Carl Lumma gets caught in a lie

Once again Carl Lumma stumbles and fumbles
and bumbles and bungles when he makes writes:

Message 7086 of 7107 | Previous | Next [ Up Thread ] Message
Index
Msg #
From: "Carl Lumma" <clumma@y...>
Date: Wed Apr 14, 2004 8:32 am
Subject: Re: Great webpages, great pieces Dante Rosati!

ADVERTISEMENT
> http://users.rcn.com/dante.interport/justguitar.html
>
> And that is not all! Microtonal guitarist and composer
> Dante Rosati teaches at Julliard, right in the den of lions!

"This listener has gotten far more enjoyment from three of
Dante's tracks than from dozens of Brian's cassettes and
CDs. [in mclaren's music[ the signal-to-noise ratio isn't
very good." -- Carl Lumma

Naturally this is a lie.

Carl Lumma here shows us the problem with telling lies in
public, because it's liable to come back to bite you on
the ass...as Carl Lumma has now discovered.

I now quote a letter from 5 years ago which Carl Lumma
sent me. I have Carl Lumma's letter in my hand as I type:

"From:
"Carl Lumma
(..)
"www.lumma.org

"To:
"Brian McLaren
(..)

"My letters, for some time now, have gradually been getting to
look more and more like e-mails. Here, the final step is taken;
I type in bits of your old letter, put ">'s" before each line,
and thej write my reply. I guess I jsut find it a good way to
conduct correspondence.

"Your package was received last night (which would be February
10th) with great delight. I was like a kid in a candy store. I
finsihed Tape #1 before bed, and am now listening to Side A ot
Tape #2. I really like the stuff."

(..)

So which si it, Carl Lumma?

Were you lying then, when you wrote "I really like the stuff"?

Or are you lying now, when you claim "[in mclaren's music]
the signal-to-noise ratio isn't very good"?

Which is it, Carl Lumma?

Explain it to us.

Were you lying then?

Or are you lying now?

Getting caught in his own lie illustrates the fundamental dilemma
of telling lies in public -- eventually, the lies catch up with
the liar. Sooner or later, a contradiction shows up, hard evidence
appears, and the game's up for people like Carl Lumma and Dante
Rosati.

As for the remainder of Carl Lumma's contemptiblly failed effort
to discredit me goes, he mentions that I burn CDs on a CD-R and
therefore my CDs are "self-produced." The logical conclusion
is that self-produced CDs and LPs and cassettes are signs of
poor musicanship and indicate that the person who produces
'em is a crappy musician.

Good thinking, Carl.

In that case, et's get rid of all Harry Partch's muisc. We
can safely burn the Partch master tapes and stop listening
to all the Partch CDs now that we've been informed by
your blazing burst of isnight that self-produced recordings
are shit.

Next, we can get rid of all Conlon Nancarrow's music, since he
also produced his own LPs.

From there we can move on to such obviously worthless scumbags
as Wendy Carlos, Frank Zappa, and a vast range of other
composers and musicians who choose not to french-kiss the
bunghole of a major record label and sign their life's work
away for a mess of pottage.

If you haven't finished laughing at Carl Lumma's grotesquely
foolish reasoning, hang on -- there's more.

Not content to get caught in one obvious lie, Car Lumma
tries his hand at a second lie when he falsely claims:

"Not only has he alienated himself from the tuning list,
he's managed to alienate himself from many of the
microtonalists he used to work with in San Diego, by
snail-mailing lengthy attacks much like the ones he posts
here." -- Carl Lumma

This is of course a typically laughable lie from Carl
Lumma. In actual fact I'm on excellent terms with all
the micrtonalists in San Diego, every single one. I
phone them just about every week and the major problem
I have is that I tend to spend much too much time
talking to the microtonalists in San Diego because our
conversations are far too enjoyable.

It would be easy enough to continue debunking Carl Lumma's
ridiculous and flagrantly dishonest post, but why bother?

How much of an egg do you have to eat to know it's rotten?
---------
--mclaren

--- In metatuning@yahoogroups.com, "xenharmonic" <xed@e...> wrote:

>
> Next, we can get rid of all Conlon Nancarrow's music, since he
> also produced his own LPs.
>

This is not true. Conlon Nancarrow never produced a single LP of his
own or any other music. The efforts of John Edmunds, John Cage, Merce
Cunningham, and Roger Reynolds led to the first Columbia LP. The next
recordings were by New World and 1750 Arch and, eventually, Wergo.

Gabor

> "This listener has gotten far more enjoyment from three of
> Dante's tracks than from dozens of Brian's cassettes and
> CDs. [in mclaren's music[ the signal-to-noise ratio isn't
> very good." -- Carl Lumma
>
> Naturally this is a lie.

Are listeners not are allowed to revise their opinions?
When I was a kid I thought REM was a pretty good band.
My opinion of their music hasn't changed, but after being
exposed to new worlds of music my assesment of their
relative merit has changed dramatically. I used to think
Phish were virtuosic but annoying, but one day I 'got'
their sense of humor and now I think their music is some
of the most significant of the 20th century.

I hadn't heard Dante's music (in fact I don't believe it
existed) at the time I wrote the letter you cite, and
certainly I had not heard the majority of microtonal music
I now have.

> "Your package was received last night (which would be
> February 10th)

Are you sure this wasn't 1998? (You say 1999 below.)
Wait, I have that letter. Let me look it up...

...yup it was 1998. So were you lying when you said '99?
Just wondering.

> with great delight. I was like a kid in a candy store. I
> finsihed Tape #1 before bed, and am now listening to
> Side A ot Tape #2. I really like the stuff."

How could this statement include an assessment of the
signal/noise ratio if I had only listened to one of a
plurality of tapes by the time I'd written it?

> As for the remainder of Carl Lumma's contemptiblly failed
> effort to discredit me goes, he mentions that I burn CDs
> on a CD-R and therefore my CDs are "self-produced." The
> logical conclusion is that self-produced CDs and LPs and
> cassettes are signs of poor musicanship and indicate that
> the person who produces 'em is a crappy musician.

Nope, I didn't say that. I did read you to say that *not*
having CDs makes one a crappy musician. Would that be an
accurate assessment of your position?

I meant your claims of having CDs do not represent the
peer review involved in being professionally produced.
Anybody can make a CD and offer it for sale today. So
when someone repeatedly brags, and lords 'having CDs'
over others, it makes sense to point this out.

> "Not only has he alienated himself from the tuning list,
> he's managed to alienate himself from many of the
> microtonalists he used to work with in San Diego, by
> snail-mailing lengthy attacks much like the ones he posts
> here." -- Carl Lumma
>
> This is of course a typically laughable lie from Carl
> Lumma. In actual fact I'm on excellent terms with all
> the micrtonalists in San Diego, every single one.

Alienated, past tense, based on personal communication
at the time (1999 or 2000).

-Carl