For Dante: Salonen's comments...

Dante,

I mentioned reading some similar musings from Esa-Pekka Salonen, and I picked out one section to post (I'll do something else some other time). It may also give a glimpse of some of what Kraig finds appealing (and singular) in this guy. From the photo/essay book "Symphony: Frank Gehry's Walt Disney Concert Hall":

"It is astonishing how little relation there is between what is considered 'modern' in art and what is deemed 'modern' in music. Though the works of an artist like Matisse were perceived by many in the early twentieth century to be jarring and radical, those who view them today more likely find them completely appealing and fail to sense their original disruptive potential. With music, the situation is far different. For example, when one plays a less well-known piece by Stravinsky, a contemporary of Matisse, people today are likely to describe the music as "avant-garde" or perhaps "difficult," and to react not unlike many members of Stravinsky's initial audiences. Indeed, some music written in the 1910s and 1920s continues to have a frightening effect on people. This phenomenon is intriguing, and also somewhat perplexing, particularly when one considers that the sounds of contemporary rock or pop music are often far from "pleasant" or "pretty," yet they command a large audience of listeners. It seems that with classical music, in contrast, as soon as one steps outside the arena of "pleasant," one embarks on dangerous waters."

[jon] That was a good bit of what I thought sounded similar to your wonderments about why 'modern' music had not grabbed hold. He goes on to say the following (and I am not one to *completely* buy into LA completely embracing 'new' music, because I know they've had slim houses sometimes, but anyway...), which not only bodes well for that orchestra but may be a mission statement for any orchestras that are to survive more than a couple more decades:

"However, the situation in Los Angeles has changed and continues to change. Our audiences now are willing to be challenged. This was precisely our intention -- to add an element of risk to the concert experience, and to demonstrate the benefits of experiencing the unexpected in a concert. This challenge is essential to our identity as an orchestra and forces us to operate on several levels to satisfy different needs.

The transition to a broader repertoire initially elicited a strong reaction, not only in the audience, but also in the orchestra. many in the orchestra feared losing both our identity and the public's support. But soon it became obvious that by committing to these changes we were actually creating a distinct identity for the Los Angeles Philharmonic. we had been known as an "excellent orchestra" with "great sound" and "a lot of intensity," but we lacked any clear message of what qualities would distinguish us from other orchestras. now, in contrast, the Los Angeles Philharmonic is known for its open-mindedness and versatility -- its ability to move between styles and periods -- a reputation we are certain to build upon and strengthen when we move into Walt Disney Hall."

Salonen is the Real Deal for this century, if one still believes in the beast known as a symphony orchestra. He is an extraordinary conductor, has big ears, and I happen to like the music he composes as well - I might suggest his "L.A. Variations" to see how he and the orchestra have inspired each other.

Cheers,
Jon

Thanks Jon, that is >very< interesting. Off hand, I wonder if part of the
difference is that our visual sense is experienced as things "out there"
whereas music gets into you more and effects emotions directly? His example
of Matisse is interesting. What music is analogous- maybe neo-classical
Stravinsky? I could see Munch/Schoenberg as a correspondance, or Klimt/Berg.
But what visual art would go with Xenakis? Giant photos of bombing victims?
How would people react to that?

I remember the first time I ever really listened to thrash metal (it was a
Megadeth album). I was fascinated by the guitar work and listend to "Hanger
18" several times. That night I dreamed of deamons tearing and dismembering
me. So Salonen makes an excellent point when he says that "sounds of
contemporary rock or pop music are often far from "pleasant" or "pretty,"
yet they command a large audience of listeners."

I wonder how many people went out and bought Penderecki after seeing "The
Shining"? There the music fit the visuals like a glove. People love to be
scared and grossed out in the movies (graphic violence), but "scary music"
seems to be something else. And is the problem with this music really that
it is "scary"? Some of it, maybe, but that can't be whats going on here.
Punk rock is typically "angry", which can be related to be people who are
also angry. After 9/11 there are alot of SCARED people around, so you would
think they would turn to Xenakis in droves, if that was the dynamic in
operation.

The reaction of most people to serial or experimental music is often a)
boredom b) irritation c) it makes them nervous, and yes sometimes d) it is
disturbing.

So there are a couple of possibilities:
a) the music sucks
b) the lack of familiarity with the style. (alot of people will be bored by
gamelan, mbira, chinese opera, etc, because they simply have no frame of
reference for what they are listening to, whereas people native to those
cultures who grow up hearing it take it in stride.)

People can only keep up with music that changes incrementally- eg, pop music
as it slowly shifts from year to year. What happened in the 20th c was too
fast for most people to go with- the acceleration in musical change mirrored
the acceleration with technological change, with only pop and "lite
classics" lagging behind. Alot of people dont like be-bop either- it was too
big of a change from what came directly before. They like what they know.
People who like Miles in his "cool" period couldn't follow him into fusion.
People who liked Stravinky's neo-classicism couldn't follow him into
serialism. People know what they know and like what they like, and they want
more of the same (for the most part).

I'm sure there was at least one person in the audience for the Lutoslawski
cello concerto in LA who had never heard anything like that before, and
liked it. Maybe more than one. So imagine if every day people were exposed
to new music- slowly, person by person, an audience would form. And maybe,
eventually, mothers would sing a Webern song to their babies and they would
grow up familar with this music, the same way we grow up hearing pop
everywhere.

Is there someone out there who has had a child and raised the child in a
household where this music was heard all the time? YES THERE IS! And what
was the result? STOCKHAUSEN'S KIDS ARE ALL EXCELLENT MUSICIANS WHO DONT BAT
AN EYELASH AT THIS KIND OF MUSIC- in fact they play it all the time!

So Salonen is doing the only thing he really can do, and the thing he should
do- program this music so people can hear it! Most concerts of this music
are preaching to the converted, for they are the only ones who attend. But a
major symphony is still attended by people with conservative ears, yet with
attention spans longer than the 3 min. of pop songs. So they are a fertile
field for exposure.

Nobody reads Finnegans Wake, or even Ulysees much. If they read at all, they
read Stephan King and Criton. King is actually a good writer, but he's no
Joyce. Reading the Wake requires a major commitment of time and energy. Most
people simply do not have either to spare. Appreciating most 20th
experimental music requires a similar commitment. Both the Wake and 20th c
music are complex. People dont have the time or interest. They want small
doses of familiar pleasures, like a cigarette. Pop songs are a measured drug
delivery system.

The problem is that all of these possible reasons for the lack of
appreciation for most 20th "progressive" music- length, complexity,
unfamiliarity, can be countered by examples that exhibit these
characteristics, yet has a wider appreciation. Length? People will sit
though 3 hour movies. Complexity? Beethoven is complex. Or, if that too is
actually a relatively small audience, alot of Hip Hop and Techno is
sonically very complex.

No, I think the great divide is tonality. No matter how complex, people can
absorb tonal music. No matter how simple, atonal or non tonal
(electro-acoustic) music is a problem. As long as there is a tonic, there is
something to grab on to. Without that, most people simply draw a blank.

Maybe.

Dante

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Szanto [mailto:JSZANTO@...]
> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 2:32 AM
> To: metatuning@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [metatuning] For Dante: Salonen's comments...
>
>
> Dante,
>
> I mentioned reading some similar musings from Esa-Pekka Salonen,
> and I picked out one section to post (I'll do something else some
> other time). It may also give a glimpse of some of what Kraig
> finds appealing (and singular) in this guy. From the photo/essay
> book "Symphony: Frank Gehry's Walt Disney Concert Hall":
>
> "It is astonishing how little relation there is between what is
> considered 'modern' in art and what is deemed 'modern' in music.
> Though the works of an artist like Matisse were perceived by many
> in the early twentieth century to be jarring and radical, those
> who view them today more likely find them completely appealing
> and fail to sense their original disruptive potential. With
> music, the situation is far different. For example, when one
> plays a less well-known piece by Stravinsky, a contemporary of
> Matisse, people today are likely to describe the music as
> "avant-garde" or perhaps "difficult," and to react not unlike
> many members of Stravinsky's initial audiences. Indeed, some
> music written in the 1910s and 1920s continues to have a
> frightening effect on people. This phenomenon is intriguing, and
> also somewhat perplexing, particularly when one considers that
> the sounds of contemporary rock or pop music are often far from
> "pleasant" or "pretty," yet they command a large audien!
> ce of listeners. It seems that with classical music, in contrast,
> as soon as one steps outside the arena of "pleasant," one embarks
> on dangerous waters."
>
> [jon] That was a good bit of what I thought sounded similar to
> your wonderments about why 'modern' music had not grabbed hold.
> He goes on to say the following (and I am not one to *completely*
> buy into LA completely embracing 'new' music, because I know
> they've had slim houses sometimes, but anyway...), which not only
> bodes well for that orchestra but may be a mission statement for
> any orchestras that are to survive more than a couple more decades:
>
> "However, the situation in Los Angeles has changed and continues
> to change. Our audiences now are willing to be challenged. This
> was precisely our intention -- to add an element of risk to the
> concert experience, and to demonstrate the benefits of
> experiencing the unexpected in a concert. This challenge is
> essential to our identity as an orchestra and forces us to
> operate on several levels to satisfy different needs.
>
> The transition to a broader repertoire initially elicited a
> strong reaction, not only in the audience, but also in the
> orchestra. many in the orchestra feared losing both our identity
> and the public's support. But soon it became obvious that by
> committing to these changes we were actually creating a distinct
> identity for the Los Angeles Philharmonic. we had been known as
> an "excellent orchestra" with "great sound" and "a lot of
> intensity," but we lacked any clear message of what qualities
> would distinguish us from other orchestras. now, in contrast, the
> Los Angeles Philharmonic is known for its open-mindedness and
> versatility -- its ability to move between styles and periods --
> a reputation we are certain to build upon and strengthen when we
> move into Walt Disney Hall."
>
> Salonen is the Real Deal for this century, if one still believes
> in the beast known as a symphony orchestra. He is an
> extraordinary conductor, has big ears, and I happen to like the
> music he composes as well - I might suggest his "L.A. Variations"
> to see how he and the orchestra have inspired each other.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Dante Rosati wrote:

> But what visual art would go with Xenakis? Giant photos of bombing victims?

he always seems so 'Archetectural' to me as far as inner visuals. more
'classical than 'romanic'

>
>
> Is there someone out there who has had a child and raised the child in a
> household where this music was heard all the time? YES THERE IS! And what
> was the result? STOCKHAUSEN'S KIDS ARE ALL EXCELLENT MUSICIANS WHO DONT BAT
> AN EYELASH AT THIS KIND OF MUSIC- in fact they play it all the time!

Slonimsky told me he would play pleasant music when his daughter would cry for
a bottle and then put on disonanyt music when she got it to . When she grew up
she....lost all interest in music.
I think the whole 'behavourist" explaination of music doesn't hold up. It does
seem by 8-12 though those not exposed to different music venture little far
from home, for what i call the 'language of their tribe"

>
>
> So Salonen is doing the only thing he really can do, and the thing he should
> do- program this music so people can hear it! Most concerts of this music
> are preaching to the converted, for they are the only ones who attend. But a
> major symphony is still attended by people with conservative ears, yet with
> attention spans longer than the 3 min. of pop songs. So they are a fertile
> field for exposure.

These places would be completely packed if the price was less. Personally over
$200 for me and Erin slows us down quite a bit

>
>
>

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

Hi Kraig-

Yes, the graphic sketches for Metastasis look like the Philips Pavillion,
etc., but while, for me, cool architechture looks cool, it doesn't cause an
emotional response like music does. It was fairly well understood, even by X
himself, that the origin of his aesthetic was the carnage and near death
(and actual disfigurment) he experienced in WWII.

On the other hand, Milan Kundera, in the booklet to the CD of Kraanerg,
explains how Xs music helped him after the Russian invasion of
Czecheslovakia:

"I found solace in the music of Xenakis. I learnt to love it during the
darkest period of my life, and of my country's history."

He goes on to posit that the reason why was the complete >lack< of
sentimentality in X's music:

"Hence the passion for X: he revealed the world to me, rich vast,complex...
and without sentiment; a space of consoling objectivity in which the
agressiveness of a soul bent on self-expression has no place".

"It's all very well for someone like Stravinsky to reject music as the
expression of feelings; the naive listener has no other way of understanding
it. That's the curse of music, that's its stupid side. A violinist has only
to play the first three held notes of a Largo, and the sensitive listener
sighs "Ah, how beautiful!" In these first three notes which have provoked
such emotion, there is nothing, no invention, no creativity, nothing at all:
just the most ridiculous "sentimental trickery". But noone is exempt from
this way of perceiving music, from the imbecilic smile that it elicits."

"But a moment can come (in the life of one man or that of a whole
civilization) in which sentimentality (previously regarded as a force which
makes man more human, and mitigates the coldness of Reason) is suddenly
unmasked as "the superstructure of brutality." It was at such a moment that
Music seemed to me like the deafening noise of the emotions, whereas the
world of noise in X's compositions became, for me, beauty: beauty with the
affective filth washed away, beauty stripped of sentimental barbarism."

Or, it could be that Kundera found X's music healing for the same reason why
we put on sad songs when we have a broken heart: A homeopathic dose. For all
his maths, X couldn't help but put his deepest feelings into his music. I'm
sure for him it was a catharsis- the rays of (relative) sunshine that appear
in his later works show that he was healing.

I'm glad Slonimsky was not my dad- he sounds sick. Its one thing to have the
music in the air, quite another to try and train some kind of Clockwork
Orange response in your progeny. Yikes- send Social Services to his house!

I agree about seat prices- $10 for a movie is already alot, but the same $$
should get you into any concert.

Dante

> -----Original Message-----
> From: kraig grady [mailto:kraiggrady@...]
> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 1:13 PM
> To: metatuning@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [metatuning] For Dante: Salonen's comments...
>
>
>
>
> Dante Rosati wrote:
>
> > But what visual art would go with Xenakis? Giant photos of
> bombing victims?
>
> he always seems so 'Archetectural' to me as far as inner visuals. more
> 'classical than 'romanic'
>
> >
> >
> > Is there someone out there who has had a child and raised the child in a
> > household where this music was heard all the time? YES THERE
> IS! And what
> > was the result? STOCKHAUSEN'S KIDS ARE ALL EXCELLENT MUSICIANS
> WHO DONT BAT
> > AN EYELASH AT THIS KIND OF MUSIC- in fact they play it all the time!
>
> Slonimsky told me he would play pleasant music when his daughter
> would cry for
> a bottle and then put on disonanyt music when she got it to .
> When she grew up
> she....lost all interest in music.
> I think the whole 'behavourist" explaination of music doesn't
> hold up. It does
> seem by 8-12 though those not exposed to different music venture
> little far
> from home, for what i call the 'language of their tribe"
>
> >
> >
> > So Salonen is doing the only thing he really can do, and the
> thing he should
> > do- program this music so people can hear it! Most concerts of
> this music
> > are preaching to the converted, for they are the only ones who
> attend. But a
> > major symphony is still attended by people with conservative
> ears, yet with
> > attention spans longer than the 3 min. of pop songs. So they
> are a fertile
> > field for exposure.
>
> These places would be completely packed if the price was less.
> Personally over
> $200 for me and Erin slows us down quite a bit
>
> >
> >
> >
>
> -- -Kraig Grady
> North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
> http://www.anaphoria.com
> The Wandering Medicine Show
> KXLU 88.9 FM WED 8-9PM PST
>
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Hi Dante!
I am totally with you with your praise of Xenakis. I probably listened to
him most in the 70's when he was doing his big statistical mass pieces. Like i
said this stuff never really got me on a emotional level like Penderecki did at
that time and possibly tainted by this early relationship with his stuff, i
possibly down play what his music became, increasingly emotional, Still i think
there is a restaint to his work, even when it in its extreme like the age of
gold. Play that one at work, I have and they still remember!

I saw Xenakis once, I was walking around cal-arts in the big gallery alone
and all of a sudden i felt an amazing warmth behind me, i turn around and saw a
person who i had not heard enter. I looked at him and said to myself, "Damn,
It's Xenakis '. He was the the most beautiful ugly man i had ever seen and he
seem to project this great love from himself and after staring at each other
for a long minute, he left and I thought to myself again.
"I completely understand why this man is such a great and big Composer!"

There is such a 'higher order' to his music that one can hear is possibly why i
never go for just an emotional response.

Stravinsky was likewise another tortured soul who existed with both under
his belt. The ending trumpet
of Petroushka can still shivers up my spine. the requiem canticles has to be
one of the most frightening openings of any requiem. The ending is equally
intense. Recently i was going through Les Noces
and i can not think of any other composer who can turn a rather mudane detail
into something totally new.
More than any other composer, i find myself thinking, " i would not have
thought of that.

Prokofiev i mention cause i have been having a big synchronicity thing
going on for about the last two weeks. It is the 50th aniversery of his death
and it seems like his guiding spirits are rising to get him the recognition he
deserves. I can't imagine ever coming up with the theme to the 3rd piano
concerto or the fifth. He has been following me now everywhere i go from the
most unexpected places. I play in a club and for someone there , it is her
favorite composer. just one example

As a composer , i long defected toward the tonal side or more correctly the
'acoustical' side. Britten is someone also should not be underestimated and can
be as dark as anyone.

Dante Rosati wrote:

> Hi Kraig-
>
> Yes, the graphic sketches for Metastasis look like the Philips Pavillion,
> etc., but while, for me, cool architechture looks cool, it doesn't cause an
> emotional response like music does. It was fairly well understood, even by X
> himself, that the origin of his aesthetic was the carnage and near death
> (and actual disfigurment) he experienced in WWII.

-- -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 metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati" <dante@i...> wrote:

> No, I think the great divide is tonality. No matter how complex,
people can
> absorb tonal music. No matter how simple, atonal or non tonal
> (electro-acoustic) music is a problem. As long as there is a tonic,
there is
> something to grab on to. Without that, most people simply draw a
blank.
>
> Maybe.
>
> Dante

Assuming you're talking about Western culture, I still wouldn't
completely agree with you. A great deal of pop music is not tonal but
modal. Would you be willing to replace "tonal" with "modal" above?
Strangely, though, even microtonal atonality seems to be quite
popular these days when presented in the form of techno. Meanwhile, a
half-hour spent watching "Extreme Rock" -- bands that are presumably
speaking to the most severe feelings of anger and resentment among
our youth -- on MTV2 revealed little more than an overabundance of i-
VI-III-VII progressions.

Paul-

You must define "tonal" differently. To me, it means that there is usually
more or less of a tonal center that pitches are heard in relation to. It
doesn't matter what the scale is.

Dante

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Erlich [mailto:PERLICH@...]
> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 1:18 AM
> To: metatuning@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [metatuning] Re: For Dante: Salonen's comments...
>
>
> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati" <dante@i...> wrote:
>
> > No, I think the great divide is tonality. No matter how complex,
> people can
> > absorb tonal music. No matter how simple, atonal or non tonal
> > (electro-acoustic) music is a problem. As long as there is a tonic,
> there is
> > something to grab on to. Without that, most people simply draw a
> blank.
> >
> > Maybe.
> >
> > Dante
>
> Assuming you're talking about Western culture, I still wouldn't
> completely agree with you. A great deal of pop music is not tonal but
> modal. Would you be willing to replace "tonal" with "modal" above?
> Strangely, though, even microtonal atonality seems to be quite
> popular these days when presented in the form of techno. Meanwhile, a
> half-hour spent watching "Extreme Rock" -- bands that are presumably
> speaking to the most severe feelings of anger and resentment among
> our youth -- on MTV2 revealed little more than an overabundance of i-
> VI-III-VII progressions.
>
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Paul-

Let me clarify- I know that there are some definitions that distinguish
"tonal" and "modal" on the basis of functional harmony, but in the sense I
am using "tonal" it simply means "with tonal center(s)" to distinguish from
music that either does not have, or consciously works to avoid, such.

Dante

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dante Rosati [mailto:dante@...]
> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 2:21 AM
> To: metatuning@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [metatuning] Re: For Dante: Salonen's comments...
>
>
> Paul-
>
> You must define "tonal" differently. To me, it means that there is usually
> more or less of a tonal center that pitches are heard in relation to. It
> doesn't matter what the scale is.
>
> Dante
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paul Erlich [mailto:PERLICH@...]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 1:18 AM
> > To: metatuning@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [metatuning] Re: For Dante: Salonen's comments...
> >
> >
> > --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati" <dante@i...> wrote:
> >
> > > No, I think the great divide is tonality. No matter how complex,
> > people can
> > > absorb tonal music. No matter how simple, atonal or non tonal
> > > (electro-acoustic) music is a problem. As long as there is a tonic,
> > there is
> > > something to grab on to. Without that, most people simply draw a
> > blank.
> > >
> > > Maybe.
> > >
> > > Dante
> >
> > Assuming you're talking about Western culture, I still wouldn't
> > completely agree with you. A great deal of pop music is not tonal but
> > modal. Would you be willing to replace "tonal" with "modal" above?
> > Strangely, though, even microtonal atonality seems to be quite
> > popular these days when presented in the form of techno. Meanwhile, a
> > half-hour spent watching "Extreme Rock" -- bands that are presumably
> > speaking to the most severe feelings of anger and resentment among
> > our youth -- on MTV2 revealed little more than an overabundance of i-
> > VI-III-VII progressions.
> >
> >
> >
> > Meta Tuning meta-info:
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> > metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
> >
> > To post to the list, send to
> > metatuning@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > You don't have to be a member to post.
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati" <dante@i...> wrote:
> Paul-
>
> Let me clarify- I know that there are some definitions that
distinguish
> "tonal" and "modal" on the basis of functional harmony, but in the
sense I
> am using "tonal" it simply means "with tonal center(s)" to
distinguish from
> music that either does not have, or consciously works to avoid,
such.
>
> Dante

Some music from the Renaissance and thereabouts is "modal" and rarely
exhibits what one would call a "tonal center". Not sure how popular
such music is, though . . .

On the other hand 'variations on a theme of thomas tallis by Vaughn Williams
most would call tonal even though it is modal. I would call Renaissance
music tonal as so often the beginnings and ends are in the same key center.
The in between cadences are not any more complex than Mahler who we call
tonal.
it is not a big point though.
Willeart is one of my fav and of course Gesualdo.

Paul Erlich wrote:

> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati" <dante@i...> wrote:
> > Paul-
> >
> > Let me clarify- I know that there are some definitions that
> distinguish
> > "tonal" and "modal" on the basis of functional harmony, but in the
> sense I
> > am using "tonal" it simply means "with tonal center(s)" to
> distinguish from
> > music that either does not have, or consciously works to avoid,
> such.
> >
> > Dante
>
> Some music from the Renaissance and thereabouts is "modal" and rarely
> exhibits what one would call a "tonal center". Not sure how popular
> such music is, though . . .
>
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

-- -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 metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati" <dante@i...> wrote:

/metatuning/topicId_6270.html#6271

> Thanks Jon, that is >very< interesting. Off hand, I wonder if part
of the
> difference is that our visual sense is experienced as things "out
there"
> whereas music gets into you more and effects emotions directly?

1) I think the sense of *sight* is more fundamental, or maybe even
*crucial* than sound. Which would you rather be, blind or deaf? (Of
course, as musicians we probably would say the former... but that
wouldn't correspond to the majority, I think...)

and

2) Artwork is *tangible* and can even be *purchased* like an object.
Our culture is materialistic to an unfortunate degree, so the
*visual* arts are more integrated into it, and more elevated in it...

Just some thoughts...

J. Pehrson

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, kraig grady <kraiggrady@a...>

/metatuning/topicId_6270.html#6274

> I saw Xenakis once, I was walking around cal-arts in the big
gallery alone
> and all of a sudden i felt an amazing warmth behind me, i turn
around and saw a
> person who i had not heard enter. I looked at him and said to
myself, "Damn,
> It's Xenakis '. He was the the most beautiful ugly man i had ever
seen and he
> seem to project this great love from himself and after staring at
each other
> for a long minute, he left and I thought to myself again.
> "I completely understand why this man is such a great and big
Composer!"
>

***Gee, I guess I'm quite lucky. I got to know Xenakis quite a bit
when I worked with "D.J. Spooky" on the electronic cues for
Krannerg... We even traded addresses like "regular" composer-
contacts! He got on my mailing list that way.

Then later, through my friend the composer Charles Bornstein, my wife
and I met with Xenakis and his wife in Charles' little Paris
apartment and we spent maybe an hour chatting, which maybe Xenakis 3
feet away... Then he had to leave... and it was over.

J. Pehrson

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Erlich" <PERLICH@A...> wrote:

/metatuning/topicId_6270.html#6275

> --- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "Dante Rosati" <dante@i...>
wrote:
>
> > No, I think the great divide is tonality. No matter how complex,
> people can
> > absorb tonal music. No matter how simple, atonal or non tonal
> > (electro-acoustic) music is a problem. As long as there is a
tonic,
> there is
> > something to grab on to. Without that, most people simply draw a
> blank.
> >
> > Maybe.
> >
> > Dante
>
> Assuming you're talking about Western culture, I still wouldn't
> completely agree with you. A great deal of pop music is not tonal
but
> modal. Would you be willing to replace "tonal" with "modal" above?
> Strangely, though, even microtonal atonality seems to be quite
> popular these days when presented in the form of techno. Meanwhile,
a
> half-hour spent watching "Extreme Rock" -- bands that are
presumably
> speaking to the most severe feelings of anger and resentment among
> our youth -- on MTV2 revealed little more than an overabundance of
i-
> VI-III-VII progressions.

***Hmmm... maybe they're too upset to study music theory... :)

JP