Re: [microsound] Re: Cages prepared piano

[amnesia <amnesia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Did Cage prepare is piano evry time?



ross healy ( CRAY)
http://www.fallt.com/artists/cray.html
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/2567/amnesia.htm

OUT SOON:

CRAY
 "comment" MP3/3"CD (fällt/ireland) (nov2000)
(http://fallt.com/invalidObject/index.html)
"communications error" (vibragun records/sydney) (dec200)
http://www.vibragun.com.au

----- Original Message -----
From: "steve roden" <sroden@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "microsound" <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 12:08 PM
Subject: [microsound] Re: poor mr. pita, look what you've done to him...


> hello -
> since i get the belated digest, i thought i'd drop in another two cents to
> all this -
>
> first -  and it seems to surface so often here and on the lowercase list -
> is the argument of liner notes and the artist giving you printed
> information or no information on how something was made -
>
> and second, this kind of technical credit that has surfaced with the pita
> argument -
>
> i would think in computer music, there is a similar kind of geek as in any
> form of music that can have a kind of cultish following - the guy (or
girl)
> who wants to know not only who played guitar, but what kind of guitar,
what
> kind of delay pedal, etc. the more tiny liner notes, the better to be able
> to obsess over everything technical or otherwise. i know a lot of jazz
fans
> who can name recording dates, etc. for me this is all not so interesting.
> it seems that half the posts on this list are in regards to technical data
> for making work - this is different information than what you should
expect
> on the inside of a cd.
>
> i really think that to have this all develop over the work of pita is
quite
> funny, because his work has been praised here so often. and this whole
> notion of someone else writing a patch seems to me to be as big of a
> revelation as finding out bill clinton didn't inhale - what's the
> difference if you still like the work. the guy who made the patch hasn't
> made a record that has been discussed on the list to the best of my
> knowledge - and i am sure that if he did it would be different than
pita's.
>
>
> i think it is funny that poor pita has to 'set the record straight' - he
> already had set it straight when he made work that interested most of
you -
> the magic is in the music. it isn't about  refrigerators, dj's, sampling,
> etc. it is about what the artist is presenting to you as a work of art -
> and in this way the duchamp thing, which i also initially felt was totally
> irrelevant, kind of makes sense because as much as a urinal questions our
> notions of sculpture; it seems that pita's presentation of a patch (not
> using a cumputer for my work i have no idea what a patch actually is!) is
> questionable to some of you as 'music' or sound art. it is never about
> being the first one or claiming some kind of virgin territory for oneself.
> anyone with a $30 soundmaker program can make oodles of oval tracks, but
so
> far no one has done an oval-like record that we all like and think is
> original. it is the nature of this kind of music to use programs and
> equipment designed to do one simple task that will specifically change
> 'sound' in one's work - but hey that is why guitar freaks used a boss
pedal
> or a dod pedal.
>
> the notion that this thing plays itself and that makes it only the
property
> of the programmer is ludicrous - look at colin nancarrow's work for player
> pianos - everyone knew what a player piano could do, but he has taken it
> totally beyond the expectation of what could be done with that machine.
> perhaps pita has done the same thing with this patch. having to defend
> oneself in terms of having some influence on the making of the patch seems
> rather crazy to me. i thought this kind of justification ended when one
got
> out of graduate school! how in this day and age can anyone question the
> authenticity or authorship of any work. there is no moral right or wrong
to
> using a program someone else devised  - should we be prosecuted for not
> naming the brand of the refrigerator or the city in a field recording -
> hopefully it is what one does with this material that is interesting - and
> i would suspect again that in the case of the folks on this list, pita has
> proven all this by your constant interest in the work itself. what has he
> done with it that makes it his own - perhaps it is the music, perhaps it
is
> only the package or the presentation of the music - but whatever it is,
the
> general concensus is that it works...
>
> on my new cd i used only bernhard gunter's details agarandis as my source
> material for a few tracks - it has been completely transformed beyond any
> recognition - and i state that i used this material in the booklet - but i
> didn't state how i tranformed it (i even forgot to put in there that i
> didn't use a computer to really confound folks :-). personally, i can't
see
> how this knowledge would help you appreciate my work - i can't answer the
> argument for or against text or information at this point. i think when
> someone is simply justifying what they are doing there is a tendency to
> appear to be 'claiming territory' for oneself and this can be problematic
> indeed - possibly what gunnar is talking about. i also think at some point
> the text can be much more interesting than the work itself and this for me
> is extremely problematic (probably also what gunnar is talking about).
> interesting and good to talk about do not define the ultimate listening
> experiences in my book. but classical music has a history of liner and
> composer's notes that tend to contextualize work and process and i think
it
> can be rather enlightening - not for the listening part, but for the
> thinking part later. i have always had rather exptensive notes in my works
> and my intention is always to humbly lay bare what the ideas were that
> inspired my work. some enjoy it, some kick my ass over it. i view it as
> humble and truthful, others as pretentious. we can never please everyone
> and there is not a simple answer to this part of the discussion, which i
> think is why it surfaces so often. i do think that in the vote department,
> most non-artists couldn't care less how pita makes his work. they simply
> want to listen to it. since i don't even know what i patch is, i will
chalk
> one vote up there from myself as well.
> thanks for listening, sorry if i ranted a bit.
> steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
> steve roden/in be tween noise
> box 50261 pasadena california 91115-0261
> usa
> phone 626 403 9343
> please note, we have no more fax.
> e-mail:sroden@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "the eyes transmit thoughts, therefore i shut them from time to time in
> order to stop having to think"
> robert walser
> .
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org
>