music

HI Jim
What I find quite interesting is the, in general,
complete lack of interest shown by those working in
contemporary visual arts for what could be described
as contemporary "art" music.
Read an interview with a visual artist and it almost
inevitable references popular music of some stripe (
including, to be fair, often quite challenging stuff
at the far end of the 'popular' spectrum)
I can't help feeling though people are missing out on
lots of good stuff - I've had a mini Elliot Carter
revival at home recently and it is *staggering* stuff
-but it does take quite a lot of thought and
engagement and it's by no means instant in its
rewards.
Other folk doing great stuff are the two Hungarians
Ligeti and Kurtag . Luciano Berio, who died recently,
always repays attention.
The unfortunately named but wonderful German composer
Heiner Goebbels definitely worth a few hours of
anyone's time.
In jazz I listen to everything Brad Meldhau releases.
I think there's a reverse ( but similar) problem with
Meldhau in that on a cursory listen he sounds almost
too easy to get along with and its only repeated and
careful listening that reveals his enormous depth.
I've given a little thought as to why there is this
strange disjunction- I think one of the reasons is
simply that there is little of this stuff available
for download. A second is that popular ( in the very
broadest sense) musicians have embraced digital
technology much more quickly and thoroughly than
either "art" ( the terminology is horrible and
clunky..) composers or jazzers and so certainly many
people working in new media tend to have an almost
built in predisposition towards that sort of work
which ften reflects their techniques and perhaps their
concerns.
Personally I listen to everything, but I am getting a
bit bored with stuff, often digital, that has a
surface shininess ( nice/interesting new sounds) but
no structure or real depth beyond that - lots of
electronica is for me like eating way too much
chocolate.
In that connection it's revealing to read things like
"Sound on Sound", which are pretty much new sounds
pornography - they are exclusively about how to make
new *sounds*, completely in isolation from what one
might then do with them, which of course is the
interesting and difficult two thirds of the iceberg.
best
michael
— Jim Andrews <[email protected]> wrote:

> Douglas Coupland, when asked what new band he's
> listening to that he can't
> stop listening to, recently said:
>
> "I think the day of discovering a brand new band is
> largely over.
> Everybody's a musical curator now, young and old.
> What's interesting is that
> people over 30, who throughout the 20th cenury more
> or less stopped engaging
> with music, are back in the trenches experiencing
> music they never would
> have found sans Internet. For me right now it's
> 1960's feel-good bands like
> the New Seekers as well as 1970's dinosaur rock like
> Emerson Lake and
> Palmer, which I didn't like when it first came out."
>
> I don't know. Sounds a bit myopic to me.
>
> The last day or so I've been listening to/watching
> the music videos
> available through the media library of winamp 5. I
> don't know whether I
> should be disappointed in the media library or music
> more generally or
> myself, but there just wasn't much that really got
> me. I got the strange
> feeling I'd heard it all before. Mind you all this
> stuff is from AOL, ie, it
> all hits a certain pro level. yet by dad there's an
> awful lot of sameness in
> that media library.
>
> My own suspicion is that there *is* music out there
> that is really new, but
> for all our communications devices it's still hard
> as hell to hear it, to
> find it. It is inaudible as far as empire is
> concerned. Like that Vicki
> Bennett/People Like Us music I put a link in to a
> while ago. That's
> interesting contemporary music, not an endless
> repeat loop–though it uses
> other peoples' music from the 20's through the 90's
> as its only material.
>
> dazed & confused,
> ja
> http://vispo.com
>
>
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is
> open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
> out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Thanks, Michael. Of the people you mention, I've heard only Berio; I'll
check out the rest, if possible, via file-sharing programs.

Maybe there'll come a time when regular composition in the arts is once
again fruitful via feedback through other levels of composition, perhaps.
But, at the moment, it seems that whereever we turn, whether in writing or
music or visual art, the note is a phrase (larger scale). Or the word is a
letter or symbol (smaller scale). To be a bit flip about it, as though we
were moving from assembly language to a 'higher' level language.

ja

Hi Jim,

Maybe this will help:
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/top/2004/

From that list I particularly like Devendra Banhart, Joanna Newsom, and Sufjan Stevens. The majority of those projects I don't even know. But in my college radio DJ days I would have known them all.

Ours is a good era for off-the-radar pop music. But then it's been a good era for off-the-radar pop music since 1962.

peace,
curt

_

Jim Andrews wrote:

> Douglas Coupland, when asked what new band he's listening to that he
> can't
> stop listening to, recently said:
>
> "I think the day of discovering a brand new band is largely over.
> Everybody's a musical curator now, young and old. What's interesting
> is that
> people over 30, who throughout the 20th cenury more or less stopped
> engaging
> with music, are back in the trenches experiencing music they never
> would
> have found sans Internet. For me right now it's 1960's feel-good bands
> like
> the New Seekers as well as 1970's dinosaur rock like Emerson Lake and
> Palmer, which I didn't like when it first came out."
>
> I don't know. Sounds a bit myopic to me.
>
> The last day or so I've been listening to/watching the music videos
> available through the media library of winamp 5. I don't know whether
> I
> should be disappointed in the media library or music more generally or
> myself, but there just wasn't much that really got me. I got the
> strange
> feeling I'd heard it all before. Mind you all this stuff is from AOL,
> ie, it
> all hits a certain pro level. yet by dad there's an awful lot of
> sameness in
> that media library.
>
> My own suspicion is that there *is* music out there that is really
> new, but
> for all our communications devices it's still hard as hell to hear it,
> to
> find it. It is inaudible as far as empire is concerned. Like that
> Vicki
> Bennett/People Like Us music I put a link in to a while ago. That's
> interesting contemporary music, not an endless repeat loop–though it
> uses
> other peoples' music from the 20's through the 90's as its only
> material.
>
> dazed & confused,
> ja
> http://vispo.com
>
>

and more:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/collective/A3212740

not outsider music ( http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1556523726/ ), but more like what dubuffet called "neuve invention" – borderline cases of works that straddled the boundary between Art Brut and mainstream art.

_


curt cloninger wrote:

> Hi Jim,
>
> Maybe this will help:
> http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/top/2004/
>
> From that list I particularly like Devendra Banhart, Joanna Newsom,
> and Sufjan Stevens. The majority of those projects I don't even know.
> But in my college radio DJ days I would have known them all.
>
> Ours is a good era for off-the-radar pop music. But then it's been a
> good era for off-the-radar pop music since 1962.
>
> peace,
> curt
>
> _
>
> Jim Andrews wrote:
>
> > Douglas Coupland, when asked what new band he's listening to that he
> > can't
> > stop listening to, recently said:
> >
> > "I think the day of discovering a brand new band is largely over.
> > Everybody's a musical curator now, young and old. What's interesting
> > is that
> > people over 30, who throughout the 20th cenury more or less stopped
> > engaging
> > with music, are back in the trenches experiencing music they never
> > would
> > have found sans Internet. For me right now it's 1960's feel-good
> bands
> > like
> > the New Seekers as well as 1970's dinosaur rock like Emerson Lake
> and
> > Palmer, which I didn't like when it first came out."
> >
> > I don't know. Sounds a bit myopic to me.
> >
> > The last day or so I've been listening to/watching the music videos
> > available through the media library of winamp 5. I don't know
> whether
> > I
> > should be disappointed in the media library or music more generally
> or
> > myself, but there just wasn't much that really got me. I got the
> > strange
> > feeling I'd heard it all before. Mind you all this stuff is from
> AOL,
> > ie, it
> > all hits a certain pro level. yet by dad there's an awful lot of
> > sameness in
> > that media library.
> >
> > My own suspicion is that there *is* music out there that is really
> > new, but
> > for all our communications devices it's still hard as hell to hear
> it,
> > to
> > find it. It is inaudible as far as empire is concerned. Like that
> > Vicki
> > Bennett/People Like Us music I put a link in to a while ago. That's
> > interesting contemporary music, not an endless repeat loop–though
> it
> > uses
> > other peoples' music from the 20's through the 90's as its only
> > material.
> >
> > dazed & confused,
> > ja
> > http://vispo.com
> >
> >

> and more:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/collective/A3212740


Compare the above with:

"Scratch Peace" (#30) by Gregory Whitehead at
http://vispo.com/temp/whitehead.m3u or
http://www.ubu.com/sound/whitehead.html

(needs some volume)

ja
http://vispo.com

——=_NextPart_001_000D_01C78413.BAF916C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="windows-1251"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Spreading too thin, pi.
Management services amp fee monthlyget.
Generaleye on appleipod feedmacnn mobileirc, chatallmac newsby macnnmacnn. =
On appleipod, feedmacnn mobileirc chatallmac.
Purchase nonvoting less than cash assets total market tiny.
Shipdlo ipodezgear ezwake ultraears sxtunewear leather, nanonew, nano dlomo=
re. Nonvoting, less than cash assets total market.
Top, macs reduced imac probriefly reviews.
Nano dlomore gm chevy volt update buick.
Offline while company new products will offer live coverage? Gui games, uni=
x developer other topics digital av. Offline while company new products wil=
l offer.
Forumsmy home hardware power mac powerbook, imacemac mini.

——=_NextPart_001_000D_01C78413.BAF916C0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="windows-1251"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-125=
1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Spreading too thin, pi.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Management services amp fee monthlyget.</F=
ONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Generaleye on appleipod feedmacnn mobileir=
c,
chatallmac newsby macnnmacnn. On appleipod, feedmacnn mobileirc chatallmac.=
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Purchase nonvoting less than cash assets t=
otal
market tiny.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Shipdlo ipodezgear ezwake ultraears sxtune=
wear
leather, nanonew, nano dlomore. Nonvoting, less than cash assets total mark=
et.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Top, macs reduced imac probriefly reviews.=
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Nano dlomore gm chevy volt update buick.</=
FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Offline while company new products will of=
fer live
coverage? Gui games, unix developer other topics digital av. Offline while=

company new products will offer.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Forumsmy home hardware power mac powerbook=
,
imacemac mini.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A HREF=http://nifroq.proportionat.com/?jsumouzgxfgl><IMG alt="" h=
space=0
src="cid:000b01c783f2$33e776c0$ebc2285a@dron" align=center border=0><=
/A></DIV>

——=_NextPart_001_000D_01C78413.BAF916C0–