What is New Age Music?
Sam Ghandchi
What is new age music? It is surely "reasonable" to ask this
question because the genre is so new that it still may need
some time to become part of our "common sense." 1987 was
the first year new age music was recognized as a category for the
Grammys. No one asks what classical, jazz, country, or rock music
is, because such genres have found their place in the auditory
experience of the general public. You may not like country music,
but you "know" what parts of you is touched (or dis-touched!) by it.
It is like our knowledge of differentiation between fruits and
vegetables. Even such old conceptual categories are not completely
or globally well-defined. For example, in Persian language a
cucumber is a fruit whereas in English it is a vegetable.
To my knowledge, new age music can be defined on five principles.
One that philosophically it takes its inspirations from global subjects.
For example, environmental issues like desert, ocean, or space are
not particular to any nation. Thus, using such inspirations in works
like Kitaro's Silk Road (desert) or Jim Chappell's Tender Ritual (ocean)
or Constance Demby's Novus Magnificat (space) is not due to the
environmentalist approach of the artists necessarily; but it definitely
shows a yearning of these artists for global themes. Also subjects
such as peace in Vollenweider's music, or relaxation in Annie Locke's
works, or love in Chris Spheeris' Desires of the Heart are not
particular to any race, nation, or religion. Thus this music, similar to
the art of the Renaissance has many themes yet retains a general
philosophical approach within itself. An observation that may
support my claim is that out of probably 4000 works of this music, I
have not heard even one military march composition ,whereas I have
found among the classical composers mostly more than one march
composition!
The second characteristic of new age music is that it draws upon the
musical experience of the whole world to develop its particular
styles. In other words, it does not confine itself to Western or
Eastern styles of music. I agree with John Schaefer (author of New
Sounds) who considers Eric Satie and Debussy of the turn of the
century as predecessors of new age musicians; because they too went
to the world music to form their own musical style. Good examples
of inventing a world style in new age music are Deuter and Peter
Michael Hamel who with their mastery of both Eastern and Western
music developed their own unique forms of synthesis. I need to
point out that developing a world style does not prevent new age
music from holding a variety of styles within itself. In fact, an
unprecedented enhancement of variety in new age musical style has
followed from its global approach to style. Some works are very
close to jazz that are conveniently called new age jazz, such as David
Boruff's Dreamstreet. Whereas, some works such as Teja Bell's New
Spirit of Christmas can be termed "new age classical!"
The third characteristic of new age music in contrast to classical
music, is that most of its artists claim to have a goal for their music.
Classical musicians, just like eighteenth century philosophers, talked
the least of "final causes" and goals for their music. Although, today
we may attribute some form of nationalism as the hidden "goal" of
their compositions, they would never admit any purpose or goal. For
classical musicians the relationship between what the artist felt and
what the audience received was the weakest bond even to ponder
on. The first challenges to their philosophy was presented by G.I.
Gurdjieff (1877-1949), a Russian philosopher/musician, who thought
of music as a vehicle to transform man. He was a predecessor of
today's new age musicians who consider the purpose of their
compositions so important that they sometimes feel the need to write
it on the cover of their albums! It is ironic that the major labels that
are used to classical works, usually eliminate such comments to avoid
offending the audience. But strangely enough the audience relates to
this music better when they are informed what the musician has
intended to describe in the music.
I, as of yet, do not know how to understand this phenomena in
musicological terminology. It is true that sometimes the new age
artists' comments about their music is excessive, but it is noteworthy
to mention that for classical musicians the opposite extreme was true
and the neutrality of music was stressed? For example, most people
who have heard Georgia Kelly's Seapeace have experienced the
tranquility of water which is intended in the album. The pictorial
dimensions of Ray Lynch's Deep Breakfast or Emerald Web's Traces
of Time are shared by many listeners. The geometrical effect of
Western Spaces and the way it opens "gates" of higher levels of
consciousness is hard to deny after 40 times of attentive listening!
Especially, works such as Soundings Tapestry intend to bring out the
deep yearnings for a whirling nature in the listener and the
experience is easy to feel. Are such effects only imagined in the
mind of these artists?
The fourth characteristic of new age music lies in the non-traditional
use of instruments. It is true that synthesizer is a new instrument,
but if it is used to imitate the sound of traditional instruments in
their traditional way, we would not call the music new age. In
contrast, if the traditional instruments are played in a non-
traditional way, we would consider the music as new age. For
example, Windham Hill studio of Menlo Park (California) is a pioneer
of using traditional instruments in new age music in the world. Will
Ackerman, the founder of Windham Hill, has tuned the guitar in
different ways for the various cuts of his album Passage, none of
them to be the traditional tuning of this old instrument. Or Andreas
Vollenweider's innovativeness with the harp is so extensive that one
can hardly call his instrument harp anymore. Or Deuter's
performance of the Eastern sitar is very different from the
traditional use of that instrument in the East. Innovations with
electronics, computers, and lasers have just begun. Heart of Space's
Starflight(1) and Emerald Web's Traces of Time are examples of such
achievements. This characteristic is a reason that people who are not
ready for such drastic changes in the sounds of the instruments have
difficulty relating to this music.
Finally the fifth characteristic of new age music is its mood
orientation as follows:
1. Some works are very JOYFUL; they are pleasant in a playful
mood. I think Tangerine Dream's Underwater Sunlight and Dan Ar
Bra's Music for the Silences to Come are good examples of such
works. In Eastern style music Deuter's SAN is a noteworthy example.
2. There are works that are UPLIFTING, can wake you up from a
passive mood to an active mood. Works such as Kitaro's Silk Road,
Don Harriss' Elevations, Robert Safir's Sound Paintings, and Ray
Lynch's Deep Breakfast are good examples of such effect. One can
best use them when participating in creative activities such as
drawing or painting. They reinforce your energies during the
creative process.
3. There are works that are CONTEMPLATIVE in a sense that they
help one to brainstorm or read, and even works that have some
ROMANTIC effect. For example, George Winston's Autumn, Jim
Chappell's Tender Ritual in piano, and Bruce Bec-Var's Take it to
Heart in guitar, are perfect for brainstorming and reading. And,
Mark Sloniker's Paths of Heart exhilarates a romantic mood.
4. Some works of new age music aid in RELAXATION. Annie
Locke's Portraits and Herb Ernst's Dreamflight in piano and electronic
music have tremendous therapeutic effect. Tony Scott's Music for
Zen Meditation in clarinet, Anne Williams' Skydance in harp, and
Voyager's Sound Dreams in environmental sounds are the finest
examples of this effect. These works are the best for massage,
therapy, unwinding or any other undertaking that requires a
relaxing background.
5. Finally, some works of new age music have a MEDITATIVE
effect. Repeated attentive listening sometimes up to 40 or 50 times,
even for people who are familiar with this music, is necessary to
experience these works thoroughly. A resonance with different parts
of one's auditory system such as a trance-like state may even follow.
These works are intense and are not necessarily good for relaxation.
They usually require complete attention and are not good as
background music. Michael Stearn's Planetary Unfolding, Richard
Burmer's Bhakti Point, Constance Demby's Novus Magnificat, Steve
Roach's Dreamtime Return, Iasos' Angelic Music, or Kevin Braheny's
The Way Home are good examples of such multi-layered musical
pieces.
After listening many times, the multiple layers begin to differentiate
like a rainbow. Your auditory system will be like a prism and this
music will act like a white light breaking into a rainbow. In fact,
classical music by bringing the simultaneous performance of many
instruments (in orchestral music) opened a new stage in musical
experience. It has taken three centuries until a major portion of our
city dwellers have become auditorily comfortable with that
invention. Then it seems that the multi-layered new age works are a
simultaneous performance of several concerts yet by "one"
instrument! This phenomena is starting a new stage of music as
significant as orchestral music. It is generally referred to as space
music. I feel this to be an inadequate description of their music. I
prefer to call this invention as "multi-layered music." Most likely in
the future these works will make the main body of a "classical"
heritage of our new age music.
Finally, I need to acknowledge that I differ with some
musician/authors such as Steve Halpern in my understanding of new
age music. From my readings of his works, it seems to me that
Halpern thinks new age music is essentially a music that does not
have beats. Although this may be true of his own works, it is not
true of the majority of new age composers. For example, Andreas
Vollenweider (who received the first Grammy Award in the New Age
Category in 1987) undeniably has beat in his music.
Also, I need to site that although some works of new age music (such
as Deep Breakfast of Ray Lynch) are conducive to the improvement
of creativity, I do not regard this characteristic as a differentiation
for new age music. In fact, probably Baroque music has more such
capacity than most of the new age works. Yet a new age approach to
Baroque by institutes like Lind Institute of Vienna or Barzak
Institute of California has helped to bring this side of music to light.
They have compiled the Baroque adagios, andantes, largos, etc.
according to the moods they bring rather than the artists' original
themes.
In this respect, some subliminal works such as Halpern's Study &
Learn are probably a new development in our times, although I have
a hard time viewing them as music. They seem more like forms of
psychological learning tools to me. The guided relaxation tapes of
Emmett Miller (e.g. Rainbow Butterfly and the Healing Journey) are
great works which help people to visualize the state of being they
wish and to approach that state through visualization. They are the
finest for stress reduction or to deal with the so-called "non-curable"
diseases. Shakti Gawain's Creative Visualization tape is another
example of a visualization method which does not even have music.
One could probably use poetry, crystals, tarot cards, I Ching, or even
ordinary dice for meditation. This is why I prefer not to include
these phenomena as a part of new age music.
Moreover, the scarcity of vocals in the new age music is not
necessarily a characteristic. There are three reasons for this reality.
The first is that the appeal of lyrics in a particular language is
minimal globally, and opera-like sounds may only play such a role!
The most noteworthy achievement in such an approach is the use of
vocals in Mathias Thurow's Cornucopia that I would like to call a
"new age opera!" The second difficulty with vocals is that
traditionally human voice reinforces a particular interpretation of
music and reduces the multiplicity of musical appreciation. The best
historical examples of the use of this phenomena are the Medieval
Church that used choral voices as an instrument to focus the music
for praise of God and the Church. Or the use of choral voices in the
Soviet music of Stalin's era to reinforce the praise of the state and
Stalin at the top. Probably this is also another reason for the
avoidance of vocals by new age artists who desire to promote
openness. Thirdly I think an essential non-traditional use of voice
comparable to the "invention" of opera probably has not occurred yet
and we may expect breakthroughs in this realm. I view Constance
Demby's Novus Magnificat as the beginning of this journey.
The most recent development in new age music is Visual Music
Video. In contrast to ordinary music videos that bring in a story and
limit one's interpretation of music, the visual music videos bring in
pictures of nature or animations that expand one's visual repertoir
for constructing one's own interpretation of the music. If you watch
a visual music video and listen to its music without the picture later
and back to the picture again, you will find that you have enriched
your musical experience without limiting it to any particular
interpretation. In other words, the imagery is open, in contrast to
most visual imagery of TV or the movie industry that are closed
forms. This is why to an uninformed watcher, they seem like: "So
what, where is the result? What is the goal?"
Allan Kessler, the founder of New Era Media and a pioneer of this
invention explains this phenomena in a different way. He says that
the visual imagery resonates with other senses bypassing our
conscious split mind resulting in a holistic experience. This
phenomena is called "synesthesia." His Natural Light, is a good
example of what visual music video can bring to our musical
experience. It is a very well-thought work which he and David
Fortney have produced using masterpieces such as Burmer's Bhakti
Point. It is extremely appealing for meditation. Structures from
Silence, with a multi-layered visual imagery created by Marian Dolan
and the music of Steve Roach, is also a real masterpiece of space
music video concept.
I have written my impressions of new age music and would like to
invite and encourage musicians, musicologists, and listeners to
respond to these opinions in order that we can all increase our
understanding.
The commercialization of new age music has two opposite results. On
the one hand, more people are being exposed to this music and this
broadens the base of the music. On the other hand, many mediocre
works are being produced for the market that are not worthy of the
genre and they are the reason many people have the impression of
Relevator music" for new age works!
One way to insure the growth of quality works in this music is to
provide a close rapport between the sophisticated listeners with
exquisite taste and the talented musicians who wish to release only
high quality works. I think this newsgroup is helping to improve
this rapport.
- Sam Ghandchi
sa...@netcom.com
Lon Lowen Jr.
a lot of research into that essay, however, I really think you should you
talk a little more about how most "new age" musicians feel about the title
"new age".
Country musicians don't complain about being labeled country musicians.
Jazz musicians don't complain about being labeled jazz musicians.
New Age musicians complain about about being labeled new age musicians.
Why?
I think you should do some research on this.
--
Lon Lowen Jr. | Wayne State University
Netcom Online Communications | Detroit, Michigan, USA
lll...@netcom.com | (lll...@mts.cc.wayne.edu)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew C. Crowell
>What is New Age Music?
>
>What is new age music? It is surely "reasonable" to ask this
>question because the genre is so new that it still may need
>some time to become part of our "common sense." 1987 was
>the first year new age music was recognized as a category for the
>Grammys. No one asks what classical, jazz, country, or rock music
>is, because such genres have found their place in the auditory
>experience of the general public. You may not like country music,
>but you "know" what parts of you is touched (or dis-touched!) by it.
>It is like our knowledge of differentiation between fruits and
>vegetables. Even such old conceptual categories are not completely
>or globally well-defined. For example, in Persian language a
>cucumber is a fruit whereas in English it is a vegetable.
To me, as a composer and musician working in a field that gets _tagged_ as
"Newage", I'm _painfully_ aware that at one point, the term had some sort of
meaning, but is now nothing more than a hang-tag used by record labels,
retailers, and marketing people to identify what sort of nice noises you
might be happening to make. I do _not_ (vehemently!) like this term. Not
at all. I think it's been abused, and I think it's most ridiculous to try
and link everyone who does quiet, contemplative music to this term and
to what it implies. I know several other musicians who fall under this
terminology, and they _also_ don't appreciate being called "Newage".
And please note: as in a quote I heard once in an interview with
Liz Story (who also disparages the use of this term) "Newage...rhymes with
Sewage".
>
>To my knowledge, new age music can be defined on five principles.
>One that philosophically it takes its inspirations from global subjects.
It does? News to me...much of the inspiration _I_ have for my work lies in
very _small_ phenomena: how a sound sounds in combination with other sounds,
how certain natural sounds would work in combination with others in the
studio, and so on. I take virtually none of my inspiration from "global
subjects", and I think you're generalizing here.
>For example, environmental issues like desert, ocean, or space are
>not particular to any nation. Thus, using such inspirations in works
>like Kitaro's Silk Road (desert) or Jim Chappell's Tender Ritual (ocean)
>or Constance Demby's Novus Magnificat (space) is not due to the
>environmentalist approach of the artists necessarily; but it definitely
>shows a yearning of these artists for global themes. Also subjects
>such as peace in Vollenweider's music, or relaxation in Annie Locke's
>works, or love in Chris Spheeris' Desires of the Heart are not
>particular to any race, nation, or religion. Thus this music, similar to
>the art of the Renaissance has many themes yet retains a general
>philosophical approach within itself. An observation that may
>support my claim is that out of probably 4000 works of this music, I
>have not heard even one military march composition ,whereas I have
>found among the classical composers mostly more than one march
>composition!
In a very real sense, "On the Threshold of Liberty" by Mark Isham is a slow
march, which I think the implicit nature of the title also bears out.
I would also like to point out that if you have to sit and listen to
a piece of music with the semiotic intent of the music at the forefront of
your conscious thought, you're almost _certainly_ ignoring the music. Music
is not space dust, nor desert caravans, nor _whatever_...it is an artfully
assembled set of sonic phenomena, which a composer and/or a performer has
taken a lot of trouble to assemble and bring to you. To not pay attention
to this craftsmanship is a waste and an insult to that effort.
>
>The second characteristic of new age music is that it draws upon the
>musical experience of the whole world to develop its particular
>styles. In other words, it does not confine itself to Western or
>Eastern styles of music. I agree with John Schaefer (author of New
>Sounds) who considers Eric Satie and Debussy of the turn of the
>century as predecessors of new age musicians; because they too went
>to the world music to form their own musical style. Good examples
>of inventing a world style in new age music are Deuter and Peter
>Michael Hamel who with their mastery of both Eastern and Western
>music developed their own unique forms of synthesis. I need to
>point out that developing a world style does not prevent new age
>music from holding a variety of styles within itself. In fact, an
>unprecedented enhancement of variety in new age musical style has
>followed from its global approach to style. Some works are very
>close to jazz that are conveniently called new age jazz, such as David
>Boruff's Dreamstreet. Whereas, some works such as Teja Bell's New
>Spirit of Christmas can be termed "new age classical!"
On this, at first, I agree. But when you try to tag things as "Newage this"
and "Newage that", it simply sends me lurching for the space-sick bags. Dig
this: did you ever consider that a lot of that "new age jazz" and "new age
classical" terminology has nothing to do with "Newage", but a lot to do with
some bozo in an Armani suit in a boardroom somewhere cooking up new marketing
strategies? "Hmmm...let's call this New Age Country, Manny...the fern-heads
will _eat it up_!!!" Blinders off, d00d...
>
>The third characteristic of new age music in contrast to classical
>music, is that most of its artists claim to have a goal for their music.
Whaaaaaaat? A goal? I have to have a goal? 'Scuse me? Something goal-like
like "nuking the whales for world peace in the rainforest" too, I'm sure...
What happened to "creating nice music"? Not goal-oriented enough, I guess...
>Classical musicians, just like eighteenth century philosophers, talked
>the least of "final causes" and goals for their music. Although, today
>we may attribute some form of nationalism as the hidden "goal" of
>their compositions, they would never admit any purpose or goal. For
>classical musicians the relationship between what the artist felt and
>what the audience received was the weakest bond even to ponder
>on. The first challenges to their philosophy was presented by G.I.
>Gurdjieff (1877-1949), a Russian philosopher/musician, who thought
>of music as a vehicle to transform man. He was a predecessor of
>today's new age musicians who consider the purpose of their
>compositions so important that they sometimes feel the need to write
>it on the cover of their albums! It is ironic that the major labels that
>are used to classical works, usually eliminate such comments to avoid
>offending the audience. But strangely enough the audience relates to
>this music better when they are informed what the musician has
>intended to describe in the music.
No, no, no...you don't find such comments because, in many cases, _they just
don't exist_!!! I can see it now..."The Classical Label Conspiracy Against
New Thought". Oh, eeeee-frickin'-ghad.
And frequently, when these issues _do_ exist, well...are they really
so important that you _have_ to know them to enjoy the music? Really? Is it
_that_ urgent? If so, methinks you've got a problem...
>
>I, as of yet, do not know how to understand this phenomena in
>musicological terminology. It is true that sometimes the new age
>artists' comments about their music is excessive, but it is noteworthy
>to mention that for classical musicians the opposite extreme was true
>and the neutrality of music was stressed? For example, most people
>who have heard Georgia Kelly's Seapeace have experienced the
>tranquility of water which is intended in the album. The pictorial
>dimensions of Ray Lynch's Deep Breakfast or Emerald Web's Traces
>of Time are shared by many listeners. The geometrical effect of
>Western Spaces and the way it opens "gates" of higher levels of
>consciousness is hard to deny after 40 times of attentive listening!
>Especially, works such as Soundings Tapestry intend to bring out the
>deep yearnings for a whirling nature in the listener and the
>experience is easy to feel. Are such effects only imagined in the
>mind of these artists?
Go get a book on psychoacoustics. There's a lot going on that's not magical
here. To paraphrase Arthur C. Clarke, what's going on here is the stuff that,
to the "primitives", is magic...but it's really just good application of
technology. Also, while you're at it, go read Michael Harner's _The Way of
the Shaman_, especially the parts regarding the "sonic driving" techniques
for inducing altered states and trances. Especially when dealing with Steve
Roach (as you point out w/ his "Western Spaces" collaboration with Kevin
Braheny). Roach _knows his stuff_ in the studio, and I'm not about to
attribute anything mystical to someone who's as good a synthesist as he is.
He just knows where the buttons to push are, psychoacoustically.
>
>The fourth characteristic of new age music lies in the non-traditional
>use of instruments. It is true that synthesizer is a new instrument,
>but if it is used to imitate the sound of traditional instruments in
>their traditional way, we would not call the music new age. In
Why?
>contrast, if the traditional instruments are played in a non-
>traditional way, we would consider the music as new age. For
Again, why? Sounds pretty damned arbitrary to me...
>example, Windham Hill studio of Menlo Park (California) is a pioneer
>of using traditional instruments in new age music in the world. Will
>Ackerman, the founder of Windham Hill, has tuned the guitar in
>different ways for the various cuts of his album Passage, none of
>them to be the traditional tuning of this old instrument. Or Andreas
>Vollenweider's innovativeness with the harp is so extensive that one
>can hardly call his instrument harp anymore. Or Deuter's
>performance of the Eastern sitar is very different from the
>traditional use of that instrument in the East. Innovations with
>electronics, computers, and lasers have just begun. Heart of Space's
>Starflight(1) and Emerald Web's Traces of Time are examples of such
>achievements. This characteristic is a reason that people who are not
>ready for such drastic changes in the sounds of the instruments have
>difficulty relating to this music.
No...this sounds like garbage to me. Ackerman is just trying some alternate
jazz tunings, nothing more. And Deuter's performance techniques on the sitar
probably have a _lot_ more to do with relative inexperience with a highly
complex instrument than with non-traditionality. And I'm inclined to think
that people are quite ready for new sounds, it's just the clowns in those
expensive Armani suits again saying: "Don't make those fucked-up noises,
you! We can't _sell_ that crap!" 'Member, these are the same charming people
who also bring you such "unenlightened" nonsense as Paula Abdul and Billy
Ray Cyrus, if you're dealing with a major label or their subsidiary or one
of the independents who relies on a major for distribution...and that bracket
encompasses a _lot_ of this field. As for the smaller, _truly_ independent
labels like Fortuna and Celestial Harmonies, I happen to see a _lot_ of
work on those labels that encompass a lot of new techniques and timbres.
Even P.M. Hamel, who you drag out above, can be found banging around inside
a prepared piano on "Transition" on Celestial Harmonies. Or what about Michael
Stearns's use of "the Beam" on some of this stuff. Or Steve Roach's _very_
complex electronic textures on pretty much anything he does? Doesn't sound
like your conceptualizing about unfamiliarity holds water here.
Oh, ugh. And here we see the "fern-head" mentality in full bloom. Look, I hate
to bash the side of your nice, crystal-covered world in, but I think this
is just silly. It smacks of that numb-nuts jerk Steven Halpern's nonsense
about "different colored healing musical energies blah blah blah" or something
equally gah-roooovey. I can hardly think that everyone you cite above had
_precisely_ the effect you pigeonhole them into in mind when they came up
with the music you categorize them with. In fact, I'd say that some of them
had no such thing in mind at all...like Tangerine Dream, for example.
The other thing I _highly_ object to here is that you are imposing
a _subjective_ set of emotions, contexts, concepts, etc etc etc ad nauseaum
on something which _should be left to the individual listener_. Let _us_
decide how a piece moves us. Just because _you_ find something uplifting
doesn't mean we all have to; some of us may find the same piece very
melancholy (such as Kevin Braheny's "The Way Home", which you claim to be
"meditative") or something else besides. This categorization of benefit I
object to, will always objects to, have always objected to, because it
removes the listener's objective opinion from the loop between the creation
and the comprehension of that creation. In short, don't tell us what to think.
>
>After listening many times, the multiple layers begin to differentiate
>like a rainbow. Your auditory system will be like a prism and this
>music will act like a white light breaking into a rainbow. In fact,
>classical music by bringing the simultaneous performance of many
>instruments (in orchestral music) opened a new stage in musical
>experience. It has taken three centuries until a major portion of our
>city dwellers have become auditorily comfortable with that
>invention. Then it seems that the multi-layered new age works are a
>simultaneous performance of several concerts yet by "one"
>instrument! This phenomena is starting a new stage of music as
>significant as orchestral music. It is generally referred to as space
>music. I feel this to be an inadequate description of their music. I
>prefer to call this invention as "multi-layered music." Most likely in
>the future these works will make the main body of a "classical"
>heritage of our new age music.
I think you need to spend a little time in a recording studio. Again, to
paraphrase Clarke: this is magic only if you don't understand it. And turn
off those prisms and white lights and such.
Also, before you dive in on explaining to us all the history of the
orchestra, the evolution of classical music, and so forth, I'd suggest you
go take some courses in music history. Yes, there _is_ such a thing...and I've
had three years of it, enough to authoritatively tell you that your observations
about these things above are pure crapola, quite uninformed, quite
incorrect. The acceptance of the orchestra, in fact, has little to do with
the public's inability to appreciate the "newness" of it...but it has a _lot_
to do with the plain, simple fact that orchestras were a reserved thing in
most of Europe for the _rich_; the general population didn't get to hear
orchestras until the advent of recording technology in this century. The
few poor people, average folks, who heard a great orchestra in the 1700s and
1800s didn't tend to go screaming into the night nor burst into flame,
either; this sort of music was readily appreciated by all.
>
>Finally, I need to acknowledge that I differ with some
>musician/authors such as Steve Halpern in my understanding of new
>age music. From my readings of his works, it seems to me that
>Halpern thinks new age music is essentially a music that does not
>have beats. Although this may be true of his own works, it is not
>true of the majority of new age composers. For example, Andreas
>Vollenweider (who received the first Grammy Award in the New Age
>Category in 1987) undeniably has beat in his music.
>
>Also, I need to site that although some works of new age music (such
>as Deep Breakfast of Ray Lynch) are conducive to the improvement
>of creativity, I do not regard this characteristic as a differentiation
>for new age music. In fact, probably Baroque music has more such
>capacity than most of the new age works. Yet a new age approach to
>Baroque by institutes like Lind Institute of Vienna or Barzak
>Institute of California has helped to bring this side of music to light.
>They have compiled the Baroque adagios, andantes, largos, etc.
>according to the moods they bring rather than the artists' original
>themes.
I would like to point out that the Barzak Institute isn't really taken
seriously by people in academia. The research would be _nice_ if it were
_objective_, but I can't say as how looking for blanket moods in musical
works is a funtion of objective thought. People are simply going to differ
on how they perceive music, and this is _not a bad thing_. It's what makes
us all individuals.
>
>In this respect, some subliminal works such as Halpern's Study &
>Learn are probably a new development in our times, although I have
>a hard time viewing them as music. They seem more like forms of
>psychological learning tools to me. The guided relaxation tapes of
>Emmett Miller (e.g. Rainbow Butterfly and the Healing Journey) are
>great works which help people to visualize the state of being they
>wish and to approach that state through visualization. They are the
>finest for stress reduction or to deal with the so-called "non-curable"
>diseases. Shakti Gawain's Creative Visualization tape is another
>example of a visualization method which does not even have music.
>One could probably use poetry, crystals, tarot cards, I Ching, or even
>ordinary dice for meditation. This is why I prefer not to include
>these phenomena as a part of new age music.
Whaaaat? And yet you try to overlay "Newage" with all sorts of _other_ batty
phenomena? Gee, why _not_ toss Halpern and Shakti Gawain into the stew here?
They're just as flakey as some of the other observations _you've_ made in
the course of this posting...
>
>Moreover, the scarcity of vocals in the new age music is not
>necessarily a characteristic. There are three reasons for this reality.
>The first is that the appeal of lyrics in a particular language is
>minimal globally, and opera-like sounds may only play such a role!
>The most noteworthy achievement in such an approach is the use of
>vocals in Mathias Thurow's Cornucopia that I would like to call a
>"new age opera!" The second difficulty with vocals is that
>traditionally human voice reinforces a particular interpretation of
>music and reduces the multiplicity of musical appreciation. The best
>historical examples of the use of this phenomena are the Medieval
>Church that used choral voices as an instrument to focus the music
>for praise of God and the Church. Or the use of choral voices in the
>Soviet music of Stalin's era to reinforce the praise of the state and
>Stalin at the top. Probably this is also another reason for the
>avoidance of vocals by new age artists who desire to promote
>openness. Thirdly I think an essential non-traditional use of voice
>comparable to the "invention" of opera probably has not occurred yet
>and we may expect breakthroughs in this realm. I view Constance
>Demby's Novus Magnificat as the beginning of this journey.
Uh, yeah...why not view this as the following: the human voice is difficult
to record properly. Time in a recording studio = money. You can't waste
time that a little label is bankrolling on playing about with compressors,
mikes, limiters, EQs, etc etc etc on getting a good vocal sound, so the
voice just doesn't get cut. Seriously. When one _does_ see the voice being
used, it's generally on projects for major labels that have the time, money,
and patience to fool with such things (like Enya, on WEA) or when the
recording techniques are not so demanding (David Hykes). Also, consider that
it's _so_ much cheaper to layer up synth upon synth upon synth, rather than
fuddle about with those mikes and things. You can cut _lots_ more music, by
volume, with lots of synths, than with one voice...and this makes the people
in the Armani suits happy again.
>
>The most recent development in new age music is Visual Music
>Video. In contrast to ordinary music videos that bring in a story and
>limit one's interpretation of music, the visual music videos bring in
>pictures of nature or animations that expand one's visual repertoir
>for constructing one's own interpretation of the music. If you watch
>a visual music video and listen to its music without the picture later
>and back to the picture again, you will find that you have enriched
>your musical experience without limiting it to any particular
>interpretation. In other words, the imagery is open, in contrast to
>most visual imagery of TV or the movie industry that are closed
>forms. This is why to an uninformed watcher, they seem like: "So
>what, where is the result? What is the goal?"
The most recent development in music, _period_, is video. It's only a logical
extension that brings it to "Newage". Ever heard of MTV, d00d?
>
>Allan Kessler, the founder of New Era Media and a pioneer of this
>invention explains this phenomena in a different way. He says that
>the visual imagery resonates with other senses bypassing our
>conscious split mind resulting in a holistic experience. This
>phenomena is called "synesthesia." His Natural Light, is a good
>example of what visual music video can bring to our musical
>experience. It is a very well-thought work which he and David
>Fortney have produced using masterpieces such as Burmer's Bhakti
>Point. It is extremely appealing for meditation. Structures from
>Silence, with a multi-layered visual imagery created by Marian Dolan
>and the music of Steve Roach, is also a real masterpiece of space
>music video concept.
I have a copy of the "Structures from Silence" video. It is very boring. If
I wanted to watch shaving cream dissolve, I'd do it myself. I'm only glad
that I pirated my copy, rather than laying out shekels for that gibberish.
"Multi-layered visual imagery", my ass...if you want multilayered visual
imagery like that, gang, here's the combo:
A video switcher with crossfading.
A camera.
A couple of U-matics.
A monitor so you can do cheap video-feedback effects.
A color keyer.
A sink.
A can of Gillette "Foamy".
Fire it all up, burn some tape, squirt some shaving cream, swirl it all
through that used Grass Valley switcher, and lay in the synth. VOILA!!!
"Multi-layered visual imagery"! Just stick it in a box with appropriate
language appendant to appeal to druggies and fernheads, and you've got a
hot "Newage" video.
Don't laugh. That's just how "Structure from Silence"'s video was
concocted.
The rest of "Newage" video just strikes me as people going nuts with
switchers and stock nature footage...although some of the stuff done for
Private Music is quite beautiful and artfully done in the way in which the
imagery is combined. I'll concede that they have their act together...it's
only too bad that they got eaten by RCA not too long after they got going.
>
>I have written my impressions of new age music and would like to
>invite and encourage musicians, musicologists, and listeners to
>respond to these opinions in order that we can all increase our
>understanding.
Well, my impressions are pretty damn harsh...but they come from experience
on the _other_ side of the speakers. And I intended to be quite nasty;
it's really time for a major reality-check here. The state of this music
is _not_ a fixity in the meditiative, aura-dripping, gobbledy-crap that
is listed above. Read this group; more people have been discussing people
like Jarre, Oldfield, and 808 State (ferchrissakes!) as of late than people
who you have to dig thru yards of "Newage" marketing hype to get at their
lame musical meanderings. I mean really...would you _honestly_ rather
listen to someone like Dik Darnell (as an example) who has all of his
music "done thru him", and who couches some otherwise-rudimentary synth
playing in a bunch of Native American imagery and polycrap which he probaly
cribbed from reading _Black Elk Speaks_, or would you rather have someone
like Steve Roach who's got his "Soma" CD, which also touches on Native
American imagery and concepts, which is a tour-de-force of musical
craft? Honestly?
All you're doing above is to reinforce the marketing hype, Mr. Gandchi.
I don't appreciate this, having been in the nice panelled rooms with the
People in the Armani Suits once, and seeing what sort of pap they wanted to
turn _my_ work into. My advice is to leave the mystical pixie-dust out of
this, to remove the categorizations based on emotion, usage, etc, and to
yank your blinders. "Newage" has become those things thanks to the intervention
of corporate America, not due to some mystical power. When one looks at
things like "Hearts of Space", the labels, the multi-millions made on
books to tell you how Newage Music Will Correct Your Overbite and so forth,
all you _really_ see is the grindings of a machine that really wants to
turn the individual appreciation of music into a rubber-stamped product.
Yeah, even Hearts of Space...ever notice how much Steven Hill plays his
label's _own material_ on the show? On a show that's supposed to be on
_non-commercial_ stations? If that's not hype and advertising, I don't know
what is.
Yes, yes...let's feed them all these things...we can even make the
_fern-heads_ into nice Amurrikkkan consumers. Toss in Ramtha, some weird
Adobe Photoshop hallucination for a cover, then drag that 12-year-old with
the Soundblaster in here...HEY! KID! Give us some "Newage"! This is what
rubber-stamping will give us in the end. Please, _please_...let us all
decide in our own way what to think, what to feel, what to do, what to buy...
don't open up the pigeonholes anymore.
>
>The commercialization of new age music has two opposite results. On
>the one hand, more people are being exposed to this music and this
>broadens the base of the music. On the other hand, many mediocre
>works are being produced for the market that are not worthy of the
>genre and they are the reason many people have the impression of
>Relevator music" for new age works!
Yet these are the works you cite above. The great material, such as Klaus
Schulze, Mike Oldfield, early Tangerine Dream, Kitaro when he's not trying
to sound like his other 659 albums, and even other composers and performers
such as Pauline Oliveros, Henryk Gorecki, Terry Riley and so on who by
dint of their sound fall into this semi-category, just doesn't get heard.
Oh sure, occasionally you have flukes like "Tubular Bells" or Gorecki's
3rd Symphony, but this just shows that the music can stand even against
corporate quasi-hostility to anything that's not a bazillion-seller. In
fact (a trivia question for those of you old enough to answer), did anyone
really hear of Mike Oldfield's "Tubular Bells" before it was used in
"The Exorcist"? Hm? Another glorious example is the first release (finally!)
in the USA of some of Popol Vuh's material...albeit rather edited and
bowdlerized and in the guise of being soundtracks for Werner Herzog.
And who's responsible for the razor blades and packaging in that manner?
Why, it's our pals in the Armani suits again...this time, Milan, a
sub-label at big ol' BMG.
Don't fool yourself. The commercialization of _anything_ simply
pins it down like a butterfly and _kills_ it...by shoving it into a nice
bin with a nice "Newage" label on the top and all the appendant rainbows,
crystals, whales, flowers, beams of white light, etc etc ack in tow. Ugh.
>
>One way to insure the growth of quality works in this music is to
>provide a close rapport between the sophisticated listeners with
>exquisite taste and the talented musicians who wish to release only
>high quality works. I think this newsgroup is helping to improve
>this rapport.
Well, I refused about $20K from the People in the Armani Suits because I
didn't want my name associated with pap. But I think also that trying to nail
down something vital and living like music is a real stupid mistake.
It's good to have rapport, yes, but it's very _bad_ to try to authoritatively
say that "this is this". Why not leave "this" to its own devices, and let it
grow, change, and be fruitful, rather than trying to attach a bunch of
semiotic baggage to it?
>
>- Sam Ghandchi
>sa...@netcom.com
>
>
D.A.C. Crowell
Computer Music Project/School of Music
University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
(da...@cmp-rt.music.uiuc.edu)
>
Sam Ghandchi
: Sam, I think you have created a very nice piece of work. You obviously put
: a lot of research into that essay, however, I really think you should you
: talk a little more about how most "new age" musicians feel about the title
: "new age".
: Country musicians don't complain about being labeled country musicians.
: Jazz musicians don't complain about being labeled jazz musicians.
: New Age musicians complain about about being labeled new age musicians.
: Why?
: I think you should do some research on this.
: --
Lon,
I do not know the reason for every single one of the people who
do not like to be called new age, but I remeber some of the issues
below:
The term New Age causes their music not to be bought by many
listeners who feel this term signifies a pseudo-religiuos overtone.
Especially these musicians think this term isolates a lot of their Christian
customers. In fact because of this reason, at hte beginning, most
of the major labels would not allow the artists to call their music
New Age when they wanted to go with those labels. How much is their view
right? I think it is true that some Christian listeners feel offended by
the term New Age, but I would say that it is a very small group. The ones
like this I have met were members of some New Age cults, in the past, that were
later disillusioned turned around and are now members of some Christian cults.
I think for most listeners, this is just a term that this type of music
is referred to and like any other name, it may have some overtones
for its original pioneers but it is just a name now. Just like
the name America for America, Columbia for Washington DC, etc. Usually
when you name your baby, there is a lot of arguments about naming
him/her but afterwards, some may still want to argue it but I find
more interesting issues to argue about than names. I think people
have the right to call Washington DC, John Doe, but nobody will recognize
what they are talking about. For example I see some people on this news
group who call themselves "New Age" musician but at the same time
they do not want me to use this term. I find this a contradiction.
Also they are writing in a newgroup which is called "rec.music.newage."
The term new age was slected from many other names such as electronic
acoustic, new sounds, and many others that I do not remember when the
word for the category at the Grammy was first decided. I personally like
the choice and I do not equate the term with any new age cult or
new age group. I do not equate it with any music label either. For
me it is a very nice name which is finding its own value and long
after these cults and these companies are gone, the name new age will
remain for this music. It is like if you were the parents of
Albert Einstein and you named your baby Albert Einstein. Albert after
some religious figure and Einstein after his father. But Albert Einstein
grew to be someone of high significance and noone remembers those initial
reasons except the historians and perhaps some members of his immediate family.
In recent times the term Artificial Intelligence was coined by
McCarthy at Stanford. Many other pioneers of this science such as Herbert
Simon did not like this term. Some prefered Computer Inference, etc. But
the term AI is here and will be with us and most of its practitioners do
not see any of the connotations that the original opponents were so
rightly afraid of.
2. Some other new age musicians do not like the term new age because they
do not like any term, period. It is like many artists who do not like any
term such as REALISM, IMPRESSIONISM, etc to categorize their work. They
think they are unique and do not fit any category. In fact they are both
right and wrong. They are unique just like apples, but they fit some
category like fruit. But I do not have any quarrel with these artists.
I think a good musician creates good music. He/she can think that
it does not fit any category or.... The reason people make categories and
groups is to access and find the right kind of music for our taste.
The artist can view it anyway he/she wants. Categries help listeners
to find the type of work they are looking for. Currently about 5000
new works of what is generally called New Age is produced and submitted to
various companies, radio stations, etc. It is simply impossible for every
listener to listen to all of them. This is why grouping can help
the accessibility of this music for a wider group of people. BTW, most
of the new age musicians I know hate the pigeon holes created by the academic
music departments and they welcome attempts to put their music in new
categries, although most of them believe they create across categories,
for eaxmple see the works of Richard Burmer. There are some members of
the music departments and academia who have been teaching us music for
centuries and expect everyone to fit in their pigeonholes. Most
new age musicians are not part of such academia and in fact they showed
their creativity by not following the guidelines set by these
departments. I need to note that there is a big difference between
someone who teaches music at some university and what we call a musician.
Aaron Copland has a good theoretical explanation of that which I do
not need to repeat.
I am just writing as a listener and if all the listeners start talking
about their own private groupings that they use to distinguish between
George Winston and Steve Roach or Tangerine Dream, then we may come up
with a new way of looking at this music which a century later can be taught
at the University of X's Music Department as the Musicology 101.
Sam Ghandchi
: Lon Lowen Jr. | Wayne State University
Sam Ghandchi
: Computer Music Project/School of Music
I am afraid that I cannot talk your language to respond to you the
way you write. I was not going to respond to your posting at all but then
I thought to write to you once hoping to alleviate your hatered. If it
does not help then I do not know of anything else to say to you and will need
to keep silent and wait for you to discover it for yourself.
You have downgraded Windham Hill artists and Deuter and
recommended yourself as a new age musician. I am just a new age
music listener but I refuse the pigeon holes of your music department
and I try to understand this music on my own merrits and I share it
with other listeners. Nobody has to accept my thoughts, but as we
share our thoughts, we the listeners may have something for the
musicians to listen to and for the Music classes to teach.
I am sorry for the bad experiences you have had with the labels. I
have no affinity with any label or any new age group, but I like
the emtional experiences that this music inspires. I have been lucky to
have met many new age music listeners and new age musicians and I can give
you an advice which you can take or toss. If you want to become
a new age musician, do not listen to the works of new age music
or any other music for that matter for at least five years.
Also do not read any books about music. Take some time off or if you
cannot afford it, take your weekends and go to the country side and
just listen to the birds, water, and wind. When you are in the city,
just listen to anything you hear but do not listen to what is called
music. Take TWO ears and ONE mouth. It would be better if you could take
more than TWO ears and less than ONE mouth.
Then after a few years, you may be able to create New Age music
but still there is no guarnteee but you would have a good chance.
If you keep on with your hatred, I am afraid you may not even have that
slight chance.
- Sam Ghandchi
sa...@netcom.com
Add
Andrew C. Crowell
> Dear Mr. Andrew C. Crowell (da...@cmp-rt.music.uiuc.edu)
>
>recommended yourself as a new age musician. I am just a new age
>music listener but I refuse the pigeon holes of your music department
>and I try to understand this music on my own merrits and I share it
>with other listeners. Nobody has to accept my thoughts, but as we
>share our thoughts, we the listeners may have something for the
>musicians to listen to and for the Music classes to teach.
My music department, huh? That's a neat one...actually, I serve as an
advisor to the Computer Music Project at the University of Illinois on
matters regarding recording technology and audio. My own compositional
work has nothing to do with this institution, actually. Again, Mr. Gandchi,
you assume too much.
And as for my "downgrading" artists on Windham Hill, I would like
to point out that I own a _lot_ of Windham Hill material, and have a very
high respect for a lot of what goes on on that label, musically. The same
goes for Deuter. What I _object_ to, however, are third-rate imitations
of both of these formulae...and there is a lot of this sort of schlock
that goes on, and much of it is encouraged by the music industry.
>
>I am sorry for the bad experiences you have had with the labels. I
>have no affinity with any label or any new age group, but I like
>the emtional experiences that this music inspires. I have been lucky to
>have met many new age music listeners and new age musicians and I can give
>you an advice which you can take or toss. If you want to become
>a new age musician, do not listen to the works of new age music
>or any other music for that matter for at least five years.
>Also do not read any books about music. Take some time off or if you
>cannot afford it, take your weekends and go to the country side and
>just listen to the birds, water, and wind. When you are in the city,
>just listen to anything you hear but do not listen to what is called
>music. Take TWO ears and ONE mouth. It would be better if you could take
>more than TWO ears and less than ONE mouth.
I think it rather presumptious for you to tell me how to compose. You are not
me. You are, by your own admission, a "listener". And I have no desire to
"become a new age musician". I already am _a_ musician, which is far more
important than being a musician with a convenient label around my neck. Some
people think I do "new age" music. That's fine for them to think that. But
it's _not_ fine when I get pigeonholed into the nonsense that the "newage"
movement espouses, some of which seems to occupy the above paragraph.
As for advice, I'd suggest to you that you get informed. An
_informed_ listener is much more empowered than a mere listener. _Find out_
how the industry work, why certain things are called "new age", what
marketing strategies are and how they operate. Learn for yourself how
most of the shots are called not by artists when they're under the major
label gun, but by people who have no real creative impulse or ability.
You suggest I take five years off. _I_ suggest you go take some classes in
music business if you want to be authoritative about how music and the
business _that it is_ (even with small independents, it is) works. "New
age" has a lot less to do with peace, crystals, and inner harmony these
days, and a lot more to do with marketing niches, demographics, and
sales tactics.
Also note: you wanted dialogue. You even solicited it. I'm really
quite sorry if this sort of thing is just not what you're equipped to
hear, but it is the real world calling with your personal wake-up call.
Yes, this sort of thing sucks and isn't fun to hear; yes, this is a real
brick through your stained-glass window, but it is the truth. If you're
not prepared to confront the truths about how your music is made, marketed,
and sold, then you should stop listening yourself. Permanently.
>
>Then after a few years, you may be able to create New Age music
>but still there is no guarnteee but you would have a good chance.
>If you keep on with your hatred, I am afraid you may not even have that
>slight chance.
"Have a nice day", huh? Actually, I have two labels looking at my work now.
And this "hatred" you keep referring to has nothing to do with anything
evil and nasty and nefarious and ugly...it is a real, genuine, burning
desire to create something that can keep its integrity, even in the face
of the Armani-suited ones. There is nothing wrong with hate. Hate can be
quite constructive if its directed against something unjust, anticreative,
and imbecilic. If you can't feel hate for those who want to steal away the
core of creativity of something, then you're a cripple. Plain and simple.
You just become one of those nicenicenicenice people being led along by
whatever consumeristic principle that the folks in Market Research have
come up with _this_ week. Seriously..._get informed_...and then, methinks,
you'll be getting pretty damned angry too...
D.A.C. Crowell
Deeptendu Majumder
It would be nice if some that voracious output can be directed towards
more consctructive things like a FAQ aimed at r.m.n readers at large.
All that knowledge can be better used than putting down others. We
all know diff people see nuage in diff ways. Let us just agree to
disagree and move on.
and let's try to be succint..I wonder how many people read these super
long posts..My short attention span does not allow me.
I can see why people do not care about contributing because there
are always people who seem to know better. If I was Mr Gandchi I
would simply quit posting.
d
David Datta
: people seem to have no shortage of words when they start to fight.
of course! :-)
: All that knowledge can be better used than putting down others. We
: all know diff people see nuage in diff ways. Let us just agree to
: disagree and move on.
The problem with this is not saying anything is the same thing as
accepting what Mr. Ghandchi says as truth. These are his opinions, not
fact. I think it is very important that this discussion between the
listener and artist take place.
He has been making some pretty broad statements about the feelings of
many people he has apparantly never been in contact with and some of
his statements contradict what they have said in other forums, some of
what he has said contradicts information I have gotten in my own
personal communication with the artists. This is not to say that all
musicians disagree with what he is saying. It is impossible to make a
blanket statement.
: I can see why people do not care about contributing because there
: are always people who seem to know better. If I was Mr Gandchi I
: would simply quit posting.
I hope he doesn't stop posting, he just needs to learn a little about
the "real world" and stop making assumptions about what musicians feel
and intend to "say" with their music. I find this all quite funny. It
would be like me making comments about why certain pictures are painted
without knowing the artist or anything about contract work. I will
never argue with a musician about why she/he as created something, I
can NEVER know.
Of course, the other side of the coin is that I can't make any
assumptions about what Mr. Ghandchi feels when he listens to music that
has been put in the "new age" classification. If you carefully read his
posting, he is explaining his view of New Age music, not trying to
define it.
The problem is, the New Age music classification is a cubby hole for
music, not ideals. It is a marketing term first and a style of music
second.
Music created with the intent and thoughts that Mr. Ghandchi lists is
usually classified as "New Age Music" and it usually fits the
classification. However, the assumption cannot be made that all music
marketed as "New Age" is created with those ideas/ideals.
.
--
- Dave Da...@cs.uwp.edu
"Information wants to be free." - Elektric Music
Deeptendu Majumder
: The problem with this is not saying anything is the same thing as
: accepting what Mr. Ghandchi says as truth. These are his opinions, not
: fact. I think it is very important that this discussion between the
: listener and artist take place.
I AGREE..but I do not like the put down attitude on the other person's
part..the argument could have been made without being so hostile. It
makes me feel very disrespectful for musicians (whoever that may be) who
I thought made such beautiful music. It is like getting to meet Mr. Roach
and finding out he is a total jerk..After that I do not think I would
view his music the same way any more..of course I do not know anything
about him..just an hypothetical example...it does not help a musician
when s/he comes across as a hostile person..S/He may have justifiable
reasons to be angry..but little caution be exercised in directing the
anger..
Ultimately it is the listener who is going to shell out the green bills.
I saw Mr.G approach was from the real nuage viewpoint and it exists. Ever
since this group was formed we have complained time and again that lot of
other people like Schulze unfairly gets cornered into nuage bins..I do not
like the term either and I have said that many times in past. I was very
surprised to see Adrian Legg put in nuage bin at Towers.
G stated HIS VIEWS as a listener. And I have seen opinions like that in mags
too. I personally do not really care so much..I have my peception of what
I like and do not like and I have my own feelings and I probabaly would
qualify my comments with the word "IMHO" a lot more than G did.
Lets get a nice post that addresses the nuage music thing from the
viewpoint of people who are in the know. A viewpoint which is may be in
oppposition with Mr. G's. May be you (David) can take a shot. I remember
you used to post lot of "official" stuff like release notes, etc. when
this group started and then not anymore. Things like that help somebody
(like me) who are not in personal communication with the creators....
: The problem is, the New Age music classification is a cubby hole for
: music, not ideals. It is a marketing term first and a style of music
: second.
probably the musicians should get together and launch an offensive...
instead of blasting the listener..who should be the last to be alieneted.
:-)
BTW does anybody has any stat about music sales being hurt when the musician
is labeled as nuage. And I would like to know what would these musicians
rather call themselves..or not anything at all may be ???
d
--
------
"Like a harsh neon streaking through the velvet darkness
the whetted knife of Life tore its path through her Dreams"
Marc Salvatori
: I AGREE..but I do not like the put down attitude on the other person's
: part..the argument could have been made without being so hostile. It
: makes me feel very disrespectful for musicians (whoever that may be) who
: I thought made such beautiful music. It is like getting to meet Mr. Roach
: and finding out he is a total jerk..After that I do not think I would
: view his music the same way any more..of course I do not know anything
: about him..just an hypothetical example...it does not help a musician
: when s/he comes across as a hostile person..S/He may have justifiable
: reasons to be angry..but little caution be exercised in directing the
: anger..
The person was venting(emotional), so I tuned him out. His behaviour is
hardly representative of successful, professional musicians. I agree that it
is difficult, as a listener, to seperate the person from the artist. Of
course it's easier when I focus on the music and could care less about the
celebrity. ;-)
: Ultimately it is the listener who is going to shell out the green bills.
You hit the hammer on the head! Like it or not, money is a fundamental element
that defines the relationship between a professional musician and her
listeners.
David Datta
: : David Datta (da...@cs.uwp.edu) wrote:
: : I AGREE......
That wasn't me, it was Deeptendu. (Just to set the record straight.)
Andrew C. Crowell
>
>The person was venting(emotional), so I tuned him out. His behaviour is
>hardly representative of successful, professional musicians. I agree that it
>is difficult, as a listener, to seperate the person from the artist. Of
>course it's easier when I focus on the music and could care less about the
>celebrity. ;-)
Oh...okay. Successful, professional musicians are supposed to be emotionless
robots. Ah. GEE...WHIZ! Makes sense to me, uh-huh. Nope, not supposed to
get mad about things like having the creative integrity of a musical work
(or a musical genre) sold down the river by the marketing department. Nope.
No, nothing to get mad about here, nopenopenope. Well, I think I'll just
skip-a-dee-doo-dah into the next room and grab a few of these nice pills
with the "V" on them and get professionally successful.
...which might work if I wasn't successful already...LISTEN BUB!
_My_ "venting" has a lot to do with professional music. It has to do with
professionals trying to take a musical form which is developing, growing,
and vital, and stuff it into a nice, hermetically-sealed pigeonhole, from
which it will probably not see any further developments of an exciting
and dynamic nature. I think I have a reason to be emotional, having seen
this process in action, and having dealt with an attitude by _lovers of
this same music_ that one should stick one's head in the sand and ignore
this process...and even play right along with it. Ignore what you like...
but when all of this "new age" music starts sounding increasingly the same,
is marketed in increasingly similar manners, acquires a bona-fide
demographic niche that the labels can tally things against...and it makes
an emergent form stagnate, you only have yourself to blame when you're
stuck with hundreds of CDs that sound the same.
Ten years ago, this was interesting music. _Fifteen_ years ago,
when I discovered this sort of music for myself, it was _damned_ interesting
and still without a label at the time. But now, it's really drying up.
Much of the horror here has been brought on by two things: 1) dealing
with the industry on its own terms for one project and 2) doing a show for
a community radio station which dipped into the "new age" genre, and doing
this weekly for over two years. I've discussed the former (unless you
"tuned that out"), but the latter just bore out the conclusions I was
making back in 1988. Most of what the station received was utterly _useless_
material. It _did_ all sound the same...passals of weeniezoids who'd
discovered MIDI and figured "Hey...I can use this to make really simple
music that I'm capable of hashing out and I'll call it "New Age", dress it
up with a psuedo-mystical visual, add some properly mysterioso gibberish
to the liner notes and _voila!_...I've got a k00l Newage CD!" Ugh. I can't
even begin to tell you how much of this wasted effort never saw airtime,
both by myself, and the other two DJs programming this music. To some,
having nice consistent music might be nice. To me, it's not a good thing.
Music is one of the "lively arts", not something you stick under glass
and admire from a distance...and when it stops being "lively", then like
most other living things, the patient is obviously sick.
Personally, I don't particularly care if you find my tone of rhetoric
in these posts abrasive, emotional, or whatever. If that's what you're
concentrating on, then you need a serious check on your reading skills.
What _is_ important here is what I have to say, in my opinion, and what
I am saying is that, from my observation, something is not going well
with this music. It is having its vitality siphoned-off by the music
industry, and to play along with that is a serious mistake. As someone who
is involved in making a living at music, this concerns the _hell_ out
of me...and it should concern other people who read this group, also.
Sitting there saying "oh...his message is unimportant...he is so _emotional_:
ergo, I will not listen" is a mistake. If you're so concerned about my
emotionality over the content, then perhaps it would behoove you to _find
out why_ I might be so emotional over this...and get the message _that_ way.
Deeptendu Majumder
I will not go through all your comments..i will make some comments which
should NOT be viewed as sarcastic or cynical in anyway...
I hate to say this, but..
job related stress could be a charcterization..Many of us working in
various fields of research go through these situations in one way or
other. It does not have to be newage music. We are all trying to be
unique..and if you have gone through the process of doing a dissertation
at UIUC then you know it better than anybody else..After a while it
gets very hard to be unique when tons and tons of garbage are being
produced by various wanna bees from various places...In a way that
brings out the best among us..in another way it makes the rest, psycho...
As far as my work is concerned..I am probably getting into the latter
category if I do not graduate fast..
: robots. Ah. GEE...WHIZ! Makes sense to me, uh-huh. Nope, not supposed to
: get mad about things like having the creative integrity of a musical work
: (or a musical genre) sold down the river by the marketing department. Nope.
yes I would get mad too..
: but when all of this "new age" music starts sounding increasingly the same,
: is marketed in increasingly similar manners, acquires a bona-fide
: demographic niche that the labels can tally things against...and it makes
: an emergent form stagnate, you only have yourself to blame when you're
: stuck with hundreds of CDs that sound the same.
: Ten years ago, this was interesting music. _Fifteen_ years ago,
: when I discovered this sort of music for myself, it was _damned_ interesting
: and still without a label at the time. But now, it's really drying up.
I agree..then try to be the Brian Eno of the next wave..make the next
leap.. find the key to the next door..somebody will do..somebody has
always done it..evolution is more common, but somebody always seem to bring
in a revolution..somehow..even when things look so saturated..it is
getting harder..too many people..too many minds..too many whims..too many
fancies..too much competition..
but we have to keep trying..
good luck..to all of us..
I really mean it..
d
Andrew C. Crowell
>
>I hate to say this, but..
>
>job related stress could be a charcterization..Many of us working in
>various fields of research go through these situations in one way or
>other. It does not have to be newage music. We are all trying to be
>unique..and if you have gone through the process of doing a dissertation
>at UIUC then you know it better than anybody else..After a while it
Nah...I don't see myself as being particularly stressed-out, unless you
consider the consequences of trying to work in a field where you're very
aware that the processes that market music are quite set against the
release of music that contains anything interesting or innovative, as it
would seem. I mean, seriously...Kitaro gets to put out a bazillion albums
that all sound the same, most of what my work gets tagged as ("Newage")
by the industry sounds like so much Muzak, and _interesting_ stuff takes
seemingly forever to hit the shores of the USA. Klaus Schulze _finally_
got domestic releases with his "Royal Festival Hall" and "Dome Event"
CDs...after how long? Richard Pinhas _finally_ got his work rereleased
and put out in the States...and some of it is nearly 20 years old at this
point! Meanwhile, you can get all the Yanni you want... Stressed? Nah...
'Sides, I don't do academia anymore...I just advise 'em on how to
make their machines work better. I have a nice cushy sound design/soundtrack
composition job with a software company. "So why are you worried about
making money, Mr. Crowell?" I'm not. I'm _far_ more concerned in this case
about seeing an emergent and normally-vibrant musical genre being pigeonholed
and marketed and codified until it turns into a static, non-living,
non-exciting...but safe and marketable...thing. Music is important to
me. Perhaps a tad more important than some people reading this group
would _like_ it to be to me, because this topic makes me angry and upset
and makes me say things that sometimes have four-letter words in them
because I feel as strongly as I do. Nothing deserves to sit under a bell
jar...least of all, music.
>gets very hard to be unique when tons and tons of garbage are being
>produced by various wanna bees from various places...In a way that
>brings out the best among us..in another way it makes the rest, psycho...
>As far as my work is concerned..I am probably getting into the latter
>category if I do not graduate fast..
One reason I left academia, in fact...at the urging of a couple of very
well-meaning and ultimately, correct, professors. Trying to create beauty
when all around you is music that sounds like "The Mating Dance of the
Hewlett-Packard Calculators" is a real pain in the royal behind. And the
majority of professor-types _do not_ appreciate music that puts audiences
to sleep because it was _intended_ to...:)
>
>: Ten years ago, this was interesting music. _Fifteen_ years ago,
>: when I discovered this sort of music for myself, it was _damned_ interesting
>: and still without a label at the time. But now, it's really drying up.
>
>I agree..then try to be the Brian Eno of the next wave..make the next
>leap.. find the key to the next door..somebody will do..somebody has
>always done it..evolution is more common, but somebody always seem to bring
>in a revolution..somehow..even when things look so saturated..it is
>getting harder..too many people..too many minds..too many whims..too many
>fancies..too much competition..
>
>but we have to keep trying..
Well, at least the company pays for the toys for me to keep trying. And _I
will_ keep trying...irrespective of how many people think I should go sit
on a mountaintop repeating "boom-shaka-laka-laka" for five years so I can
apprehend the "inner truth" of a m9 chord.
Deeptendu Majumder
: release of music that contains anything interesting or innovative, as it
: would seem. I mean, seriously...Kitaro gets to put out a bazillion albums
: that all sound the same, most of what my work gets tagged as ("Newage")
: by the industry sounds like so much Muzak, and _interesting_ stuff takes
: seemingly forever to hit the shores of the USA. Klaus Schulze _finally_
: got domestic releases with his "Royal Festival Hall" and "Dome Event"
: CDs...after how long? Richard Pinhas _finally_ got his work rereleased
: and put out in the States...and some of it is nearly 20 years old at this
: point! Meanwhile, you can get all the Yanni you want... Stressed? Nah...
I think most of us will agree to that...I think the problem is the market
that drives the record label and companies. I do not know anybody at
Cunieform, people who released Pinhas's stuff here, but knowing a little
bit about Wayside records I would probably guess it is a small outfit
compared to Virgin or Realworld or whatever. It is probably not easy
for small labels like that to reach the level of circulation and frequency
of new releases of bigger companies unless the public is willing to
spend money. I am pretty sure most people out there would prefer Yanni
over Pinhas even though artistically the latter is more adventurous.
Many of my friends ridicule me when they hear Schulze's Cyborg or Eno's
Thursday Afternoon..You paid $16 for this thing!!!
The situation you are describing has always been the case with people
who are trying to stretch the envelope..in any field..people with
money are not too comfortable in putting the money behind these folks and
the rest is predictable. No audience..no sale..no money..no backing..
no release..no audience...vicious cycle probably..
I wonder at times why places like NMDS disappeared..how long will Deep
Listening foundation survive..Probably it was a good move for them to
form a consortium kind of deal to keep that streak of adventure in
music alive..
: me. Perhaps a tad more important than some people reading this group
: would _like_ it to be to me, because this topic makes me angry and upset
: and makes me say things that sometimes have four-letter words in them
: because I feel as strongly as I do. Nothing deserves to sit under a bell
: jar...least of all, music.
Quite understandable...problem is these people are the majority and
they are ones who will spend the money..and often people who really
care do not have the money..They like me go around buying used records
and making tapes from friends..That does not help folks like you and
other musicians (Mark) who read this group.
: majority of professor-types _do not_ appreciate music that puts audiences
: to sleep because it was _intended_ to...:)
I have felt many times that real work goes on outside academia..:-) But
I need that slip of paper to throw my weight around..
d
Dan Tarradellas
I found Constance Demby's Novus Magnificat so boring I wanted to pull my teeth out !
yuk !
pttt!
Deeptendu Majumder
: I found Constance Demby's Novus Magnificat so boring I wanted to pull my teeth out !
if you ask me..I would say it is classic of the genre :-). When I first heard
it 1987 I was very impressed even though I do not hear it much anymore.
d
Sam Ghandchi
: I found Constance Demby's Novus Magnificat so boring I wanted to pull my teeth out !
: yuk !
: pttt!
I do not know who had recommended that album to you. But I know that I
would not have recommended it to you until you were searching for
something like that. We all change our states of minds from time
to time and at each state, we are looking for different types
of music, just as musicians create different types of music at
different periods of their life experience. Some kinds of music
we may never be able to relate to. For example, from what I have
heard from a number of astute new age music listeners, I believe John Adams'
Light over Water must be a great work. But I have never been able to
relate to it. I am comfortable to acknowlege this thing. Also, there are some
works that I think are masterpieces, but I have not been in the mood
(or state of mind or whatever psychologists may call it) to listen to them. From
the little interaction that we have had on the net, I would
have recommended the following to you and perhaps some of them
would actually be of interest to you:
Richard Burmer- MOSAIC
Dietez Schutz-Voyage
Brian Eno-Thursday Afternoon
Roger Eno-Between Tides
George Wallace-Communion
John Schmoelling-Wuivend Riet
Michael Stearns-Ancient Leaves
Jerry Goodman-Ariel
Kevin Braheny-Galaxies
Ian Tescee-IO
Monjure-Message from Arcturus(maybe)(But this is one of my favorites)
Harold Budd-White Arcade
Emerlad Web-Valley of the Birds
- Sam
P. Thoma
>Klaus Schulze _finally_
>got domestic releases with his "Royal Festival Hall" and "Dome Event"
>CDs...
What.... DOMESTIC? I should be very interested to know what is domestic in
_The_Dome_event_. Domestic? What does it means? That it is commercial?
The beginning is not commercial at all, the 6 first minutes are a kind
of sampling collage which seems experimental, the end is a Mimimoog impro
which is one of the best he made,... And bethwwen the beginning and
the end, it is one of the best pieces he has made so far....
" Long before there was something called meaning, there was something called life ". - Rig Veda
Marc Salvatori
: I think most of us will agree to that...I think the problem is the market
: that drives the record label and companies.
: The situation you are describing has always been the case with people
: who are trying to stretch the envelope..in any field..people with
: money are not too comfortable in putting the money behind these folks and
: the rest is predictable. No audience..no sale..no money..no backing..
: no release..no audience...vicious cycle probably..
I predict the market vehicle is about to expand at the expense of well-heeled,
comfortable labels. One day listeners will be able to download, vie Internet
for example, songs to a minidisc for a fee; thus leaving the "middle-man
labels" out. Listeners can acquire samples for free, and buy in to full tracks
for a fee. The "middle-man" is about to expand or go away altogether. The
result will be a wider array of expressions to choose from!
Andrew C. Crowell
>
>>Klaus Schulze _finally_
>>got domestic releases with his "Royal Festival Hall" and "Dome Event"
>>CDs...
>
>What.... DOMESTIC? I should be very interested to know what is domestic in
>_The_Dome_event_. Domestic? What does it means? That it is commercial?
>The beginning is not commercial at all, the 6 first minutes are a kind
>of sampling collage which seems experimental, the end is a Mimimoog impro
>which is one of the best he made,... And bethwwen the beginning and
>the end, it is one of the best pieces he has made so far....
>
What it means is that Klaus Schulze finally got a release out in the US
market, which those of us on this side of the Atlantic consider the "domestic"
market. Calm down.
DACC.
Andrew C. Crowell
>Deeptendu Majumder (dips@aurora) wrote:
>
>: The situation you are describing has always been the case with people
>: who are trying to stretch the envelope..in any field..people with
>: money are not too comfortable in putting the money behind these folks and
>: the rest is predictable. No audience..no sale..no money..no backing..
>: no release..no audience...vicious cycle probably..
>
>I predict the market vehicle is about to expand at the expense of well-heeled,
>comfortable labels. One day listeners will be able to download, vie Internet
>for example, songs to a minidisc for a fee; thus leaving the "middle-man
>labels" out. Listeners can acquire samples for free, and buy in to full tracks
>for a fee. The "middle-man" is about to expand or go away altogether. The
>result will be a wider array of expressions to choose from!
I _really_ don't think so. If the majors would've wanted this sort of thing,
we would've had it years ago. The technology exists and has existed to do
this sort of thing. In fact, something like it has existed in the guise of
those "personalized tape" kiosk setups you see in some retail outlets or
which you can mailorder custom tapes from. _However_, the industry doesn't
like those, and it has very good reasons not to.
See, if you cut out the "middleman", you're actually cutting out
some of what the labels themselves do, which enables them to claim continued
reasons for markup on their product. Also, some of the labels have reasons
for using "middlemen", as those middlemen are also part of the process that
allows the labels to track sales, and to chart their material via (in the
case of distributor-reported sales) _Cashbox_ (_Billboard_ is primarily
based on airplay, not as much on sales as _Cashbox_). The problem here is
that there's also been a running payola scam between distributors and the
labels inasmuch as the labels' promo departments can "suggest" that certain
releases be reported as doing higher-than-actual sales levels, and those
_Cashbox_ reporters get cheap "free product" that they can resell to their
company for cash. Normally, "promo" items like that are "cuts", in other
words, they have a cut or hole thru their catalog number or barcoding,
but the "free product" that invariably gets sent are "cleans"...items which
haven't been altered. When you consider that a good chart placement for a
product, even one which isn't deserving of it, guarantees sales, you begin
to see why the majors aren't going to give up their distribution for some
sort of electronic scheme...in fact, they have every reason to fight it.
Seriously. What have the majors been whooping about lately? Used
CD sales. Why? Well, they don't get any more profit off of them...off of
something they already sold and got profit off of once already. They claim
they're hurting because of these sales. I claim this is another ruse like
the "home taping" scam, which was eventually shot down when studies showed
that in a lot of cases, the ability to freely tape material and have a home
copy actually _boosted_ sales, because people heard the material on a
release, and wanted the actual product. When you come down to it, the majors
are more likely to make a scheme involving e-distribution at the grassroots
level _illegal_, rather than support or develop it.
Oh, and don't get so optimistic about the mini-disc, either. When
it was originally conceived, Sony wanted to use an algorithm for compression
that would've given same-as-CD fidelity for the format. Who shot it down?
The majors...can't have a good-as-CD recordable consumer medium, 'member...
or have we forgotten the ballyhoo over SCMS on DAT and some of the even
more boneheaded copy-management (manglement?) schemes that the majors
proposed. Pisses me off, as if I want DATs that I can copy DAT->DAT with
in digital at 44.1 kHz, I have to buy an expensive pro-level machine, or
something else that can strip-out SCMS bits...all because some bonehead
in an Armani suit wants another fur-lined sink for his executive washroom
or some such.
Deeptendu Majumder
: CD sales. Why? Well, they don't get any more profit off of them...off of
: something they already sold and got profit off of once already. They claim
: they're hurting because of these sales. I claim this is another ruse like
: the "home taping" scam, which was eventually shot down when studies showed
: that in a lot of cases, the ability to freely tape material and have a home
: copy actually _boosted_ sales, because people heard the material on a
I can relate to that..Many a times I have liked the music enough to get
an original copy..An original copy gives me that *possessing a good thing*
feeling which I cannot get from a copy :-)
The other night I was watchnig McNews on late night TV and they were
talking about this used CD thing. It really sucks..I usually buy used CDs
at small stores which are not retailers like Towers or Turtle or whatevr.
But this whole idea irritates me so much. If they plan to stop selling
used CD (which IMHO will never happen) I will stop buying whatever new
CDs I do buy these days..They just never seem to be happy with their
profit..more and more and more..As I have said in the past, at times I really
wonder how much profit is made out of people buying full priced CDs without
having much clue about the music and then end up hating it like hell.
d
Andrew C. Crowell
>
>The other night I was watchnig McNews on late night TV and they were
>talking about this used CD thing. It really sucks..I usually buy used CDs
>at small stores which are not retailers like Towers or Turtle or whatevr.
>But this whole idea irritates me so much. If they plan to stop selling
>used CD (which IMHO will never happen) I will stop buying whatever new
>CDs I do buy these days..They just never seem to be happy with their
>profit..more and more and more..As I have said in the past, at times I really
>wonder how much profit is made out of people buying full priced CDs without
>having much clue about the music and then end up hating it like hell.
Or another good example of how the "used CD's are killing music" argument
is fuller of holes than prime Swiss cheese: my SO picked up a disc by
The Tear Garden, used, natch, called "Tired Eyes Slowly Burning". Well,
he dug this so much that he went out and bought the tape of the next
album, then later replaced that with a CD, then got the CD of their third
album, and is now chasing down CDs by The Legendary Pink Dots, which is
the other project of Tear Garden frontman Edward Ka-Spel. Only the first
CD in that chain was used...the rest, the industry made its full fees on...
I really wonder how often this sort of thing happens...'course, you'll never
catch an industry spokesperson talking about _this_ phenomena...
Nabeel R Ibrahim
>Deeptendu...@cad.gatech.edu writes:
>>The other night I was watchnig McNews on late night TV and they were
>>talking about this used CD thing. It really sucks..I usually buy used CDs
>Or another good example of how the "used CD's are killing music" argument
>is fuller of holes than prime Swiss cheese:
I was at a local music store that has quite a few used cds and they had
a sign up that offered a $2 discount if you filled out a survey.
I went to fill out the survey and found that it was started
to demonstrate to the record companies that people buying used
cds actually *helps* the companies. Anyway, I started talking
with one of the guys who works there and he said that one of
the record companies refused to ship the new Garth Brooks cd to
this store because it sold used cds!!! I question the legality of
what the record company did...(not that I care about getting
the new Garth Brooks cd:-) ).
If the record companies continue to do this, I think it would be
great for everyone to buy DAT machines and make copies of their
friends cds. hahaha...that would really piss off the record companies...
nabeel
P****************----Palestinian Statehood Now!----*************************
E Nabeel Ibrahim | You know you're getting older when *
A ibr...@en.ecn.purdue.edu | you actually consider buying one *
C Electrical Engineering, Senior | of those record sets that "isn't *
E Purdue University | available in stores." *
!*************** Does "anal retentive" have a hyphen? *******************
Deeptendu Majumder
: the record companies refused to ship the new Garth Brooks cd to
: this store because it sold used cds!!! I question the legality of
Yeah that news program I mentioned was also talking about this and
they showed all these pissed off people making burgers out of Garth
Brook's CDs over a grill..I am not kidding..:-) and I think I heard
Brook's label/distributor decided to reverse their decision.
d
Marc Salvatori
: I _really_ don't think so. If the majors would've wanted this sort of thing,
: we would've had it years ago. The technology exists and has existed to do
: this sort of thing. In fact, something like it has existed in the guise of
: those "personalized tape" kiosk setups you see in some retail outlets or
: which you can mailorder custom tapes from. _However_, the industry doesn't
: like those, and it has very good reasons not to.
I hear you, but tapes are less "functional" than discs. Just as discs are
better suited to computers, so too for music. Already they are bridging the
two technologies. IMHO for the forseeable future, discs will be the
storage medium of choice. Mail order is okay, but it is not as "open" as
the airwaves(not that I am claiming the airwaves are as open as they can be!),
but at least I can sample first before I commit a single dollar. How many
disc stores have you seen that offer a listening room? In the greater Seattle
area there is only one(a chain) called Silver Platters; and mind you, it's a
limited selection! The music industry has a long way to go before it can
claim that it fully serves its customers. In spite of this pathetic arena,
there are a few businesses that aim to please their customers. Let's see
which ones succeed!
: See, if you cut out the "middleman", you're actually cutting out
: some of what the labels themselves do, which enables them to claim continued
: reasons for markup on their product. Also, some of the labels have reasons
: for using "middlemen", as those middlemen are also part of the process that
: allows the labels to track sales, and to chart their material via (in the
: case of distributor-reported sales) _Cashbox_ (_Billboard_ is primarily
: based on airplay, not as much on sales as _Cashbox_).
You cut out the middle man, and you cut out non-value-added waste to the
customer. With a medium(such as Internet) that is more "open" than the
airwaves, more artists can get exposure. Listeners won't need a superficial
chart to tell them what to buy. As they sample, they can let their "ears"
make the decisions.
: Seriously. What have the majors been whooping about lately? Used
: CD sales. Why? Well, they don't get any more profit off of them...off of
: something they already sold and got profit off of once already. They claim
: they're hurting because of these sales. I claim this is another ruse like
: the "home taping" scam, which was eventually shot down when studies showed
: that in a lot of cases, the ability to freely tape material and have a home
: copy actually _boosted_ sales, because people heard the material on a
: release, and wanted the actual product. When you come down to it, the majors
: are more likely to make a scheme involving e-distribution at the grassroots
: level _illegal_, rather than support or develop it.
I can't agree with you more about their resistance to giving the listener
more control over the market. But, as you point out, the grassroots eventually
sees its way. Cassettes came through quite profitably. And 44KHz discs, be
they minidiscs eventually or something else, will find a market. Either
these companies jump on board, or the grassroots will leave them behind. You
can't form market trends; you can only capitolize on them. Sony found out
with the superior Beta tape; IBM found out with the micro-channel.
: Oh, and don't get so optimistic about the mini-disc, either. When
: it was originally conceived, Sony wanted to use an algorithm for compression
: that would've given same-as-CD fidelity for the format. Who shot it down?
: The majors...can't have a good-as-CD recordable consumer medium, 'member...
: or have we forgotten the ballyhoo over SCMS on DAT and some of the even
: more boneheaded copy-management (manglement?) schemes that the majors
: proposed.
You're right! It won't be easy for us to get the service that we want. But
some organization out there is going to want our business and will be willing
to address our needs. Any doubts that we will be all too willing to give
such an organization our business?
Andrew C. Crowell
>Andrew C. Crowell (da...@cmp-rt.music.uiuc.edu) wrote:
>
>: I _really_ don't think so. If the majors would've wanted this sort of thing,
>: we would've had it years ago. The technology exists and has existed to do
>: this sort of thing. In fact, something like it has existed in the guise of
>: those "personalized tape" kiosk setups you see in some retail outlets or
>: which you can mailorder custom tapes from. _However_, the industry doesn't
>: like those, and it has very good reasons not to.
>
>I hear you, but tapes are less "functional" than discs. Just as discs are
>better suited to computers, so too for music. Already they are bridging the
>two technologies. IMHO for the forseeable future, discs will be the
>storage medium of choice. Mail order is okay, but it is not as "open" as
>the airwaves(not that I am claiming the airwaves are as open as they can be!),
>but at least I can sample first before I commit a single dollar. How many
>disc stores have you seen that offer a listening room? In the greater Seattle
>area there is only one(a chain) called Silver Platters; and mind you, it's a
>limited selection! The music industry has a long way to go before it can
>claim that it fully serves its customers. In spite of this pathetic arena,
>there are a few businesses that aim to please their customers. Let's see
>which ones succeed!
True...but until we can get a user-recordable disc format that's not been
industry-crippled or massively overpriced due to nebulous reasoning, we're
stuck with tape formats as the best possible storage and recording medium.
DAT is still a lot better than the industry-proctored DCC or MD formats,
which really don't offer audio quality that's too far above a high-quality
cassette with Dolby C or dbx II NR. And DAT does have random access
capabilities, albeit slower than those two formats. But DAT, if you can
get the right machine (one with AES/EBU ports), will give you a proper
44.1 kHz digital->digital copy capability. DCC and MD still have some sort
of copy management scheme.
It's nice, also, to think that some smaller concerns might force
the industry to its knees, wrenching from them pleas of humble forgiveness
for being such slugs. But let's face it: you and I (and the vast majority
of people reading this newsgroup) do not represent the primary music
consumer...nor will we ever. We are what's known as a "speciality niche".
The big, big money is coming from a host of unwashed and unconcerned masses
who'd _much_ rather have Billy Ray Cyrus and Dr. Dre over Brian Eno or
Jean-Michel Jarre. Face it...as long as you have mass-produced product for
a majority who've been told that "this is what you want!", you're not going
to see changes in the industry. The best possible solution (not a solution,
really) is to stay as informed as possible as to what the music industry
is actually up to (because what they do affects what we get to listen to,
or how we listen to it), and try and avoid those players in the game who
suck up to the industry, whether that sucking-up is to create music that's
undeniably mediocre or to be an industry robot (like Garth Brooks was
being in the used CD debate).
>
>You cut out the middle man, and you cut out non-value-added waste to the
>customer. With a medium(such as Internet) that is more "open" than the
>airwaves, more artists can get exposure. Listeners won't need a superficial
>chart to tell them what to buy. As they sample, they can let their "ears"
>make the decisions.
But it's the industry's "non-value-added waste" mechanism, remember? They
have to have some methods to justify marking up a product which costs about
$2 _max_ to manufacture. And as long as they have this big machine to jack
the price of a CD up about 400% before it hits the retailer (who punches
that price even more!...check out how much a CD gets marked up sometime...
it's revolting!) and to pour that money right back in their pockets while
maintaining chart positioning control, that mechanism's going to stay
right in place. And the Internet is _not_ more open than the airwaves; check
the disparity between the percentages of those of us who have full net
access, and the average Joe Shmoe who can tune in a radio to his local
schlock 'n' roll or "sanitized-for-your-protection" country station. It's
a pretty big gap, and not one which is likely to change all that much for
a long while.
>
>I can't agree with you more about their resistance to giving the listener
>more control over the market. But, as you point out, the grassroots eventually
>sees its way. Cassettes came through quite profitably. And 44KHz discs, be
>they minidiscs eventually or something else, will find a market. Either
>these companies jump on board, or the grassroots will leave them behind. You
>can't form market trends; you can only capitolize on them. Sony found out
>with the superior Beta tape; IBM found out with the micro-channel.
Hmmm...those aren't good examples, as those are things which wound up losing
money for those companies due to their perceived inadequacies with the
consumer. The average consumer doesn't perceive any inadequacies with
the music industry, and as long as you have that situation, you're not going
to see any grassroots changes. Also, cassettes were not "grassroots"; that
was a major push on the part of Philips to get a replacement of sorts for
reel-to-reel tape, and it was over a long period of time that the cassette
saw sufficient improvement to become a usable format that could compete
in audio quality with the LP. About the only recordable disc format I can
see being a suitable equivalent to present industry-grade formats is CD-R...
but CD-R player/recorders aren't being introduced into the consumer market
in the USA. Why? The industry, again. They'll let you buy a "crippled"
format like DCC or MD, but not a real, bona-fide CD burner. You can get
them, sure...but at a major markup and only if you're willing to hunt thru
the pro audio outlets; your average stereo component place won't have 'em.
After all, these _have_ to be able to burn a Red Book format CD-R, without
any goofy copy management schemes or other profit-managing wackiness, so
you _of course_ can't let them loose on the _evil_ public who'll, naturally,
go around pirating every CD in sight! The industry'll _never seel another
CD_...NOT!!!
>
>: Oh, and don't get so optimistic about the mini-disc, either. When
>: it was originally conceived, Sony wanted to use an algorithm for compression
>: that would've given same-as-CD fidelity for the format. Who shot it down?
>: The majors...can't have a good-as-CD recordable consumer medium, 'member...
>: or have we forgotten the ballyhoo over SCMS on DAT and some of the even
>: more boneheaded copy-management (manglement?) schemes that the majors
>: proposed.
>
>You're right! It won't be easy for us to get the service that we want. But
>some organization out there is going to want our business and will be willing
>to address our needs. Any doubts that we will be all too willing to give
>such an organization our business?
Just doubts that such an organization wouldn't be run out of business by
industry threats, coersion, or rumormongering. After all, that's one helluva
"them" for an "us" to go up against. Smartest thing is to stay as informed
as possible about what the industry does to maintain its control, and try
to work around that as much as you're able.
John Fereira
>Lon Lowen Jr. (lll...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: Sam, I think you have created a very nice piece of work. You obviously put
>: a lot of research into that essay, however, I really think you should you
>: talk a little more about how most "new age" musicians feel about the title
>: "new age".
>
>: Country musicians don't complain about being labeled country musicians.
>: Jazz musicians don't complain about being labeled jazz musicians.
>
>: New Age musicians complain about about being labeled new age musicians.
>: Why?
>
>: I think you should do some research on this.
>: --
>
>Lon,
>
>I do not know the reason for every single one of the people who
>do not like to be called new age, but I remeber some of the issues
>below:
[detailed analysis of new age music deleted]
A couple of years ago, someone asked "how can you tell if it's newage
music". I, only partially tongue in cheek responded, "if the artist
complains that they don't want their music labeled as new age, then it
probably is".
I really don't care if you call it new age music, or what specifically
new age music is. Occasionally, someone will ask "what is jazz?" or "what
is blues?", but for new age music the question seems to pop up once a week
here. Why is that?
John
Chuck Anderson
>The Tear Garden, used, natch, called "Tired Eyes Slowly Burning". Well,
>he dug this so much that he went out and bought the tape of the next
>album, then later replaced that with a CD, then got the CD of their third
>album, and is now chasing down CDs by The Legendary Pink Dots, which is
>the other project of Tear Garden frontman Edward Ka-Spel. Only the first
>CD in that chain was used...the rest, the industry made its full fees on...
The industry made it's full fees on the used CD, too, when it was
originally sold.
--
*************************************************************************
Chuck Anderson uucp : uunet!nyx!canderso
Boulder, CO internet: cand...@nyx.cs.du.edu
*************************************************************************
Sam Ghandchi
: A couple of years ago, someone asked "how can you tell if it's newage
: music". I, only partially tongue in cheek responded, "if the artist
: complains that they don't want their music labeled as new age, then it
: probably is".
: I really don't care if you call it new age music, or what specifically
: new age music is. Occasionally, someone will ask "what is jazz?" or "what
: is blues?", but for new age music the question seems to pop up once a week
: here. Why is that?
: John
Thank you for your note. Very good question. In fact,
you could broaden your question and ask: Why is there a lot of
emotional flaming" on the question of "What is new age music?" in
comparison to a similar question such as "What is country music?"
I would respond that this is normal for a new endeavor, whether it is
in music or any other sphere of life, because new age music is a very
living thing that is still in the process of being born. There have
been periods of history when questions in other areas of human life
were so immediate that people were actually burnt in the flames for
the answer they gave to those questions. Labels such as materialist
or idealist would cause all kinds of flames. Nowadays it is just
virtual (electronic) flames which we are witnessing and it is not as
bad, or is it?
The real practitioners of new age music, who try to create something
really new are daily ridiculed and victimized by academic and
business authorities as "flaky", whenever they do not line up with
standard guidelines that their opponents expect them to comply
with. Sometimes, some practitioners themselves may repeat what
their abusers have said to them to free themselves of the labels
levied against them. But the reality is that their musical effort itself
is challenging the institutional powers that are not going to give up
their authority even if a different name is used for the music of
these artists. For these authorities, the dispute is not just an issue of
truth and aesthetics. The bottom-line is power and money.
Some of the labels. etc are now trying to tame this monster and use
the term new age as long as it complies with their standards. But I would not
be surprised if they change their approach later. I
remember one new age musician who used to produce works that were
finally accepted by labels, and they even recommended to others to
make works like "that guy". Suddenly that musician himself made a
work which was "way-out-of-line". Suddenly these same labels
were saying that "pif he has become a real flake in this last one!!!"
and he couldn't find a publisher for that one.
Most new age musicians have faced this dismissal at some point in
their career when they were labeled "flaky" because of trying to
create a new sound. MOST OF NEW AGE MUSIC LISTENERS HAVE
BEEN LABELED AS "FLAKY" BY SOMEONE AROUND THEM FOR
LISTENING TO SUCH WEIRD SOUNDS. I personally do not condemn
many famous new age musicians for avoiding these discussions in
the press. They are actually creating the new age music, they do not
need to talk about it. They are like Galileo whose foot was writing
something and his mouth was saying something else.
Some may think that it is because of association with new age movement that this name-calling is happening, but I am sure
that is not the case. There are scientists such as Willis Harman who
specifically call themselves, new age, and nobody calls them flaky.
I think the books of such authors are not really as much of a threat
to any business or academic interests yet, whereas this music is
really growing and it can be damaging to many interests.
Even if these new music folks condemn all traits of new age and even
if they dissociate themselves from anything called new age and if
they wipe out the word new age from their vocabulary, those bullies
will still call them "flaky". It is like bullies who can use hurtful
humor to put down a young kid. One should stand up to it and not to
become an abuser him/herself to do the same hurt to someone else
by calling them abusive terms like "flake" because of liking a
different tune, etc no matter how much one is against any specific
cult or line of thought.
The similar kind of put-down was used against rock music when
they were called druggy etc at the beginning. Radio stations did not
play their music.... But the difference is that new age seems to be a
bigger threat to many types of institutions (related to music+), from
classical to rock. Many people in academia and business feel
threatened. Imagine if tomorrow, the world decided to speak
Chinese. All the literary authorities of English language, people who
have power because of the dominance of this language, etc would
be out-of-business.
This reality puts pressure on the musician and music listener of this
new sound and this is why we have all these flames. I believe the
more our new age musicians go to their roots in the world and create
a symbiotic relation with the universe, the more powerful will be
their music, enriched with love and peace, which can overcome many
of these obstacles. It takes more efforts than they already have
done, but I think the musicians who have dared to go this far and
challenge flat-Earth beliefs, can still go farther. I do not necessarily
agree with the philosophical ideas of IASOS, but I think he is one
good example of a musician who has dared to take such a journey all
by himself.
- Sam Ghandchi
Erik Johnson
>>Klaus Schulze _finally_
>>got domestic releases with his "Royal Festival Hall" and "Dome Event"
>>CDs...
>
>What.... DOMESTIC? I should be very interested to know what is domestic in
>_The_Dome_event_. Domestic? What does it means? That it is commercial?
You're apparently replying to an America-centric poster. In this context,
"domestic" means "released by an American distributor". Although I haven't
heard "Dome Event", I'd be *very* surprised to see any Klaus Schulze work
described as "commercial".
_______________________________________________________________________________
Erik N. Johnson Don't believe any return address rumors. The
KLA Instruments Corp. one and only True Address is e_jo...@kla.com.
(408) 456-6323
If Casper is a Friendly Ghost, what happened to Casper the Friendly Dead Kid?
GECS d- -p+ c+ l u+ e- m++--* s++/+ h+ f+ !g(+) w+ t@ r+ y+
Marc Salvatori
: John Fereira (jo...@hpcc01.corp.hp.com) wrote:
: : I really don't care if you call it new age music, or what specifically
: : new age music is. Occasionally, someone will ask "what is jazz?" or "what
: : is blues?", but for new age music the question seems to pop up once a week
: : here. Why is that?
<text omitted>
: Even if these new music folks condemn all traits of new age and even
: if they dissociate themselves from anything called new age and if
: they wipe out the word new age from their vocabulary, those bullies
: will still call them "flaky". It is like bullies who can use hurtful
: humor to put down a young kid. One should stand up to it and not to
: become an abuser him/herself to do the same hurt to someone else
: by calling them abusive terms like "flake" because of liking a
: different tune, etc no matter how much one is against any specific
: cult or line of thought.
John sums it up well for me. "I don't care" about what others like as much
as I care about what *I* like; I welcome other peoples perceptions and
and opinions, but I reserve the right to choose for myself. And I agree, Sam,
that it is best to "stand up" and be a free thinker. I crave diverse music as
much as I do a nutritionally balanced meal; the alternative is boring.
Marc Salvatori
: It's nice, also, to think that some smaller concerns might force
: the industry to its knees, wrenching from them pleas of humble forgiveness
: for being such slugs. But let's face it: you and I (and the vast majority
: of people reading this newsgroup) do not represent the primary music
: consumer...nor will we ever. We are what's known as a "speciality niche".
: The big, big money is coming from a host of unwashed and unconcerned masses
: who'd _much_ rather have Billy Ray Cyrus and Dr. Dre over Brian Eno or
: Jean-Michel Jarre. Face it...as long as you have mass-produced product for
: a majority who've been told that "this is what you want!", you're not going
: to see changes in the industry.
True! Our music standards are probably higher than the majority which is
likely to be less informed, but no less inclined to lower the costs of
enjoying music(I wish I could, but notice I didn't say "good" music). You are
right that education is a major factor that determines expectations of music
consumers. Besides the subjective factor of its entertainment value, another
factor is cost; not just in terms of dollars, but also in terms of
functionality and convenience. People who fixate on the dollar alone don't
understand that the value of the CD to the average listener was higher than an
LP in spite of the price hike because it is more portable, functional, and
plain easier to work with; similar reasons applied when the LP superseded the
78 records, and when the 78's replaced cylinders. You're right to say that the
consumer has no control over what is introduced to the market; but when
something more desireable comes along, goodbye to the status quo!
: The best possible solution (not a solution,
: really) is to stay as informed as possible as to what the music industry
: is actually up to (because what they do affects what we get to listen to,
: or how we listen to it), and try and avoid those players in the game who
: suck up to the industry, whether that sucking-up is to create music that's
: undeniably mediocre or to be an industry robot (like Garth Brooks was
: being in the used CD debate).
True, true! Consumer awareness keeps the monopolizers at bay.
: But it's the industry's "non-value-added waste" mechanism, remember? They
: have to have some methods to justify marking up a product which costs about
: $2 _max_ to manufacture.
They don't have to have an explanation for their margins. They get what they
can get away with depending on the level of competition.
: And as long as they have this big machine to jack
: the price of a CD up about 400% before it hits the retailer (who punches
: that price even more!...check out how much a CD gets marked up sometime...
: it's revolting!) and to pour that money right back in their pockets while
: maintaining chart positioning control, that mechanism's going to stay
: right in place.
Like I said before, someone who doesn't give a rip about bruised
feelings(egos) is going to come along some day and "rock the boat." If the
profit margins get high, competition will rise to the occasion.
: And the Internet is _not_ more open than the airwaves; check
: the disparity between the percentages of those of us who have full net
: access, and the average Joe Shmoe who can tune in a radio to his local
: schlock 'n' roll or "sanitized-for-your-protection" country station. It's
: a pretty big gap, and not one which is likely to change all that much for
: a long while.
I don't wish to nit pick here. The point I wanted to make was that small-time
"me" has a better chance of getting my ideas to a wide array of people
via the likes of Internet than on such media as radio, T.V., or newsprint.
: The average consumer doesn't perceive any inadequacies with
: the music industry, and as long as you have that situation, you're not going
: to see any grassroots changes.
True today. You're right; perception makes a difference, no matter how
uninformed.
: >You're right! It won't be easy for us to get the service that we want. But
: >some organization out there is going to want our business and will be willing
: >to address our needs. Any doubts that we will be all too willing to give
: >such an organization our business?
: Just doubts that such an organization wouldn't be run out of business by
: industry threats, coersion, or rumormongering. After all, that's one helluva
: "them" for an "us" to go up against.
With such cliches as "Saying isn't showing" and "Talk is cheap" in mind, all it
takes is a single demonstration of a non-proprietary product. After that,
misinformation is recognized for what it is. All it takes is a market with a
high enough profit margin, and someone who welcomes the competition.
: Smartest thing is to stay as informed
: as possible about what the industry does to maintain its control, and try
: to work around that as much as you're able.
I'll second that!
Andrew Wing
Perhaps we should rename the group:
rec.music.newage.for.want.of.a.better.name :-) or
rec.music.newage.$500.prize.for.a.better.name ;-)
--
Andy Wing Lead Applications Analyst - Temple University Computer Services
v20...@vm.temple.edu v20...@templevm.bitnet@pucc.princeton.edu
agw...@astro.ocis.temple.edu