Defining Good Music vs Bad Music?
Jarl Sigurd
the net, I've had quite a few people comment on how
bad they thought my music was. Now I'm curious just
as to how people go about defining "good music" as
opposed to "bad music". Is good music
(a)music that is entertaining and enjoyable to listen to.
(b)music that is difficult to play and thus cannot be
performed by just anyone
(c)music that is performed in accordance to the
principles that are people are taught when they
receive musical instruction from a teacher or school.
(d)music that sounds the similar to the music they are
accustomed to hearing on the radio and TV
In this sense one might compare music with language.
If somebody speaks "Good English" do they can
(a)speak English in a way that is clear and easy to understand
(b)speak English in a way that is complex and uses a lot of
big words and complex sentence constructions
(c)speak the "King's English" in the grammatical way
that is taught in schools.
(d)Speak English in the way it is spoken on Radio and
Television
Jarl Sigurd
to listen to music that may be good or bad depending on
how you define good and bad: http://www.mp3.com/JarlSigurd
Samuel Vriezen
all the time. Good music is music that doesn't disappoint me when I
choose to spend time with it.
Your points look like polemical non-issues to me. These categories
also look a bit like Borges' Chinese animal encyclopedia. 'music that
sounds like flies from a great distance', etc.
--
Samuel
(...) I have a theory
About masterpieces, how to make them
At very little expense, and they're every
Bit as good as the others. (...)
- John Ashbery, 'Introduction'
evan johnson
and a convincing means of avoiding that drama. In particular, it has
a palpable air of trying to be something it's not, and failing
continuously.
evan
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>Is good music
>> (a)music that is entertaining and enjoyable to listen to.
>
>yes
But not exclusively. Unless you stretch 'entertaining' to mean 'it
keeps the attention going', it might not always be the most applicable
word. I wouldn't make a point of disagreeing to someone claiming that
Machaut's Mass, Webern's 'Bagatellen', Reich's 'Drumming' or Boulez'
2nd sonata are 'entertaining', but I probably wouldn't use that word
myself.
orangie
says...
composer, but Jarl shows us the nature of the beast.
mike
Sonarrat Citalis
<623x6.14990$TW.6...@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>:
Buddy, you can argue all you like, but your music has absolutely
nothing to recommend it.
--
-Jeff Jones and Sonarrat.
Samuel Vriezen
wrote:
>> >Is good music
>> >> (a)music that is entertaining and enjoyable to listen to.
>> >
>> >yes
>>
>> But not exclusively. Unless you stretch 'entertaining' to mean 'it
>> keeps the attention going', it might not always be the most applicable
>> word. I wouldn't make a point of disagreeing to someone claiming that
>> Machaut's Mass, Webern's 'Bagatellen', Reich's 'Drumming' or Boulez'
>> 2nd sonata are 'entertaining', but I probably wouldn't use that word
>> myself.
>>
>Well, I dunno. If it isn't enjoyable to listen to, I basically don't have
>time for it. Now note that there are many forms of enjoyment. I "enjoy"
>listening to Shostakovich 4th Symphony, even though it's like being put
>under psychic attack for an hour. Does this make me a masochist? maybe.
>
My point on stretching meanings exactly. However, what about the
average Mass music. Seven centuries after the fact, we may listen to
the Messe de Tournai and 'enjoy' it and thereby deem it 'good music'.
We can only speculate if that would have made sense to the monks that
actually performed it...
D.G. Porter
>
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 15:27:17 -0500, j...@po.cwru.edu (Jeffrey Quick)
> wrote:
>
> >> >Is good music
> >> >> (a)music that is entertaining and enjoyable to listen to.
> >> >
> >> >yes
> >>
> >> But not exclusively. Unless you stretch 'entertaining' to mean 'it
> >> keeps the attention going', it might not always be the most applicable
> >> word. I wouldn't make a point of disagreeing to someone claiming that
> >> Machaut's Mass, Webern's 'Bagatellen', Reich's 'Drumming' or Boulez'
> >> 2nd sonata are 'entertaining', but I probably wouldn't use that word
> >> myself.
> >>
> >Well, I dunno. If it isn't enjoyable to listen to, I basically don't have
> >time for it. Now note that there are many forms of enjoyment. I "enjoy"
> >listening to Shostakovich 4th Symphony, even though it's like being put
> >under psychic attack for an hour. Does this make me a masochist? maybe.
> >
>
> My point on stretching meanings exactly. However, what about the
> average Mass music. Seven centuries after the fact, we may listen to
> the Messe de Tournai and 'enjoy' it and thereby deem it 'good music'.
> We can only speculate if that would have made sense to the monks that
> actually performed it...
I was under the impression that it wasn't "monks" per se who performed
it but a trained choir of say 5 people, no more.
It is still one of the most elegant pieces of the time. Any speculation
that Phillippe de Vitry composed the Gloria?
D.G. Porter
>
> In article <623x6.14990$TW.6...@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>, "Jarl Sigurd"
> <jarls...@geocities.com> wrote:
>
> > Since I started posting clips of my guitar playing on
> > the net, I've had quite a few people comment on how
> > bad they thought my music was. Now I'm curious just
> > as to how people go about defining "good music" as
> > opposed to "bad music". Is good music
> > (a)music that is entertaining and enjoyable to listen to.
>
>
> > (b)music that is difficult to play and thus cannot be
> > performed by just anyone
>
>
> > (c)music that is performed in accordance to the
> > principles that are people are taught when they
> > receive musical instruction from a teacher or school.
>
>
> > (d)music that sounds the similar to the music they are
> > accustomed to hearing on the radio and TV
> >
>
> > In this sense one might compare music with language.
> > If somebody speaks "Good English" do they can
> > (a)speak English in a way that is clear and easy to understand
>
>
> > (b)speak English in a way that is complex and uses a lot of
> > big words and complex sentence constructions
>
> sentence structure to articulate.
>
> > (c)speak the "King's English" in the grammatical way
> > that is taught in schools.
>
>
> > (d)Speak English in the way it is spoken on Radio and
> > Television
>
> English.
>
> I remember when I was young, my English teacher had hissy fits about
> "Winston tastes good, like [not "as", which would be proper since Winston
> IS a cigarrette] a cigarrette should.". Now, it's a miracle if you find an
> express checkout "for twelve items OR FEWER.".
That illustrates the common misunderstanding. The aisle in question is
for anyone with 12 items or fewer, and Les. Les can bring in as many
items as he wants.
Les even has his own store: Food For Les.
dana
dana
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:18:15 -0500, "Jarl Sigurd"
orangie
mike
John Sheehy
"Jarl Sigurd" <jarls...@geocities.com> wrote:
Good for what? Bad for what? Strip the question of the platonic
idealism it is assuming, and this is what you're left with.
--
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <jsh...@ix.netcom.com>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Alain Naigeon
3ac4f984...@news.onlynews.com...
> Why ask such an idiotic question concerning matters of TASTE?!
That's a typical troll :-)
Good and bad depend much on the personal story
of the listener.
Taste is about which "genre" of music you're inclined
to listen to.
But, in each particular genre, you begin by liking
nearly everything. But then, after some time, more
talent is needed to amaze you, and you begin to build
a hierarchy inside this genre.
But even this hierarchy might be in relationship with
my story. Listening to small ensembles for years, I could
be quite amazed when discovering Wagner's music.
But can perfectly imagine a different way, that is,
beginning with big orchestral scores and then falling
in love with the highly talentful simplicity of some
earlier composers.
It seems that for me it works as if, at a given time
in my life, "good" would often mean "still better" than
what I've known up to now.
... I said a typical troll, in which I've fallen, perhaps :-)
Perhaps because I find this point rather interesting
if can be avoided the two traps "What you like is
bad music" and "Anything is good since liked by
some people".
--
*==> "Musique renaissance" is now available in English <==*
Alain Naigeon - Strasbourg, France - anai...@free.fr
http://anaigeon.free.fr | http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/anaigeon/
D.G. Porter
>
> In article <3AC4F8...@pacbell.net>, dgpo...@pacbell.net says...
> > Jeffrey Quick wrote:
> > > "Winston tastes good, like [not "as", which would be proper since Winston
> > > IS a cigarrette] a cigarrette should.". Now, it's a miracle if you find an
> > > express checkout "for twelve items OR FEWER.".
> >
> > That illustrates the common misunderstanding. The aisle in question is
> > for anyone with 12 items or fewer, and Les. Les can bring in as many
> > items as he wants.
> > Les even has his own store: Food For Les.
>
I'll post some MIDI files on the binaries newsgroup,
news:rec.music.classical.recordings. I posted some months back but they
disappear fast. Look for them in a few hours. Some from 1974-76, some
from 1993-2000. (I did tape pieces in the intervening years.)
orangie
D.G. Porter
>
> D.G., do you have any of your music I can listen to?
>
> mike
Just posted 21 MIDI files to news:alt.rec.music.classical.recordings.
Just to ward you, the 19th is 556K. And these sound good on my system,
but sounded awful on the UC Davis soundcards. Lot of cut-offs and
imbalances. I think my card is a Voyetra. I also think I get better
results playing it through the MIDI Orchestratror than the Real Audio
player.
orangie
sounding to me; but in my recent work I was thinking of Massiaen while I
was writing this rhythm and mode combination! Your's sounds like it
emerged naturally from the transformations? Was this a learn'ed change?
Do you think the Wencislaw song sounded like this at one time?
thanks again, mike
D.G. Porter
news:alt.binaries.sounds.midi.classical, the next one on my list.
I'll leave them in in the non-binaries group for a while but then I'll
delete them.
I dunno, I was thinking more of the HiLos when I wrote this one.
D.G. Porter
Again, this was the wrong newsgroup. I meant to send them to
news:alt.binaries.sounds.midi.classical, where I shall repost them (all
21 of them now).
dana
saying, "I hate that piece." But views are purely subjective.
Why not have a more important discussion on, say, whether the U.S.
should get rid of Daylight Savings Time.
I say we should get rid of it. It's far outlived its usefulness.
dana
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:45:13 -0500, j...@po.cwru.edu (Jeffrey Quick)
wrote:
>In article <3ac4f984...@news.onlynews.com>, cdjack...@fuse.net
>(dana) wrote:
>
>> Why ask such an idiotic question concerning matters of TASTE?!
>
>Are you saying that good vs. bad music is totally subjective then? Why do
>we use terms which usually denote moral absolutes, for music we either like
>or dislike, if in fact there is not some inherent value involved?
>
>--
>The Democrats: the next third party.
>
>"Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should be
>changed regularly, and for the same reason."
>-----Gerry Brooks (in the Toronto Globe & Mail)
>
dana
label someone a "troll."
Listen, sweetie, a "troll" is someone who throws bombs and then runs.
I've been around this newsgroup since 1996. And I ain't goin'
nowhere.
dana
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 23:07:03 GMT, "Alain Naigeon" <anai...@free.fr>
wrote:
David Horne
Though I kill-filed Sig*rd's posts a while ago, I find many of the
replies to them entertaining and interesting. What's worse than his
original posts IMO though, are smug, pompous, pretentious, snotty little
critiques like this.
David
--
David Horne
Composer in Association- RLPO
www.davidhorne.co.uk
orangie
> > was writing this rhythm and mode combination! Your's sounds like it
> > emerged naturally from the transformations? Was this a learn'ed change?
> > Do you think the Wencislaw song sounded like this at one time?
> >
> > thanks again, mike
>
> I dunno, I was thinking more of the HiLos when I wrote this one.
>
>
special. And, Nelson Riddel doing the Coventry Carol.
My childhood, in a cigar box.
mike
orangie
da...@davidhorne.co.uk says...
> evan johnson <evan.j...@ELIyale.edu> wrote:
>
> > Your music is bad because it lacks both a sense of tension-based drama
> > and a convincing means of avoiding that drama. In particular, it has
> > a palpable air of trying to be something it's not, and failing
> > continuously.
>
> Though I kill-filed Sig*rd's posts a while ago, I find many of the
> replies to them entertaining and interesting. What's worse than his
> original posts IMO though, are smug, pompous, pretentious, snotty little
> critiques like this.
>
> David
>
>
the real problems with his music. In your rightious egarness, you've cut
off the noisesome noise, but, you have forgotten that all manner of
sound-objects teach us what composing is. A composer's group is not the
same as a Gourmet Music Group. Words like "tension" and "release" are
exactly the kind of universal terms we can use to analyse any genre of
music. "Tension" is like the narrowing of the frame around the picture;
"release" is the expanding of the frame to include the ground. "Kill-
file" is the last sex-act of the sexless.
mike
Alain Naigeon
> I love troll baiters. When they've nothing constructive to say, they
> label someone a "troll."
I've perhaps misused the word, I didn't mean anything about you!
I was just saying that the two points "hierarchy in value" against
"taste only" could lead to dozens of posts...
Really, I din't mean anything else.
toasty_g1
music is to see an example of what is not good music. Thanks, Jarl, for
supplying the answer to your own question.
Brett G.
--
Visit Toasty's Town
http://www.angelfire.com/la/toastystown/
"Jarl Sigurd" <jarls...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:623x6.14990$TW.6...@tor-nn1.netcom.ca...
David Horne
> In article <1er4qw5.12g9o73aanvhaN%da...@davidhorne.co.uk>,
> da...@davidhorne.co.uk says...
> > evan johnson <evan.j...@ELIyale.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Your music is bad because it lacks both a sense of tension-based drama
> > > and a convincing means of avoiding that drama. In particular, it has
> > > a palpable air of trying to be something it's not, and failing
> > > continuously.
> >
> > Though I kill-filed Sig*rd's posts a while ago, I find many of the
> > replies to them entertaining and interesting. What's worse than his
> > original posts IMO though, are smug, pompous, pretentious, snotty little
> > critiques like this.
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> Are you a composer? This is exactly the sort of critique which points to
> the real problems with his music.
I think very little of the responses to Sig*rd are attempting to point
out 'real problems' which he may or may not have. As I said, he can
spark off interesting threads, no doubt unwittingly, but there's
something dispiriting (to me at least) about seeing folks pile on a a
poster who obviously isn't quite the full shilling, or a troll, or
whatever he is. He might be a 7-year-old girl posting from Macedonia- I
don't really care.
I was being ironic when I said 'critiques'- if that's really what you
consider a compositional critique to be, then we obviously speak
different languages. As far as I was concerned, it was a fairly generic
put down for music that one might not happen to like, and it reeked of
pretension, and was ultimately futile IMO. Why the heck should Sig*rd's
MIDI files gore _anyone's_ ox?!
dana
dana
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 17:30:30 GMT, "Alain Naigeon" <anai...@free.fr>
wrote:
>"dana" <cdjack...@fuse.net> a écrit dans le message news:
orangie
da...@davidhorne.co.uk says...
> > the real problems with his music.
>
> I think very little of the responses to Sig*rd are attempting to point
> out 'real problems' which he may or may not have.
>
posting toward him. We have to find out what kind of creative imagination
Jarl has. And then we have to find out if his creativity can extend
into music. It's not enough just to be passive consumers of music: we
have to understand how music is created. Jarl's music seems to be a
consumer based composition media -- He writes what "sounds good" and
leaves it at that.
The simple fundamentalist response to the new is the Negation. This was
critiqued as an infantile response in Kant's response to Voltare. Kant,
at least, tried to show that there was possibilty in everything, though
everything, for him, had to have its place. There is no place for someone
like Jarl except in these NG's.
I believe you are following too rigidly the left pointer, in
rec.music.compose: wallowing in the "rec" and not enough in the
"compose". It is really your responsibility to understand music as a
human activity. Most posters seem to think music is a pass-time or a
paycheck.
mike
David Horne
> In article <1er5jk0.1pppu651q84uo0N%da...@davidhorne.co.uk>,
> da...@davidhorne.co.uk says...
> > > the real problems with his music.
> >
> > I think very little of the responses to Sig*rd are attempting to point
> > out 'real problems' which he may or may not have.
> >
> Then I think you (among thousands) didn't understand the nature of my
> posting toward him. We have to find out what kind of creative imagination
> Jarl has. And then we have to find out if his creativity can extend
> into music. It's not enough just to be passive consumers of music: we
> have to understand how music is created.
As I wrote previously, we appear to be speaking different languages,
because that reads like Bollocks to me. It might be different if I heard
you say it, but at the moment I find it hard to read with a straight
face. In any case, 'we' don't have to do anything, but you can do what
you like.
> I believe you are following too rigidly the left pointer, in
> rec.music.compose: wallowing in the "rec" and not enough in the
> "compose". It is really your responsibility to understand music as a
> human activity. Most posters seem to think music is a pass-time or a
> paycheck.
Whatever. I honestly don't get your point. That no doubt works both
ways.
orangie
da...@davidhorne.co.uk says...
> > have to understand how music is created.
>
> As I wrote previously, we appear to be speaking different languages,
> because that reads like Bollocks to me. It might be different if I heard
> you say it, but at the moment I find it hard to read with a straight
> face. In any case, 'we' don't have to do anything, but you can do what
> you like.
>
> > I believe you are following too rigidly the left pointer, in
> > rec.music.compose: wallowing in the "rec" and not enough in the
> > "compose". It is really your responsibility to understand music as a
> > human activity. Most posters seem to think music is a pass-time or a
> > paycheck.
>
> Whatever. I honestly don't get your point. That no doubt works both
> ways.
>
> David
>
> --
> David Horne
> Composer in Association- RLPO
> www.davidhorne.co.uk
>
>
the fuzzy-puppy rec.music.classical group, where everyone hangs around
and gossips. But, it's not a creative position for a serious composer. I
need to know if you have any creative solution to the Jarl problem.
Otherwise, I'd have to think that you were cognitively handicapped,
short-attention spanned spazmo, spewing out your attitude in the alley.
Is composing a creative act or not? Why should this NG just be a standing
around name dropping and bragging activity? I hate pub life much more
than I hate people like Jarf.
mike
Alain Naigeon
> All is forgiven.... ;-)
Thanks!
David Horne
> I have to assume that your position is just "piss off".
No, my position is that I don't really know what you're talking about.
> That's fine in
> the fuzzy-puppy rec.music.classical group, where everyone hangs around
> and gossips. But, it's not a creative position for a serious composer. I
> need to know if you have any creative solution to the Jarl problem.
I've never been to his website, just as I rarely visit any other links
to MIDI compositions. I have no interest in doing so, and I don't see
what being a serious composer has to do with any of that. 'Creative
positions' and 'creative solutions' just strike me as such BS in the
context of all of this that I want to scream. My first post in this
thread was simply a personal reaction to what I considered... well, I've
been there already. You, OTOH, thought it was 'exactly the sort of
critique' etc., and I think that's a load of rubbish. You disagree.
Fine.
Jaakko Mäntyjärvi
>
> evan johnson <evan.j...@ELIyale.edu> wrote:
>
> > and a convincing means of avoiding that drama. In particular, it has
> > a palpable air of trying to be something it's not, and failing
> > continuously.
>
> Though I kill-filed Sig*rd's posts a while ago, I find many of the
> replies to them entertaining and interesting. What's worse than his
> original posts IMO though, are smug, pompous, pretentious, snotty little
> critiques like this.
Smug, pompous, pretentious, snotty PR copy tends to provoke a response
in kind unless the stuff being promoted really is very very very good.
If a person advertises himself as the next Mahler and his music turns
out to be disjointed modal ramblings with virtually no structure, is it
any wonder that garments get rent and spleens vented?
Having actually listened to Sig*rd's stuff, I can sympathize with these
'critiques', as you call them, even if they do not always bother to go
into detail. The 'piano concerto', as I have said before, conjures up
for me an image of a stoned cantina band from Star Wars accompanying a
one-armed dwarf manically bashing a concert grand. And that's all it
does. While the harmonic environment is something I can appreciate,
there is precious little invention and compositional technique involved.
It is the difference between the painting of a child and the painting of
a Naivist artist whose style is a matter of choice.
> --
> David Horne
> Composer in Association- RLPO
Association Composing, as in Association Football? :-)
--
Regards,
Jaakko Mäntyjärvi
Helsinki, Finland
"Nil significat nisi oscillat. Du vap. Du vap. Du vap."
David Horne
> Smug, pompous, pretentious, snotty PR copy tends to provoke a response
> in kind unless the stuff being promoted really is very very very good.
True, but isn't that sinking to the same level of silliness? Besides,
it's not as if S*gurd _just_ arrived on the r.m.c. scene, is it?
> If a person advertises himself as the next Mahler and his music turns
> out to be disjointed modal ramblings with virtually no structure, is it
> any wonder that garments get rent and spleens vented?
No. Personally though, I'd consider it a bit embarrassing, and probably
best ignored.
> > David Horne
> > Composer in Association- RLPO
>
> Association Composing, as in Association Football? :-)
Well, Liverpool _is_ known for its football teams! :) Anyway, I do
prefer 'association'- 'composer-in-residence' always sounds a bit like
you've been _put_ there, like a houseplant. Not really accurate either,
as I'm only 'resident' there about 12 weeks a year.
David
--
David Horne
Composer in Association- RLPO
orangie
da...@davidhorne.co.uk says...
> > need to know if you have any creative solution to the Jarl problem.
>
> I've never been to his website, just as I rarely visit any other links
> to MIDI compositions. I have no interest in doing so, and I don't see
> what being a serious composer has to do with any of that. 'Creative
> positions' and 'creative solutions' just strike me as such BS in the
> context of all of this that I want to scream.
>
quartet. Do you have a position on "laugh"?
mike
orangie
> thread was simply a personal reaction to what I considered... well, I've
> been there already. You, OTOH, thought it was 'exactly the sort of
> critique' etc., and I think that's a load of rubbish. You disagree.
> Fine.
>
>
gets out of your way? Really uncreative, unless you like secondhand
smoke: "Duh, you disagree! I disagree yur face!"
really cool.
mike
orangie
same faults as Jarly's. It's ok to gossip about him in the puppy-dog
classic group, but in a composer group we have to consider that what he's
doing is kind of music, and that, for some reason, he's not making a
complete music. Examining his shortcomings can be more instructive than
examining some industrial grade mozart woodwind piece. The approach to
him is obviously not through his music, so one has to find the creative
entity underneath the clown. Probably for Jarl there is a real
enthousiasm underneath. This is far more inspiring than some prize
winning wonder whiner who gets patronized at a prom concert. What is
reason for the artist making art? Are we all supposed to be Andrew
Wubbers and David Hokey's?
Georges Auric
Dr.Matt
comment.
His posting style was funny the first 2 times.
--
For spammers: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/uce.htm
My CD "Kabala": http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields/cd.html
Matt Fields DMA http://listen.to/mattaj TwelveToneToyBox http://start.at/tttb
"Is there a theorbo in the house?"
Sonarrat Citalis
>> If a person advertises himself as the next Mahler and his music turns
>> out to be disjointed modal ramblings with virtually no structure, is it
>> any wonder that garments get rent and spleens vented?
>No. Personally though, I'd consider it a bit embarrassing, and probably
>best ignored.
Sigurd, however, wears it like a badge of honor.
If you don't mind, I can't contain myself any longer.
Warning: Anti-Jarl diatribe follows! Jarl, if you're reading this, I
respectfully ask that you do not continue past the division below. I'm just
complaining, that's all, and there's no point in me hurting you this way.
=========
I have heard Jarl Sigurd's piano concerto, all of it, and I even have the sheet
music for the first movement. David hit it right on the nose: it's
embarrassing. Nothing that could be recognized as music shows up here. Form?
One motif, a series of lengthy ramblings, repeat motif, go on to next movement,
repeat same pattern. Melodic invention? It sure doesn't sound like anything
else, but neither does the sound of a live pig being hurled into a television
screen. In fact, I'm not sure that there's a melody at all, it sounds more like
just a bunch of chords. Okay. Technical skill? No, there's really no room for
interpretation, either. The bottom line is that to call this work skeletal is
to let it off easy. It is the scattered, bleached bones of a long-dead animal
in the desert.
=========
-Snrrt Ctls, yr fthfl srvnt.
Dragon Code: DC2.Mfps+D Gm L12f T2c Phlwlt Sku Cpi+/wh:wh,ebl++ Bic/wa A17
Fr Ni M O+ H $- F---! R+++! Ac~ J(r++v--) U! I V---! Q---! Tc++ Df+++!
Jaakko Mäntyjärvi
> Jaako, you have to consider that your own work might have some of the
> same faults as Jarly's.
I agree. I would not like to ever find myself in a position where I
think that the music I write is faultless.
> It's ok to gossip about him in the puppy-dog
> classic group, but in a composer group we have to consider that what he's
> doing is kind of music, and that, for some reason, he's not making a
> complete music. Examining his shortcomings can be more instructive than
> examining some industrial grade mozart woodwind piece.
This too is true. But it is difficult if not impossible to separate the
persona from the music in a case such as this. If you will bear with me
for a while, I'll use a matrix to explore this. Let's start with two
composer parameters, 'agreeability' and 'talent'. The possible cases are:
1. agreeable and untalented -- instantly forgotten
2. agreeable and talented -- the best case scenario
3. disagreeable and talented -- if music is wonderful, personality can
be overlooked
4. disagreeable and untalented -- raises hackles
One can forgive a talented artist a lot of personality quirks, but in an
untalented artist the opposite is the case: the disagreeability tends to
get magnified because of the perceived lack of talent. This is an
extremely simplistic way of looking at it, but I believe that this is
what we are seeing at work in the case of JS.
[Disclaimer: This should not be taken to imply that JS is,
categorically, untalented.]
Let's add a third parameter, 'technical skill'. The possible cases are:
1. agreeable, untalented, technically unskilled -- instantly forgotten
2. agreeable, untalented, technically skilled -- makes you feel sorry
that the music is so vacuous
3. agreeable, talented, technically unskilled -- prompts encouragement
and advice as to how to improve
4. agreeable, talented, technically skilled -- the best case scenario
5. disagreeable, talented, technically unskilled -- merits recognized
but does not prompt encouragement or advice
6. disagreeable, talented, technically skilled -- if music is wonderful,
persona can be overlooked
7. disagreeable, untalented, technically skilled -- makes you feel
furious that the music is so vacuous
8. disagreeable, untalented, technically unskilled -- raises hackles
> The approach to
> him is obviously not through his music, so one has to find the creative
> entity underneath the clown. Probably for Jarl there is a real
> enthousiasm underneath. This is far more inspiring than some prize
> winning wonder whiner who gets patronized at a prom concert. What is
> reason for the artist making art? Are we all supposed to be Andrew
> Wubbers and David Hokey's?
Again, it is more a question of persona and attitude than of talent or
proficiency. There is a grain of truth in 'marketing is everything'. The
very same music will prompt quite a different reaction if presented with:
a) Please listen to these pieces. I would appreciate any comments that
you may have.
b) I am God. You will listen to this crystallization of my divine
spirit, incapable though you are of comprehending it!
orangie
dinner with Jarb, I will try to abstract whatever qualities I can get
from his presentation. In a sense, it seems to me to be the case that his
persona is identical to his musical product: both are very random and
trouveé -- I recognize his style, sometimes, as that of friends of mine
at the coffee house. But I will keep looking at the manifestation. I
wonder if my own work doesn't reflect my persona? And, perhaps
Beethoven's his? And also the Hindemith persona, his?
My persona is both shallow and profound... volcanic island humped out of
nothing, and with no shelf to rest my elbows. And my music would like to
be deep enough to touch the bottom of the earth, but my head is in the
clouds. Probably, if I were uplifted sandstone or squished dolmite, I
would take more for granite. And then I could play with midi and not
worry about music?
Jarj makes me think of what I might have been like, had I been born a
mammal.
etna ferber
Don Wallace
hissy-pissy fight in rec.music.theory?
Donny Guitar
"orangie" <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.152ffc85d3ef264b989fbf@news-server...
D.G. Porter
is stuff everyone says is bad music):
21 of my MIDI files are still posted in
news:alt.binaries.sounds.midi.classical. Old and newer stuff. And a
read-me post also.
I think that's the right NG name...
Mr. Legend
then it's not music. I do believe that some music is better than other
music. I find something in each song I listen to, and hang onto that. I
don't hate music, and I'm very tired of negative critics who comment on how
bad a song is. I don't mind compare and contrast. But when people come out
and just say "I hate this song" to the majority of the songs they hear,
that's rather upsetting. They're completely entitled to their opinion, as
long as it uses proper descriptions, and not just "this song sucks" or "this
song is horrible". Because as you can see by this thread, you will have to
back up your statement, defend and define it properly, because you can't
label music as bad, but you can describe how it lacks of a better song, in
my personal theory.
Lutegirl
and testimony,which I'll gladly do again and again.
I could have just walked back to Union Station and just gone home,but instead
I felt I needed a walk,if for anything to contemplate and get some fresh air.
I went to the National Gallery of Art, the East building, and found myself
contemplating in front of a cubist guitar*not a cuban guitarist :)
but an absolutely fantastic work,by Pablo Piccasso,one of his "Spanish"
paintings.
When he first presented that painting to the world, I'm sure he was met by all
kinds of small minded critisism by people who did not understand his vision or
view of the world.
If he took all of that critisism to heart,and it caused him not to paint from
the heart but by what other peoples expectations or commercial expectations
based on tradition, to be, then the future of modern art could have been
compromised.
Maybe Jarl is putting his music in the wrong genre, like putting a modern
abstract
painting in with other paintings that are in the romantic classical genre, both
are art,but with people who have only eyes for one and not the other will fail
to see it for the art that it is.
The irony is, that most music theory, derives from a time in art, where people
like Piccasso would not be recognized for thier artistic creativity, ideas and
talents.
Standing face to face with a Piccasso is really a miracle, to be able to reach
music by anybody, this instantaneous, means that I could be facing a modern
composer that is not defined by classical terms or standards of music, but who
creates music from thier own vision of what music should be, and I wouldn't
trade that for anything in the world.
Andrea
Ola Hansson
Lutegirl <lute...@aol.com> skrev i
>
> When he first presented that painting to the world, I'm sure he was met by
all
> kinds of small minded critisism by people who did not understand his
vision or
> view of the world.
Understand? Just because history has favoured Picasso doesn't mean he was
the one who
was "right". I don't think Picasso's "vision" is interesting at all.
>
> If he took all of that critisism to heart,and it caused him not to paint
from
> the heart but by what other peoples expectations or commercial
expectations
> based on tradition, to be, then the future of modern art could have been
> compromised.
Come on ! Do you really think Picasso painted from the heart?
> Standing face to face with a Piccasso is really a miracle
Á miracle? haha! I envy you !
Dr.Matt
Lutegirl <lute...@aol.com> wrote:
>I went to the "Napster" hearing on Tuesday, and sat through 3 hours of debate
>and testimony,which I'll gladly do again and again.
>
> I could have just walked back to Union Station and just gone home,but instead
>I felt I needed a walk,if for anything to contemplate and get some fresh air.
Gee, I've been back and forth between Georgetown, Brookland, and
Silver Spring.
>I went to the National Gallery of Art, the East building, and found myself
>contemplating in front of a cubist guitar*not a cuban guitarist :)
>but an absolutely fantastic work,by Pablo Piccasso,one of his "Spanish"
>paintings.
Very famous, too.
>
>When he first presented that painting to the world, I'm sure he was met by all
>kinds of small minded critisism by people who did not understand his vision or
>view of the world.
>
> If he took all of that critisism to heart,and it caused him not to paint from
>the heart but by what other peoples expectations or commercial expectations
>based on tradition, to be, then the future of modern art could have been
>compromised.
Are you sure all of that happened?
People are remarkably funny animals, not prone to simple behavior patterns.
thesubu...@webtv.net
good sexual postion or act. :-))