Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup makemicromusic Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists and common practice music

I believe Chris's, Domina's, and my own work definitely DID have strong implications to what common practice music could become and drew on existing historical ideas.

My entry "Dimension"'s tuning, for example, includes 7 of 10 notes within about a cent of quarter comma meantone (can't get much more common practice than that)! It also includes one mode which is virtually the same as Mohajira, which is derived from a Middle Eastern equivalent of common practice theory. So you can even view it as "common practice...Middle East meets West".

Meanwhile Chris's piece is based in one of Gene's Dwarf tunings loaded with good low-limit ratios and, to be honest, I believe could well have the most emotional and down-to-earth melodies in the entire competition.

Domina
Catrina Lee's entry, meanwhile, also has great melody plus a kind of production quality that sound unreal. I'll be....if you could honestly say this piece has bad production quality...even if you didn't like it. Plus it's done in an ultra-melodic Eastern tuning that sounds a good deal like a subset of common practice.

Granted though Marcel...I agree a lot of the other entries went astray, assuming the goal was to create something relate-able to "normal" common practice listeners, but also far out there. Out of the whole competition I can name about 4 songs I can actually recommend to my friends and expect them to take seriously...over about 30 entries...and that, IMVHO, is pretty sad.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗straub@...

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> Granted though Marcel...I agree a lot of the other entries went
> astray, assuming the goal was to create something relate-able to
> "normal" common practice listeners, but also far out there. Out of
> the whole competition I can name about 4 songs I can actually
> recommend to my friends and expect them to take seriously...over
> about 30 entries...and that, IMVHO, is pretty sad.
>

Marcel's comment was, once more, beyond any decency - but I have to grant one thing: from the point of view of creating something relate-able to "normal" common practice listeners/stirring up interest for microtonality in the "general public"(however you want to define that term), indeed very few of the presented pieces are likely candidates for this.

Domina Catrina Lee's piece sure is well-produced, with beautiful timbres. It stands out against many other pieces in the competition as well as the pieces generally heard in this list - but this changes quite radically if you leave the list. If I heard it on the radio, I would most probably qualify it as another "world music" piece - nice but not particularly outstanding against tons of other music pieces that are there in the world. And similar things I would have to say for most of the other pieces of the competition. Some sound like film music or like contemporary classical music, some like ambient electronics, easy listening electronics or whatever - but they simply do not "stand out" against other existing music in the genre, apart from the fact that they are microtonal. This includes your piece as well as Chris's piece - as well as any of my own stuff (if it would have made it to the competition at all).

I cannot exclude the guy who, according to Aaron, has "nothing but contempt for the state of online discussions of music and microtonality", is entirely wrong. Maybe Neil Haverstick is not entirely wrong not listening to the pieces people post here. In any case, a little modesty might be a good thing for us here. Writing great music, microtonal or not, is hard - that is one conclusion to draw, in any case.

Among my personal favorites in the Untwelve contest were Igs' piece and the piece by James Wyness, BTW.
--
Hans Straub

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

Hans,

>"Domina Catrina Lee's piece sure is well-produced, with beautiful
timbres. It stands out against many other pieces in the competition as
well as the pieces generally heard in this list"

Agreed...IMVHO, it's a world more easily accessible upon first listen than 95% of what I hear around here.

>"If I heard it on the radio, I would most probably qualify it as another "world music" piece"

I see what you're saying in at least some ways, the arrangement and feel, in some ways, is fairly standard...for world music.

>"Some sound like film music or like contemporary classical music,
some like ambient electronics, easy listening electronics or whatever -
but they simply do not "stand out" against other existing music in the
genre, apart from the fact that they are microtonal. This includes your
piece as well as Chris's piece - as well as any of my own stuff (if it
would have made it to the competition at all)."

Well, a question about my own failure, what "genre" does my piece pigeonhole itself in? I suppose I failed at my goal, which was to write something with a dance-like energy, new age like softness, jazz-style solos, and ambient-like textures that really can't be pigeonholed in a genre. Maybe I should have gone even further and thrown in some surprise harsh sounds to make it more obvious it's not easy listening?....

The other thing, as I've said before, is I think the personal-ness and enthusiasm of Chris's and Domina's melodies make those pieces stand apart as being more than "standard displays of their respective genres"...but I'm interested to hear why/how you think those pieces fall short of being more than "just another example of their respective genres".

--- On Sun, 2/13/11, straub@... <straub@...>
wrote:

From: straub@... <straub@...>
Subject: Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists and common practice music
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 4:15 AM

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

> Granted though Marcel...I agree a lot of the other entries went

> astray, assuming the goal was to create something relate-able to

> "normal" common practice listeners, but also far out there. Out of

> the whole competition I can name about 4 songs I can actually

> recommend to my friends and expect them to take seriously...over

> about 30 entries...and that, IMVHO, is pretty sad.

Among my personal favorites in the Untwelve contest were Igs' piece and the piece by James Wyness, BTW.

Hans Straub

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗jonszanto <jszanto@...>

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Daniel Forró <dan.for@...>

🔗straub@...

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> Â Â Well, a question about my own failure, what "genre" does my
> piece pigeonhole itself in?Â I suppose I failed at my goal, which
> was to write something with a dance-like energy, new age like
> softness, jazz-style solos, and ambient-like textures that really
> can't be pigeonholed in a genre. Maybe I should have gone even
> further and thrown in some surprise harsh sounds to make it more
> obvious it's not easy listening?....
>

You sure could - I just don't think it would change much. I do not have the full overview over the field of electronic music - but I know so much that it is a really vast field with an overwhelming variety of styles, and I have the impression that nearly every thinkable (or even seemingly unthinkable) combination has already been tried. Your combination of dance-like energy, new age like softness, jazz-style solos, and ambient-like textures is, to my knowledge, not even an unusual combination. I think it is nowadays next to impossible to do something that cannot be pigeonholed somewhere. I mean, my stuff is mostly neoclassical or neoromantic - downright old-fashioned, except for the xenharmony. So what? I just try to make it as "good" (or "deep", in Neil's words) as possible.
--
Hans Straub

🔗straub@...

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
> I'm pretty certain that my entry didn't fall into any recognizable
> genre, but if Hans thinks it does I would, like you, be interested to
> hear what pigeon he thinks inhabits that particular hole.
>

Alright, here are some of my impressions now.

Your case, Gene, is quite clear to me. I would call it "Twentieth century neoclassical". So I would pigeonhole the pieces by Monroe Golden (the winner but not my favorite, BTW) as well as Shaahin Mohajeri, Martin Loridan, David Snow, Donald Craig, Cameron Bobro, Kathy McTavish, Chris Vaisvil and Chuckk Hubbard.

Pigeon hole "Ambient/soundscape" I would attach to the pieces by Jacques Dudon, Joseph Post, James Wyness, John Seales, Ann Cantelow, Giovanni Damiani, Joshua Musikantow.

Pieces in the contest that caught my attention are:

Jacques Dudon - quite creative use of electronical sound manipulations.

James Wyness (as mentioned) - at first sight, a "spectral" piece based on overtones - but with quite surprising turns make it suspenseful, and pleasing timbre.

Ann Cantelow - quite original concept with series of glissandi that group to sudden harmonies. (That's what it sounds to me - maybe this has been done by others, too...)

Kathy McTavish - composition a little "traditional", but beautiful string timbres.

And, as mentioned, Igs' piece - for the vibraphone timbre and the impressive guitar climax. Less for the tuning, which I did not really like.

As for xenharmony - I gotta confess most of it did not "catch" me. The pieces of Giovanni Damiani and David Snow exhibit some xenharmonies not uninteresting to my ear, but the pieces in general I liked less...
--
Hans Straub

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

>"Your combination of dance-like energy, new age like softness,
jazz-style solos, and ambient-like textures is, to my knowledge, not
even an unusual combination."

Well if you know an electronica group that does do this...I'm eager to hear.

>"I think it is nowadays next to impossible to do something that cannot be pigeonholed somewhere."

So the idea of fresh/good new music is virtually dead? I have trouble believing it...and it seems like a double standard to say (paraphrased) "try to make fresh new music" and "such a task is basically impossible".

--- On Mon, 2/14/11, straub@... <straub@...> wrote:

From: straub@... <straub@...>
Subject: [MMM] Re: The unproductiveness of these lists and common practice music
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, February 14, 2011, 4:46 AM

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

> Â Â Well, a question about my own failure, what "genre" does my

> piece pigeonhole itself in?Â I suppose I failed at my goal, which

> was to write something with a dance-like energy, new age like

> softness, jazz-style solos, and ambient-like textures that really

> can't be pigeonholed in a genre. Maybe I should have gone even

> further and thrown in some surprise harsh sounds to make it more

> obvious it's not easy listening?....

Hans Straub

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

eck

You can make genre classifications as broad or narrow as you wish. In any
incarnation of genre you are not letting the music stand on its own -
especially in a collection like the Un12 entries.
We are not talking about Lady Gaga or Brittney Spears - the entrants all
tried to be original instead of attempting to be appealing to largest
possible monetized market.

For example for me Gene's piece and my piece are far too different to be
considered "the same".

Genre's exist for one reason only - to simplify talking about music.
Therefore by definition it degrades the impression of the music discussed.

Chris

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 8:25 AM, <straub@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm pretty certain that my entry didn't fall into any recognizable
> > genre, but if Hans thinks it does I would, like you, be interested to
> > hear what pigeon he thinks inhabits that particular hole.
> >
>
> Alright, here are some of my impressions now.
>
> Your case, Gene, is quite clear to me. I would call it "Twentieth century
> neoclassical". So I would pigeonhole the pieces by Monroe Golden (the winner
> but not my favorite, BTW) as well as Shaahin Mohajeri, Martin Loridan, David
> Snow, Donald Craig, Cameron Bobro, Kathy McTavish, Chris Vaisvil and Chuckk
> Hubbard.
>
> Pigeon hole "Ambient/soundscape" I would attach to the pieces by Jacques
> Dudon, Joseph Post, James Wyness, John Seales, Ann Cantelow, Giovanni
> Damiani, Joshua Musikantow.
>
> Pieces in the contest that caught my attention are:
>
> Jacques Dudon - quite creative use of electronical sound manipulations.
>
> James Wyness (as mentioned) - at first sight, a "spectral" piece based on
> overtones - but with quite surprising turns make it suspenseful, and
> pleasing timbre.
>
> Ann Cantelow - quite original concept with series of glissandi that group
> to sudden harmonies. (That's what it sounds to me - maybe this has been done
> by others, too...)
>
> Kathy McTavish - composition a little "traditional", but beautiful string
> timbres.
>
> And, as mentioned, Igs' piece - for the vibraphone timbre and the
> impressive guitar climax. Less for the tuning, which I did not really like.
>
> As for xenharmony - I gotta confess most of it did not "catch" me. The
> pieces of Giovanni Damiani and David Snow exhibit some xenharmonies not
> uninteresting to my ear, but the pieces in general I liked less...
> --
> Hans Straub
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗straub@...

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> >"Your combination of dance-like energy, new age like softness,
> jazz-style solos, and ambient-like textures is, to my knowledge, not
> even an unusual combination."
>
> Â Â Well if you know an electronica group that does do this...I'm
> eager to hear.Â
>

Well, I am not an expert in electronica - but, e.g., how about these:

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=754876
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=179832

> >"I think it is nowadays next to impossible to do something that cannot be pigeonholed somewhere."
>
> Â Â So the idea of fresh/good new music is virtually dead?Â I
> have trouble believing it...and it seems like a double standard to
> say (paraphrased) "try to make fresh new music" and "such a task is
> basically impossible".
>

Hmm, hehe... Good point. Lemme think... Well, I would say it is possible to create something really new, if somebody is a genius. Which I am not. But, well, of course I keep trying - I am just aware that the probability is not very high.
--
Hans Straub

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

Hans>"Well, I am not an expert in electronica - but, e.g., how about these:"

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=754876

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=179832"

Well, the first group you mentioned (Andromeda) has dance-energy-like yet relaxing beats (dare I say, pretty original sounding beats), but no lead melodies and virtually no bass-line or counterpoint: it really is "ambient with a beat", Lord knows how you could call that jazz with no leads or even much energy in the background chords.

The second group "The Wimshurst's Machine" has at least enough melodies and leads to be considered lounge/"new age" jazz...but virtually no energy in the lounge/chillouts-style beats (hence, no fast high energy shifting cymbal line or kicks). Plus the leads have little drive or solo-like nature to them (making them sound a bit like Muzak played in grocery stores)...and, again, the bass-line doesn't come out as prominent or energetic at all: there's no "funk" in it.

IMVHO, neither of the above comes close. Look at my beat style's energy vs. the second group example you gave, and the aggressiveness/amount-of-and-inflection-in solos and leads of mine vs. both. The only real parallels I see among all of them...is they all have beats of some sort and lush backgrounds...and are all relaxing. The first one, at least, can say it has a not-so-different beat style it's going for (it truly has a dance level of energy, unlike the second ground)...

What does sound "similar" to my ears, in a fair number of ways, are rare songs like like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNKN7N_luMw (Way Out West: Stealth).
They have both the drive in the beats and lead melodies (there's no way in...you could easily compare it to new age jazz or musak) plus the bassline...yet the overall feeling of relaxation. It's relaxed but...definitely NOT lounge/new-age jazz or chillout.

And, even then, that song is not so jazz/solo intensive...with only the voice and occasional pianos acting as background leads.

>"Hmm, hehe... Good point. Lemme think... Well, I would say it is possible
to create something really new, if somebody is a genius. "

I don't think it's as hard as people think. How many artists don't use 4/4 rhythms and/or repeating snares or claps on every other beat? How many artists (even microtonal) use 11-limit yet maintain an overall sense of relaxation? How many artists make music that's uncannily high energy, yet also silky smooth (ok, maybe BT, Frou Frou, and Way Out West...but who else)?

Then again it seems (through you and others) that most people actually rate production quality and "timbre/effects (also including things like portamento/glissando and vocoder use)" as the mark of originality for style of the music...so people may not care about said-above originality factors...or groups like Way Out West who use them.
They, it seems, don't look into how the beats or harmonies are structured (granted...that you remarked on none of those issues for any of the entries to the competition). This seems to downgrade music largely to an art of production rather than composition...which I see as a huge problem. And I've seen the same issue on Trax in Space, SoundClick, and numerous other music sites: that the two catching factors are either catchy lyrics or good timbre (be it arrangement/vocal strength/or otherwise) and that actual quality/quantity of harmonies and melodies gets thrown by the wayside...

--- On Mon, 2/14/11, straub@... <straub@...> wrote:

From: straub@... <straub@...>
Subject: [MMM] Re: The unproductiveness of these lists and common practice music
To: MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, February 14, 2011, 7:31 AM

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

> >"Your combination of dance-like energy, new age like softness,

> jazz-style solos, and ambient-like textures is, to my knowledge, not

> even an unusual combination."

> Â Â Well if you know an electronica group that does do this...I'm

> eager to hear.Â

Well, I am not an expert in electronica - but, e.g., how about these:

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=754876

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=179832

> >"I think it is nowadays next to impossible to do something that cannot be pigeonholed somewhere."

> Â Â So the idea of fresh/good new music is virtually dead?Â I

> have trouble believing it...and it seems like a double standard to

> say (paraphrased) "try to make fresh new music" and "such a task is

> basically impossible".

Hans Straub

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗straub@...

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:
>
> Â Â Then again it seems (through you and others) that most people
> actually rate production quality and "timbre/effects (also
> including things like portamento/glissando and vocoder use)" as the
> mark of originality for style of the music...so people may not care
> about said-above originality factors...or groups like Way Out West
> who use them.
> Â Â They, it seems, don't look into how the beats or harmonies are
> structured (granted...that you remarked on none of those issues for
> any of the entries to the competition).Â This seems to downgrade
> music largely to an art of production rather than
> composition...which I see as a huge problem.Â And I've seen the
> same issue on Trax in Space, SoundClick, and numerous other music
> sites: that the two catching factors are either catchy lyrics or
> good timbre (be it arrangement/vocal strength/or otherwise) and
> that actual quality/quantity of harmonies and melodies gets thrown
> by the wayside...
>

Well, sure, my evaluations in this case were "over-all" evaluations. After all, the competition called for sound files, not scores. And from the view of stirring up the interest of "normal common practice listeners", to use that term once again, things like production quality, well, simply are a factor. I would not say that it's the essential one for me - I think that in my comments I do well make this distinction and that I well do look into how harmonies are structured.

As for timbres, there is another point: the importance of timbres varies strongly with musical style. In the field of "ambient/soundscape" stuff, electronica generally, but also certain areas of contemporary classical music, timbres are an essential part of the composition, sometimes even THE essential part - while in other genres, such as piano music, this does hardly matter. Comparing musical pieces in these different styles inevitably boils down to comparing apples with oranges.

And indeed a large part of the Untwelve competition's entries were in such "timbre-oriented" genres. In many of them, the question of how harmonies are structured seemed to be more or less close to irrelevant. The question is whether one should exclude these from the competition or not? In a way, I do not envy the jury...
--
Hans Straub

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

Hans>"I think that in my comments I do well make this distinction and that I well do look into how harmonies are structured."

In that case, would it be safe to assume none of the pieces at all, in your opinion, had strong harmonies? And if so, what were the main failing points? I'll admit, Cool My Head, Eidolon (Domina's song), Godzareh depression, and Gene's piece were the only ones in the competition, to me, with very memorable harmonies or melodies.

>"In the field of "ambient/soundscape" stuff, electronica generally, but
also certain areas of contemporary classical music, timbres are an
essential part of the composition, sometimes even THE essential part -
while in other genres, such as piano music, this does hardly matter."
Exactly...although what happens to pieces where there are 3-4 instruments IE "rock/pop style orchestration"? It seems obvious to me both timbre and melody/harmony do matter in those cases...and, if anything, if you have to lose one (far as making a song known as a "classic"), it would be timbre (IE the Beatles/Ramones/Doors...all had terrible timbre/production).

>"In many of them, the question of how harmonies are structured seemed to
be more or less close to irrelevant. The question is whether one should
exclude these from the competition or not? In a way, I do not envy the
jury..."
I will say this much...I think anything that's an ambient soundscape (meaning without lead melodies and some sort of backing chords) sound be in a different competition...and possible songs with 3-5 melodic instruments used in another competition...and 1-2 instrument pieces in yet another

Otherwise it becomes a game of how much the judges value timbre over melody/harmony or vice-versa...and can easily result in a situation where the composer aims for melody/harmony, but gets judged almost completely on timbre.

. And, furthermore, I think it should be a point to judge more so how the instruments are arranged (far as what type of instrument is picked and how clearly they are spaced among octaves) than the timbre of each individual instrument. In the latter case, whoever has the most expensive, clearest sounding instuments...can end up almost completely winning by default...and thus it almost become a corporate "pimp my studio" sort of game.
Personally, I use $20 sample CDs, a $200 synth, and $100 computer speakers. But I know some people have $600 guitars, $2000+ software orchestra software, $10000+ hardware racks with $3000 synths, $500 studio monitors, and more... IMVHO, there's nothing "open" about a music competition where people, by and large, end up being rated by how their instruments sound more than even how they are arranged. It's as if people are rating the cherry on top more than the ice cream sundae...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [MMM] The unproductiveness of these lists and common practice music

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

🔗straub@...

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗jonszanto <jszanto@...>

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗Daniel Forró <dan.for@...>

🔗straub@...

🔗straub@...

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

🔗Chris Vaisvil <chrisvaisvil@...>

🔗straub@...

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗straub@...

🔗Michael <djtrancendance@...>

🔗m.develde@...