From Kevin Ryan Sent Mon, Aug 23rd 1999, 15:55
From Kevin Ryan Sent Mon, Aug 23rd 1999, 15:55
ChairCrusher <xxxx@xxxxxx.xxx> writes: >>When you hear a melody it has an emotional resonance that is, for most >>people, lacking in pure rhythm music. But that doesn't need to be the >>case -- when a good DJ drops "The Bells" by Jeff Mills into a set, you >>would need a heart of stone to resist the propulsive mood of that track. I always thought the single reason "The Bells" is so popular is because of its 4-tone melodic hook (played by the "bells," I suppose). The percussion is extremely propulsive, but I don't think the rhythm alone would stand out so far from among Detroit tracks if it wasn't for the hook. Somebody writes: >>> but people who think IDM is >>> "the most complex music" really ought to check out other sections of the >>> record store before they pat themselves on the back again for being so >>> "deep". . . Who wants complex music? I sure don't. (And remember, a Beethoven symphony becomes MUCH more complex when played by bad musicians!) martin <xxxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxx-xxxx.xx.xx> responds: >>john coltrane >> >>if theres one musician i think everyone has to check out its trane.. >> >>devastating Um, if I had to pick one word for Coltrane, it would be "inaccessible." At least for his later free-form period. I personally don't like all his noodling around, but that's just a personal opinion, not a judgement of talent--he is the man when it comes to saxophone. It seems very excessive to me--and if I didn't know better (but I do), I might say he was trying to show off his skills. "Giant steps" is a very accessible album, that's the one I own..."India" is pretty amazing, but I just have trouble listening to it for more than 15 minutes (in other words, I'm working on it). But I don't listen to or enjoy jazz so I'll stop right now. Stravinsky's "Le Sacre du Printemps," however, there's some gratuitous complexity I can understand. Drusca <xxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> asks: >>>How does non-repetition lead to liberation of melody ? Good question--it doesn't, not exactly. But "Tristan und Isolde" was a turning point in romanticism (perhaps the most influential piece written in the 19th century) which liberated art music from its classical structure focusing on parsed and repeated phrases. You're right, I'm giving it too much credit; but at the same time, it really helped get the ball rolling for future experimentalists. >>> if you listen to a lot of the music of the Futurists I haven't. I've just read their literature. Thanks for the recommendation. >>>It's kind of funny to dismiss the theories of a highly, highly >>>intelligent man >>>like Cage by simply calling them "lame". Yeah, it is funny, but I do think it's a bad aesthetic. Just like Cage was an anarchist, and I believe anarchism is pretty stupid. Cage was important as a wake-up call to 20th century art; he took minimalism/maximalism to an extreme and really created a stir. In other words, it is the events the Cage created, imo, not so much his music, that were influential. How often do you listen to 4'33"? >>>>> Trance, house, jungle, etc are supposed to be repetitive, >>> >>>Says who ? Well, listen to them! xxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx writes: >>Its very difficult to define what is intentional: once our attention is >>called to a sound, we put it on a pedestal, and listen to that rather than >>other sounds. Well, that was Cage's point. "Intentional" for Cage described sounds coming from the stage--sounds that a composer wrote to a score. "Nonintentional" was left for anything else--sounds coming from the audience, the air, outside, etc. Cage wanted to show that both kinds of sounds are legitimate music. I'd write more but I have to leave right now...kevin mR.