not a mind meld

[Kim Cascone <kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I understand what you're saying and would be willing to accept your
> thinking if your statements were less sweeping.
ben, with all due respect, I am not interested in you accepting my way of
thinking...I put these ideas out there for microsounders to chew on, pick
apart, digest, refute, etc but I have little interest in 'converting' anyone
to my way of thinking...

> Kim, I respect your
> opinion, so I have to confirm what I think you just said: do you really
> believe that this is the ONLY way for "music" - all music, I can only
> assume - "to progress"?   that there's no more room for progress in
> music created by a physical means?
I think people tend to 'read' statements made about culture as
absolute...but what you think I am saying is not quite right...there are
many ways for music to progress and I describe only one of them... I was
referring to ' all music' as 'non-beat oriented sound-art/music as produced
by electronic means'...since this list seems to be focussed in that area I
assume people know I am referring to this type of music/sound-art...

as for progressing via physical means...nutshell (which will be misread I'm
sure): the physicality involved in performing traditional music primarily
serves to keep 'dead' idioms' alive for the people who directly profit by
them (e.g., classical, rock 'n roll, jazz, etc)...physical prowess is linked
into a musical political/economy that the laptop (so far) has managed to
escape... 
again, no time to explain deeper but I like the discussions my murky
statements have spawned...
also, great book mentions by the list...