Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Most of the noise musicians I know have more in common with you than with whoever is "at war with the establishment" or whatever. I have not met any of these "at war" noise people, not even the ones who have played at High Zero or have otherwise passed through Baltimore-DC on tour.They're all making noise music because that's how they wish to express themselves, that's all. No anti-anything. I was referring to what I saw on the video. People talking about being "desensitized" and "limited by definitions of music" and all that. I got a little ahead of myself thinking they were making a statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Also, I just listened to a few of Allerian's tracks and most of them I was able to count a beat and noticed a definite melody. Perhaps we're thinking about two different definitions of noise...? That "Dylan of Noise" that I thinking Pighood posted was more the noise I was thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 It makes me sad that a musical academic doesn't know John Cage or his most famous work. He is Exhibit A that your 'definition' of what is music is tenuous at best and completely wrong-headed at worst. this HAS to be a joke.:poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 this HAS to be a joke.:poke: It's certainly not. This is an example of a composer using the nature of music (sound AND SILENCE) in an ironic way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sizzlemeister Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Let me make it easy for all of you. Music exists on a quantum level, at least, and therefore is and is not at the same time. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Let me make it easy for all of you. Music exists on a quantum level, at least, and therefore is and is not at the same time.Carry on. Of course, that's either a joke, or nonsense. Music does not exist on the quantum level, because one doesn't interpret sound at that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 It's certainly not.This is an example of a composer using the nature of music (sound AND SILENCE) in an ironic way. oh my god, this thread has derailed into pure and 104% retarded. http://youtube.com/watch?v=hUJagb7hL0E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members controlvoltage Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Sound= tones identified on any world music scale Time= adhering to a time signature Totally wrong at a fundamental physical level. Seriously, think about it for a minute.Ok, now was that minute you spent thinking about it in 4/4 time, or 6/8?"Time" is a perception of events unfolding in a linear sequence - or, you could call it the direction of causality. There are two schools of thought; namely that it is one of the fundamental quantities of the universe in which we exist, or alternatively that it is all in your head. Either way, the concept of events occurring over a span of time exists independently of the concept of musical meter and time signature. Surely you can see that this is so."Sound" meanwhile is a perception which occurs in the brain, in response to neurosensory stimuli which we receive due to physical vibrations in our surrounding medium, air. If a tree falls right next to you, and it's really loud, it makes a sound. This is true regardless of whether the sound is a pure "tone" or not, which in itself is independent of whether or not that "tone" is "identified on any world music scale." By your logic, an audible vibration occurring at 440 Hz is a sound, while an audible vibration occurring at 443.56565656 Hz is not a sound. What then, pray tell, is it?OK, I'm done here... sorry for ranting... and of course you are entitled to hold a personal definition of "music" that does not include things you don't like. But don't try to convince someone else that your personal definition is universal, unless you can talk a better game than that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Remember, I have been talking about the CONVENTIONAL AND TRADITIONAL definition of music. In these conventions and traditions, sounds have been tonal and time has been in a time signature. This is convention and tradition I'm working with. {censored}, I'm not even saying that I think that sound and time can be expressed and measured differently. I'm talking about the convention of music throughout history. Only. Got it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Got it? pure and 104%, sir! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jjdugan3 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Remember, I have been talking about the CONVENTIONAL AND TRADITIONAL definition of music.In these conventions and traditions, sounds have been tonal and time has been in a time signature. This is convention and tradition I'm working with.{censored}, I'm not even saying that I think that sound and time can be expressed and measured differently.I'm talking about the convention of music throughout history. Only.Got it? That's like saying there is only 1 true religion,my apologies to anybody ultra orthodox in any religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Right, I know it is! That's the thing, I'm just using the conventional model of music to question noise. I'm not saying it's right, at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members controlvoltage Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 I'm talking about the convention of music throughout history. Only. Got it? "THE"convention of music?Throughout HISTORY?you are expressing a very limited perspective on the world.Have fun with that. I'm going to go do something else now.PS) in clear terms, what I am trying to say here is that you are writing as though your own *personal* definition of "musical convention" is bigger or more objective than it is. It's just your personal definition. That's OK, but it will come across a LOT more reasonably if you express it as what it is, namely your opinion, and not as some kind of natural law that has been accepted by everybody since time immemorial, or whatnot. You're making that stuff up, and you haven't even done enough research to do a good job of it. So, keep sharing your opinions; that's what this board is for! But you'll get picked on a lot less (or maybe not at all) if you say "in my opinion," or "It seems to me" and stuff like that, instead of laff riots like "the convention of music throughout history."Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 "THE" convention of music? Throughout HISTORY? you are expressing a very limited perspective on the world. Have fun with that. I'm going to go do something else now. PS) in clear terms, what I am trying to say here is that you are writing as though your own *personal* definition of "musical convention" is bigger or more objective than it is. It's just your personal definition. That's OK, but it will come across a LOT more reasonably if you express it as what it is, namely your opinion, and not as some kind of natural law that has been accepted by everybody since time immemorial, or whatnot. You're making that stuff up, and you haven't even done enough research to do a good job of it. So, keep sharing your opinions; that's what this board is for! But you'll get picked on a lot less (or maybe not at al) if you say "in my opinion," or "It seems to me" and stuff like that, instead of laff riots like "the convention of music throughout history." Cheers! No it's not my personal idea.I'm speaking in grand terms cuz I'm getting tired and bored.I know what you're doing, and I'm really not up for it. You can't honestly make me concede that the way music is currently taught only suggests that notes on a scale and time signatures could be an incarnation of music. Or that the great composers all decided to use an arbitrary and loose system of notation that has just happened to move on as the foundation of reading and writing music.Yes...those are inventions in my head.Great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mildbill Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 4'33" is about perception, and on the quantum level sound is light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jjdugan3 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 The argument is disingenuous because it supposes "western music" as a static form,music evolves as does the definition.Tradition and convention now include Henry Purcell to say the Velvet Underground,another band thought anti music,tuneless,not music etc,as stated by purveyors of music in the classic sense..So long as it's has a key and has a beat it's music..mmmm?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Allerian Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Remeber that time we all talked about pianos? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Remeber that time we all talked about pianos? Yeah. I'm a fan of Chinese Buffet...until the noise break, of course. But i like the voicings of the instruments. Very ironic. Creepy vocal loop, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jjdugan3 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 The effect forum has a field day with stuff like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members carbon111 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Remeber that time we all talked about pianos? Pianos can occasionally provide backing to synthesizers, that's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 I thought 4'33" was about the fact that the audience itself is the performance...the occasional cough, rustle of programs, etc... Probably a long four and a half minutes for some, I'd wager Especially if you have a cold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Especially if you have a cold.^or a severe allergy to rag-weed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mildbill Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 I thought 4'33" was about the fact that the audience itself is the performance...the occasional cough, rustle of programs, etc... Exactly - Perception The performance of sound is constantly around us. I'm not of the opinion that it's music in any sense other than the poetic however. (If you haven't read thru the whole thread - the quantum thing is probably WTF?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mildbill Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Remeber that time we all talked about pianos? What did we say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members akliner Posted November 28, 2007 Members Share Posted November 28, 2007 Buying a baby grand for conservatory blah blah blah blahblah OH NOEZ THE CP300 IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH YES IT IS OH NOEZ MUST HAS STEINWAYZ LOLZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.