Is style important?
Philip Kappaz
a new style that would describe one as a 'modern' composer vs and old-style
composer? I think the last 'style' that I was aware of was minimalism, but
that is now considered an old style. Are stylistic differences important
anymore? Most composers now say their work is 'eclectic', meaning they
don't know what it is, but they try to use every stylistic tool in their
toolkit whenever it seems appropriate.
When everything is good because every composer has good potential, when
every style is good because every style has potential, and when every work
is good because it contains its own statement - regardless of the reception
by the listening audience - how does one separate the "wheat from the
chaff", as it were. For without style, or some standard, how does the
community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
consistency and honestly? And if the community is no longer responsible for
making such judgements, but individuals, then are composers truly only
composing for themselves?
Samuel Vriezen
On Tue, 09 Oct 2001 18:32:06 GMT, "Philip Kappaz"
<pka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What is considered 'modern' music in the current academic circles? Is there
>a new style that would describe one as a 'modern' composer vs and old-style
>composer? I think the last 'style' that I was aware of was minimalism, but
>that is now considered an old style. Are stylistic differences important
>anymore? Most composers now say their work is 'eclectic', meaning they
>don't know what it is, but they try to use every stylistic tool in their
>toolkit whenever it seems appropriate.
>
>When everything is good because every composer has good potential, when
>every style is good because every style has potential, and when every work
>is good because it contains its own statement - regardless of the reception
>by the listening audience - how does one separate the "wheat from the
>chaff", as it were.
Judgement, taste, good listening.
>For without style, or some standard, how does the
>community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
>consistency and honestly? And if the community is no longer responsible for
>making such judgements, but individuals, then are composers truly only
>composing for themselves?
Very abstract questions. In practice, it's far easier to sort these
things out than in theory, I find.
--
Samuel
** shameless selfpromotion tag ** ANNOUNCING:
New works: 'Skylger Piano Trio' & a new virtuoso Flute 'Toccata II', and my '95 piano spectacle,
'Begin'. With Ned McGowan, flute; Dante Oei, piano; Jacob Plooij, violin; John Addison, cello.
Posthoornkerk Amsterdam (haarlemmer houttuinen 47 - back entrance), Oct 21 at 20:30
Samuel Vriezen
<pka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>For without style, or some standard, how does the
>community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
>consistency and honestly?
I figure that only one in seven pieces are good, so what I do is, I
count the number of notes in a piece and when it's divisible by seven
I call the piece good.
BenHeneghan
<pka...@hotmail.com> writes:
>When everything is good because every composer has good potential, when
>every style is good because every style has potential, and when every work
>is good because it contains its own statement - regardless of the reception
>by the listening audience - how does one separate the "wheat from the
>chaff", as it were. For without style, or some standard, how does the
>community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
>consistency and honestly?
What community? There's several communities of music listeners.
>And if the community is no longer responsible for
>making such judgements, but individuals, then are composers truly only
>composing for themselves?
Composers can compose for themselves *and* some imagined (and yet still
possibly real) community - just don't get too specific about its size or
geography.
best wishes
Ben Heneghan
See some of my scores at http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/
Remove poser to email
jeff harrington
> For without style, or some standard, how does the
> community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
> consistency and honestly?
One must listen with open ears - open and not prejudiced
by the hype of others or to any ideal of "community",
if you want to glean the possibilities of truly new styles.
You are too dependent on your dreams of bashing the
icon of Harrington to listen openly. In other
words, you have a neurotic fixation on one of the most
pathetic and incompetent composers to have ever lived.
Me.
I pity you.
jeff harrington
http://www.parnasse.com/jeff.htm
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>one of the most
>pathetic and incompetent composers to have ever lived.
>
>Me.
Ah, is that so? I really MUST hear your music now!... ;-)
Philip Kappaz
"jeff harrington" <je...@parnasse.com> wrote in message
news:3BC3BCC7...@parnasse.com...
Philip Kappaz
>
> > For without style, or some standard, how does the
> > community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
> > consistency and honestly?
>
> One must listen with open ears - open and not prejudiced
> by the hype of others or to any ideal of "community",
> if you want to glean the possibilities of truly new styles.
>
> You are too dependent on your dreams of bashing the
> icon of Harrington to listen openly. In other
> words, you have a neurotic fixation on one of the most
> pathetic and incompetent composers to have ever lived.
>
Imbedded in this comment is the possibility that we may NOT always be able
to make fair judgements because of a lack of standards or guidelines for
what should be considered quality music and what should not. Read the
words. For given the lack of standards and guidelines, what we have is truly
the possibility -from a compositional perspective - that a Jarl work is just
as good as mine or yours. That is the essence of the question...
Dr.Matt
Philip Kappaz <pka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What is considered 'modern' music in the current academic circles? Is there
Based on my exposure to academic composers, the style-of-the-moment is
high-tech hip-hop.
--
Matthew H. Fields http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields
"Is there a hemidemisemiquaver in the house?"
Dr.Matt
Samuel Vriezen <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Oct 2001 18:32:06 GMT, "Philip Kappaz"
><pka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>For without style, or some standard, how does the
>>community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
>>consistency and honestly?
>
>I figure that only one in seven pieces are good, so what I do is, I
>count the number of notes in a piece and when it's divisible by seven
>I call the piece good.
Do you believe the number of notes in pieces are evenly distributed
in Z-7?
How do you count the number of notes in a piece like Philip's "Voices
of Change"?
Dr.Matt
Jeff is still shell-shocked. He hasn't had his full sardonic edge
since 2001.09.11. It was too up-close and personal for him.
Dr.Matt
Indeed, the only thing separating them is subjective opinion. Some
people swear Paul McCartney is a better composer than Beethoven ever
was. You can't prove them wrong or right. It's life. Live with it.
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>In article <3bc35a1...@news.xs4all.nl>,
>Samuel Vriezen <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>On Tue, 09 Oct 2001 18:32:06 GMT, "Philip Kappaz"
>><pka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>For without style, or some standard, how does the
>>>community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
>>>consistency and honestly?
>>
>>I figure that only one in seven pieces are good, so what I do is, I
>>count the number of notes in a piece and when it's divisible by seven
>>I call the piece good.
>
>Do you believe the number of notes in pieces are evenly distributed
>in Z-7?
Good point. I think the Baroque tended towards 2 or 5 mod 7, whereas 0
mod 7 is more overrepresented in the Renaissance. Hence, I listen more
to Renaissance than to Baroque music.
>How do you count the number of notes in a piece like Philip's "Voices
>of Change"?
Count the legs and divide by four?
(Actually, I once tried to determine the number of notes in
Ferneyhough's Time and Motion Study #1 - by score. I don't think
there's an unambiguous amount...)
Dr.Matt
Samuel Vriezen <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 13:57:31 GMT, fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <3bc35a1...@news.xs4all.nl>,
>>Samuel Vriezen <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 09 Oct 2001 18:32:06 GMT, "Philip Kappaz"
>>><pka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>For without style, or some standard, how does the
>>>>community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
>>>>consistency and honestly?
>>>
>>>I figure that only one in seven pieces are good, so what I do is, I
>>>count the number of notes in a piece and when it's divisible by seven
>>>I call the piece good.
>>
>>Do you believe the number of notes in pieces are evenly distributed
>>in Z-7?
>
>Good point. I think the Baroque tended towards 2 or 5 mod 7, whereas 0
>mod 7 is more overrepresented in the Renaissance. Hence, I listen more
>to Renaissance than to Baroque music.
>
>>How do you count the number of notes in a piece like Philip's "Voices
>>of Change"?
>
>Count the legs and divide by four?
>
>(Actually, I once tried to determine the number of notes in
>Ferneyhough's Time and Motion Study #1 - by score. I don't think
>there's an unambiguous amount...)
How many notes in Penderecki's Tren?
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
Two. (I only count mod 7)
Dr.Matt
Funny, I thought there were 3 notes: the dense note, the fiddly note,
and the final chord.
>--
>Samuel
>
>** shameless selfpromotion tag ** ANNOUNCING:
>
>New works: 'Skylger Piano Trio' & a new virtuoso Flute 'Toccata II', and
>my '95 piano spectacle,
>'Begin'. With Ned McGowan, flute; Dante Oei, piano; Jacob Plooij,
>violin; John Addison, cello.
>Posthoornkerk Amsterdam (haarlemmer houttuinen 47 - back entrance), Oct
>21 at 20:30
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>>>How many notes in Penderecki's Tren?
>>
>>Two. (I only count mod 7)
>
>Funny, I thought there were 3 notes: the dense note, the fiddly note,
>and the final chord.
The final chord must have zero notes, then.
Dr.Matt
Samuel Vriezen <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 17:03:46 GMT, fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt)
>wrote:
>
>>>>How many notes in Penderecki's Tren?
>>>
>>>Two. (I only count mod 7)
>>
>>Funny, I thought there were 3 notes: the dense note, the fiddly note,
>>and the final chord.
>
>The final chord must have zero notes, then.
Hmmm, I hear the final chord as 1 note, though P writes it as 52 notes...
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>In article <3bc4cace...@news.xs4all.nl>,
>Samuel Vriezen <sqv.remo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 17:03:46 GMT, fie...@login.itd.umich.edu (Dr.Matt)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>How many notes in Penderecki's Tren?
>>>>
>>>>Two. (I only count mod 7)
>>>
>>>Funny, I thought there were 3 notes: the dense note, the fiddly note,
>>>and the final chord.
>>
>>The final chord must have zero notes, then.
>
>Hmmm, I hear the final chord as 1 note, though P writes it as 52 notes...
He writes three notes? Well, I think three players were absent when I
last heard it. (Or they hired four extras).
jeff harrington
> In article <3BC3BCC7...@parnasse.com>,
> jeff harrington <je...@parnasse.com> wrote:
> >Philip Kappaz wrote:
> >
> >> For without style, or some standard, how does the
> >> community judge a Jarl piece or a Harrington piece with a sense of
> >> consistency and honestly?
> >
> >One must listen with open ears - open and not prejudiced
> >by the hype of others or to any ideal of "community",
> >if you want to glean the possibilities of truly new styles.
> >
> >You are too dependent on your dreams of bashing the
> >icon of Harrington to listen openly. In other
> >words, you have a neurotic fixation on one of the most
> >pathetic and incompetent composers to have ever lived.
> >
> >Me.
> >
> >I pity you.
> >
> >jeff harrington
> >http://www.parnasse.com/jeff.htm
>
> Jeff is still shell-shocked. He hasn't had his full sardonic edge
> since 2001.09.11. It was too up-close and personal for him.
Wait a minute... I thought that was funny!
Maybe Matt's right... ouch...
jeff
jeff harrington
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:07:48 GMT, jeff harrington <je...@parnasse.com>
> wrote:
>
> >one of the most
> >pathetic and incompetent composers to have ever lived.
> >
> >Me.
>
> Ah, is that so? I really MUST hear your music now!... ;-)
Well, if you like that kinda pathetic and incompetent and repetitious
rock/blues/jazz-inspired/deconstructed crap than you prob'ly suck
even more than I do...
No! Wait, that's impossible....
Nobody can suck as much as I do! You see, I make sucking
an art form and then I try and convince big shots like X and Y
that I'm a real composer...
It's all part of my clever pseudo-careerism - an evil plan to
trick classical audiences into listening to pop music. I intend
to corrupt every stuffy hole in Albert Hall into drug use, whoring
and even someday dancing... oh yeah!
Wahuh hah ah ahaha uhhah ha uhhhh... huhhh.... huh..... blorp...
jeff
Dr.Matt
Wait, that's an orthodox Jewish joke. It's off-color, I'll tell you in
private e-mail.
>Wahuh hah ah ahaha uhhah ha uhhhh... huhhh.... huh..... blorp...
>
>jeff
>
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>Samuel Vriezen wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:07:48 GMT, jeff harrington <je...@parnasse.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >one of the most
>> >pathetic and incompetent composers to have ever lived.
>> >
>> >Me.
>>
>> Ah, is that so? I really MUST hear your music now!... ;-)
>
>Well, if you like that kinda pathetic and incompetent and repetitious
>rock/blues/jazz-inspired/deconstructed crap than you prob'ly suck
>even more than I do...
>
>No! Wait, that's impossible....
>
>Nobody can suck as much as I do! You see, I make sucking
>an art form and then I try and convince big shots like X and Y
>that I'm a real composer...
Good grief!
>It's all part of my clever pseudo-careerism - an evil plan to
>trick classical audiences into listening to pop music.
Egregious!
>I intend
>to corrupt every stuffy hole in Albert Hall into drug use, whoring
>and even someday dancing... oh yeah!
You don't say!
>Wahuh hah ah ahaha uhhah ha uhhhh... huhhh.... huh..... blorp...
Highly remarkable!
Personally, I'm trying to let people think that hitting a few keys on
the piano in some order or other is music... harharhar...
jeff harrington
Samuel Vriezen wrote:
Wait just a freakin' minute now bustah... that's one of my tricks too.
Ah been doin' that since '78!
Plagiarist! Thief! Scoundrel! Incompetent Careerist Mutha!
jeff
Dr.Matt
orangie
<3BC762BD...@parnasse.com>:
>Nobody can suck as much as I do! You see, I make sucking
>an art form and then I try and convince big shots like X and Y
>that I'm a real composer...
>
cheez, man. if you'd just fukking DO the suck of music into music, you'd be
there.
jeff harrington
Ha... I'm not sure what you mean, but I am sure you want to be mean...
Not sure how to respond to you guys that despise my
music except to mock myself! Ha hahah....
Should I be civil? Should I attack your music? I'll try and stay funny,
but please bear in mind that every time I respond to you it's with the
deepest sense of having a mosquito flying around my head.
Uh... bite me?
Bzzzzzzzz......
Swat.
jeff
orangie
>> cheez, man. if you'd just fukking DO the suck of music into music,
>> you'd be there.
>
>Ha... I'm not sure what you mean, but I am sure you want to be mean...
>
no, man, i really am a nice person, i just don't like to see music bullied
out of existance by commercial exigencies. you've got the means to do
things with sound, but your stuff sounds like all you want to do is make
friends. you're so young, and i can't but feel that you could become a
strong composer if you'd turn your back on whatever it is in the music
scene that both bugs you and drives you. it's probable that you've never
hung out with people really driven to create: people who really have to
create, the way little johns have to have offspring. this group is your
chance to get torqued-out, and you're too distracted away from music to Not
have to pay attention to what's going down about your music.
Allen Richmond, Conductor/Composer
I wave my stick and everyone's convinced....er, um...oh well: Harumph! Harumph!
> --
> Samuel
>
> ** shameless selfpromotion tag ** ANNOUNCING:
>
> New works: 'Skylger Piano Trio' & a new virtuoso Flute 'Toccata II', and my '95 piano spectacle,
> 'Begin'. With Ned McGowan, flute; Dante Oei, piano; Jacob Plooij, violin; John Addison, cello.
> Posthoornkerk Amsterdam (haarlemmer houttuinen 47 - back entrance), Oct 21 at 20:30
--
From the podium,
Allen Richmond, Conductor/Composer
Allen-R...@Musician.Org
[Ditch the hyphenation for no-spam functionality.]
jeff harrington
> je...@parnasse.com (jeff harrington) wrote in
> <3BC77A17...@parnasse.com>:
>
> >> cheez, man. if you'd just fukking DO the suck of music into music,
> >> you'd be there.
> >
> >Ha... I'm not sure what you mean, but I am sure you want to be mean...
> >
>
> no, man, i really am a nice person, i just don't like to see music bullied
> out of existance by commercial exigencies. you've got the means to do
> things with sound, but your stuff sounds like all you want to do is make
> friends. you're so young, and i can't but feel that you could become a
> strong composer if you'd turn your back on whatever it is in the music
> scene that both bugs you and drives you.
You know, orangie, you're a total blow hard. You rant about my music
without listening to it. You bashed Capriccio 2 minutes after I posted it -
which given Usenet news propagation rates must mean you listened to
approximately 1 minute of it or less... of course... that's all you needed to
know it sucked. Whatever... your problem? You're scared ot a future
where pluralism might reign. Where Ferneyhough and Xenakis might
play next to a piece that uses rock rhythms here and there.
Have you listened to every piece of mine? No way.
You are scared and that's why you flail away at me. You're scared
that your religion of orthodox modernism dies. You know what?
You're crazy. It's all going to keep going on forever. Pluralism - not
Jeff-ism is going to rule FOREVER.
Anyways, what I'm doing is no different than what Bartok did with Hungarian
song. I deconstruct it and attempt to create art forms with it
that are dense and fluid and transitional. It's not the material
that's interesting in my music you stupid old fart, it's the TRANSITIONS.
It's the way I suggest a transition and then revert back and forth, no...
but you're too big an asshole to listen to it. The surface is so abhorent
to you that you can't even begin to listen. You're a closed-minded
old drunk who is too dead to even listen openly. You have no idea
of what I'm saying nor how I am able to say it to the people that
absolutely love my music.
> it's probable that you've never
> hung out with people really driven to create: people who really have to
> create, the way little johns have to have offspring. this group is your
> chance to get torqued-out, and you're too distracted away from music to Not
> have to pay attention to what's going down about your music.
I'm freakin' 45 years old - asshole. Can't you read? I was a die hard
Carterian modernist for all of the 70's. I hung out with all of the crazy
druggy Carter students and we would talk about Finnisy and Xenakis
and Boulez and about extreme densities of textures and about the horror
of selling out.
You know what. When my brother blew his freakin' brains out all
over my dad's gun room - in front of my mom... I decided that I wanted
to write a different kind of music. A music that could express something
beyond complexity and densities of texture. My teacher, the great
Ivesian modernist, James Drew once told me - and I believe it - that
you cannot write an atonal love song.
Well, I wanted to write something new.
Frankly, I think you're the guy that's stuck in some little corner of
nowhere, not me. I just came back from a fantastic Vermont music
festival where I hung out for 3 days with the most brilliant eclectic
and wonderful modernists, anti-modernists and just plain weird folks.
We drank and laughed and made fun of each other's stuff. I have
a life - an exciting musical life - and I'm surrounded by brilliant artists
like
my wife's family, my friends in NYC and my internet buddies.
You're a pathetic man... and I'm not going to keep posting like this to
you because I'm not that interested in what you have to say. Just this
once I'm going to let you know that I think you're a close-minded
fool.
Sorry, folks... for posting like this but this jerk had it coming.
Meanwhile... there's this little mosquito buzzin' roun' mah head...
SWAT.
jeff
orangie
>
>Have you listened to every piece of mine? No way.
>
>You are scared and that's why you flail away at me. You're scared
>that your religion of orthodox modernism dies. You know what?
>You're crazy. It's all going to keep going on forever. Pluralism - not
>Jeff-ism is going to rule FOREVER.
>
fuk you, toad boy. matt's the one with the modernist religion. two minutes
of Puerto Rican music intention shows more wit and intellgence than
anything you shown. plus, you evidently haven't listened to my stuff, or
you'd know that i'm constantly trying to overcome the sterility of
modernist style that i was trained to write. you're not even there enough
to know who your natural allies are. but i've spent hours listening to your
music, because yours represents a dumber form of philip glass -- and, thus,
a schematic, none significant, form of banality. and, i pay attention to
this simply because you were there and i don't get much chance to hear crap
music, and because i really don't know what makes a music like this
possible... on what level a person could hear this and be moved by it.
you can twinkle your little toes, but i don't see why your music should get
special protection just because you're making references to classical
music. you can talk and talk, but your stuff is really not a music which
sounds like it's only supposed to exist for its own sake. it's a shallow
music -- depending on our already knowing rock and classical and muszak --
and "shallow" is the worst fukking thing. as for the group's reaction to
your stuff, you shouldn't trust the opinion of Anyone in this group --
you're here too and you know how driven you are by fads.
old guys like me are only scared that we'll fall into the trap of thinking
we're perfect. we watch the kids do that routine, and we see how worthless
Dignity is as a value concept.
orangie
<UqJx7.68086$OW.14...@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com>:
all right, let me give you something useful. look at Layton's music... how
he want's to Say something with it... calls you into it with fanfare. and
look at mine... old guy's stuff, where i want to absorb the listener into
it in media res... turn the corner and you're in the drama. the Copland
type chorale works starting right in with development. and your music
sounds to me like you want to make music... otherwise i wouldn't bother
with you... but a music to entertain. a lawn party music. and the deal
here, is that compose is pretty pressurized... i look for other conscious
people here, and i'm trying to find out if you're conscious or not. most of
the others are pretty out front about what they are. but, you're not. your
playing the punk classical composer persona is engaging enough, but i want
to find out if there's anything behind it but pose... there's no truth yet
in your music... it's all potential.
so, what's useful about this? it's the suggestion i'm making now that you'd
better find a teacher, because your music is starting to simply imitate
itself. find some crazy barroom pianist to show you where music comes from:
it's a dirty, nasty place, yes? we have to live there, you and i, but we're
able to purify experience into music.
Dr.Matt
><je...@parnasse.com> wrote:
>> Ivesian modernist, James Drew once told me - and I believe it - that
>> you cannot write an atonal love song.
Fifteen Poems from the Book of the Hanging Garden, Arnold Schoenberg,
op.15, 1909, text by Stefan George. The DeGaetani/Kalish recording is
sweet.
--
Matthew H. Fields http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields
"Is there an uncello in the house?"
jeff
> orang...@aol.com (orangie) wrote in
>
> but, you're not. your
> playing the punk classical composer persona is engaging enough, but i want
> to find out if there's anything behind it but pose... there's no truth yet
> in your music... it's all potential.
>
I'm not going to waste too much time on you, because I believe
that you're neurotically obsessed on me, partly the result of my
portraits by my wife or something. Maybe because people sometimes
talk about me here... and you're jealous... who the fuck knows
or cares... call it a combination of my posting style, my
pretentious portraits, my pathetic success on MP3.COM, who
knows...
You're entitled to your opinion, I would suggest that you not
waste time trying to save me. I'm beyond hope, a real flake and
not worthy of your time. I'm going to pursue this course because
I like my music, not because Kyle Gann or Matt Fields does. I
write for myself and my wife, believe it or not - there is no agenda
and no attempt to sell out. I am not exactly the shining
example of success, numbnuts, I don't have a lot of commissions
nor a record deal, nor even hopes of getting a performance
in the next 12 months. OK, I may get my chamber symphony
performed sometime this year. Whoopie...
And yes, I have listened to your music.
I found it ridiculously lacking in focus and in direction. I think
you have no idea what you're trying to do, nor what you ARE
doing, either here in your postings or in music. And I equate
that with substance abuse. One of the main reasons I've been
trying to keep this from getting personal. I believe you are
basically deranged. Your music wanders from one ridiculously
unfocussed thought to another, never forming a gestalt, never
climaxing, just wandering and wandering aimlessly.
And just so you understand I love deeply complex good
atonal music. Barraque, another composer you've probably
never heard of, is one of my all time favorite composers
of any period.
So, let's just ignore each other if you must to keep from
your continuous attacks, that is, if you don't mind and lets
talk about music, the writing of music and about other
people's music.
> but we're
> able to purify experience into music.
I can only hope that we could create some type
of relationship here on this newsgroup that isn't
so spiteful nor so obsessive. I appreciate a few of your
postings from time to time; I might suggest you just
take it easy in re moi.
Ok? You're not going to change me nor influence
me. I am my own pathetic man as ridiculous as that might
seem to you.
jeff harrington
orangie
>I'm not going to waste too much time on you, because I believe
>that you're neurotically obsessed on me, partly the result of my
>portraits by my wife or something.
like, i think you think i'm harrington. i'm only interested in the music
aspect of your persona. and even then only because you represent a moment
in composition that i recognize in my own process. i wonder that you've
never encountered this kind of interest in your work before. if not, then i
think you'd better give up the street-punk mozart approach and actually ask
matt how to compose music.
orangie
>
>And yes, I have listened to your music.
>
>I found it ridiculously lacking in focus and in direction. I think
>you have no idea what you're trying to do, nor what you ARE
>doing, either here in your postings or in music.
guess again. probably you're not onto music enough to hear a non-pop
generated sound. your comps show this, and your mind confusion is maybe
stemming from thinking that what you know of music is all there is to know.
your stuff reminds me of what the marley kids were doing when they were
trying to get michael jackson famous while using their dad's name to crush
the industry. only, you never had a dad.
orangie
>Ok? You're not going to change me nor influence
>me. I am my own pathetic man as ridiculous as that might
>seem to you.
>
>jeff harrington
>
i think that's all we can ever try to be. but, there are these accidents
where you find yourself mentally fucked up by some really intense mind and
it scares you. what you do in response is your character. we all go through
it.
evan johnson
wrote:
> My teacher, the great
>Ivesian modernist, James Drew once told me - and I believe it - that
>you cannot write an atonal love song.
Ever heard Penderecki's setting of the Song of Solomon?
evan
Jeff Harrington
Shit, man, you're really out of your mind. You sure can dish it out,
but evidently, you can't take it without insulting.
That's pathetic. I really found your music wandering, lacking in focus
and without gestalt. I find your posts wandering, spiteful and lacking
and focus and without gestalt.
Your style- and that is what this thread is about is to me, is a personal
rambling ranting. You may find that interesting musically, but I appreciate
complex forms which generate expectations and which create and deny
expectations.
You can drop your stupid pop music insults... that's laughable. And
trying to hurt me with a father ref, is the most pathetic spiteful attempt
at mean-spirited postings I've EVER seen here... whoa... creepy.
jeff
Jeff Harrington
No, I'll have to check it out... I know obvious other counter-examples,
too
Most of Lutoslawski's output for one... Matt referenced Hanging Gardens
Vivier... Takemitsu!
jeff
Dr.Matt
Gosh, yes, all of Takemitsu's atonal pieces sound to me like love songs,
whether they have voices or not.
orangie
>> your stuff reminds me of what the marley kids were doing when they
>> were trying to get michael jackson famous while using their dad's name
>> to crush the industry. only, you never had a dad.
>
>Shit, man, you're really out of your mind. You sure can dish it out,
>but evidently, you can't take it without insulting.
>
>
oops, sorry dude, you must have had a dad. my mistake.
orangie
>Your style- and that is what this thread is about is to me, is a
>personal rambling ranting. You may find that interesting musically, but
>I appreciate complex forms which generate expectations and which create
>and deny expectations.
>
yeah! finally about music. and seriously, for once, this is the problem for
me too. there's a generated expectation, where you set up a condition for
the listener... like starting with a cymbal crash. and there's what i hear
as a Late Beethoven solution, where the crash comes two thirds in and is
set up by the "lack of crashes" or small crashes used as flavor. sometimes,
though, there's just a distributed smallness over the entire work, where
the aesthetic is like watching the curtain shadow move over the afternoon
livingroom floor. i'm trying to make what's been called a "texture" music,
where the texture sets function like harmony blocks: transforming into one
another. that was the point of the obvious disintegration at the end of the
23rd symphony: devolution to root, or something, but not harmonic root. i
love music, and i love all the great set-up musics: Bolero, Beethoven
9th... even the Liszt rhapsodies (even the Gershwin rhapsody!), but i also
hear Webern and Stockhausen as melodic music... just like the other music
freak in the group, i acid-tripped on modernists waaay back when.
like, your music? ... have you seen the movie "Black Orpheus"? where the
samba pervades the film and the variation musics are root-of-samba? ...
that's how i think of your music and where i think it might go...
describing a universe of music. but i didn't hear the directions to the
root-cellar, mon... the hidden room to your music... and, like, i'm
stumbling around with this, saying, is this disco -- where the "beat goes
on"? is this streetfair? -- dancing in the dark?
i only know you as music.
mike
orangie
>You can drop your stupid pop music insults... that's laughable. And
>trying to hurt me with a father ref, is the most pathetic spiteful attempt
>at mean-spirited postings I've EVER seen here... whoa... creepy.
>
>jeff
>
by the way, jeff, i didn't have a father... he forgot to marry my mother...
you know how it is with those rich fukkers who don't really like to get
tooooo personal with the lower classes.
the insult moved from fun, cause i know it doesn't mean anything at all
(except you'all now know that what you call me has a real reference... so,
here's to "meaning".)