Music of the future
Jarl Sigurd
Archer070 wrote
>Playing Haydn's 104 tonight and began to wonder. What will become of it
all?
>When I was a kid there was no question that this stuff--the classical canon
of
>instrumental music-- was the center of the artistic universe, as it had
been
>for a century and a half. Now there is plenty of question. The audience
for
>this concert will be mostly over fifty years of age, and their children all
>think Beethoven is a St. Bernard.
>
>What will replace it? What will it sound like?
Hint: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd
Seriously, I think classical music will make a comeback in the 21st
century, though not in the form we are accustomed to hearing it.
One of the problems Classical(or at least classical orchestral)
music faced in the 20th Century was that it was the most expensive
and thus least accessible type of music to perform. The cost of
hiring an orchestra of 60 to 100 highly trained musicians is
enough to dissuade a lot of people from putting on performances
of classical music. But now with computers and synths, it's possible
to perform Classical orchestral music music for less than what it
costs to have a 3-5 piece rock band to perform. I think as the
century progresses, we are going to see more and more
aspiring musicians go into classical style music.
Jarl Sigurd
to savour the lush ornamental string section of my E-minor
symphony, visit: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd2
ba...@visi.com
perhaps then again who cares...as classical music is just one style of
writing music. you should not devote your whole carreer to writing
just classical music, there are many forms and approaches to music.
the music you write might well deterine the market you with to enter.
Medium changes music...21 century composer should be able to create
all forms of music all styles and still come up with something new.
Steve-oooooooooooo>_<
David Ashbridge
century? What utter tosh! I you think it will make a comeback, JUST
WHAT do you think it has been doing for the past century???? Scrubbing
the floors? Languishing by the roadside? Having an extended vacation?
Playing hide and seek? gone AWOL altogether?
SInce you probably missed it, I will do a quick resume of the 20th
century.
The twentieth century saw THE biggest expansion of composed, performed,
recorded, published, discussed, analysised wrote about, classical music
than any other century. It saw the biggest increase in professional
orchestras, opera companies, chamber music performers, soloists,
conductors, instruments, instrumental development, producers, agencies,
and marketing at any time ever. The twentieth century has seen
classical music even in the face of global pop and rock music become a
WORLDWIDE event which was NOT the case in 1900. It has seen the advance
of instrumental techniques way in advance of what was available in 1900,
although that is not say the musicians then were bad, far from it. It
has seen the taking up of music by the general public on a scale that
would even our parents could not have guessed possible and seen the
diversification of styles beyond our wildest dreams (or nightmares
depending on your point of view!). It has also seen the expansion of
the number of concert venues for all types of classical music and a
whole industry in developed countries that matches the support of music
like retail outlets. Amateur classical musicians have risen in number
and quality thrughout the twentieth century. There is not the least
reason to suggest that is going to change much in the near future. If I
have missed anything out, please can others feel free to add to this
list.
Classical music does have have plenty of problems to overcome that is
not in doubt and never has been. Worldwide promotion and access not
dependant on things like the computer because that is not always
available, (see South Africa for example on the old homelands or in
Soweto) considering the place of music in a global climate where
countries may lose their identity, losing a snobby image in developed
countries, and financial support across the board are examples.
But the ridiculous statement that orchestral music is the least
accessible and most costly is simply untrue. Ballet and Opera in
particular outstrip orchestral music amost every time. as for the
notion that computers are going to perform classical music, whilst they
may well contribute to initial access amd study, they will not replace
live music simply because in the end the boredom factor associated with
a screen will stop trained musicians using it for long, and it is
IMPOSSIBLE to learn the skill of playing an instrument beyond a meagre
level just using a computer. There is also nothing of intinsic value in
getting a computer to do all the hard work. It may please those who
don't get a hearing very often, but the majority of music is going to be
linked to the more traditional approaches.
Sadly I think you have an extremely narrow limited view of clasasical
music if you think even for one minute that classical music has dipped
to the extent it will have to make a comeback. I do not see any reason
to think that Pop and Rock music are that much more popular now than
they ever were. Those music styles have always had a pretty huge
following amongst the young worldwide and that will doubtless continue.
What I find encouraging is that many of those same people are prepared
to listen to classical music as well. That is the change of siesmic
proportions. Ok, we have always had those on whatever side of the
divide who prefer ONLY to listen to one type of music, but puralism has
its benefits. Today our universities and music colleges are filled with
music students who like not only pop and rock but plenty of classical as
well and don't harbour the grudges. Incidentally, we have computers in
just about EVERY room here and I am glad to say that 95% of all music
making in this university is computer free. Long may it last. This is
all to the good.
Jarl Sigurd wrote:
>
>
> Seriously, I think classical music will make a comeback in the 21st
> century, though not in the form we are accustomed to hearing it.
> One of the problems Classical(or at least classical orchestral)
> music faced in the 20th Century was that it was the most expensive
> and thus least accessible type of music to perform. The cost of
> hiring an orchestra of 60 to 100 highly trained musicians is
> enough to dissuade a lot of people from putting on performances
> of classical music. But now with computers and synths, it's possible
> to perform Classical orchestral music music for less than what it
> costs to have a 3-5 piece rock band to perform. I think as the
> century progresses, we are going to see more and more
> aspiring musicians go into classical style music.
On the last point of self-promotion, if you REALLY want a lush sound in
your symphony, forget the sampler and just for once persuade a decent
semi-amateur orchestra to perform it for you. I promise it beats the
computer every time.
Dr.Matt
That will change, when people realize that classical music doesn't compete
with pop music but rather with basketball for market share.... {8V{D>>>
--
For spammers: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/uce.htm
My CD "Kabala": http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/cd.html
Matt Fields DMA http://listen.to/mattaj TwelveToneToyBox http://start.at/tttb
"Is there a theorbo in the house?"
Samuel Vriezen
you describe of computers imitating orchestras is an impoverishment of
both orchestral and electronic practice and is therefore moribund,
likely only to appeal to people who _really_ want to create orchestral
music but don't get taken seriously by the orchestras.
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001 08:28:02 -0500, "Jarl Sigurd"
<jarls...@geocities.com> wrote:
--
Samuel
All beauty, resonance, integrity,
Exist by deprivation or logic
of strange position.
-John Ashbery, 'Le livre est sur la table'.
Dr.Matt
Samuel Vriezen <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>Jarl, electronic music is a genre in itself - the 'classical' music
>you describe of computers imitating orchestras is an impoverishment of
>both orchestral and electronic practice and is therefore moribund,
>likely only to appeal to people who _really_ want to create orchestral
>music but don't get taken seriously by the orchestras.
Hahaha, I see a storm brewing! Jerry, please go lightly!
Jerry Gerber
"Samuel Vriezen" <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:3a9ed4a2...@news.xs4all.nl...
> Jarl, electronic music is a genre in itself - the 'classical' music
> you describe of computers imitating orchestras is an impoverishment of
> both orchestral and electronic practice and is therefore moribund,
> likely only to appeal to people who _really_ want to create orchestral
> music but don't get taken seriously by the orchestras.
>
>
Maybe right, maybe not. The last thing I consider myself is a "classical
composer". That has such a stigma of being involved with musically-correct
academia or worse, some weird conceited snobbish society that the term has
done more harm than good to music as far as I am concerned. I find it more
liberating to just be a composer and musician. But if you are saying that
the virtual orchestra is being utilized by people who are not as gifted at
composition by those who get live orchestras to do their work, uh, I think
you're turning your back on how flexible the electronic medium really is.
Because electronic music began as blips and bleeps and odd sounds in
gigantic studios forty years ago certainly doesn't mean it is going to end
up being used like that. I hope that is not what you meant because it is
ridiculous.
I must add that electronic music isn't a genre--it's a medium, in the same
way that the orchestra is a medium. The medium can exist to serve many
genres and styles.
--
Jerry Gerber
www.jerrygerber.com/discs.htm
www.cdbaby.com/virtualorchestra
mark h
my view on this, can be summed up like this: three chords only go so far.
also i might add, synthesizers only go so far...
recently attended a performance of the phoenix symphony (rare for me cause
i'm a rocker at heart), and i was blown away.....there is no comparison
between five guys on a stage getting a groove going, and 80 musicians
playing very difficult instruments as one musician.
thank god i was open to the emotion of the music, cause the whole experience
started me thinking again about my early musical education, the roots and
history of it, and i even notice how the best of pop draws a little from
classical.
i would say we are in evolution musically...who knows what they will say
about todays music 300 years from now?....hopefully we will have kept the
best of each genre and honored our ancestors.
been lurking here for a month or so... i like a lot of the stuff ive heard
that yall posted....
and even tho three chords have served me well, I might even dig out the old
college theory books and relearn some of the classical stuff i use every day
without knowing it!
nice to meet yalll
Markh
Dr.Matt
Jerry Gerber <jerry...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>"Samuel Vriezen" <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
>news:3a9ed4a2...@news.xs4all.nl...
>> Jarl, electronic music is a genre in itself - the 'classical' music
>> you describe of computers imitating orchestras is an impoverishment of
>> both orchestral and electronic practice and is therefore moribund,
>> likely only to appeal to people who _really_ want to create orchestral
>> music but don't get taken seriously by the orchestras.
>>
>>
>
>Maybe right, maybe not. The last thing I consider myself is a "classical
>composer". That has such a stigma of being involved with musically-correct
>academia or worse, some weird conceited snobbish society that the term has
>done more harm than good to music as far as I am concerned. I find it more
>liberating to just be a composer and musician. But if you are saying that
>the virtual orchestra is being utilized by people who are not as gifted at
>composition by those who get live orchestras to do their work, uh, I think
>you're turning your back on how flexible the electronic medium really is.
>Because electronic music began as blips and bleeps and odd sounds in
>gigantic studios forty years ago certainly doesn't mean it is going to end
>up being used like that. I hope that is not what you meant because it is
>ridiculous.
Maybe she meant to be ridiculous?
>
>I must add that electronic music isn't a genre--it's a medium, in the same
>way that the orchestra is a medium. The medium can exist to serve many
>genres and styles.
It's a salad dressing that you can also use as a cream rinse!
Bernard Hill
<mus...@brunel.ac.uk> writes
>What on earth do you mean? Classical music will make a comeback in 21st
>century? What utter tosh! I you think it will make a comeback, JUST
>WHAT do you think it has been doing for the past century???? Scrubbing
>the floors? Languishing by the roadside? Having an extended vacation?
>Playing hide and seek? gone AWOL altogether?
>
>> Jarl Sigurd
>>
>> to savour the lush ornamental string section of my E-minor
>> symphony, visit: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd2
Well done Jarl! Excellent post!
Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland
01750 21854
+44 1750 21854
dana
Great posting.
Just curious, which pieces did you hear during the concert?
dana
John Harrington
>> also i might add, synthesizers only go so far...
>>
>> recently attended a performance of the phoenix symphony (rare for me cause
>> i'm a rocker at heart), and i was blown away.....there is no comparison
>> between five guys on a stage getting a groove going, and 80 musicians
>> playing very difficult instruments as one musician.
Yep. No comparison whatsoever.
John
David Ashbridge
>
> yah but Classical Music lacks Market Share.
> That will change, when people realize that classical music doesn't compete
> with pop music but rather with basketball for market share.... {8V{D>>>
Being quite honest, unless you are looking at the broadcast and
televising of classical music the solutions don't really lay in market
share. It lays in outdated attitudes. Market share really only
reflects immediate interests. Market share is a pretty useless tool
when we have to try and quantify what makes up interest and education.
Here the over-riding sport is football. It is on some channels 24 hours
a day and weekends are just non-stop coverage of 22 men chasing an
inflated pile of air with countless thousands watching. This does not
make the blindest bit of lasting difference to music of any
description. Plenty of musicians also like sports across the planet.
However CM has something to learn from baseball, basketball, or football
when it comes to drumimg up interest and enthusiasm. At the bottom end
the kids and the adults GET INVOLVED and actually PLAY THE GAMES.
Watching is additional and whilst the big stars exist there is not the
elitism that seems to say this is impossible. Instead there are hundreds
of hopeful youngsters every week wishing to try their luck.
Now if we could even do 1% of that with CM just think of the numbers
involved. Pop music suceeds because one reason is there is no
pretension. When we get people introduced to PLAYING serious music with
orchestral instruments it is usual an interest that stays with people
for life. That is my goal. MArket share means nothing to me.
Dr.Matt
I'm quite with you on the value of education. Here in the US there's
a big push to pass education off to the churches under the banner of
"private enterprise"...
But let me, once again, nay: TWICE again, quote for you the
salient part of my original post:
{8V{D>>>
Jarl Sigurd
David Ashbridge wrote in message <3A9EAB8F...@brunel.ac.uk>...
>What on earth do you mean? Classical music will make a comeback in 21st
>century? What utter tosh! I you think it will make a comeback, JUST
>WHAT do you think it has been doing for the past century???? Scrubbing
>the floors? Languishing by the roadside? Having an extended vacation?
>Playing hide and seek? gone AWOL altogether?
Face it, the old gray mare just ain't what she used to be in the
glory days of Furtwangler and Mengelberg. Classical music has
been in a state of decline since 1955.
>On the last point of self-promotion, if you REALLY want a lush sound in
>your symphony, forget the sampler and just for once persuade a decent
>semi-amateur orchestra to perform it for you. I promise it beats the
>computer every time.
Tell you what, I'll use the 92 dollars I've earned at
http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd towards hiring a
small orchestra to perform my next composition.
How small an orchestra do you think I could hire
for $92 US?
To listen to a new direction in classical orchestral
music, visit: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd2
Jarl Sigurd
Samuel Vriezen wrote
>Jarl, electronic music is a genre in itself -
This raises the question of how one defines genre. In this day
and age it's hard to market any form of music unless there is
a genre it can be associated with. So how do you define a
piece of music in terms of genre. Do you define musical genre
in terms of how it is produced i.e. instrumentation? Do you define
it in terms of how closely it conforms to stylistic conventions? Or
do you define it in terms of sound. Ultimately since it is the listener
that keeps a music form viable, should it not be the sound impressions
the music makes on the listener that defines the genre. Were you to
play one of my concerti posted at http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd
to unitiated listerners who don't know how this music was produced,
and ask them to classify it in terms of genre, I would wager that most
would classify it as classical rather than jazz, rock, electronica, metal
or anything else. Though my music may have been composed using
the solid body electric guitar depicted at http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd
few listeners would classify it as Heavy Metal Rock. Though it may
have been recorded from a computer, I think few listeners would
classify it as Electronica. Regardless of what instruments I use to
record my music, the sound that the listener ultimately hears is made
up of Classical Orchestral sounds rather than Heavy Metal Sounds or
Electronic sounding Synth sounds. So It befits the classical genre category
more than any other.
>the 'classical' music
>you describe of computers imitating orchestras is an impoverishment of
>both orchestral and electronic practice and is therefore moribund,
>likely only to appeal to people who _really_ want to create orchestral
>music but don't get taken seriously by the orchestras.
If that's the case, then there must be a lot of people who_really_want to
create orchestral music but don't get taken seriously by the orchestras.
I've had 2000 people listen to my concerti during the month of February.
Jarl Sigurd
to listen to Classical Orchestral music composed by
Jarl Sigurd, visit: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd2
Jarl Sigurd
David Ashbridge wrote
>
>The twentieth century saw THE biggest expansion of composed, performed,
>recorded, published, discussed, analysised wrote about, classical music
>than any other century. It saw the biggest increase in professional
>orchestras, opera companies, chamber music performers, soloists,
>conductors, instruments, instrumental development, producers, agencies,
>and marketing at any time ever.
You're forgetting that the 20th Century also saw the greatest expansion
in the world's population. There are more people involved in Classical
music today simply because they're are more people. But how large
is the ratio of audiences of classical music to musicians performing
it now as compared to say 1920. The ratio of audiences to musicians
is very important.
> The twentieth century has seen
>classical music even in the face of global pop and rock music become a
>WORLDWIDE event which was NOT the case in 1900.
True it has expanded outside of Europe and gained ground in
the non-Western world.
>It has seen the advance
>of instrumental techniques way in advance of what was available in 1900,
>although that is not say the musicians then were bad, far from it.
I prefer the sound of historical performance recording from the
1930's and 40's to anything recorded after 1955. I would say the
artististic calibre of classical music performances has decined
abysmally since the age of Furtwangler and his BPO or Mengelberg
and his Concertgebouw
>Sadly I think you have an extremely narrow limited view of clasasical
>music if you think even for one minute that classical music has dipped
>to the extent it will have to make a comeback. I do not see any reason
>to think that Pop and Rock music are that much more popular now than
>they ever were.
Rock Music has taken a horrible beating over the past beating,
I would say that Rock is enjoying the same popularity as Jazz
did in the late 1960's. Yet there are more Rock bands than
ever before. As one heavy metal musician recently remarked,
in the 1970's there were maybe 10 metal bands selling a million
records each. Now there are a million metal bands selling 1O CD's
each. Rock bands are performing bar gigs for a free rounds of
beer. That old grey mare ain't what she used to be either.
Jarl Sigurd
to hear musical proof that computers are a classical music
lover's friend, visit: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd2
orangie
jarls...@geocities.com says...
so much joy. and, in assault orchestras, Boulez, as a conductor of
Debussy, helped reinvent the romantic orchestra's sound. there are so
many fine symphonies and conductors today. you should go to a cd store
and listen to them with headphones.
emerson, lake and palmer are fine sources for classical flavored music.
and, it is nice that you have learnt to say "furtwangler" and (that hack)
"mengelberg" at your tender age. such a prococious boy! and so many
interesting people listening to your music! jarf, i think, some day you
might want to think of becoming a musician. there are many fine and
annoying people playing subway stops with casio and pig-amp.
your devoted,
anton
--
music files at http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/224/orangie.html
orangie
says...
well, some people are saying that you are my creation, and that i am
making you up for fun. well. that's pretty annoying. i don't know whether
it says more about you or me. i mean, you've never once said anything
clever or funny or glamourous in all your posts! you just go on and on
about how much money (as if you didn't make more in tips at the store!).
so, i'd like you to say, publicly, that you are only you, so that people
can see your writing matches your music, and that anyone literate and
musical and cultur'eed could see that yur music was just, well, you know.
ever since you became Rudi Tonalis's favorite rent boy you've been
talking, talking, about music, and how you're going to be a famous
composer like him. well, ... i mean, last year it was hair implants. i
hope you grow out of this soon, cause we really don't like you changing
the CD every time you enter the room. if i hear the Help soundtrack one
more time... i mean, really.
by the way, tom says you left your sunglasses under his bed, and that he
wants his yamaha 282 back. he needs to add some latin rhythms for a club
date.
(plus, you're not creative enough to Invent a new use for the alphabet
for ng posts, allowing caps to Only be used as emphasis and honorific or
de-honorific, instead of relying on the stupid all-cap syndrome! i mean,
caps... i know when the sentence starts!)
orangie
Dr.Matt
Jarl Sigurd <jarls...@geocities.com> wrote:
>How small an orchestra do you think I could hire
>for $92 US?
If you can hitchhike to Prague, you can probably hire an amateur flautist.
That won't count as scoring, though. But it may give you an idea what
it feels like to really do it. But there are many pretty young ones
in Prague.
Samuel Vriezen
<jerry...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> The last thing I consider myself is a "classical
>composer". That has such a stigma of being involved with musically-correct
>academia or worse, some weird conceited snobbish society that the term has
>done more harm than good to music as far as I am concerned.
Fair enough, you are an American.
>I find it more
>liberating to just be a composer and musician. But if you are saying that
>the virtual orchestra is being utilized by people who are not as gifted at
>composition by those who get live orchestras to do their work, uh, I think
>you're turning your back on how flexible the electronic medium really is.
>Because electronic music began as blips and bleeps and odd sounds in
>gigantic studios forty years ago certainly doesn't mean it is going to end
>up being used like that. I hope that is not what you meant because it is
>ridiculous.
I'm not advocating blips. Electronic music is of course older than the
blips.
>I must add that electronic music isn't a genre--it's a medium, in the same
>way that the orchestra is a medium. The medium can exist to serve many
>genres and styles.
What I would advocate is a thorough thinking through of the relation
between medium and form. I don't see the point of idiomatic orchestral
music not intended for orchestras than I see the point of writing
Highland bagpipe music especially for the piano.
Jerry Gerber
">
> I'm not advocating blips. Electronic music is of course older than the
> blips.
Not by much.
>
> What I would advocate is a thorough thinking through of the relation
> between medium and form. I don't see the point of idiomatic orchestral
> music not intended for orchestras than I see the point of writing
> Highland bagpipe music especially for the piano.
The virtual orchestra can do many things well in the hands of a skilled
orchestrator. The most important point is how the music sounds in that
medium, not whether or not it would be effective in another medium. Much
music is "adaptable", and not so idiomatic that it can't retain its
effectiveness in other mediums. My concern as an virtual orchestra composer
is getting it to sound in such a way that the listener isn't concerned with
the medium, but with the message, the content, the essence. I think your
view of "idiomatic orchestra music" is very different than mine. The usage
of the orchestra, especially orchestration, has changed drastically over the
past 500. Tradition is in a state of modification and reinterpretation as
it usually is. The "orchestra" is an idea, not a law. The multi-timbral
experience in the virtual orchestra does not have a negative impact on form.
Quite the contrary, the computer is a powerful tool for developing musical
form. Perhaps to you a virtual orchestra composer is simply "reinventing the
wheel", but to me I see options and possibilities that cannot be realized in
the acoustic orchestra. But I agree with you, a thorough thinking through
of the relation between medium and form is both good and necessary. This is
true in any art and any medium. But the conclusions drawn from that
investigative thought are going to produce very different results from
different composers.
--
Jerry Gerber
www.jerrygerber.com
www.jerrygerber.com/discs.htm
Dr.Matt
Jerry Gerber <jerry...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>">
>> I'm not advocating blips. Electronic music is of course older than the
>> blips.
>
>Not by much.
I show that electronic music starts in about 1876... Elisha Grey, who
arrived at the US Patent Office an hour after AG Bell and who taught
at Oberlin and founded what would eventually become Western Electric,
had a byproduct of his telephone which contained a one-note oscillator
and a couple of octaves of piano keyboard. The first networked music
was 1899 (a keyboard controlled the frequency of an arc lamp, and an
accidental discovery was that the combination made power surges at the
tuned frequency, thus causing other arc lamps on the same circuit to
play the same music).
Cahill's 1897-1917 telharmoniums (36 notes per octave, each produced by a
mechanoelectric AC generator at a different speed, 40 to 4000 Hz
fundamentals) inspired Busoni's 1907 call for an all-electronic music.
Etc... All this history is available on-line...
MIDI is at its best when it manifests all the expressiveness of...
a theremin (1917), an instrument of such elegant simplicity that it
was a Heathkit build-your-own theremin that got the teenage Robert
Moog interested in his life's work.
orangie
fie...@login.itd.umich.edu says...
> In article <sIXn6.9437$%4.10...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> Jerry Gerber <jerry...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >">
> >> I'm not advocating blips. Electronic music is of course older than the
> >> blips.
> >
> >Not by much.
>
> I show that electronic music starts in about 1876... Elisha Grey, who
> arrived at the US Patent Office an hour after AG Bell and who taught
> at Oberlin and founded what would eventually become Western Electric,
> had a byproduct of his telephone which contained a one-note oscillator
> and a couple of octaves of piano keyboard. The first networked music
> was 1899 (a keyboard controlled the frequency of an arc lamp, and an
> accidental discovery was that the combination made power surges at the
> tuned frequency, thus causing other arc lamps on the same circuit to
> play the same music).
>
> Cahill's 1897-1917 telharmoniums (36 notes per octave, each produced by a
> mechanoelectric AC generator at a different speed, 40 to 4000 Hz
> fundamentals) inspired Busoni's 1907 call for an all-electronic music.
>
> Etc... All this history is available on-line...
>
> MIDI is at its best when it manifests all the expressiveness of...
> a theremin (1917), an instrument of such elegant simplicity that it
> was a Heathkit build-your-own theremin that got the teenage Robert
> Moog interested in his life's work.
>
>
kmk
David Olen Baird
wrote:
>But let me, once again, nay: TWICE again, quote for you the
>salient part of my original post:
>
>
> {8V{D>>>
>
> {8V{D>>>
>
Not a bad likeness, Dr. Matt.
---
David Olen Baird, Composer
mailto:davb...@tfs.net
vist the Garden Suite page at:
http://www.tfs.net/~davbaird/tgs.htm
David Ashbridge
>
> Face it, the old gray mare just ain't what she used to be in the
> glory days of Furtwangler and Mengelberg. Classical music has
> been in a state of decline since 1955.
>
Sorry that is just WRONG. Face what? You provide no evidence
what-so-ever. It sounds like it is only YOUR perception that classical
music has been in state of decline since 1955 although what you are
basing it on is far from clear. Where the hell is your evidence to back
it up??? There have been hundreds, nay thousands of quality musicians
since Furtwangler and Mengelberg and just citing these two does in no
way indicate a decline. I presented LOTS of evidence to the contrary to
show your statement is total hogwash. Can you present some REAL
evidence to show it is not?
Incidentally your claimed 'glory days' of Mengelberg happened during the
interwar period when Europe may be considered to be at a particularly
low ebb. Germany was bankrupt and heading for Fascism, Britain was in a
political mess through the 1920s with falling standards of living, made
a great deal worse after the Wall Street Crash. Eastern Europe was also
in turmoil. Russia had just had a revolution and the initial freedom
was replaced with Stalin's purges starting around 1930. Mengelberg
himself expressed solidarity with Fascism and he lost he standing after
1940. Furtwangler 'glory days' likewise coincided largely with the
unstable Weimar Republic when Germany went bankrupt and the following
horrors of Nazi Germany and the Second World War although it is harder
to say to what extent he accepted the Nazi regime. Whatever the
situation, classical music worldwide had quite a rough passage during
those years, most particualar in those countries that had witnessed
performances by Furtwangler and Mengelberg. Perhaps you have forgotten
how many world class musicians fled Europe and found another home in
America. And it is to America's credit it a)provided a home b)allowed
them freedom to be themselves c)vastly developed the culture of
classical music within its own boundaries as a result, the good effects
of which America is benefitting from now. Or perhaps you don't agree
since you state classical music has been in decline for so long?
Meantime here is some more and this time I will cite specific
countries. The largest growth in music education that we have ever had
has occured through the last fifty years. I mean that on a world wide
basis as well. The amount of money going into music sponsorship is
greatly more than before World War 2. State funding of classical music
in the UK started in the 1940s and grew significantly until the 1980s
when it leveled out before a decline and small revival now. But it
still can not be compared with 1950 which was MUCH LOWER. In Germany,
state sponsorship of orchestras and musicians has only recently been
considered for review. The growth through the second half of the
twentieth century was massive. France has continued it growth and has
emerged as a major musical force in Europe ove this last century and
kept it up. Music flourished in Russia under the Communists far more
than it ever did prior to 1917. The problem here was the state
interferred in all sorts of dreadful ways regarding freedom and
persecution. But the quality and quanity of musicians coming out of
Russia has never been higher. The same is true of Poland which was
destroyed at the end of WW2. I could cite the same sort of case for
Czechoslavakia, Austria and Hungary.
Spain is another case. Now emerging from the dark years of Franco, its
orchestras and musicians are becoming better known and making more of an
impression than ever they did before. Music education is growing
again. China as well, coming from almost nothing in 1900 and despite
ALL the horrendous political rubbish that was the cultural revolution in
mid 60s. Their music and orchestras have grown hugely in recent years,
particular since 1976. Just compere what they have now with what they
had even in 1950. I can recall Ozawa conducting in China in 1976 as the
western symphony orchestra was allowed once again. Now Shanghai is the
leading cultural force in China with western opera and orchestras.
Biejing is desparately trying to catch up. Classical music education
has flourished there in the last 20 years more than anywhere else on
mainland Asia. Classical music in the Philippines has dated from more
in the last fifty years than any other time. It's national orchestra
dates the mid 1970s and musical education there continues across its
universities. Professional Filipino musicians feature regularly on
cruise ships and they are of very high quality. Japan is the REAL story
of Asia of course. The biggest market for western classical to have
developed since 1945. But I suppose this is yet more evidence of a
decline because it is not centred around Furtwangler and Mengelberg.
I can't even see how your argument would work in regard to America.
From what I can gather classical music has grown and prospered there
possibly more than most countries on earth. It boasts some of the
finest orchestras anywhere, some of the finest education available,
virtually EVERY well known university has a quality orchestra, musicians
world wide hold America to be one of THE places where performance and
sponsorship of music outstrips many other countries. Please show us all
evidence of your claimed decline.
What about South America? Brazil cannot in any way claim the coverage
of America, but it also has seen a growth in classical music edustaion,
profesional orchestras, and coverage of the sunject. Villa-Lobos
started wide spread musical education in Brazil in 1940. It also has
more quality composers than many other countries and it is only the lack
of highly developed musical infrastructure that prevents them having the
opportunities others get elsewhere. But classical music is continuing
to grow to this day, often led by private individuals as opposed to the
state. Argentina has tried to maintain its cultural standing through
thick and thin. Even here there is more now than there was in the early
part of the century. Caracas, Lima and Santiago can all claim to be
major players within their own counties all of which have started to
develop classical music.
Australia has had a similar experience. It has been one of the fastest
growing countries since 1945 and has since that time has produced world
class classical musicians on a fair regular basis with a spreading of
interest throughout the country. New Zealand too. Going to the other
side the planet, even Iceland has its own professional orchestra and
plenty of professional composers.
Now it's your turn Jarl. Show us ALL evidence of your claimed decline.
I for one will be most interested to know about it since it will come in
handy as part of my own research. If you are correct I will happily
defer.
David Ashbridge
>
> You're forgetting that the 20th Century also saw the greatest expansion
> in the world's population. There are more people involved in Classical
> music today simply because they're are more people. But how large
> is the ratio of audiences of classical music to musicians performing
> it now as compared to say 1920. The ratio of audiences to musicians
> is very important.
Perhaps you would like to PROVIDE from verifyable sources the difference
in audience ratios. Also WHY is the ratio of audiences to musicians
very important? From what we know now, apart from the standard economic
fluctuations that happen anywhere there are more people listening to
classical music than there ever was before. Please show us all evidence
if this is not so.
> I prefer the sound of historical performance recording from the
> 1930's and 40's to anything recorded after 1955. I would say the
> artististic calibre of classical music performances has decined
> abysmally since the age of Furtwangler and his BPO or Mengelberg
> and his Concertgebouw
What you prefer is your own taste of course but perhaps you should have
your ears examined. Most people prefer clarity on the recorded sound as
well. So do the vast majority of composers, musicians and listeners.
But your statement "the artististic calibre of classical music
performances has decined abysmally since the age of Furtwangler and his
BPO or Mengelberg and his Concertgebouw" is just total crap. If you
think that things have declined so much, how come no one else has seemed
to notice? There are more than enough cynical critics out there to
start shouting out if they even notice a hairs difference between a
recording and a performance by the same orchestra. Ever considered the
possiblity that it is YOU who is wrong and totally out of touch?
> Rock Music has taken a horrible beating over the past beating,
> I would say that Rock is enjoying the same popularity as Jazz
> did in the late 1960's. Yet there are more Rock bands than
> ever before. As one heavy metal musician recently remarked,
> in the 1970's there were maybe 10 metal bands selling a million
> records each. Now there are a million metal bands selling 1O CD's
> each. Rock bands are performing bar gigs for a free rounds of
> beer. That old grey mare ain't what she used to be either.
This analogy isn't worth the screen it appears it on.
Twopence-halfpenny rock bands have NOTHING to do with your supposed
decline of classical music. The better ones make money. the real bad
ones don't. So whats new? Try sticking to the subject.
John Harrington
mus...@brunel.ac.uk wrote on 3/3/01 6:54 AM:
> Perhaps you would like to PROVIDE from verifyable sources the difference
> in audience ratios.
Sure. Sit in any concert hall in the US and look around at the empty seats.
John
John Harrington
mus...@brunel.ac.uk wrote on 3/3/01 6:32 AM:
<snip>
> Incidentally your claimed 'glory days' of Mengelberg happened during the
> interwar period when Europe may be considered to be at a particularly
> low ebb. Germany was bankrupt and heading for Fascism, Britain was in a
> political mess through the 1920s with falling standards of living, made
> a great deal worse after the Wall Street Crash. Eastern Europe was also
> in turmoil. Russia had just had a revolution and the initial freedom
> was replaced with Stalin's purges starting around 1930.
Harry Lime: "In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare,
terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da
Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they
had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo
clock."
John
whi...@flash.net
<mus...@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
Methinks thou art shooting at the fly with ye olde elephant gun. ;-)
Richard White
--
Hear Linda Ronstadt sing Richard White on
ŚA Merry Little Christmasą Elektra #62572-2/4
CDs: ŚMusic for Guitarą and ŚMusic for Woodwinds and Piano'
available at: http://www.mp3.com/richardwhite
http://listen.to/richardwhite whi...@flash.net
Jarl Sigurd
David Ashbridge wrote
>Perhaps you would like to PROVIDE from verifyable sources the difference
>in audience ratios. Also WHY is the ratio of audiences to musicians
>very important?
When the number of musicians at a performance outnumber the
audience members, you're in big trouble.
> From what we know now, apart from the standard economic
>fluctuations that happen anywhere there are more people listening to
>classical music than there ever was before. Please show us all evidence
>if this is not so.
There are more people in the world than ever before. Also
the proliferation of recorded music and play back systems
has increased the sheer number of listens to classical music.
Still I would argue that classical music does not get the reception
or generate the widespread enthusiasm that it did in the early
decades of the past century.
>This analogy isn't worth the screen it appears it on.
>Twopence-halfpenny rock bands have NOTHING to do with your supposed
>decline of classical music.
Rock bands, Orchestras, like Armies travel on their stomachs.
It's hard to sustain any kind of endeavour without money
coming in from somewhere.
> The better ones make money. the real bad
>ones don't. So whats new?
I think the laws of supply and demand have more to do with
who makes money than how good the individual performers
or performing groups happen to be. Musicians all to often
delude themselves by placing too much importance on their
own talent and not enough on the realities of the market that
exists outside of it.
Jarl Sigurd
to listen to two symphonies composed by Jarl Sigurd
visit: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd2
Ken Moore
<sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> writes
>What I would advocate is a thorough thinking through of the relation
>between medium and form. I don't see the point of idiomatic orchestral
>music not intended for orchestras than I see the point of writing
>Highland bagpipe music especially for the piano.
but using one instrument in the character of another is a hallowed
practice. Trumpet flourishes get into consort music in the 16th
(possibly 15th) C, when trumpeters were soldiers first and musicians a
very bad second. I recall "Parsley's Clock", music for viol consort
from late 16th C, with bell motifs. What about the opening of Britten's
"Les Illuminations"? more trumpet music on the 20th C string orchestra.
--
Ken Moore
k...@hpsl.demon.co.uk
Web site: http://www.hpsl.demon.co.uk/
Neal
"Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote in message
news:G8Un6.485$kI5....@news.itd.umich.edu...
> In article <QRRn6.3598$TW.1...@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
> Jarl Sigurd <jarls...@geocities.com> wrote:
>
> >How small an orchestra do you think I could hire
> >for $92 US?
>
As Mr Troll is killfiled, I'll respond through the Doctor's post.
If you write intelligently and with an eye to playability, you can easily
find amateur and college orchestras which will play your music and even
perhaps pay you to do it. Of course, this requires talent.
orangie
i doubt that you could get anyone but a dedicated quartet, of your own
forming, to play music when you wanted it, so that you could proof it.
the midi works fine. mozart would have written on a casio, if he had had
one. anyone who writes, writes more than one [precious masterpiece] a
month. what's the point of posting such spin? is it jarf that makes you
all so calculating? or are you just excited by the [hunt]?
mike
George Byrd
on "Re: Music of the future"
orangie <orang...@aol.com> wrote:
>> MIDI is at its best when it manifests all the expressiveness of...
>> a theremin (1917), an instrument of such elegant simplicity that it
>> was a Heathkit build-your-own theremin that got the teenage Robert
>> Moog interested in his life's work.
>>
>>
>for which, we are greatful? wendy carlos?
Um, Robert Moog produced Clara Rockmore's CD.
GB
--
Opinions above are NOT those of APAN, Inc.and are NOT legal advice.
"I am not arguing with you -- I am telling you."
<< J. McN. Whistler, _The_Gentle_Art_of_Making_Enemies_ >>
Randy Poe
<jarls...@geocities.com> wrote:
>> The better ones make money. the real bad
>>ones don't. So whats new?
>
>I think the laws of supply and demand have more to do with
>who makes money than how good the individual performers
>or performing groups happen to be.
Do you think the demand for bad musicians is the same as the demand
for good musicians?
> Musicians all to often
>delude themselves by placing too much importance on their
>own talent and not enough on the realities of the market that
>exists outside of it.
Which realities are those that take precedence over being able to do a
job you contract for and provide a service that pleases the paying
customer?
- Randy
orangie
> In <rec.music.compose>, Sat, 03 Mar 2001 04:02:18 GMT,
> on "Re: Music of the future"
> orangie <orang...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> MIDI is at its best when it manifests all the expressiveness of...
> >> a theremin (1917), an instrument of such elegant simplicity that it
> >> was a Heathkit build-your-own theremin that got the teenage Robert
> >> Moog interested in his life's work.
> >>
> >>
> >for which, we are greatful? wendy carlos?
>
> Um, Robert Moog produced Clara Rockmore's CD.
>
> GB
mike
David Horne
> In article <3AA10094...@brunel.ac.uk>, David Ashbridge
> <mus...@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
[_huge_ snippage]
>
> Methinks thou art shooting at the fly with ye olde elephant gun. ;-)
Which is kind of the opposite of your reply/post ratio when you think
about it.
David
--
David Horne
Composer in Association- RLPO
www.davidhorne.co.uk
Jarl Sigurd
>
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2001 09:52:48 -0500, "Jarl Sigurd"
> <jarls...@geocities.com> wrote:
>
> >> The better ones make money. the real bad
> >>ones don't. So whats new?
> >
> >I think the laws of supply and demand have more to do with
> >who makes money than how good the individual performers
> >or performing groups happen to be.
>
> Do you think the demand for bad musicians is the same as the demand
> for good musicians?
When the demand for musicians greatly exceeds the supply, there
will be more demand for musicians(even bad ones) than when the
supply of musicians greatly exceeds the demand. When there are
too many musicians of a certain type around, even the good ones
will have trouble finding work. When there are to few musicians
around, even some of the bad ones will wind up getting gigs.
> > Musicians all to often
> >delude themselves by placing too much importance on their
> >own talent and not enough on the realities of the market that
> >exists outside of it.
>
> Which realities are those that take precedence over being able to do a
> job you contract for and provide a service that pleases the paying
> customer?
The reality of whether or not those customers exist. If a performer
contracts to do a performance and no one shows up to see it, that
performer might encounter problems getting paid.
whi...@flash.net
da...@davidhorne.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> <whi...@flash.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <3AA10094...@brunel.ac.uk>, David Ashbridge
> > <mus...@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> [_huge_ snippage]
>
> >
> > Methinks thou art shooting at the fly with ye olde elephant gun. ;-)
>
> Which is kind of the opposite of your reply/post ratio when you think
> about it.
>
> David
[_no_ snippage whatsoever]
Admirably perceptive ;-)
George Byrd
>In article <3aa14abb...@ca.news.verio.net>, geo...@apan.org says...
>> In <rec.music.compose>, Sat, 03 Mar 2001 04:02:18 GMT,
>> on "Re: Music of the future"
>> orangie <orang...@aol.com> wrote:
[somebody wrote:]
>> >> MIDI is at its best when it manifests all the expressiveness of...
>> >> a theremin (1917), an instrument of such elegant simplicity that it
>> >> was a Heathkit build-your-own theremin that got the teenage Robert
>> >> Moog interested in his life's work.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >for which, we are greatful? wendy carlos?
>>
>> Um, Robert Moog produced Clara Rockmore's CD.
>>
>> GB
>case in point. but, diin't carlos use a moog?
Yep.
I was just pointing out that Moog's interest in Theremin did bear
fruit for which we can be grateful, even if one entirely discounts his
own primary synthsizer invention. As well, IIRC, in recent years Moog
has marketed a Theremin of a design which is a great improvement over
Theremins previously made by others.
Others besides Carlos have also recorded Moog performances for major
labels. Rick Powell (if I have the name right), released an LP of
country music on RCA in the '70s I believe. It probably didn't sell
very well, but the music was very well performed IMHO, and the sleeve
cover still brings a grin.
GB
--
Opinions above are NOT those of APAN, Inc.and are NOT legal advice.
"Thoreau was a great musician, not because he played the flute
but because he did not have to go to Boston to hear 'the Symphony'."
<< Charles Ives, _Essays_Before_a_Sonata_, 5, "Thoreau" >>
Peter T. Daniels
What about Britten's Hymn to St. Cecilia -- imitations of various
instruments by unaccompanied voices.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
Samuel Vriezen
<jerry...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> I'm not advocating blips. Electronic music is of course older than the
>> blips.
>
>Not by much.
>
Busoni already was aware of it. But the oldest synthesizer I've seen
is something 19th century, which uses overtonely tuned tuning forks
which resonate by putting them in a magnetic field or something like
that. By switching on and off certain of these forks, other timbres
could be created.
>
>>
>> What I would advocate is a thorough thinking through of the relation
>> between medium and form. I don't see the point of idiomatic orchestral
>> music not intended for orchestras than I see the point of writing
>> Highland bagpipe music especially for the piano.
>
>
>The virtual orchestra can do many things well in the hands of a skilled
>orchestrator. The most important point is how the music sounds in that
>medium, not whether or not it would be effective in another medium. Much
>music is "adaptable", and not so idiomatic that it can't retain its
>effectiveness in other mediums. My concern as an virtual orchestra composer
>is getting it to sound in such a way that the listener isn't concerned with
>the medium, but with the message, the content, the essence. I think your
>view of "idiomatic orchestra music" is very different than mine. The usage
>of the orchestra, especially orchestration, has changed drastically over the
>past 500. Tradition is in a state of modification and reinterpretation as
>it usually is. The "orchestra" is an idea, not a law. The multi-timbral
>experience in the virtual orchestra does not have a negative impact on form.
>Quite the contrary, the computer is a powerful tool for developing musical
>form. Perhaps to you a virtual orchestra composer is simply "reinventing the
>wheel", but to me I see options and possibilities that cannot be realized in
>the acoustic orchestra. But I agree with you, a thorough thinking through
>of the relation between medium and form is both good and necessary. This is
>true in any art and any medium. But the conclusions drawn from that
>investigative thought are going to produce very different results from
>different composers.
Well, I haven't heard your music, so I can't judge how far you got in
idiomatic studies. I agree technology could be used to do things that
are similar to older things but more, such as in Nancarrow's case - he
was the one to most fully explore a new idiom given by this particular
technology, the player piano.
Personally I've been very hesitant to use computers. I find that so
much choice in timbre gives me too much responsibility, and I wonder
if the predefined programs of others really will give me what I need,
or if I rather will find myself programming all the utilities I find
necessary. In the case of electronic 'orchestra', for instance, what I
expect myself to be running into is a situation in which you want a
specific mix of timbres and you find yourself needing a sound that is
in some way like the trumpet, in others like over-pressuring the cello
say, and none of the existing sounds apply. I would be deeply bothered
if I would at this stage acknowledge my bank of samples as final, so I
would program a new sound. But then all hell breaks loose, because I
would increasingly doubt the usefulness of the given orchestral idiom
in what I'm doing. So that's why I'm hesitant. I'm afraid I'd have to
turn into IRCAM.
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
Yes - but I would hardly expect the singers of Jannequin's Chanson de
la Guerre to actually want to present themselves as authentic
footsoldiers and cannonfodder. This is always reference, or quotation,
similar to the use of voice, percussion and organ in Varèse's Poème
Electronique.
David Olen Baird
>In article <1eppqcq.1l2ncjp1x92ragN%da...@davidhorne.co.uk>,
>da...@davidhorne.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
>
>> <whi...@flash.net> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <3AA10094...@brunel.ac.uk>, David Ashbridge
>> > <mus...@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> [_huge_ snippage]
>>
>> >
>> > Methinks thou art shooting at the fly with ye olde elephant gun. ;-)
>>
>> Which is kind of the opposite of your reply/post ratio when you think
>> about it.
>>
>> David
>
>[_no_ snippage whatsoever]
>
>Admirably perceptive ;-)
>
Agreed.
But, shooting an elephant gun with a fly? ;^)
>Richard White
>--
>Hear Linda Ronstadt sing Richard White on
>ŚA Merry Little Christmasą Elektra #62572-2/4
>CDs: ŚMusic for Guitarą and ŚMusic for Woodwinds and Piano'
>available at: http://www.mp3.com/richardwhite
>http://listen.to/richardwhite whi...@flash.net
---
whi...@flash.net
Olen Baird) wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 22:25:01 GMT, whi...@flash.net wrote:
>
> >In article <1eppqcq.1l2ncjp1x92ragN%da...@davidhorne.co.uk>,
> >da...@davidhorne.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> >
> >> <whi...@flash.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <3AA10094...@brunel.ac.uk>, David Ashbridge
> >> > <mus...@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> [_huge_ snippage]
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Methinks thou art shooting at the fly with ye olde elephant gun. ;-)
> >>
> >> Which is kind of the opposite of your reply/post ratio when you think
> >> about it.
> >>
> >> David
> >
> >[_no_ snippage whatsoever]
> >
> >Admirably perceptive ;-)
> >
>
> Agreed.
>
> But, shooting an elephant gun with a fly? ;^)
>
> >Richard White
Dave: That's very funny! Now that you put it that way, I think the he was
trying to _get up my nose_ :-) albeit unsuccessfully.
(P.S. O.T. - I'm sending that attachment off to you today.)
Richard
David Horne
> Dave: That's very funny! Now that you put it that way, I think the he was
> trying to _get up my nose_
Um, no. I was commenting on the fact you quoted pages of text, and added
one line of rejoinder. I couldn't give a damn about you.
Marsha Rider
"Dr.Matt" <fie...@login.itd.umich.edu> wrote "
> David Ashbridge <mus...@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> >Now if we could even do 1% of that with CM just think of the numbers
> >involved. Pop music suceeds because one reason is there is no
> >pretension. When we get people introduced to PLAYING serious music with
> >orchestral instruments it is usual an interest that stays with people
> >for life. That is my goal. MArket share means nothing to me.
>
> I'm quite with you on the value of education. Here in the US there's
> a big push to pass education off to the churches under the banner of
> "private enterprise"...
>
<snip>
Since I am in the US and am unaware of a *big* push to pass education
off..."private etnerprise", could you elaborate?
Marsha
(who's been away for a while and took days to wade through 813
posts)
Seth Johnson
> Personally I've been very hesitant to use computers. I find that so
> much choice in timbre gives me too much responsibility, and I wonder
> if the predefined programs of others really will give me what I need,
> or if I rather will find myself programming all the utilities I find
> necessary. In the case of electronic 'orchestra', for instance, what I
> expect myself to be running into is a situation in which you want a
> specific mix of timbres and you find yourself needing a sound that is
> in some way like the trumpet, in others like over-pressuring the cello
> say, and none of the existing sounds apply.
This is easier to do than it sounds. I'm planning -- this is fairly
long-range, mind you -- to develop a graphical interface through which a
composer can easily manipulate the partials present over the course of a
given sample for timbral "fine-tuning." No need to rely completely on
others' samples/patches/etc.
As for the timbral hybrids you've described, CERL sound group's "Loris"
C++ library provides methods for "morphing" between two timbres. The
algorithm has been applied in the synth used for Lippold Haken's continuum
fingerboard, which allows for such "morphing" based on the z-position
(front-to-back) of one's finger(s) on the board. The same methods could be
applied to create a rather simple utility through which the composer
specifies two samples, and how long the utility should take to "morph"
between the two. The utility then synthesizes the sound accordingly. When
the compser hears the timbre he wants, he tells the utility to mark the
"morphing postition." Voila - new hybrid timbre to use.
CERL's website is:
http://www.cerlsoundgroup.org/
> I would be deeply bothered
> if I would at this stage acknowledge my bank of samples as final, so I
> would program a new sound. But then all hell breaks loose, because I
> would increasingly doubt the usefulness of the given orchestral idiom
> in what I'm doing.
I don't understand (?).
> So that's why I'm hesitant. I'm afraid I'd have to
> turn into IRCAM.
Speaking of whom, the methods I described essentially would be SDIF
editors (a format which I think was developed them, invaluable to
the development of additive synthesizers).
Regards,
-Seth
Dr.Matt
Sure, go to Thomas.Loc.Gov and do a search for "vouchers"
--
For spammers: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/uce.htm
My CD "Kabala": http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/cd.html
Matt Fields DMA http://listen.to/mattaj TwelveToneToyBox http://start.at/tttb
"Is there a theorbo in the house?"
dana
dana
(who happens to have a 12 year-old neice in parochial school (no
vouchers yet though), yet continues to hold this view.)
On Mon, 05 Mar 2001 10:22:15 GMT, fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt)
wrote:
David Ashbridge
Switzerland also produced the mucicians/composers Frank Martin, Otmar
Schoeck and Honegger. Whilst they are not world beaters they are far
from incompetant either. All still have works in the repertoire.
Seth Johnson
> Yes!! Down with public funds for private and religious education!
Down with public funds, as far as I'm concerned. I agree with you, but it
has more to do with private schools ending up like the public penitentur..
er, schools.
--
Seth Johnson
Publicly schooled, self-educated.
whi...@flash.net
da...@davidhorne.co.uk (David Horne) wrote:
> <whi...@flash.net> wrote:
>
> > Dave: That's very funny! Now that you put it that way, I think the he was
> > trying to _get up my nose_
>
> Um, no. I was commenting on the fact you quoted pages of text, and added
> one line of rejoinder.
Quite by design, mon amour!
>I couldn't give a damn about you.
If that were really so you wouldn't have posted.
Richard White
orangie
>
> Switzerland also produced the mucicians/composers Frank Martin, Otmar
> Schoeck and Honegger. Whilst they are not world beaters they are far
> from incompetant either. All still have works in the repertoire.
>
>
Dr.Matt
In fact, more and more I find Martin a model more worthy of study than
Stravinsky.
Dr.Matt
<whi...@flash.net> wrote:
>David Horne wrote:
>>I couldn't give a damn about you.
>If that were really so you wouldn't have posted.
I'll be in the kitchen fixing drinks while the two of you work this out.
orangie
fie...@login.itd.umich.edu says...
> >Switzerland also produced the mucicians/composers Frank Martin, Otmar
> >Schoeck and Honegger. Whilst they are not world beaters they are far
> >from incompetant either. All still have works in the repertoire.
>
> In fact, more and more I find Martin a model more worthy of study than
> Stravinsky.
>
>
but, Honegger has some nice things to say about rhythm too.
whi...@flash.net
fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt) wrote:
> In article <whitco-0503...@ip185.tucson14.az.pub-ip.psi.net>,
> <whi...@flash.net> wrote:
> >David Horne wrote:
> >>I couldn't give a damn about you.
> >If that were really so you wouldn't have posted.
>
> I'll be in the kitchen fixing drinks while the two of you work this out.
>
I hope you have a limit, Matt; Ain't gonna happen.
Bottoms Up! ;-)
ba...@visi.com
>Hi Mark,
>
>Great posting.
>
>Just curious, which pieces did you hear during the concert?
>
>
>dana
>
>
>On Fri, 02 Mar 2001 00:56:35 GMT, "mark h" <bob...@home.com> wrote:
>
>>i write pop rock (ready to be flamed).....
>>my view on this, can be summed up like this: three chords only go so far.
>>
>>also i might add, synthesizers only go so far...
>>
>>recently attended a performance of the phoenix symphony (rare for me cause
>>i'm a rocker at heart), and i was blown away.....there is no comparison
>>between five guys on a stage getting a groove going, and 80 musicians
>>playing very difficult instruments as one musician.
>>
>>thank god i was open to the emotion of the music, cause the whole experience
>>started me thinking again about my early musical education, the roots and
>>history of it, and i even notice how the best of pop draws a little from
>>classical.
>>
>>i would say we are in evolution musically...who knows what they will say
>>about todays music 300 years from now?....hopefully we will have kept the
>>best of each genre and honored our ancestors.
>>
>>been lurking here for a month or so... i like a lot of the stuff ive heard
>>that yall posted....
>>and even tho three chords have served me well, I might even dig out the old
>>college theory books and relearn some of the classical stuff i use every day
>>without knowing it!
Well when your talking about pop rock I guess your talking about the
boaring music of America...I write Jpop and I have as many harmonies
as I do Classical, though all based on Jazz Harmony the seventh chord.
Differnet culture different approach.
Steve-O
>>
>>nice to meet yalll
>>Markh
>>
>>
>
stefan petersilge
>This raises the question of how one defines genre. In this day
>and age it's hard to market any form of music unless there is
>a genre it can be associated with.
http://genres.mp3.com/genre_description
BTW did you get rid of your horrible phase problems ?
Stefan
--
Stefan Petersilge
SANGIT OM MUSIC PRODUCTION
listen to my music at www.mp3.com/sangitom
Jarl Sigurd
stefan petersilge wrote
>BTW did you get rid of your horrible phase problems ?
Not yet, I'll have to see when I record some of my
latest midi compositions if I can do something
about them. I was thinking of re-recording the
files I've got posted at http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd
but I haven't got around to doing that yet.
Jarl Sigurd
to listen to music that is best listened to in Hi Fi
mp3 format, visit: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd
orangie
jarls...@geocities.com says...
the pieces? no one decent is going to give them another listen just
because they're in a cleaner audio format. someone supporter of yours,
might, at least, and out of vanity, relisten. maybe jerry.
but, your music isn't into clean audio format! it's into gush and grovel.
G & G is not a music you'd want to hear well articulated. it's music for
underwater pool speakers fidelity: the bruce springsqueek line shows off
well against the calvin sportsbriefs. a moment musicale.
K. Kraus
Top Catt
says...
Never mind the cleaner audio format--if it's low-fi you want, go to:
http://www.thedirectxfiles.com/manufacturers/iz_vinyl.htm
Where you'll find something that will fulfill the nostalgic dreams of
anyone who ever dumped their LP collection and turntable, and now regrets
it.
orangie
top_c...@hotmail.com says...
ll ge th new Vi yl ri ht no !
i e
orangie
> Never mind the cleaner audio format--if it's low-fi you want, go to:
> >
> > http://www.thedirectxfiles.com/manufacturers/iz_vinyl.htm
> >
> > Where you'll find something that will fulfill the nostalgic dreams of
> > anyone who ever dumped their LP collection and turntable, and now regrets
> > it.
> >
>
just loaded it. it's a hundred times better than the old fusion vinyl
plug-in! thanks for the link.
G. Gould
Top Catt
says...
> In article <MPG.1517fc964c4c2f4f989e51@news-server>, top catt says...
> > Never mind the cleaner audio format--if it's low-fi you want, go to:
> > >
> > > http://www.thedirectxfiles.com/manufacturers/iz_vinyl.htm
> > >
> > > Where you'll find something that will fulfill the nostalgic dreams of
> > > anyone who ever dumped their LP collection and turntable, and now regrets
> > > it.
> > >
> >
> master catt.
> just loaded it. it's a hundred times better than the old fusion vinyl
> plug-in! thanks for the link.
>
> G. Gould
>
You're welcome--I'm holding out for the next version with the "Edison
cylinder" setting, myself.
T.C.