Paul Lansky pulls the plug

[james mccartney]

Was SuperCollider the final straw..?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/06/arts/emusic.php

--
--- james mccartney

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[thor-2]

On 4 Aug 2008, at 20:05, James McCartney wrote:

> Was SuperCollider the final straw..?
>
> http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/06/arts/emusic.php

Argh! Journalism can surely be a dirty business. Phew.

But Lansky's the generation of grand manifestos. Either you are
blowing the horns as an electronic musican or not.  : )

I hope to see him here one day when that guitar stops being so
interesting!



_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[James Harkins-2]

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:38 PM, thor <th.list@...> wrote:
> But Lansky's the generation of grand manifestos. Either you are
> blowing the horns as an electronic musican or not.  : )

Yet Lansky is the last person I would imagine taking any manifesto
(whether his own or someone else's) very seriously at all.

I wouldn't read too much into this.

A potentially interesting discussion is brewing here -
http://www.electro-music.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28081

hjh

--
James Harkins /// dewdrop world
jamshark70@...
http://www.dewdrop-world.net

"Come said the Muse,
Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,
Sing me the universal." -- Whitman

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[kernel-12]

On 4 Aug 2008, at 13:05, James McCartney wrote:

> Was SuperCollider the final straw..?
>
> http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/06/arts/emusic.php

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic  
music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and  
looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise  
emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all  
those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I  
always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and  
the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For  
want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground,  
where it belongs?

Incidentally I do listen to music other than electronic stuff.

kernel


_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[gimbal]

"I'm interested in writing for real people at this point,"

and WHY am I so upset that he implied synths are not "real people"?
that doesn't even make sense!

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 3:29 AM, kernel <kernel@...> wrote:

On 4 Aug 2008, at 13:05, James McCartney wrote:

Was SuperCollider the final straw..?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/06/arts/emusic.php

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground, where it belongs?

Incidentally I do listen to music other than electronic stuff.

kernel

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[James Harkins-2]

On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground, where it belongs?

I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't encourage this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the musical product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the "composer" has something "important" to say, and the audience goes to this preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully to that important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).

Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert hall-itis.

hjh

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[scacinto]

James Harkins-2 wrote:

On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:

I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the social  
aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't encourage  
this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the musical  
product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the "composer" has  
something "important" to say, and the audience goes to this  
preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully to that  
important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).

Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to  
musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music solipsism,  
but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert stage (or  
primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert hall-itis.

hjh

I agree with this idea.  More, one need only spend 9 or so years in the conservatory to realize that the compositional paradigm is still based on the mythos of the composer imparting something otherworldly to us via some 19th century German-Romantic concept of nature and reality (in the Platonic sense.)  In other words, it is to a large degree complete nonsense.  

One more thing, and apologies to those offended (please contact your publisher and lodge complaints with Mr. Skippy) -- if one cannot see beyond the mystique of "wood and metal", to see beyond "notes" (whatever those are...) to what Music is, one might as well get out of the game -- the world really does not need more Pendereckis (in the latest sense of him.)  SuperCollider, Metal tubes, a violin, a subway tunnel; these are all "instruments."  A painter once painted with colors, now he paints with bits, with projectors, with Processing, with dancers... why do "composers" cling to a limiting ideology of a so-called acoustic "purity" with such veracity?  Perhaps what we need are not more violins, but better speakers.  Perhaps what we need are not more vibraphones, but better physical modeling synthesis... perhaps what we need are not more notes, but more imagination.  Perhaps we should be less concerned with the number of "albums" we put out per year and more with the quality of the art we produce.

che sera!

The old guard has retired -- vive le Nuove Musiche!!!

- Senior Grumpy Pants

P.S.  They never made music like they used to.

[Don Craig]

If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?

That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred space" is exactly

the point and purpose of art.

Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you are exactly

who I'm talking about. 

My two cents,

Don

On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, James Harkins wrote:

On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground, where it belongs?

I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't encourage this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the musical product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the "composer" has something "important" to say, and the audience goes to this preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully to that important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).

Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert hall-itis.

hjh

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[Wyatt Fletcher]

I'm in a fucking fight club with Beethoven.  Problem is, while I'm a formidable 5'11" & 330 lbs., Beethoven is 9'6" & 600lbs.  

-wyatt

"In the long run, I shall be happier to

be moderately praised in the new style,

than greatly praised in the ordinary."

                                     - Claudio Monteverdi

On Aug 4, 2008, at 9:04 PM, Donald Craig wrote:

If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?

That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred space" is exactly

the point and purpose of art.

Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you are exactly

who I'm talking about. 

My two cents,

Don

On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, James Harkins wrote:

On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground, where it belongs?

I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't encourage this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the musical product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the "composer" has something "important" to say, and the audience goes to this preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully to that important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).

Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert hall-itis.

hjh

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[Wyatt Fletcher]

I'm in a fucking fight club with Beethoven.  Problem is, while I'm a formidable 5'11" & 330 lbs., Beethoven is 9'6" & 600lbs.  

-wyatt

"In the long run, I shall be happier to

be moderately praised in the new style,

than greatly praised in the ordinary."

                                     - Claudio Monteverdi

On Aug 4, 2008, at 9:04 PM, Donald Craig wrote:

If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?

That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred space" is exactly

the point and purpose of art.

Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you are exactly

who I'm talking about. 

My two cents,

Don

On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, James Harkins wrote:

On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground, where it belongs?

I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't encourage this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the musical product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the "composer" has something "important" to say, and the audience goes to this preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully to that important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).

Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert hall-itis.

hjh

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[Scott Wilson-3]

I have a feeling the author of the article has more of an axe to grind than Lansky, who is basically just saying, 'I'm now moving in a different direction."

Frankly, good for him. We should all be so brave.

As far as electronic music is concerned, rumours of its demise have been greatly exaggerated. Different, yes. More diverse, yes. Dead, not so much.

And as far as all this stuff about 'composers', 'academia', 'solipsism', 'Adorno' (okay... Adorno), etc. goes, I always feel such generalisations tell me more about the concerns of the person making them than about the people they are supposed to apply to. (I don't intend that as a criticism, but I think it's worth keeping in mind in conversations like this.)

S.

On 5 Aug 2008, at 05:04, Donald Craig wrote:

If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?

That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred space" is exactly

the point and purpose of art.

Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you are exactly

who I'm talking about. 

My two cents,

Don

On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, James Harkins wrote:

On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground, where it belongs?

I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't encourage this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the musical product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the "composer" has something "important" to say, and the audience goes to this preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully to that important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).

Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert hall-itis.

hjh

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[Simon Blackmore-2]

I guess particular sounds and processes come in and out of fashion but most music currently ends up in a digital

format anyway. Even if its not intentionally recorded someone will get it on youtube.

From my perspective this makes environments to experiment with audio data creatively all the more important.

Simon

I have a feeling the author of the article has more of an axe to grind than Lansky, who is basically just saying, 'I'm now moving in a different direction."

Frankly, good for him. We should all be so brave.

As far as electronic music is concerned, rumours of its demise have been greatly exaggerated. Different, yes. More diverse, yes. Dead, not so much.

And as far as all this stuff about 'composers', 'academia', 'solipsism', 'Adorno' (okay... Adorno), etc. goes, I always feel such generalisations tell me more about the concerns of the person making them than about the people they are supposed to apply to. (I don't intend that as a criticism, but I think it's worth keeping in mind in conversations like this.)

S.

On 5 Aug 2008, at 05:04, Donald Craig wrote:

If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?

That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred space" is exactly

the point and purpose of art.

Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you are exactly

who I'm talking about. 

My two cents,

Don

On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, James Harkins wrote:

On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:

I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back underground, where it belongs?

I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't encourage this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the musical product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the "composer" has something "important" to say, and the audience goes to this preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully to that important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).

Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert hall-itis.

hjh

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[nonprivate]

i agree. like any good artist, paul lansky is just following his nose.

Scott Wilson wrote:

> I have a feeling the author of the article has more of an axe to grind
> than Lansky, who is basically just saying, 'I'm now moving in a
> different direction."
>
> Frankly, good for him. We should all be so brave.
>
> As far as electronic music is concerned, rumours of its demise have
> been greatly exaggerated. Different, yes. More diverse, yes. Dead, not
> so much.
>
> And as far as all this stuff about 'composers', 'academia',
> 'solipsism', 'Adorno' (okay... Adorno), etc. goes, I always feel such
> generalisations tell me more about the concerns of the person making
> them than about the people they are supposed to apply to. (I don't
> intend that as a criticism, but I think it's worth keeping in mind in
> conversations like this.)
>
> S.
>
> On 5 Aug 2008, at 05:04, Donald Craig wrote:
>
>>
>> If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time
>> doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?
>> That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate
>>  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred
>> space" is exactly
>> the point and purpose of art.
>>
>> Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with
>> Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you
>> are exactly
>> who I'm talking about.
>>
>> My two cents,
>>
>> Don
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, James Harkins wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've thought for a while that something is going on with electronic
>>>> music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my experience and
>>>> looked to more 'traditional' music to find concrete or precise
>>>> emotions or messages or something.  Personally I think I can find
>>>> all those things in electronic music but you kind of have to intuit
>>>> it.  I always thought that was part of the deal though.  It is 2008
>>>> now and the world has been awash with 'electronic' music for a
>>>> while.  For want of a better expression I think it has gone back
>>>> underground, where it belongs?
>>>
>>> I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the
>>> social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia doesn't
>>> encourage this kind of thinking because of the fetishization of the
>>> musical product. I think the "concert hall" model, where the
>>> "composer" has something "important" to say, and the audience goes
>>> to this preordained, sacred space in order to listen very carefully
>>> to that important thing, is a dying model (if it isn't dead already).
>>>
>>> Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to
>>> musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music
>>> solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the concert
>>> stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with concert
>>> hall-itis.
>>>
>>> hjh
>>>
>>>
>>> : H. James Harkins
>>> : jamshark70@... <mailto:jamshark70@...>
>>> : http://www.dewdrop-world.net
>>> .::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:
>>>
>>> "Come said the Muse,
>>> Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,
>>> Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman
>>>
>>
>

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[Jonathan Segel]

right, maybe his right hand is hurting from trackpads and mice and to  
write with a pen for while. Or he can't hear above 13k anymore and  
needs things that comfort his cochlea. i definitely agree that it  
seems more like the journalist chose the slant on the story. they  
probably did the same thing when, say, Cage, Berio, Stockhausen et al  
were working in radio -"they've abandoned the old instruments for  
electronic noisescapes!" Whatever. A composer can compose with any  
sound, made in any way. The journalistic hyperbole is to exaggerate  
the all-or-nothing aspect, i.e. "i've quit forever". who knows. maybe  
a couple years down the road he wants to hear something made with a  
synthesizer or computer again.
Much of Lansky's recent music involved samples of spoken words, i'm  
sure he can still do that with actual live humans too.

-jes

On Aug 5, 2008, at 12:39 PM, nonprivate wrote:

> i agree. like any good artist, paul lansky is just following his nose.
>
> Scott Wilson wrote:
>> I have a feeling the author of the article has more of an axe to  
>> grind than Lansky, who is basically just saying, 'I'm now moving  
>> in a different direction."
>>
>> Frankly, good for him. We should all be so brave.
>>
>> As far as electronic music is concerned, rumours of its demise  
>> have been greatly exaggerated. Different, yes. More diverse, yes.  
>> Dead, not so much.
>>
>> And as far as all this stuff about 'composers', 'academia',  
>> 'solipsism', 'Adorno' (okay... Adorno), etc. goes, I always feel  
>> such generalisations tell me more about the concerns of the person  
>> making them than about the people they are supposed to apply to.  
>> (I don't intend that as a criticism, but I think it's worth  
>> keeping in mind in conversations like this.)
>>
>> S.
>>
>> On 5 Aug 2008, at 05:04, Donald Craig wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your  
>>> time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to  
>>> it?
>>> That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to  
>>> capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry."  
>>> This "sacred space" is exactly
>>> the point and purpose of art.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe  
>>> with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that,  
>>> then you are exactly
>>> who I'm talking about.
>>> My two cents,
>>>
>>> Don
>>>
>>> On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, James Harkins wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Aug 4, 2008, at 8:29 PM, kernel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've thought for a while that something is going on with  
>>>>> electronic music.  A lot of people have lost interest from my  
>>>>> experience and looked to more 'traditional' music to find  
>>>>> concrete or precise emotions or messages or something.  
>>>>> Personally I think I can find all those things in electronic  
>>>>> music but you kind of have to intuit it.  I always thought that  
>>>>> was part of the deal though.  It is 2008 now and the world has  
>>>>> been awash with 'electronic' music for a while.  For want of a  
>>>>> better expression I think it has gone back underground, where  
>>>>> it belongs?
>>>>
>>>> I think some of this is a function of not thinking through the  
>>>> social aspects of performance or audition spaces. Academia  
>>>> doesn't encourage this kind of thinking because of the  
>>>> fetishization of the musical product. I think the "concert hall"  
>>>> model, where the "composer" has something "important" to say,  
>>>> and the audience goes to this preordained, sacred space in order  
>>>> to listen very carefully to that important thing, is a dying  
>>>> model (if it isn't dead already).
>>>>
>>>> Writing for acoustic instruments adds a social dimension to  
>>>> musicmaking that isn't present in the usual computer music  
>>>> solipsism, but if the music is meant to be heard only on the  
>>>> concert stage (or primarily), then it doesn't really deal with  
>>>> concert hall-itis.
>>>>
>>>> hjh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> : H. James Harkins
>>>> : jamshark70@... <mailto:jamshark70@dewdrop-
>>>> world.net>
>>>> : http://www.dewdrop-world.net
>>>> .::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:
>>>>
>>>> "Come said the Muse,
>>>> Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,
>>>> Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc-users mailing list
>
> info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/ 
> MusicTechnology/880
> archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
> search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

__________________________
jonathan segel
jsegel@...
etc.


_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[James Harkins-2]

*sigh* Missed the point...

The question that has been on my mind for several years is, "Of whom or what do I want my music to be in service?" I don't have a complete answer (maybe I never will), but what's important to me are the changes in my thinking as a result of pondering the question.

We tend to assume that the sought-after "something important to say" will be located only (or mainly) in the sonic product, but I think that's a comforting fiction -- comforting because the sonic product is one of the few things the composer has control over. Of more interest to me is the fact that making and listening to music are social activities, and the meaning of music is as much in the social context as it is in the notes or sounds. (The experience of listening to a Beethoven symphony will be very different for a group of music theorists, as compared to that of the average symphony subscriber -- who might drink too much during intermission and actually sleep through much of it!)

Believing that the purpose of composing is to say something important (which just as often means to cram something that I think is important down the throats of the dwindling and graying subpopulation that actually goes to concert halls these days) carries a very real danger that my music might end up being in service of nothing more than my own ego. I don't find that interesting.

Part of my goal as a composer (and I'm not there yet) is to find/imagine/realize social settings for electroacoustic music that exist outside the concert hall (while I don't entirely disagree that the concert hall can be a sacred space for music, it's also a retreat from engagement with people where they are, which involves a bit of cowardice) and also outside the normal marketplace.

Anyway, I would rather try to go toe to toe with Bach (who, borrowing from Wyatt's analogy, is about 18' tall and 1100 pounds). He wrote as much for the church as for the concert. Now there is somebody who understood sacred space, much more than today's modernist wannabes.

hjh

On Aug 5, 2008, at 12:04 AM, Donald Craig wrote:

If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?

That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred space" is exactly

the point and purpose of art.

Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you are exactly

who I'm talking about. 

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[scacinto]

James Harkins-2 wrote:

Part of my goal as a composer (and I'm not there yet) is to find/
imagine/realize social settings for electroacoustic music that exist  
outside the concert hall... and also outside the normal marketplace.

Eventually, anything you "find" will become, if successful, another concert hall unless you don't want people to go, don't want them to listen with care, and don't want them to treat the situation with any sort of special consideration... in other words, you find a random street corner, don't tell anyone, and don't repeat performances.  Hstorically, there are many people who have done this, and I know some people who still do.  I find it immensely unsatisfying in artistic terms, having done it a couple times myself.  (we can argue aesthetic values a different time)

I agree that an alternative scene of sorts would be nice, but once one moves beyond the novelty of outdoor performances, etc, one realizes that unless you want the noise of the environment to play a part and compose your music that way, you want a quiet environment.  Unless you write your music in a way that benefits from distance, movement during performance, talking, and is relatively short, you're going to want places for people sit... I guess you can see where I'm going with this.  (agree or not)

I think there is an ideal space, place and time for every piece.  The concert hall is right for some, wrong for others.  Social interaction and context is secondary to me -- of primary importance is the proper setting for the music...  unless the music is all about the social interaction...

my $2.  (Inflation in the States now is a bitch.)

-S

[Sciss-3]

a sound installation is not a concert hall, and yet people can come  
and listen with care. a radio is also not a concert hall.


Am 05.08.2008 um 16:22 schrieb scacinto:

>
>
>
> James Harkins-2 wrote:
>>
>> Part of my goal as a composer (and I'm not there yet) is to find/
>> imagine/realize social settings for electroacoustic music that exist
>> outside the concert hall... and also outside the normal marketplace.
>>
>
> Eventually, anything you "find" will become, if successful, another  
> concert
> hall unless you don't want people to go, don't want them to listen  
> with
> care, and don't want them to treat the situation with any sort of  
> special
> consideration... in other words, you find a random street corner,  
> don't tell
> anyone, and don't repeat performances.  Hstorically, there are many  
> people
> who have done this, and I know some people who still do.  I find it
> immensely unsatisfying in artistic terms, having done it a couple  
> times
> myself.  (we can argue aesthetic values a different time)
>
> I agree that an alternative scene of sorts would be nice, but once  
> one moves
> beyond the novelty of outdoor performances, etc, one realizes that  
> unless
> you want the noise of the environment to play a part and compose  
> your music
> that way, you want a quiet environment.  Unless you write your  
> music in a
> way that benefits from distance, movement during performance,  
> talking, and
> is relatively short, you're going to want places for people sit...  
> I guess
> you can see where I'm going with this.  (agree or not)
>
> I think there is an ideal space, place and time for every piece.  The
> concert hall is right for some, wrong for others.  Social  
> interaction and
> context is secondary to me -- of primary importance is the proper  
> setting
> for the music...  unless the music is all about the social  
> interaction...
>
> my $2.  (Inflation in the States now is a bitch.)
>
> -S
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Paul-Lansky- 
> pulls-the-plug-tp18817595p18832191.html
> Sent from the Supercollider - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sc-users mailing list
>
> info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/ 
> MusicTechnology/880
> archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
> search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[nonprivate]

i'd love to play a gig where people sit down and shut up! how many times
have i played on a loud sound system and still been almost unable to
hear what i've been doing over the noise of shouting.

scacinto wrote:

>
> James Harkins-2 wrote:
>  
>> Part of my goal as a composer (and I'm not there yet) is to find/
>> imagine/realize social settings for electroacoustic music that exist  
>> outside the concert hall... and also outside the normal marketplace.
>>
>>    
>
> Eventually, anything you "find" will become, if successful, another concert
> hall unless you don't want people to go, don't want them to listen with
> care, and don't want them to treat the situation with any sort of special
> consideration... in other words, you find a random street corner, don't tell
> anyone, and don't repeat performances.  Hstorically, there are many people
> who have done this, and I know some people who still do.  I find it
> immensely unsatisfying in artistic terms, having done it a couple times
> myself.  (we can argue aesthetic values a different time)
>
> I agree that an alternative scene of sorts would be nice, but once one moves
> beyond the novelty of outdoor performances, etc, one realizes that unless
> you want the noise of the environment to play a part and compose your music
> that way, you want a quiet environment.  Unless you write your music in a
> way that benefits from distance, movement during performance, talking, and
> is relatively short, you're going to want places for people sit... I guess
> you can see where I'm going with this.  (agree or not)
>
> I think there is an ideal space, place and time for every piece.  The
> concert hall is right for some, wrong for others.  Social interaction and
> context is secondary to me -- of primary importance is the proper setting
> for the music...  unless the music is all about the social interaction...
>
> my $2.  (Inflation in the States now is a bitch.)
>
> -S
>
>
>  

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/

[Don Craig]

Actually, I don't think I missed the point at all. This concern for music as a "social activity" and to whom it is "in service," well, this

might be a failure of imagination on my part, but how is this not serving the marketplace? You can dress it up in talk about speaking to

the people where they are, etc., but it comes down to giving them what they they think they want. As for ego, when you have had a successful

"social activity" and the people, where ever they are, are satisfied, is your ego not well served?

But there are good points here. "Saying something important" is just as likely to be a self-serving delusion as serving the people. These issues are

seriously complicated and "correct" answers may not exist. When you actually reflect on these things, it's not hard to conclude that you can't win,

no matter what you do! I would say that what is required of anybody who places a value on their work (however that value is expressed, in or out of the

market, in or out of the Academy) is critical self-reflection; which is to say, questions like James' "Of whom or what do I want my music to be in service?"

should be taken seriously.

Sorry to get on my soapbox here. My original post was prompted by some mild irritation at the implicit notion that the 'Academy' is inauthentic, that one

measures authenticity by the number of people who show up. This was implied in the Lansky article, too. Some people have already alluded to the article's

ax-grinding.

I actually prefer Bach, myself, as well. (This is a different discussion, but did he really understand sacred space just because he was a church composer?)

Don

 

On Aug 5, 2008, at 5:35 AM, James Harkins wrote:

*sigh* Missed the point...

The question that has been on my mind for several years is, "Of whom or what do I want my music to be in service?" I don't have a complete answer (maybe I never will), but what's important to me are the changes in my thinking as a result of pondering the question.

We tend to assume that the sought-after "something important to say" will be located only (or mainly) in the sonic product, but I think that's a comforting fiction -- comforting because the sonic product is one of the few things the composer has control over. Of more interest to me is the fact that making and listening to music are social activities, and the meaning of music is as much in the social context as it is in the notes or sounds. (The experience of listening to a Beethoven symphony will be very different for a group of music theorists, as compared to that of the average symphony subscriber -- who might drink too much during intermission and actually sleep through much of it!)

Believing that the purpose of composing is to say something important (which just as often means to cram something that I think is important down the throats of the dwindling and graying subpopulation that actually goes to concert halls these days) carries a very real danger that my music might end up being in service of nothing more than my own ego. I don't find that interesting.

Part of my goal as a composer (and I'm not there yet) is to find/imagine/realize social settings for electroacoustic music that exist outside the concert hall (while I don't entirely disagree that the concert hall can be a sacred space for music, it's also a retreat from engagement with people where they are, which involves a bit of cowardice) and also outside the normal marketplace.

Anyway, I would rather try to go toe to toe with Bach (who, borrowing from Wyatt's analogy, is about 18' tall and 1100 pounds). He wrote as much for the church as for the concert. Now there is somebody who understood sacred space, much more than today's modernist wannabes.

hjh

On Aug 5, 2008, at 12:04 AM, Donald Craig wrote:

If you don't have something "important" to say, why spend your time doing it? Why should I spend my time (or money) listening to it?

That "dying model" you mention constitutes a refusal to capitulate  to the marketplace, to Adorno's "Culture Industry." This "sacred space" is exactly

the point and purpose of art.

Unfortunately,  most "composers" lack the balls to go toe-to-toe with Beethoven, and if you don't understand what I mean by that, then you are exactly

who I'm talking about. 

: H. James Harkins

: jamshark70@...

: http://www.dewdrop-world.net

.::!:.:.......:.::........:..!.::.::...:..:...:.:.:.:..:

"Come said the Muse,

Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,

Sing me the universal."  -- Whitman

[James Harkins-2]

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Donald Craig <rhomboid@...> wrote:
> but it comes down to giving them what they
> they think they want.

I hate this attitude. My position has absolutely nothing to do with
capitulating to an audience's limited conception of what good music is
(or can be).

I'm at work now and I don't have time to thrash it out further at the
moment. I'll say for now that I suspect "giving them what they think
they want" has a bit of the smell of the straw man about it.

> My original post was prompted by some mild irritation at the implicit notion that the 'Academy' is inauthentic...

Often it is, but sometimes it's absolutely the real thing. I've heard
great stuff in concert halls -- including acousmatic stuff like Trevor
Wishart's Vox-5 in quad (scared the crap out of me) and Lansky's Ride
(a wide-ranging journey).

Still, I'd love to hear either of these pieces on a well-hidden quad
system in the middle of a shopping mall. How would people react? Why
not try it? Could be fun. Certainly most of the people there wouldn't
pay as much respect to the composers as we think they should, but why
is that a problem?

> , that one measures authenticity by the number of people who show up.

Whoa, there. I *never* said that. I think you are reading something
into my post that isn't there.


I realize that what I posted is utopian in the truest sense of the
word - it can never happen! - but I find it valuable to get myself out
of some easy habits of mind. Scott (scacinto)'s criticism is right on
target, but even there some assumptions remain - that the point is for
the audience to appreciate *my* care in preparing the work, that they
should appreciate it all from start to finish (because it's *mine* and
if they hear only part of it, it's somehow an insult to *me*), that
*my* work should be the central focus - *my* *my* *my*. I think there
is value in questioning those assumptions. Whether the result of that
questioning is purely free of ego or not... I don't really care. But
part of what artists do is to imagine something that doesn't exist
yet, and I don't want to limit that imagination to the sonic product.

hjh


--
James Harkins /// dewdrop world
jamshark70@...
http://www.dewdrop-world.net

"Come said the Muse,
Sing me a song no poet has yet chanted,
Sing me the universal." -- Whitman

_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscribe and unsubscribe): http://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de:8888/MusicTechnology/880
archive: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: http://www.listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/