工具与资源tobyrush.com编辑精选
给音乐人和普通人的乐理
Music Theory for Musicians and Normal People
2014 — 2019，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
Toby W. Rush 制作的一套图解音乐理论页面，用简洁直观的图表讲解基础乐理，涵盖记谱、音阶、和声以及基础声部写作，适合初学者，后段内容接近中级。作者以 CC BY-NC-ND 授权免费发布，2014 和 2019 年两次登上 Hacker News 首页。
为什么经久不衰：它把枯燥的乐理术语压缩成简明的一页页图解参考，至今仍是入门者系统梳理基础概念的高质量免费资料。
HN 评论精选
用分数倍频与平均律把和声和音阶的数学原理讲得很通俗。
这里是我的外行解释：选一个频率，比如 400 赫兹。把它乘以一个简单分数（1/2、1/3、2/5 等），会得到一个新频率，与原频率和谐，也就是一起演奏时听起来悦耳。分数越简单，两音听起来越和谐（1/2 比 7/13 好听）。在 1 和 2 之间取几个这样的分数（如 3/2、4/3、5/4、2/1），就构成所谓的音阶。音阶内所有频率都与起始频率和谐，但彼此不一定和谐。音乐家并不总想用同一基准音，于是发明了“平均律”：用对数或指数而非分数来构建音阶，这样音阶中任何频率都能当起点，结果一致。
pubby查看英文原文
Here's my layman explanation: Pick a frequency. Let's say you picked 400 hertz. If you multiply this frequency by a simple fraction (1/2, 1/3, 2/5, etc) you get a new frequency that harmonizes with your original frequency. That means they sound nice when played together. The simpler the fraction, the better the two frequencies will sound (1/2 sounds nicer than 7/13, for example). If you pick several of these fractions between 1 and 2 (such as 3/2, 4/3, 5/4, 2/1, etc) you create what's called a scale. All the frequencies in the scale harmonize with the starting frequency, but they don't necessarily harmonize with each other. Musicians don't always want to play with the same starting frequency so they invented "equal temperament". The idea behind equal temperament is to create a scale using logarithms/exponents instead of fractions. Because it's logarithmic, any frequency in the scale can be used as a starting point and you'll get the same result.
基础乐理是 18 世纪特定风格的规则，是好的起点但并非完整真理。
这类入门讲解常忽略音乐理论的语境，以及协和与不协和到底意味着什么。没错，这些其实是 18 世纪某个特定风格和地域中“什么算正确”的品味规则，和拉莫 1822 年的论著相差不大，只是术语名换了。有人说“这解释不了爵士、无调性或晚期古典音乐里好听的东西”，你说得对，但没抓住重点。《芬尼根的守灵夜》是艺术，并不改变十四行诗的定义；十四行诗不是唯一诗体，但研究诗歌时很值得学，因为影响深远。18 世纪的基础乐理大致类似：对后世影响巨大，是很好的起点，但不应被当作“音乐如何运作”的完整正确表述，而只是一个时间、品味与技术的快照。
ianamartin查看英文原文
One of the things that these explainers often miss is the context around music theory, and what it means to be consonant or dissonant. As some comments below complain about, this seems woefully incomplete and extremely restrictive. And it is. These are the rules of taste and style about what was considered correct in a specific style and location in the 18th century. The way this is taught in basic forms like this isn't much different from Rameau's treatise in 1822. The names of things have changed a little, but the basic concept is that. For people who say, "Wait! This doesn't account for all the stuff that sounds sooooo good in Jazz, atonal music, or even later classical music! This is bullshit!" You're kind of right, but mostly missing the point. The fact that Finnegan's Wake was written and works and is a work of art, doesn't change the definition of what a Sonnet is. A Sonnet isn't the only form of poetry out there. But it's a useful thing to study if you study poetry because it's a massively influential form on lots of stuff that developed after it. The music theory fundamentals from the 18th century are roughly analogous to that. Massively influential on everything that happened later, and therefore a good place to start. But they shouldn't be read as a complete or correct statement of "how music works." Just a snapshot of time, taste, and technology that serves as a convenient starting point for exploring what happened before and after. The other thing that's often missed here is the role of music theory in the history of music. Theorists have operated across a spectrum of prescriptivism and descriptivism for thousands of years. At some points in time, theorists are laying down the rules about what music should be and claiming artistic/philosophical authority. But at other times in history, they are much more interested in simply describing how composers achieve certain musical effects. This fluctuates every couple of hundred years since the time of Plato or Aristoxenus. You see the same kinds of divides and fluctuations with linguists and dictionary editors. Some are very focused on capturing the language as it is currently used, where others are very insistent on laying down the rules of correct usage. Music theory, broadly speaking, should be understood in the same way.
提供完整 PDF 镜像，并评价其简洁且接近中级水平。
缓存缩略图引起了我的兴趣，我找到了整套内容的镜像：http://academic.udayton.edu/tobyrush/theorypages/complete.pdf。它采用 CC BY-NC-ND 授权，作者是 Toby W. Rush。顺便说，这是很棒的资源，比许多面向初学者的乐理资料更好、更简洁；如果你能读到后面较高级的音阶、结构和基础声部写作部分，就接近中级水平了。
ewoodrich查看英文原文
It piqued my interest from the cached thumbnails, and I was able to find a mirror of the complete set: http://academic.udayton.edu/tobyrush/theorypages/complete.pdf It's licensed under Creative Commons BY-NC-ND, and Toby W. Rush is the author. Great resources by the way, better and more concise than a lot of theory info for beginners (bordering on intermediate, if you are able to get to some of the more advanced scales, structure and basic part-writing/voice leading at the end).
认为这是术语与记谱而非真正理论，带有文化偏见，并推荐替代读物。
这不是“音乐理论”（尽管几乎所有人都这么认为），而是“音乐术语和记谱系统”。理论应当解释观察到的现象；这些术语和记谱并不能解释音乐，只是带你熟悉术语和记谱。我有音乐学位，学过这些以及更多东西。这份材料是对这些“非理论”内容的出色、高质量概述，但带有极强的文化偏见，而且同样没有提供真正的理论解释。如果你想以对普通人实用的方式真正理解音乐，我推荐 Bob Snyder 的《Music and Memory: An Introduction》，这本书真正教有创造力的人音乐如何运作，而不是欧洲贵族记谱法如何运作。其他视角可看 http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/htmlRT/contents.html 和 http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/ttss.html。
quadrangle查看英文原文
This isn't "music theory" (although almost everyone thinks it is). This is "music jargon and notation systems". A theory is something that explains an observed phenomenon. This jargon and notation stuff doesn't explain music, it just guides you through the jargon and notation. I have a music degree and learned all this stuff and a lot more. This presentation is an excellent, high-quality overview of this non-theory junk. It's extremely culturally-biased and, again, offers no real theoretical explanation. If you want real understanding of music in a useful way for real people, I recommend Bob Snyder's book "Music and Memory: An Introduction" which was actually written to teach creative artistic people about how music actually works rather than how aristocratic European music notation works. For some other perspectives, check out http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/htmlRT/contents.html and http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/ttss.html (normally I wouldn't push these on average folks, although they are superb but the HN crowd should be fine with them)
历次讨论
同类还值得读
直接在浏览器中启动 Linux 内核
Boot a linux kernel right inside your browser.
Fabrice Bellard 的 JSLinux 页面，用 JavaScript 在浏览器里启动一个 Linux 内核，并提供一个可交互的终端环境。
工具与资源上首页 5 次 · 2011–2025bellard.orgHacker News 未公开功能与行为清单（2018）
A List of Hacker News's Undocumented Features and Behaviors (2018)
数据科学家 Max Woolf 整理的 Hacker News 未公开功能与行为清单，涵盖投票机制、排名算法、账号惩罚等社区运作细节。
工具与资源上首页 5 次 · 2019–2025github.comMapSCII：在终端中用盲文和 ASCII 渲染地图
MapSCII – Braille and ASCII map renderer for the console
MapSCII 是一个在命令行终端里渲染地图的开源工具，用盲文字符和 ASCII 字符把地理数据画成可交互浏览的字符地图。
工具与资源上首页 5 次 · 2017–2025github.com顶尖大学的免费在线课程
Free Online Courses from Top Universities
Open Culture 整理的一份免费在线课程合集，汇集了全球顶尖大学（如 MIT、斯坦福、耶鲁等）向公众开放的网络课程资源，涵盖音频、视频等多种形式。
工具与资源上首页 5 次 · 2010–2022openculture.com淘气字符串：容易引发用户输入问题的字符串清单
Naughty Strings: A list of strings likely to cause issues as user-input data
一个 GitHub 仓库，收录了大量容易让程序出问题的用户输入字符串，如特殊字符、emoji、SQL 注入片段、系统命令等，供开发者用于测试输入处理逻辑。
工具与资源上首页 4 次 · 2015–2020github.com