Yes, there are elements of theory (and particularly in notation) that are in need of a good overhaul... people do keep trying, and maybe someday we'll see a coherent system that makes our modern chromatic stuff make as much sense as just tuning did.
It's a tough gap to bridge. Lots of folks today are high on Schenkerian analysis, which pretty much dismisses modes, and says all music stems from decorations of a basic tonality. Schenker did come up with some really nice analytical tools, but my view is that he REAAAALLY stretched some of his analysis of early music to make it fit his mold. So in a way, we've got modern tools that make a mess of the old stuff, and old tools that make a mess of new stuff.
The thing is... to understand the modern tools, to make sense out of 'em, you need the perspective of historical development. Since we're not likely to arrive at a 'unified field theory of music' in the next few months, that means learning 'common practice' harmony and counterpoint... which means learning the traditional music theory first, doubly-altered intervals and all. The sad fact is the modern theories that attempt to integrate a lot of stuff (Schenker, Reti, etc.) can't be understood without first grasping what they're against :)
By the way, it's pretty cool to listen to the music on the cusp of that change to just intonation in two versions, back to back - one on period instruments in just intonation, the other on modern tempered instruments. There's a sort of ethereal quality to the old ways :)
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
Hey, here's a tempering system that combines some aspects of both just and tempered tuning. It's even got different notes for the double sharps and double flats....
Maybe I should order a 62 fret neck? :)
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
You know what scares me? Tom, you probably understand what they're talking about!
This essay... brain explodes: Schenkerian Analysis Ouch!
Do something you love and you'll never work a day in your life...
The section on Hemlholtz in that article is very interesting.
Hey, thanks Undercat!
I wasn't ever a big fan of Schenker, because I thought his examples on tonality were contrived. It's one of those areas where I've largely bitten my tongue though - Schenker's got a lot of fans, many of whom are better versed in theory than I am.
I think he had some really great ideas - analyzing music as foreground, midground, and background, for example - but I think he was also way too quick to dismiss folks who didn't line up with his views. (All you mode fans will be delighed to know he thought all modes except Ionian and Aeolian were 'inferior', for example, and the composers who used them were 'lost in a fog of experimentation')
One other thing I've found curious about Schenker is that he held such strong ideas on tonality - but his biggest fans seem to be the atonal folks.
In musicology there aren't neat dividing lines... but I'd say at this point we've left basic theory and are now getting into analysis :)
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
