RE: [microsound] musical language

[Paulo Mouat <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Too much wishful thinking going on...  It is obvious that using a simplistic
criterion like number of occurrences of each note will certainly create
"context": common practice in music has that as a consequence by its own
very nature, not as a driving force.  A simple counter-argument dismisses
such a thesis -- grab each of the pieces mentioned and randomize the notes.
I doubt our ears would be able to discern said "context"; nevertheless, it
would be there according to the analysis.

I can't believe they even say that the schoenberg has less structure.
Certainly, they were looking for it in the wrong place.

A more accurate analysis would need to measure distance between notes, not
the notes themselves.  I guess they are oblivious of the extensive work of
Steven Pope.

//P
http://www.interdisciplina.org/00.0/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Cascone [mailto:kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 2:11 PM
> To: microsound_list
> Subject: [microsound] musical language
> 
> 
> http://www.nature.com/nsu/040614/040614-11.html



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