Re: [MMM] Re: More out-of-tune 12-equal music

Definitely we are coming out of a microtonal dark age (hopefully we will
not regress back ) and it does seem what ever anyone does is furthering
our consciousness of it or at least the horizons possible with such a
simple parameter as pitch. My only objection (which does not apply in this
case at all to be clear) is that it is important to avoid the redundant.

Gene Ward Smith wrote:

> It strikes me that if we overlook our objection to this or that
> piece, or even this or that microtonal composer, and look at the big
> picture, we are in a kind of microtonal Renaissance now.

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, kraig grady <kraiggrady@a...>
wrote:

> My only objection (which does not apply in this
> case at all to be clear) is that it is important to avoid the
redundant.

Why is it important to avoid the redunant? Obviously, we don't want
to write the same piece 600 times, as the joke has it Vivaldi did.
But I think music was in a healthy state when people felt free to
repeat themselves, or steal from someone else. Even Beethoven was not
adverse to writing crap in order to make money. Now everyone is
either supposed to an original genius a la Beethoven, leaving their
audience in the dust, or they are writing pop music, in which case
they are supposed to be writing crap to make money.

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith"
<gwsmith@s...> wrote:

> Why is it important to avoid the redunant? Obviously, we don't want
> to write the same piece 600 times, as the joke has it Vivaldi did.
> But I think music was in a healthy state when people felt free to
> repeat themselves, or steal from someone else. Even Beethoven was
not
> adverse to writing crap in order to make money. Now everyone is
> either supposed to an original genius a la Beethoven, leaving their
> audience in the dust, or they are writing pop music, in which case
> they are supposed to be writing crap to make money.

I agree that originality is not everything. Composers should write
things that they like to hear and what comes naturally. One shouldn't
force originality. Opinions of audiences, critics and colleagues
should be totally irrelevant.

Kalle

Gene,

{you wrote...}
>Why is it important to avoid the redunant?

The importance lies only with you, and the reason that you wish to create. If you like what you do, and don't care if anyone else does, then you don't even have to entertain the notion. OTOH, if the purpose of writing is to communicate with others on some artistic level, you may find that many people do not want to hear old wine in new bottles, and maybe you should rethink the approach. I'd say you seem to be in the former category.

>But I think music was in a healthy state when people felt free to repeat >themselves, or steal from someone else.

That sounds exactly like sampling and mash-ups.

>... or they are writing pop music, in which case they are supposed to be >writing crap to make money.

That shows a large lack of insight into pop music, but at least you state your 'tastes' clearly.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan M. Szanto"
<JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
> Gene,
>
> {you wrote...}
> >Why is it important to avoid the redunant?
>
> The importance lies only with you, and the reason that you wish to
create.
> If you like what you do, and don't care if anyone else does, then
you don't
> even have to entertain the notion. OTOH, if the purpose of writing
is to
> communicate with others on some artistic level, you may find that
many
> people do not want to hear old wine in new bottles, and maybe you
should
> rethink the approach. I'd say you seem to be in the former category.
>
> >But I think music was in a healthy state when people felt free to
repeat
> >themselves, or steal from someone else.
>
> That sounds exactly like sampling and mash-ups.

So when Mozart lifted stuff for the K 296 violin sonata from J. C.
Bach, would that be more like sampling or mash-up?

> >... or they are writing pop music, in which case they are supposed
to be
> >writing crap to make money.
>
> That shows a large lack of insight into pop music, but at least you
state
> your 'tastes' clearly.

This from the guy who wouldn't even listen to my pop covers, because
he just wasn't interested in that kind of stuff. :)

It was a comment not about my tastes or pop music per se, but about
what pop music is supposed to be, namely a money-making machine.

Gene,

{you wrote...}
>So when Mozart lifted stuff for the K 296 violin sonata from J. C. Bach, >would that be more like sampling or mash-up?

Though we are stretching definitions a good bit, in the difference of technology (re-using notated music vs. actual audio copying), I'd say much closer to the former.

>This from the guy who wouldn't even listen to my pop covers, because he >just wasn't interested in that kind of stuff. :)

I like pop covers when they are done well, but it was mainly your particular choices that didn't fit my particular non-classical taste. And the soundfont issue, too.

>It was a comment not about my tastes or pop music per se, but about what >pop music is supposed to be, namely a money-making machine.

Ah, yes, and that is where I think you are completely wrong. But I'm feeling pretty OT, so any more should go to meta.

BTW, I went back to "Fingers", and it does contain more of the kind of elements I think both Aaron and I were talking about. However, the difference is mainly if one a/b's it with nono, and I still feel the piece would benefit by attending to many of the areas Aaron wrote about.

Cheers,
Jon