Re: [microsound] a new primitivism?

[Ian Guthrie Yeager <iyeager@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

It seems to me that timbre has been a neglected element in the development
of western art music, and perhaps in other art music traditions around the
world.

Also, and perhaps more importantly, our ability to manipulate sound in
such a total and flexible way via technology (tape, sampler, echo,
distortion, etc etc) highlights sound in an unprecedented way.

I think it's pretty obvious that much of this focus on
timbre/texture/quality of sound would not have happened without the
development of record/reproduce technology. Even composerrs like Ligeti,
who works primarily through acoustic instruments, acknowledges influence
from electronic music. 

Of course if someone said that intense focus on sound for its own sake
were some purely 20th century phenomenon, we'd all probably think they
were full of shit, right?


-Ian


On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Andrei wrote:

> On Fri, 5 Oct 2001 w_a_s_t_e_@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > My point, or rather question, here is: 
> > Isn´t the thought of music as 
> > something physical something 
> > which has guided the making, and 
> > experiencing of music since 
> > pythagoras? Why are we all then 
> > acting as if this is something 
> > completely alien to the history of 
> > music? As if the purity of tones (to 
> > speak with Immanuel Kant) were 
> > something neglected or forgotten. 
> 
> Pretension ? Pseudo-intellectualism ? Self-aggrandizing ?
> 
> Andrei
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org
> 
> 

Ian Yeager         
igy2k