Re: originality = pretense? NOT!

[Greg <gregg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>
> > Yes, but i'm saying that so-called emulation is vital. Any attempt
> > at
> > originality is a pretension.
> > Someone who goes out of their way to
> > deliberately sound like the music of another should be congratuated,
> > basically because it cannot be done. Thus mutation and progress
> > occur.
>
> Congratulated how? With another Grammy award? Formulas have always been
> copied successfully and many have been subsequently rewarded. Maybe what
> you're trying to say is that inspiration and influence are unavoidable.
> Originality is not a pretension and it is entirely possible, otherwise
> "mutation and progress" as you put it, would not occur.

What we are talking about goes further than influence. The original poster
was looking to directly emulate a well-known electronic group through
software patches. I mean even with exactly the same hardware and software
and knowledge of working methods, such an emulation is near impossible. Any
attempt to make that emulation will end with additional artifacts that were
not part of the original artists music. These artifacts or 'mutations' are a
part of an evolutionary superstructure in the genre and should be accepted
as such.

Any attempt at originality is a pretense. Why? because you are introducing a
new life-form to an evolutionary chain without precedence. This is of course
a fiction, it cannot occur. All we see are chains of evolution, degrees of
mutation.