Members mate_stubb Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 I'm not quite old enough, I was 4 when it came out. Still, when I was 10 or so, I would see it in people's record collections along with the Stones and Zep. It was like the Yo-Yo Ma of records: everyday people knew it and had it. It doesn't mean it was great or terrible, it means that it was the first to gain public acceptance. Because of it's success, companies like RCA were willing to put out recordings by people like TOmita, hoping to cash in. I AM old enough. I was a former classical nerd 2 years into playing in my first band. In 1969, you could not escape SOB. I saw my first Moog modular on the network morning show. In those days, there were 3 TV channels and half of the country at least saw this giant blinky thing. I had already run out and bought the album the instant I heard it on the radio. At that point, my only exposure to synths had been reading and listening to The Nonesuch Guide to Electronic Music, and the local university professor who had a Putney (VCS-3). I was transfixed by that sound and that giant console. Only a year later, the ELP album came out and it had leapt to rock music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Huh?. Nonsense. The Greeks we're all scientists. Look it up. Seriously though... It was my understanding that the best and brightest in the Greek culture we Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Don't forget "The Crusades" where evil Christians kill everybody. Yeah. Gotta get that in here somewhere. Yeah. Thats all you, man. Riff! Stream of conciousness! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tagutcow Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Nope.There were all kinds of synth recordings, computer music projects etc of music by the late (as of yesterday) Milton Babbitt, I had no idea. Seems we've lost a huge number of preeminent 20th century composers in the last 5 years or so. (And yeah, I actually like Milton Babbit, and never found much substance to the accusations that his music was "academic".) Lejaren Hiller, I have some Hiller pieces on tape around here. It's astonishing, really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hexeract Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 The fact that the christian base is politically conservative is the most hilarious irony imaginable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 ...I want to say though, yeah, I hear droolmasters position to a degree, but I think he shot first and asked questions later. The original thread seemed pretty damned harmless to me. I think CR and the other poster got the short end of the stick. Nice theatrics, but whether I was unfair to CR or not has nothing at all to do with the points I'm making in this thread. It seems like you're saying that you kind of agree with me, but well, kind of not, because I'm kind of an ass - not an altogether convincing argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 CR, please excuse any affront I've offered up upon your belief system. As it is I found nothing wrong with the original post of yours, and find it highly unfair that the otherwise respectable contrarian, DM, is reading the worst into your otherwise harmless statements. I'll give him points for half right, but the half wrong makes me wince most uncomfortable, seeing as I am aligned on a similar side as my otherwise admirable forumite, and I don't think your deserving of any of the slander you've recieved in the slightest, and find myself even offended by it. Of course, as an atheist/agnostic/believer/Pagan/wolfman, it is my want to despise all religous proto types, for and towards the coming of the inevitable, post atheist cyborg octapuss of glory. Of course, this has had a profoundly negative effect on my dating life, especially when I mention the octapuss. But I must say, it always disturbs me when people measure a man by his affilitation rather then what he is actually saying at the moment, and that this measure is always to the detriment of consenus, emptahy and understanding, three things which, religous or otherwise, are the sacred responsibilities of any and all self respecting jerk offs. Yours truly, the visible hand of the ten percent off market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Nice theatrics, but whether I was unfair to CR or not has nothing at all to do with the points I'm making in this thread. It seems like you're saying that you kind of agree with me, but well, kind of not, because I'm kind of an ass - not an altogether convincing argument. I'm saying that your point about religion in this country often being a coded message for the interests of a certain political party, at their worst, is utterly accurate. I'm also saying your aim is true as poetry, but the target didn't have it coming, and there's nothing pleasant about that, regardless of any further illuminating points you choose to make over the body of his damaged character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Some gross distortions here. I think that it was obvious, whether rightly or wrongly, that I was contextualizing CR's comments by evoking some of the things that he has said here and on other forums. Obviously, if one is saying that by x, someone actually means y given past statements, then one by definition is reading more into what that person is saying than just the meaning of the words of the current statements themselves. But I expect, rather than any kind of a direct comment, additional oblique meanderings which, impressive though they are at times, often have nothing at all to do with what's actually going on. CR, please excuse any affront I've offered up upon your belief system. As it is I found nothing wrong with the original post of yours, and find it highly unfair that the otherwise respectable contrarian, DM, is reading the worst into your otherwise harmless statements. I'll give him points for half right, but the half wrong makes me wince most uncomfortable, seeing as I am aligned on a similar side as my otherwise admirable forumite, and I don't think your deserving of any of the slander you've recieved in the slightest, and find myself even offended by it. Of course, as an atheist/agnostic/believer/Pagan/wolfman, it is my want to despise all religous proto types, for and towards the coming of the inevitable, post atheist cyborg octapuss of glory. Of course, this has had a profoundly negative effect on my dating life, especially when I mention the octapuss. But I must say, it always disturbs me when people measure a man by his affilitation rather then what he is actually saying at the moment, and that this measure is always to the detriment of consenus, emptahy and understanding, three things which, religous or otherwise, are the sacred responsibilities of any and all self respecting jerk offs. Yours truly, the visible hand of the ten percent off market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tagutcow Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 It was my understanding that the best and brightest in the Greek culture we Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 We disagree about whether the target had it coming. I agree that if he didn't, there is nothing pleasant about it, but I claim that he did. If nothing else, I am still singed by burning in hell for all eternity just as he promised would happen to all non-believers, as well as other comments about only the literal interpretation of the bible saving one from such a fate, and other direct affiliations with those sentiments of the Christian right that (to my mind) are about as far away from real religion as you can get. I'm saying that your point about religion in this country often being a coded message for the interests of a certain political party, at their worst, is utterly accurate. I'm also saying your aim is true as poetry, but the target didn't have it coming, and there's nothing pleasant about that, regardless of any further illuminating points you choose to make over the body of his damaged character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Some gross distortions here. I think that it was obvious, whether rightly or wrongly, that I was contextualizing CR's comments by evoking some of the things that he has said here and on other forums. Obviously, if one is saying that by x, someone actually means y given past statements, then one by definition is reading more into what that person is saying than just the meaning of the words of the current statements themselves. But I expect, rather than any kind of a direct comment, additional oblique meanderings which, impressive though they are at times, often have nothing at all to do with what's actually going on. Sounds pretty thin, man. You're dealing with people not algebra. X doesn't always lead to Y in the heart of a person. You can't condemn a man for likely meaning something by a statement that is otherwise utterly harmless. That's a court I don't want to be involved in in the slightest. If your raising your voice for free speech on the forum by indicting the contradictory speech of another that's a very funny way to go about things, and I won't go for it by any measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 So, what it comes down to then is whether I was accurate or not - that's fair. But as you said - or I think you did - in a lot of cases in today's political, 'religious' landscape, a statement that may sound like it means one thing, may actually mean something else. But I'd say that yes - it's factually true - a person may, by a statement that sounds without context to be harmless, something else entirely. And you seem to imply that this is true. So, I'll take to heart the fact that you believe that what I say to be false, but the rest of it sounds self contradictory to me. Sounds pretty thin, man. You're dealing with people not algebra. X doesn't always lead to Y in the heart of a person. You can't condemn a man for likely meaning something by a statement that is otherwise utterly harmless. That's a court I don't want to be involved in in the slightest. If your raising your voice for free speech on the forum by indicting the contradictory speech of another that's a very funny way to go about things, and I won't go for it by any measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 We disagree about whether the target had it coming. I agree that if he didn't, there is nothing pleasant about it, but I claim that he did. If nothing else, I am still singed by burning in hell for all eternity just as he promised would happen to all non-believers. Yeah, but it's a freaking joke, man. A grim one, but a joke all the same. This world of ours will fold and collapse without any recourse to such lunacies. There's no fire to be singed by in the first place. You assume that as well as I do. Let the man say his peace without extrapolating the worst of his supposed policies from it. When he starts condemning forumites to hellfire for not beliveing what he believes, I'll be right with you in condemning such toxic madness, as will many others. But I refuse to judge a man based on what he might be saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 We seem to be agreeing and disagreeing simultaneously. Again - I may be factually in error, but I am referring to actual statements, not simply my inferences based on the fact that he claims to be a Christian, or whatever you're saying (which I'm not quite sure of). I'm totally fine with dropping the whole thing, which hadn't come up now in quite a few posts..... (and of course - I don't actually believe that people burn in hell literally. If I did, I suppose then that I'd be more forgiving of someone saying that I would do so - then again, like what you're saying, it simply comes down to a matter of fact. But you're correct - I don't believe it - which to make helps in remapping all of these statements of devotion into something else entirely) Yeah, but it's a freaking joke, man. A grim one, but a joke all the same. This world of ours will fold and collapse without any recourse to such lunacies. There's no fire to be singed by in the first place. You assume that as well as I do. Let the man say his peace without extrapolating the worst of his supposed policies from it. When he starts condemning forumites to hellfire for not beliveing what he believes, I'll be right with you in condemning such toxic madness, as will many others. But I refuse to judge a man based on what he might be saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tagutcow Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 I have no clue as to what you're talking about. As in any discussion, one makes comments about what is being said. I don't believe I've said that somehow people need to answer to ME more than anyone else - I'm commenting on the merits of what is being said - same as you, or anyone else. As I mentioned, I don't see any great merit to the arguments of either side here, but I think the original comment that much music we have today was influenced in some form or another by religious music was intended as an offhand musing after you had came out in an anti-Christian rage with fists flying. "O hai guise! Hey, I was wondering if you guys thought it would be okay if I used synths in a churc--" "--CHURCH!?! OH NO! RED ALERT! RED ALERT! WE CAN'T HAVE ANY MENTION OF RELIGION ON OUR MESSAGE BOARD! THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE! THIS IS INTOLERABLE! FOR SHAME! I HAVE A VERY SERIOUS MEDICAL CONDITION WHERE ANY MENTION OF RELIGION SENDS ME INTO ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK! AAAH! IT BURNS! IT BURNS!" "Well you know, kinda when you think about it, alot of the music we make is, like, influenced by church music sorta. I mean, like, Bach and all." "GAAAAAH! IT'S LIKE ACID ON MY SKIN! CEASE AND DESIST WITH ANY MENTION OF RELIGION FORTHWITH! I DON'T HAVE TO AGREE WITH ANYTHING YOU SAY! YOU SIR HAVE COMMITTED THE LOGICAL FALLACY OF ARGUMENTUM AD POST HOC ERGO PROMPTER HOC! I AM BESIDE MYSELF WITH RAGE! WHAT CAN YOU SAY FOR YOURSELF! NOTHING! NOTHING! YOU LOSE! YOU GET NOTHING! GOOD DAY SIR!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 As I mentioned, I don't see any great merit to the arguments of either side here, but I think the original comment that much music we have today was influenced in some form or another by religious music was intended as an offhand musing after you had came out in an anti-Christian rage with fists flying."O hai guise! Hey, I was wondering if you guys thought it would be okay if I used synths in a churc--""--CHURCH!?! OH NO! RED ALERT! RED ALERT! WE CAN'T HAVE ANY MENTION OF RELIGION ON OUR MESSAGE BOARD! THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE! THIS IS INTOLERABLE! FOR SHAME! I HAVE A VERY SERIOUS MEDICAL CONDITION WHERE ANY MENTION OF RELIGION SENDS ME INTO ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK! AAAH! IT BURNS! IT BURNS!""Well you know, kinda when you think about it, alot of the music we make is, like, influenced by church music sorta. I mean, like, Bach and all.""GAAAAAH! IT'S LIKE ACID ON MY SKIN! CEASE AND DESIST WITH ANY MENTION OF RELIGION FORTHWITH! I DON'T HAVE TO AGREE WITH ANYTHING YOU SAY! YOU SIR HAVE COMMITTED THE LOGICAL FALLACY OF ARGUMENTUM AD POST HOC ERGO PROMPTER HOC! I AM BESIDE MYSELF WITH RAGE! WHAT CAN YOU SAY FOR YOURSELF! NOTHING! NOTHING! YOU LOSE! YOU GET NOTHING! GOOD DAY SIR!" That's not fair at all, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 This is so far from what I said, as evidenced by the fact that it's so far from what I believe, that I really can't comment at all. But again - nice theatrics. As I mentioned, I don't see any great merit to the arguments of either side here, but I think the original comment that much music we have today was influenced in some form or another by religious music was intended as an offhand musing after you had came out in an anti-Christian rage with fists flying."O hai guise! Hey, I was wondering if you guys thought it would be okay if I used synths in a churc--""--CHURCH!?! OH NO! RED ALERT! RED ALERT! WE CAN'T HAVE ANY MENTION OF RELIGION ON OUR MESSAGE BOARD! THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE! THIS IS INTOLERABLE! FOR SHAME! I HAVE A VERY SERIOUS MEDICAL CONDITION WHERE ANY MENTION OF RELIGION SENDS ME INTO ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK! AAAH! IT BURNS! IT BURNS!""Well you know, kinda when you think about it, alot of the music we make is, like, influenced by church music sorta. I mean, like, Bach and all.""GAAAAAH! IT'S LIKE ACID ON MY SKIN! CEASE AND DESIST WITH ANY MENTION OF RELIGION FORTHWITH! I DON'T HAVE TO AGREE WITH ANYTHING YOU SAY! YOU SIR HAVE COMMITTED THE LOGICAL FALLACY OF ARGUMENTUM AD POST HOC ERGO PROMPTER HOC! I AM BESIDE MYSELF WITH RAGE! WHAT CAN YOU SAY FOR YOURSELF! NOTHING! NOTHING! YOU LOSE! YOU GET NOTHING! GOOD DAY SIR!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tagutcow Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 This is so far from what I said, as evidenced by the fact that it's so far from what I believe, that I really can't comment at all. But again - nice theatrics. It's called artistic license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 It's called artistic license. I guess, but if it's outright false, then there are other names for it also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike Conway Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Songs of faith and devotion? Oh, yeah![video=youtube;sG0-mrYG4uE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 It's called artistic license. Fair enough. You're a bright guy, no doubt, but more then a little prone to unfair characterizations of the opposition. DM was saying, I hope I'm generalizing at least half correctly, that religion in context was and is indivisible from certain political sympathies, that are by their nature, intolerant, insulting and every other God damn thing. That being said, his argument is, or seems to be, that there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Well, I don't quite agree that you're depiction of my views is quite accurate. But I appreciate that you've actually thought about them, and are also trying to be fair. Fair enough. You're a bright guy, no doubt, but more then a little prone to unfair characterizations of the opposition. DM was saying, I hope I'm generalizing at least half correctly, that religion in context was and is indivisible from certain political sympathies, that are by their nature, intolerant, insulting and every other God damn thing. That being said, his argument is, or seems to be, that there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Severalist Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 Apologies for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BonsoWonderDog Posted January 31, 2011 Members Share Posted January 31, 2011 To summarise : Froolmaster loves to argue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.