You guys have gotten me to attempt to define music in the broadest way possible. So how 'bout this? Noise crafted to elicit an emotional response in the listener.
Music is sound, sound can be music
It was hard to make a title that fit what I wanted to talk about. Reading the thread about the deleted Hip-hop/Rap thread was an interesting window on some of the mindset here (some of which was unfortunate and depressing too but that's the world we live in....). What struck me was the attitude that if it's not played on a traditional instrument it's not music, or it just "sucks" in some way.
First, many instruments today, lots of brass ones especially or guitars didn't exist until the last 100-200 years. Do they not make music?
But you have to learn to use it skillfully, so I read. Knowing how to read and write music surely qualifies one yes? Talented even, if your can write complex pieces?
Ok, then. 25 years ago I worked with early digital audio systems using sequencers and MIDI. My partner graduated with honors from Berklee college of music and was a composer. He wrote some amazing work without touching anything more than a mouse and keyboard. Was it music?
10 years later I worked with another person who did incredible work in sound collage and electronic music. They did use a controller that is essentially a piano keyboard but it only sends note data to the system. She could play wonderfully on a real piano but often used non-linear editing and manipulation to produce innovative soundscapes. Was it music?
There are other examples where people do all sorts of experimental things with sound and not a single traditional instrument is ever used. Is it art?
My point here is if you don't like something that's fine. It doesn't make you a bad, stupid, or ignorant person. Neither are you those things if you don't understand why people create things or how they choose to do it. Of course, you are free to say what you like, that's your right. But don't be surprised when you are considered ignorant and intolerant when all you have to say is negative and derogatory remarks.
Life is too short to spend energy on things you don't like. Move on past and participate in the things you enjoy and let others enjoy theirs. Or maybe open you mind and give something more than a cursory glance if curiosity gets you, explore, read, listen and learn. You may decide it really isn't for you, but then again you might.
First, many instruments today, lots of brass ones especially or guitars didn't exist until the last 100-200 years. Do they not make music?
But you have to learn to use it skillfully, so I read. Knowing how to read and write music surely qualifies one yes? Talented even, if your can write complex pieces?
Ok, then. 25 years ago I worked with early digital audio systems using sequencers and MIDI. My partner graduated with honors from Berklee college of music and was a composer. He wrote some amazing work without touching anything more than a mouse and keyboard. Was it music?
10 years later I worked with another person who did incredible work in sound collage and electronic music. They did use a controller that is essentially a piano keyboard but it only sends note data to the system. She could play wonderfully on a real piano but often used non-linear editing and manipulation to produce innovative soundscapes. Was it music?
There are other examples where people do all sorts of experimental things with sound and not a single traditional instrument is ever used. Is it art?
My point here is if you don't like something that's fine. It doesn't make you a bad, stupid, or ignorant person. Neither are you those things if you don't understand why people create things or how they choose to do it. Of course, you are free to say what you like, that's your right. But don't be surprised when you are considered ignorant and intolerant when all you have to say is negative and derogatory remarks.
Life is too short to spend energy on things you don't like. Move on past and participate in the things you enjoy and let others enjoy theirs. Or maybe open you mind and give something more than a cursory glance if curiosity gets you, explore, read, listen and learn. You may decide it really isn't for you, but then again you might.
- ...
- 42 posts total
Music is a way to use sound , taking the awareness level and the emotion level and raising them to their highest conscious possible point... Music can be used also destructively... Music of all age and cultures is also an history ,circling around the spirit...Music is not "arbitrary" it is something encompassing the rational and the irrational in a bigger whole....Then a spiritual phenomenon more than a sensible phenomenon... Ernest Ansermet wrote a thousand pages book on that matter....In french , i think it is not translated ... One of the great book of the century..... «Music is an hologram of consciousness»-Anonymus Smith «Even the distribution of primes is pure music»- Physicist Michael Berry in marcus du Sautoy book the music of primes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duVyBVNX3D8 Or this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1FqnfrcWA4 or this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI8T774ygNM The distribution of primes could be "interpreted" as an hologram of a universal memory, it is not surprizing then that a link with music could be possible... All memory is music and music is related to the deepest memory and elicit it.... Rythm is universal habits or laws in musical clothes... In India the tabla player with each part of his palm invoke and provoke a cosmic movement... Rythm is more powerful than meet the eye...Anyway all music is geometry.... |
«If all is relative, the absolute posit itself, it is the relation»-Lanza Del Vasto disciple of Gandhi Imagine a mountain where the peak could be attained by an indefinite number of roads... One peak and many roads... Imagine now that the peak is a tone pitch, and each road a voicing of it.... The problem of the existence of the relative and of the absolute is simple, it is a geometry problem in projective geometry....In music it is counterpoint....In number theory the distribution of primes....In spiritual meditation it is a conscious vision.... "relalitivism" on the contrary is an ideological view which is not simple.... Then we must learn to distinguish real problem among unreal one and political agendas....We must also distinguish science and technology, selected roads, going or not to the peak, from the mountain.... |
We actually had music class in school as a kid. They taught us music was notes on a scale and how to read and reproduce them. Rap meets that definition Same notes on same scale as all the rest...but essentially infinite ways to apply them. What varieties people like or not is another story. It’s all music. Has nothing to do with who likes which varieties or not. It’s very simple actually. No philosophy involved. It’s actually amazing that such a small collection of notes on a scale can produce endless varieties of music including rap. Toss in lyrics, stories, poetry and what have you and now you really got something that justifies spending big bucks to reproduce it well in one’s home. |
@frogman Yes, progress indeed! You chose a great sentence: "What is wrong with the notion of objects existing “independently” of conceptual schemes is that there are no standards for the use of even the logical notions apart from conceptual choices. (Putnam 1988: 114)" Putnam gets at the point I was trying to make. The notion that we can affix a label ("objects" or "music" or "noise") with the label "true" is one requires that we know this label is anchored in a reality outside of our conceptual schemes. This is something we cannot do; everything we label is labeled with our concepts, our words, and connect to our schemes -- and our purposes. That is why the relativist position is impossible to overturn. That said, what Putnam maintains -- and which I was trying to convey -- is that conceptual schemes can contain labels which are very, very stable, because they are part of forms of life which we have staked ourselves in. We see the most rigid examples of these labels in our logical terms ("and" "but" "or" etc.) and that is why Putnam mentions "logical notions." Hope that helps. |
- 42 posts total