds of studies than what random teenagers like?

Fourth, time signatures aren't everything. A lot of fairly basic pop songs make use of more advanced rhythmic techniques such as hemiola. So even if the only qualifier for creativity and outstanding composition were to be how outrageous your time signature is, many other songs besides Meshuggah's qualify as giftedly composed.

Fifth (part a), let us examine Spem in Alium by Thomas Tallis written in the 1500s, which is widely regarded as one of the most beautiful and well composed pieces of music of all time. For those of you that aren't aware, its a 40 piece motet written in 4/2. To quote Professor Carpenter, "I have a lot more respect for somebody who can write a piece for 40 voices on individual parts writing in a more common time signature to produce something beautiful and original, than a band who can be pretentious and write in a ridiculous time signature and... ultimately sound little different from many other[s]." I regard her views as not only more accurate than your views, but more accurate than my own. Perhaps we should take into account amount of effort that it takes for a man to write parts for 40 voices with absolutely NONE of the technology that we have today, and then look at how easy it is for joe blow (or jane blow) or even Meshuggah, to use a computer program to create music.

Fifth (part b), let us examine further, the classical music. Baroque period, Corelli's Trio Sonata in D, in 6/8 time throughout but with a hemiola in the middle to add interest. Classical period, Beethoven's Septet in E flat, 3/4 time throughout. Romantic period, Brahms' Piano Quintet in F minor, 3rd movement, is written in 6/8 with some 2/4 phrases. 20th Century, Stravinsky's Pulcinella Suite, 4/4, 6/8, 2/4. These people weren't just 'talented and gifted', they were geniuses. When Fredrik Thordendal of Meshuggah can write for an entire symphony, let me know.

Part the sixth, heavy metal is a genre largely targeted and listened to by teens. Shock and awe that included some people of intelligence, regardless of what type of music it was in the first place. I'm sure a university could find just as many intelligent people that are calmed by emo/hardcore/indie/j-rock/etc, etc, as they can find for heavy metal.

Oh, and one last thing. The poster child of your entire theory, Mesahuggah? Yeah, you misspelled that as well.

Err, come again? To qualify your statement, the emboldened section would have to be changed to: " SK, SOaD, and Tool follow the pop-req forms to make music, which is why they're played on the radio, so I guess it would take someone that listens to the radio to listen to them, and that might include intellectuals at one point or another."

If you want some music that strays from the norm in terms of musical theory, check out The Mars Volta. Those guys take music to the edge.

As for me, I can't stand heavy metal. About as heavy as I get is Chevelle, and even then, I'm not a big fan. Most of today's heavy metal is just screaming shit while banging on instruments, and the few exceptions to that rule (e.g. Slipknot) aren't half bad players, but they distort their sound to ridiculous extremes and end up sounding like idiots.

Don't agree too much with this article.. it sounds more like a coincidence to me.. besides, it's obviously not heavy metal that's going to make you brighter.

In my case, I'm an average student and I listen to generally rock, and to be more precise, emo, post-alternative, screamo, hardcore, techno, and some metal... oh and some rap too.. so my taste is pretty varied... but in all, it's mostly hardcore and well.. I can easily say that I have more trouble concentrating while listening to music with lyrics and a heavy beat, whereas when I'll listen to classic I'll be much more concentrated on what I'm doing.. or I just won't be distracted.