Re: [microsound] aesthetic approach

[Mark Khemma <mkhemma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well, i suppose music theory is simply additive-- people learn them and
appropriate them as part of their own style in whateer time they are part
of. but i see new dialectics of
music being formed simply due to how tightly bound out culture is to the
new technology that is discovered.  and becuase of this new technology we
are able to discover new time-space questions that have never been brought
up before. For instance, silophone.net, the discussiong of sound source
and sound desitination have been requestioned. in addition because of new
technology, new discoveries of psycho accoustics have been developed, to
create sound illusions is an example. by more fully understand human
accoustic phenomena, new emotions or new combinations of emotions can now
be honed from the viewer. sorry if this is sounding like babble, my
thoughts run faster tham my typing.
-mark

On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Michal Seta wrote:

> On 11/2/01 4:59 PM, Mark Khemma @ mkhemma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >  there is music theory in its
> > classical sense that people can talk through, but with the dawn of new
> > sound tools, it seems that there should be a new dialectic being formed.
>
>
>
> The music definition (if such thing exists) will never change so I don't see
> a need for a new dialectic.  Essentially music consists of sounds organized
> is some particular way within a certain frame of time.  And it's this
> organization of those sounds (and often the sounds themselves, without
> excluding their organization) that makes music identifiable.  So music
> theory is relevant in a discourse concerning music but one has to keep in
> mind that theories evolve.  And although a theory could be an only aesthetic
> guide for someone it doesn't need to be so necessarily.
>
> ./MiS

--Boundary_(ID_K4LiueAi4FeJ26MMc6sDzA)
Content-Type: message/rfc822; Name="High-pitched hum in Pierre Henry CD"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit