[microsound] post-laptop era?

Wed Dec 16 01:29:01 EST 2009

Getting back to your initial point... You seem to think that because someone
works with a digital interface, the nuance and history of traditional
instruments is completely abandoned. This spits in the face of the
experience I've had watching electroacoustic composers develop new
instruments. Whether the composers are academically trained or self taught,
the instruments strictly digital or physically informed, it's ludicrous to
think that the history that is embedded in our musical experiences is
abandoned when attempting to experiment in this fashion. You seem to want to
paint these constructions as entirely unilateral, but I've always witnessed
music creation as a reflexive process...

Whether the serious composers involved are explicitly drawing from an
academically induced source or second hand iterations passed on through
other conscious artists, it's ludicrous to assert that the rich musical
history stops dead simply because an artist chooses to engage with a process
that seems foreign to you. I can create a digital instrument right now, and
have countless instructors present through my vicarious exploration of the
music that inspires me. The process and evolution might not be as rigid and
traceable as a classically trained concert pianist, but why should it?
Whether I choose to be inspired by Charles Mingus or Andrew Coltrane, I'm
experiencing a rigor that is drawn from a rich musical tradition. Your
resistance to one side of the coin might make your vector seem clearer, but
what does that really offer?

Then again... Most of the people I spend my time with listen to both
Beethoven and Hair Police... Scelsi and Autechre... Dumitrescu and Major
Lazer... Balance is ideal, but it's silly to generalize about a body of
composers and musical pioneers that you seem to have limited exposure to.

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:59 PM, David Powers <cyborgk at gmail.com> wrote:

> First of all, the idea of "popular" music is totally misleading,
> because it usually refers to forms that are the result of the culture
> industry, and the demand for such music cannot be seperated from the
> "musical-industrial complex" that manufactures and markets such music.
> Now, if you want to talk about a form of music that did not arise out
> of the culture industry, such as West African tribal drumming, then we
> can really talk about a form of popular music (and I did in fact
> mention it).
>
> Second, notice how your argument tries to pin me down to some
> black-and-white position, when in fact what I am talking about is far
> more nuanced. My original example referenced "My Favorite Things," a
> pop tune if there ever was one, straight from the "Sound of Music."
> What is amazing about the Coltrane version is precisely his ability
> not to simply repeat the tune in some trite form, but to encounter
> this simple song and bring out an abstract beauty that no one could
> have foreseen, a beauty that seems to come from somewhere beyond this
> world. Coltrane engages with pop music in exactly the correct way,
> performing the impossible feat of evoking the blues, Jazz, African,
> and classical Indian music all at the same time, and with his sublime
> interpretation redeeming the songs' utopian potential and through his
> engagement creating a true musical Event.
>
> Third, even if my argument is elitist, how does that prove it wrong?
> If the exercise of critical reason and aesthetic judgment makes me
> elitist, then we need more elitists! Far worse than elitism is the old
> bourgeois relativism which now appears as postmodern relativism that
> says that everything is personal preference, no one can say anything
> about anything really, it's all just a matter of opinion. Not only is
> the end result of such a position totally nihilistic, since there can
> be no meaning, but the position contradicts itself; since if
> everything is relative, than elitism is just as valid as relativism!
>
> And to go further, there is a difference between saying that people
> have different tastes, and saying all taste is relative. To say that
> two people might disagree about the best food, where one prefers sushi
> and the other prefers a choice steak, is not the same as saying that
> since everyone has different taste, McDonald's is "just as good" as
> sushi and steak. Likewise, I don't deny that some will have different
> taste in music than me, but that in no way invalidates the idea that
> we can make aesthetic judgments about the quality of works. The fact
> that such judgments are finite and human, does means that no judgment
> can be "completely true," but that is a condition of being human and
> does not mean that we cannot make reasonably judgments as to the
> nature of things.
>
> I am extremely skeptical of these anti-elitist, relativist arguments,
> because they would seem to be nothing but the pure ideology of global
> capitalism; since every commodity is equal to some amount of money,
> every commodity is indeed relatively equal, in the fact that it can be
> bought and sold on the market place. In the case of music, the
> equality is even closer, since the price of music on itunes or a CD
> does not vary with the quality of the music. The fact is, arguing
> against elitism means arguing for a system where the rich get richer
> and the poor get poorer, for it is this very system that produces the
> ideology of relativism. Those who say that all choices are relative
> precisely justify the suffering of those who have no choice but to
> take whatever they can, while the more spiritual and refined pleasures
> of civilization are reserved for those on top.
>
> Does it take education and the existence of time outside the realm of
> work to appreciate Mahler or Mingus? Then let us destroy work and
> increase education, rather than depriving the world Mahler and Mingus
> and deluding ourselves that those with little means are getting
> exactly what they want and deserve anyway.
>
> ~David
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM, michael trommer <trommer at sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
> > I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as
> > blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to
> claim
> > not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording you
> > use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that you
> do.
> > It does smack of elitism, I must say...
> >
> > I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for
> the
> > supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often boring,
> > stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a overcomplicated
> > façade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream.
> >
> > On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" <cyborgk at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm
> >> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live
> >> performances and available recordings on the internet for more
> >> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental"
> >> even means much in the 21st century?
> >>
> >> ~David
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend <tjaredfriend at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to
> beatport
> >>> for experimental digital music.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers <cyborgk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at
> >>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here
> >>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for
> >>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians
> >>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear
> >>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find.
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> microsound mailing list
> >>> microsound at microsound.org
> >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> microsound mailing list
> >> microsound at microsound.org
> >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > microsound mailing list
> > microsound at microsound.org
> > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound
> >
> _______________________________________________
> microsound mailing list
> microsound at microsound.org
> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://or8.net/pipermail/microsound/attachments/20091215/980de391/attachment.html>