[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] microsound as pop music


but you have more than these two types of music. unless you subscribe to the "militant" academic view that anything that isn't academic is commercial/pop.

personally i listen to anything that doesn't require active intellectual analysis. if i want analysis i can buy a book. this excludes some music produced in the academic world, but not much.

the academic world also need money to exist (even if not derived from sales) and the supply of funds is highly controlled by trends just as in the pop world.

would you call arcana or densities by varese academic or pop? or my current favourite musician - anton webern. neither of these guys music are dependent (or even improves much) by analysis. i would not call any of them "academic" or "pop".

relax and enjoy some music instead of worrying so much! why not try something by kim cascone?



On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Stasisfield.com wrote:

 >But pop(ular) music sells millions of records,
 >generating huge revenues for corporations.  Academic
 >music is usually supported by grants, and is listened
 >to by a small group of listeners.  They are very, very
 >different. There is a distinction.


 If the definition of "pop music" includes "sell(ing) millions of
 records", how does one categorize work by someone like Marshall
 Crenshaw (to stray WILDLY from the realm of artists normally
 discussed here!) who has spent his lifetime crafting what I can only
 see fit to call "pop music" yet sells very few records?

> Can "pop" be as much an aesthetic as it is a label for music that
gains a certain level of acceptance by the masses? 

For me pop music is defined by the way it's constructed and by the way
it's (meant to be) consumed. Nothing to do with sales figures or
popularity. Pop music uses simple structures and simple/common musical
devices (i.e. tonal harmony, common rhythms, song structure, etc.) and can
be easily appreciated by anyone.
Pop music is primarily experienced in a visceral/sensual way. I don't
think people who mostly listen to pop music engage in active listening.
It's mostly about the general emotional effect a piece of music has on
them.

On the other hand I think with "academic" music active listening is a
requisite and sometimes more effort on the part of the listener is
required in order to understand it. Development within a piece of music
isn't really an issue in pop music, whereas that is an integral concept in
"academic" music.

I'm the one who kind of started this thread and I wanna say that the point
of making these distinctions isn't to point out one type of music's
superiority over the other. I think both pop music and academic music have
their strengths and weaknesses. I grew up on pop music and still listen to
lots of it. I don't think categorizing pieces of music as pop or academic
even serves much of a purpose in the end because it doesn't help one
enjoy listening to music in any way, which is what it's all about in the
end.
The reason I like to point out differences between these two types of
music is because it bothers me when people make comments about the musical
complexity/sophistication of a lot of what's referred to as microsound.

God, and does anyone actually refer to any music as microsound ? I know
personally I never use the term. Only if I'm referring to this mailing
list.

Andrei

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org