Re: [microsound] the great depression of experimental music? (OT)

[Michal Seta <mis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

chthonic streams <chthonic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> ok, personal difference of opinion here then.

Definitely.

> however, if music is always a social activity, why is the usual
> expectation of live concerts a one-way experience for the most part?

Because a live concert concept has not yet evolved and is still deeply
rooted in the 19th century aesthetic (and previous centuries) of the
western culture.

> i agree that music *can* be social, and can even have some degree of
> interaction.  but it's not necessary, and many people simply have
> personalities that don't desire this, or don't make it a
> priority. 

That's fine.  no problem with that.

> often the sales of recorded music far outstrip concert sales
> of the same artists.  it's simply not feasible for musicians to be in
> as many places and perform for as many people as their recordings can
> get to.  

That is understandable, too.  However, this does not seem to be the
driving force behind record sales (and now, online music sales).

> not only that, but in many cases (depending on the venue),
> the concert setting makes additional changes to the music that are
> unwelcome, possibly diminishing rather than enhancing the artist's
> original intent.

I'm not sure what you mean by that.

> another point is, if music is always meant to be social, why are there
> headphones?  
[snip]
>   a similar argument
> could be made for listening to music in a car while driving alone; it
> is not social, but does interact with the environment.

You make valid points to justify archiving of music.  I agree with all
your points.  What I see around me, though, is that various recording
media are taking over the live aspect of music making.  Not to mention
that some of the 'live' acts rely on recorded medium.  Not that I have
a prblem with that...

> one interesting exception of late has been gallery installations where
> people are given headphones to listen to the same music (or perhaps
> different music) while they're in the gallery space.  they are free to
> be social and interact, but the headphones also cut them off from each
> other.  however, this is a specific artistic concept rather than a
> social norm.

Yes.  Various gallery installations, perhormances etc are a step
towards the liberation from the traditional concert setting.  The
thing is that recorded music does not do justice to many such
performances.  But I suppose, this too is a matter of personal opinion.

> yes.  the artwork on the CD and surrounding it, in whatever form it
> takes.  you can think of the CD and its packaging as a canvas, albeit
> pre-stretched and in a predetermined size.  although sometimes
> limitations such as this can help art  rather than hurt it.  perhaps i
> argue for this more because i'm also a visual artist. however, i think
> many non-artist musicians have some kind of concept of the visual
> presentation of their music.  they can then hire artists to help
> realize this part of their vision, turning it into a multimedia
> experience greater than the sum of its parts.  perhaps it seems overly
> grand or silly to refer to a CD in a jewel case with artwork as
> multimedia, but by definition it is.

This is all true.  But, (another matter of personal taste) I don't
like them mass-produced.

> you're not a fan of warhol, then..  : )

Guess not...

> and yes, while the CDs themselves are mass-produced, i think i
> mentioned in another post the option of custom packaging, in some
> cases done by the musicians.

This appeals more to me.

> i see this as more of a problem that the majority of the producers of
> the medium are unimaginative and focus on profit rather than art.  it
> took years for CD packaging to become more interesting.  as the format
> matures, artists come up with new ways to make the medium part of (or
> at least fit with) the message.  after several years, these
> enhancements become more widespread.

I would not blame the producers alone.  The artists, too often, don't
stand up for themselves

> i don't beleive the explosion of the mp3
> format has to do with quality.  it has to do with ease of acquisition,
> and price (usually free, especially if downloaded unscrupulously).  

Yes, but since the mp3 explosion other formats came that offer the
same ease of transfer and  price but with higher quality.
Unfortuantely most consummers don't see/hear the difference.

> i know this has been said before, but it's the digital, and thus
> electronically transferrable, version of cassettes. people make
> "mixtapes" and trade songs.  not a terrible thing in itself, it can
> help to spread the music.  i love mp3s and the internet as a way to
> check out unfamiliar music; i think every artist should do it.  but i
> don't believe in this format being the final destination, but a
> sidestep.  think of it as a shortcut on your computer that leads you
> to the real thing.

I totally agree with this.


> >HD = fixed medium = CD
> >files on HD = files on CD
> 
> now you've lost me.  if a file ultimately ends up on a HD (whether of
> a large computer, laptop, or ipod), why is that any better than the
> fixed medium of the CD that is "taking over"?

No, I am not saying it is better.  It is no different.  One and the
other are the same thing.  I am afraid, however, that the widespread
of CD, CD-R, mp3 etc has a negative influence on live performance
attendance.

../MiS


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