========================================================================= Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 16:27:43 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "william.b.fox" Subject: Re: Recording Careers George Allaman wrote, in part: > After a few weeks of following EMUSIC-L, and having just read Martin's > treatise on the rules, I feel partially emboldened to ask a question of > the members that has been burning me most of my adult life. How does one > start a career as an engineer in the recording industry? I get the > impression that most of the contributors to this listserv are music > professionals. > > I majored in music for part of my college career but ended up getting a > degree in electrical engineering. I went into avionics design, simply > because I was an unfocussed lad and this was where the money was. Ever > since, I have hankered to find an opening into the recording industry. You sound like me, George. If I had been a lot more focused, I could have been an EE for a manufacturer in the MI (musical instrument) biz. Alesis, Ensoniq, Lexicon, ART, or some such place. I never majored in music nut took at least 40 hour of music courses plus the first offerings of audio recording that Ohio State had to offer. Like you, I'm an EE not working in the music biz. But I *AM* in several music groups, getting involved big time at small radio stations, and, of course, am constantly acquiring music gear for my analog eight channel cum DAT cum MIDI cum etc. studio. I.e., I'm a hobbyist. I'm afraid that I cannot help you with your questions about a mid-life career change from EE to music. I just want to let you know that you have company. I practice my instruments, I rehearse with bands, I practice at engineering, dabble with sound design, engineer radio shows, dream of hosting my own on-air programs, and I do whatever I can towards filling my life with music and music-related activities. (No wonder I'm 40 and still single!) My only recommendation would be to seek out a recording facility in your area and hang out there, schmooze the employees, ask for a part time job, or whatever else you can think of that will get your foot in the door. Good luck! Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com -- "Having a thing is not always as pleasing as wanting it. It is not logical, but it is often true." (Paraphrased from memory.) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 22:18:03 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: RE[2]: ART/MUSIC/POWE > > none of the stylistic changes that took place in > > the first millenia of written music can be traced to political > power. > > But perhaps the choice of what to write down could be, at least very early on. It's hard not to see the church in the time of the crusades as a > political body. Then there was the example of the Council of Trent, when > Palastrina was around, where the church tried to edict "no complex polyphony" because the words couldn't be understood. a) church music was collected by pope gregory from material already in common use. b) the ars nova (1300's) was extremely anti-church and cynical, much because of the crusades. c) do you mean to imply that organum and motets were invented as styles of composition because of political reasons? d) complex polyphony was eventually abandoned, but not because of the council of trent, rather because of the advocacy of a bunch of amateurs (the florentine camerata) none of this holds up under specific examination. mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 00:05:45 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Alex Kharlamov Subject: Re: D4 >why would one need two D4s? Because D4 is not a multitimbral instrument, which means you can run only one drum set at a time. Now, if you want to rec/play more than one D4 drum set at a time (for instance, two), plus run them thru different effects (say, one thru small reverb, and another thru hall revb/delays/flanger), then you need two or more D4's. This is the reason why some people buy 2 DX-7's, or two M1's, etc. Although D4 has AUX outputs, I use the AUX as dry for sounds like some kicks, and some percussion. It's also cool if you dubble all D4 drum tracks with another unit, using either the same or different drum sets on both units, running one unit wet and the other dry. By doing this you get really fat and powerful drum tracks. Life is still interesting, hey? Alex Kharlamov Planet House Music Corp. Compozytor@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:16:33 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: n > Ah. So it's something which by its very nature is impossible to prove, and > yet it exists because you say so and because you're skilled enough to > achieve it where most others haven't and can't. i don't claim uniqueness. joseph campbell discusses some of this in volume I of "the masks of God", check out the stuff about shamanic training ordeals. if others haven't it is not because they can't, it is probably because they don't care. > I think you could make a new religion out of this and become very > rich. probably, i came from california and knew quite a few who tried some such things and succeeded. what would be the point though - just to have more words to fight holy wars over? > (Actually this context-free thinking might exist, but as I say, noone can > prove anything about it; it's surely a subjective state of mind. In fact, > I suggest that I can already achieve it and what you have managed is > in fact a false approximation to it.) why do you want proof? why do you care? maybe you can already achieve it! maybe you already have!! (although that does not explain your extreme scepticism as expressed earlier). maybe i am a false approximation. check out the Campbell reference, then we can talk. mt ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:07:26 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: ART/MUSIC/POWER > > the dominance of any musical style in europe from gregorian times to > > world war II can never be said to have been the result of any kind of > > cultural imperialism. > > Can't it? Few people here have answered my argument that those who held > power _within_ societies determined which music was recorded or performed. > Can't we distinguish between the culture of aristocracy or the culture of > the proletariat? (I use the latter term loosely.) The ruling classes had > much in common with one another and the means of exchanging information, > even between nation states. (And of course, this communication was not > slight -- as witnessed by the ever-changing political relations between > nation states.) Could this not be a chief factor in the dissemination > of particular musical styles? Fashion has rarely been confined to > single nations. i think you are missing the obvious point. up until the time of wagner there was little or not distinction between popular/serious music. up until the time of the council of trent (late 16th century) there was little or no distinction between sacred and secular music. under the conditions prevailing at those times it is reasonable to assume that the most competent composers are the ones who were working. (certainly all the written evidence we have today supports that assumption, and we do have some amateur music from those eras.) while the development of music in other cultures has developed some great musical traditions which i cheerfully acknowledge, i just don't think you can point to any kind of cultural control of music in earlier times. what would be the point of blacklisting anything of value? true, we developed mutually incomprehensible languages from other cultures, but within the context of the local language it is difficult to see any evidence of cultural imperialism. it is also true that counterpoint/harmony limits severely the flexibility of rhythmic expression. this is precisely the reason i assert hierarchical ryhthmic structure to be the tradition of western music, and also the reason that counterpoint in hindu rhythmic tradition is very difficult to obtain. clearly there is a tradeoff here. i feel that western music opens up more possibilities - just think what other tradition can have such widely varied expressions as john cougar mellenkamp (ugh) and Wagner, etc...... > I'm wary of this metaphor, but we could make a similar case for actual > architecture. Notions of symmetry, ratio and perspective came about and > were 'cemented' in this culture first by the technology of literacy and > second the adoption of print technology. i never said there is no structure to african drumming, only that it can never achieve the dimension of what has been achieved in western music. writing allows things to happen outside the dimension of memory. this is a fundamental issue of great depth, since at allows connections to take place which must be unconscious and can only be brought to light through study and contemplation. as for the folk music issue, folk music was consistently integrated into "classical" practice. it was the hallmark of Monteverdi's operas, mozart's and Haydn's symphonies, Schubert, Mahler, Verdi, etc. if i didn't respond to a post it is probably because my computer has been down (THANX WINDOWS 95!) and i may have missed much. sorry. i think most of your points are valid for the 20th century, where music is marketed (sometimes almost without reference to how it actually sounds) as a commodity. now there is a clear distinction between markets, between popularity and seriousness of composition which no one yet has been truly able to bridge, (and which it is not in the music industry's interest that it ever be bridged, since disposable music is more profitable than something that will continue to be heard). now there is a corporate power structure which has everything to gain by syphoning off disposable income on disposable music. i see no evidence of such market manipulation prior to the recording industry. if you can show me composers who were obviously more skilled than those we have studied in history and who were denied work i would like to know about it. as far as i know there were a number of composers who were extremely audacious in their work who were successful and whose music has not survived due to its ridiculous complexity (e.g. the mannerists of the french courts ca 1400). mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 08:44:00 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter Mueller Subject: Re[3]: ART/MUSIC/POWE Comments: To: marshall.tuttle@TORII.COM > > none of the stylistic changes that took place in > > the first millenia of written music can be traced to political > power. > > But perhaps the choice of what to write down could be, at least very early on. It's hard not to see the church in the time of the crusades as a > political body. Then there was the example of the Council of Trent, when > Palastrina was around, where the church tried to edict "no complex polyphony" because the words couldn't be understood. a) church music was collected by pope gregory from material already in common use. Yes and it was selected to maintain the status quo. b) the ars nova (1300's) was extremely anti-church and cynical, much because of the crusades. A political move, or position,if I ever heard one. c) do you mean to imply that organum and motets were invented as styles of composition because of political reasons? No, but the ability to save them, the "mode of production" of the books that record them is the direct result of political charecteristics of the time. "Who has the gold, rules" or in this case selects what is important to support what to save. d) complex polyphony was eventually abandoned, but not because of the council of trent, rather because of the advocacy of a bunch of amateurs (the florentine camerata) A little later, a different event. Complex polyphony was readopted later, reacting against some of the earlier simple stuff. It's not like complez polyphony was dropped and readopted only once, this has happened many different times, indeed it has happened often within the works of a single person. I was merely using the Councol of Trent as an example of a political body having clear effects on the art world. none of this holds up under specific examination. nice try. everything is political. the fact that we are writing to each other is in itself a political (or at least economic) statement. mt >-- Saved internet headers (useful for debugging) >Received: from atlanta.american.edu by mail.ucsd.edu; id CAA23883 sendmail 8.6. >Received: from atlanta (atlanta.american.edu [147.9.1.6]) by atlanta.american.e >Received: from AMERICAN.EDU by AMERICAN.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with >Received: (from daemon@localhost) by atlanta.american.edu (8.6.12/8.6.11) id >Received: from telepath.com (zoom1.telepath.com [205.228.200.20]) by a >Received: from torii.com (torii@localhost) by telepath.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with >Received: by torii.com id 0VBU900N Wed, 06 Dec 95 22:18:03 -0600 >X-Mailer: TBBS/TIGER v1.0 >Message-ID: <9512062218.0VBU900@torii.com> >Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 22:18:03 -0600 >Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List >Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List >From: Marshall Tuttle >Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 >Subject: RE[2]: ART/MUSIC/POWE >To: Multiple recipients of list EMUSIC-L ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 08:54:00 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter Mueller Subject: Re[2]: ART/MUSIC/POWER Comments: To: marshall.tuttle@TORII.COM if you can show me composers who were obviously more skilled than those we have studied in history and who were denied work i would like to know about it. Clara Schumann and Fanny Mendellsohn come to mind. as far as i know there were a number of composers who were extremely audacious in their work who were successful and whose music has not survived due to its ridiculous complexity (e.g. the mannerists of the french courts ca 1400). The mere fact that you mention them shows that they have survived, even if they don't have a mega-audience. It's cool stuff, too. mt >-- Saved internet headers (useful for debugging) >Received: from atlanta.american.edu by mail.ucsd.edu; id DAA00179 sendmail 8.6. >Received: from atlanta (atlanta.american.edu [147.9.1.6]) by atlanta.american.e >Received: from AMERICAN.EDU by AMERICAN.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with >Received: (from daemon@localhost) by atlanta.american.edu (8.6.12/8.6.11) id >Received: from telepath.com (zoom1.telepath.com [205.228.200.20]) by a >Received: from torii.com (torii@localhost) by telepath.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with >Received: by torii.com id 0H15D006 Wed, 06 Dec 95 12:07:26 -0600 >X-Mailer: TBBS/TIGER v1.0 >Message-ID: <9512061207.0H15D00@torii.com> >Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:07:26 -0600 >Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List >Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List >From: Marshall Tuttle >Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 >Subject: Re: ART/MUSIC/POWER >To: Multiple recipients of list EMUSIC-L ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 15:31:44 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: ART/MUSIC/POWER HI Marshall, thanks for the considered reply... > up until the time of wagner there > was little or not distinction between popular/serious music. up until the > time of the council of trent (late 16th century) there was little or no > distinction between sacred and secular music. I concede that categorisation takes place in people's minds. But I still think that cultural attitudes might have even precluded certain musics from even being considered as anything (even existing). This is congruent with extreme prejudice which excludes certain classes of things by refusiing to even admit the possibility of their efficacy or virtue. All I'm saying (and it's easy to forget this in these still relatively enlightened times) that some music might simply have been "beyond the pale". In some forums, this sort of exclusion still operates. > what would be the point of blacklisting anything of value? You can't blacklist it until you concede that it has value. If it doesn't have a value for you (and by value I don't mean 'good'), you won't take any account of it. While those with the power to sponsor and communicate musical ideas might have been somewhat ignorant of non-Western musical practice, they didn't exactly go out of their way to find out about it. This didn't change until the late 19th century when anthropology emerged as a distinct discipline (and was elevated to greater status than the exposition of exotic curiosities). > clearly there is a tradeoff here. A tradeoff between harmonic 'richness' (if you like) and rhythmic richness. Now that's an interesting idea. I don't think anyone here would find them mutually exclusive, but I wonder if anyone knows of studies on this. (Or, more generally, why certain cultures seem to favour certain features of creative expression over others.) Is there a cognitive foundation to this I wonder (limits to comprehension of complexity, etc.) ? > my computer has been down &s3 Bummer. We've been having a geat time! But I think you got most of it. Is anyone archiving this? Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 02:24:49 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mark Hodgson Subject: A/M/P I inarticulated: >> And it's the "tone," the _feeling_ [of Marshall Tuttle's approach], that >>disturbs me. MT has good rational arguments for his viewpoints, but he is >>a professional who represents a discipline that, I always thought, is >>supposed to be at a frontier of experience. And at the frontier, aren't >>people supposed to be poised to handle that which HASN'T been experienced? to which MT responded: >i would really like to respond to this, but i am not quite sure what your >point is? OK, here's the point: A leader, scout, whatever, must be bold, must be capable of seeing the relevance of the previously unfamiliar which others might misunderstand or, more likely, not see at all. I return to the metaphor of blinders, used about 3 gazillion messages back. Too much reliance on tradition blinds one to new trends, new contexts. Without tradition, there is no basis for communication, it's true; but without the new (the news?), there is nothing TO communicate. I respect an artist if I _feel_ he or she sees something that I can't see, but that with patience and a little effort I can come to see. On the other hand, if I _feel_ the person has a mind-set which recludes seeing the new, well, I'm simply going to pay attention to others--they're more likely to be interesting. Art has to be interesting before it can be anything else, and that INITIAL interest probably will be nothing more than a _feeling_, like the feeling of just who it is that I can expect will write music meaningful to me. That is why I am very curious, at this point, to hear things which have been composed by contributors whom I know or suspect are professionals in the arts in general or music in particular, and whose contributions to this list reflect a philosophy which _feels_ potentially more open--Mark Simon, David Rodger, Mike Metlay, Dr. Kirk Corey, and Nick Rothwell among others (sorry if I offend or have miscontrued the comments of anyone included in this list, but it HAS been an educational experience and my thanks to everyone for that and to Mike Metlay and Joe McMahon for the list service). >most popular music around the world has adopted >the concept of hierarchical structure of rhythm in the modern day global >village. i find this distressing. So the global village IS just another example of western culture. I agree, and owe to this list my realization of that fact--dampens the enthusiasm somewhat, but someday I hope and believe the global village will be truly global, perhaps with automated translators available for most of us. At least more possible, I believe, than a lot of other "mud luscious and puddle wonderful" visions. And a lot more desirable. Babel was then; the future is becoming now; maybe we'll be ready for it this time. OTOH, in the decade preceding WWI, Europe was very free in its cultural interchange (e.g., no visas required for traveling throughout most of Europe by most countries). > > What is _literacy_? > >the ability to read and write. more relevantly, the ability to develop >ideas beyond the scope of memory through the use of symbolic notation. >what can be communicated to others will be limited >by the memories of those on the receiving end. so it is imperative that the cognitive skills which contribute to good memories be taught--no reason that that can't be done--but the educational system has to make an effort in response to the instant gratification of MTV, high-budget action films, and video games--otherwise the arts will suffer as much or more than will (gasp) global commerce from the loss of attention span--who cares how much artificial attention span our machines have? >sequencers allow anyone to string things together and cameras allow any idiot to take a picture. But Ansel Adams and a host of other legends in photography weren't idiots--the product of a camera can be turned into art with superior cognitive skills and artistic sense, and so can the product of a sequencer >> Edward R. Murrow, Humphrey Bogart, and Yul Brynner had images of being > > individuals to an extreme--all died from smoking. >the image of individuality and individuality are two different things. but where there's smoke, there's often fire (and other nasties) And then you said : >there is such a thing as context free thinking. Marshall, my heart-felt thanks for this one! In my thirst for an answer to your koan, I was tempted to go find a refreshing glass of dehydrated water. But I heard an inner voice say "not so fast--there may be nothing to this after all." As you probably know, and as David Rodger alluded to, there is a well-founded tradition in Psychology and Anthropology that language (implying context) is a necessary condition for thought. Developmental psychologists can provide hard evidence to support the hypothesis that the acquisition of language is necessary for the development of cognitive skills; philosophers such as Wittgenstein and anthropologists such as Sapir and Whorf are well known for their study of the inseparable relationship between language and thought, and therefore between context and thought. But the goal of Buddhist meditation might be something like what you describe as "context free thought," so I take your comment as the kind of provocative conflict-generator that can be a good thing. OTOH, even though this nothingness may be an objective of the meditation, I don't think many people believe they have experienced it (is "experience" an acceptable word? uh, is any word acceptable?). Hence, :), one of your more articulate responses : > e) . ........ But--initiation of action is distinct from reaction by virtue of some quality which by definition CANNOT BE a response to feedback from the environment (read "context"). Perhaps the disciplined mental state that attempts to achieve "context free thought" is a useful springboard to composition (to bring the topic back to this list)--I really wouldn't know, although I do know that a number of composers have claimed instead to thrive on sound-rich environments for inspiration. You'll say that "sound-rich" does not imply context, I suppose, but then we're getting into a semantic discussion, to which I would reply, "Marshall, get a context!" Or return to the Pointless Forest. How can you KNOW that this discipline is not just tuning one's mind to becoming ever more sensitive, to what people who talk about chaos refer to as "initial conditions," a kind of micro-context? >if you can free your thought processes from >any language and begin by evaluating the time-differential of the evolution >of non-symbolic thought you will begin entering into a meta phase which can >exist free from context. comments like these on cassette and CD covers have kept me from purchasing, or even listening to, "New Age" recordings--ok, I wear blinders too I suppose Bruce Edwards writes, and very well: >I have never quite been able to believe that it is a necessary condition for >art to communicate (certainly not to pre-define its audience -- that is >advertising) but how long before I get paid for a symphony of errors in >anything other than counterfeit coin. . .? but what is art if it doesn't communicate? And back to the Political Sociology, with MT in response to Mike Metlay: >jazz is not what i am talking about. there is no element of popular music >since elvis which is not directly derived from black musical practice, Earlier, MT stated (to paraphrase) that the music of the African slaves in the antebellum South was an example of how an art form could thrive regardless of the ruling class--ignoring that it was, if anything, ENCOURAGED by the plantation owners. Rome conquered Greece militarily and economically, but which culture won in the non-material sense? The history I was taught said that the Romans revered and emulated the Greek arts. I don't think anyone on this thread has explicitly distinguished between material and non-material culture in reference to the P of A/M/P. Now, one of the reasons I am NOT a Marxist is the very fact that the non-material culture is a lot more important to me than the material culture (as I suspect is the sentiment of most of the contributors to this list), and the Marxian viewpoint that the non-material culture is basically an epiphenomenon of the material culture is untenable--these realms influence each other. OF COURSE ART INFLUENCES PEOPLE! But there are many historic examples in which, for lack of a better term, the "ruling class" has positively sanctioned culture distinct to the lower classes. The plantation owners WERE able to prevent the slaves from acquiring any appreciable economic power, and had they WANTED to suppress the development of an African-American musical tradition, then damn it, they could have done it! If the Romans had wanted to suppress the Greek culture they could have done that too. Not entirely of course, nothing is ever absolute, but culture can be damaged and parts of a culture destroyed--how much of what would have been Western culture was lost when the library in Alexandria burned? We'll never know BECAUSE it was destroyed, but it's reasonable to assume quite a lot was lost--especially when we do know that some 95% of the recorded Greek plays when up in flames. Tibet once had over 6000 Buddhist temples and monasteries; now the number is in the dozens. "jetman," at "TUNANET.COM," writes: >first of all to suggest that composition is moving in a specific direction, >even to "some extent," is questionable. second, why "kind of" single sonic >beauty out as something not worthy of pursuit. Actually, I said: "this may be a 'boomer' slant on music, and that composition as we wrap up this century may have returned, to some extent, to the pursuit of sonic beauty for beauty's sake. I kind of hope not." There is NOTHING wrong with the pursuit of beauty; it's nice when there are other qualities as well, such as Mark Simon's observation (to paraphrase--it was a long way back) about complex ideas stated simply. Perhaps one could talk of different levels of beauty? OTOH, why exclude non-beautiful experience? >doesn't music have room for >exploring all sorts of emotive, political, descriptive, etc. directions. and >even if what you state is the case, we could do far worse than beauty. Certainly. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 03:56:27 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Pesach Lattin Subject: Re: Re[3]: ART/MUSIC/POWE Out of curiousity, what was the religious significance, if any of the fugue? --- Rekia ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:26:27 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Piet van Oostrum Subject: Computer Music bibliography There is a bibliography on synthesizers, midi, computer and electronic music that I have collected from various sources. I have tried to bring some structure into it, but not all books will fit into a single subject. NOTE: I haven't read these books, and the comments are from other people. The latest version of this file can be obtained by ftp from ftp.cs.ruu.nl [131.211.80.17] in pub/MIDI/DOC/bibliography or by mail from mail-server@cs.ruu.nl (send a message with HELP in the body). From the mail-server the filename without pub/ should be used. The latest monthly version is also available in the various news.answers archives around the world, in music/midi/bibliography. Version: $Id: bibliography,v 1.35 1995/09/20 14:44:23 piet Exp $ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:26:25 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Piet van Oostrum Subject: Midi files/software archives on the Internet There is a list of ftp and mail server archives with MIDI documentation, programs and music on the Internet. Also enclosed is a list of MIDI and electronic music related mailing lists. The latest version of this file can be obtained by ftp from ftp.cs.ruu.nl [131.211.80.17] in pub/MIDI/DOC/archives or by mail from mail-server@cs.ruu.nl (send a message with HELP in the body). From the mail-server the filename without pub/ should be used. The latest monthly version is also available in the various news.answers archives around the world, in music/midi/archives. Version: $Id: archives,v 1.143 1995/12/07 14:34:06 piet Exp $ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:37:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: ART/MUSIC/POWER In-Reply-To: <01HYKI7XGOPY936AQC@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU> from "David Rodger" at Dec 8, 95 03:31:44 pm > Is anyone archiving this? > Yes. LISTSERV does it, and DejaNews is doing it too. --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 14:25:59 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Pesach Lattin Subject: Re: D4 In regards to the software program FreeStyle -- is it possibly to use the "Combination" programs (ie - of a Korg X5)? Pesach Lattin Rekia Entertainment ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:44:08 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Dr. Kirk Corey" Subject: Re: ART/MUSIC/POWER/ELECTRIC/WATER/GAS/BILLS/POLTICS In-Reply-To: <9512061207.0H15D00@torii.com> On Wed, 6 Dec 1995, Marshall Tuttle wrote: [...] > i think you are missing the obvious point. up until the time of wagner there > was little or not distinction between popular/serious music. up until the > time of the council of trent (late 16th century) there was little or no > distinction between sacred and secular music. under the conditions prevailing > at those times it is reasonable to assume that the most competent composers > are the ones who were working. (certainly all the written evidence we have > today supports that assumption, and we do have some amateur > music from those eras.) You're kidding, right? Dance music (and dancing itself) was specifically forbidden in the church. Do you think for a moment that common folks in the dark ages sang chant while getting plastered at the local watering hole? Sacred and secular music were plenty distinct long before the Council of Trent. In any case, why should we assume that the most competent composers are the ones who were working? Should we assume the most competen Caesars were the ones running Rome when it fizzled? Does anyone assume the most competent politicians are the ones running Washington now? Are the best emusic composers the ones working right now? > while the development of music in other cultures has developed some great > musical traditions which i cheerfully acknowledge, i just don't think you > can point to any kind of cultural control of music in earlier times. what > would be the point of blacklisting anything of value? true, we developed > mutually incomprehensible languages from other cultures, but within the > context of the local language it is difficult to see any evidence of > cultural imperialism. The point of blacklisting things of value is being demonstrated right now by the more-or-less honorable Bob Dole and his holy crusade to restore moral virtue in Hollywood. The point of blacklisting things of value is that they are associated with specific people, and those people always end up being involved in some kind of political position. Mozart's Marriage of Figaro comes to mind. Of course, Figaro in many incarnations has survived, but the fact that *some* works of value survive despite political adversity does not in any way demonstrate that *all* or even the *best* works survive despite it. > it is also true that counterpoint/harmony limits severely the flexibility of > rhythmic expression. this is precisely the reason i assert hierarchical > ryhthmic structure to be the tradition of western music, and also the reason > that counterpoint in hindu rhythmic tradition is very difficult to obtain. > clearly there is a tradeoff here. i feel that western music opens up more > possibilities - just think what other tradition can have such widely varied > expressions as john cougar mellenkamp (ugh) and Wagner, etc...... Sure, these are varied expressions. But they are only varied within the context of Western music. If one views these from the hypothetical standpoint of a native of Java of the 16th century, or the standpoint of Pythagoras, or somewhere other than here and now, Wagner and Mellenkamp are not varied at all-- they're just all out of tune. ;) [...] > if you can show me composers who were obviously more skilled than those we > have studied in history and who were denied work i would like to know about > it. as far as i know there were a number of composers who were extremely > audacious in their work who were successful and whose music has not > survived due to its ridiculous complexity (e.g. the mannerists of the french > courts ca 1400). One can't show you a recorded history of music whose history wasn't recorded, or at least preserved. -- Kirk ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 11:54:44 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter K Schoenhoff Subject: Re: D4 In-Reply-To: <951207135955_66533446@mail04.mail.aol.com>; from "Pesach Lattin" at Dec 7, 95 2:25 pm These are the graceful words of Pesach Lattin: ->In regards to the software program FreeStyle -- is it possibly to use the ->"Combination" programs (ie - of a Korg X5)? -> ->Pesach Lattin ->Rekia Entertainment I have tried using Freestyle with my X5. I love both the software and the instrument, but so far, they don't work very well together. Last I knew (about 2 months ago) MOTU had not yet written support for the X5 into "freeMIDI" (I think that's what it's called.) FreeMIDI is a collection of instrument dirvers which works with Freestyle and their Editor/Librarian program. One of the effects of this non-support is that both instrument banks cannot be used simultaneously. (Either General MIDI or the 100 programable instruments can be used, but not both.) If you want to switch which bank you use, you have to erase all MOTU programs and re-install. I beleive one of the other effects is non-support of the COMBIs on the X5. I think that when the X5 support is written, this will be possible, but will take some more advanced work. Freestyle is written to be a "trackless" sequencer, and the idea of a COMBI makes you specify tracks. I know that isn't probably a very positive response, but I hope I've helped to answer your question. -- -Pete Schoenhoff _\|/_ pschoenh@pen.k12.va.us ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 16:28:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Roger King Subject: "Babble" on A-M-P Algorhythmic writing programs, such as "Babble," can be used to generate your computer's point of view on the issue of Art-Music-Power. "Babble" takes multiple text files, reads them for analytical structure, and then begins to babble. If you save the Art-Music-Power letters as text files and then run them through "Babble" you come up with lots of oblique contributions to the issue: Example 1: "Don't exaggerate commitment to Shamantic training. The Masks of Monteverdi's operas probably qualifies. Choruses wail your notes. who needs rests and jabs. Maybe you don't have more than your eyes. MT has good friends gather to take place what must be poised." Like "Band-In-A-Box," "Babble" offers different styles of prose: Here's the "LEAVE IT TO BEAVER" response to the thread: Example 2: "BE writes regarding MT: Gee, Dad worries about the Shamantic training. Yeah, dumb, that's okay. Hey, check out the stuff that HASN'T been experienced. The whole world unites under the Yamaha DX 2's but it's, like, 3/4 time. Gee, it sure gets complicated." Then you can run the Art-Music-Power thread files through the Harold Robins style generator. Every paragraph contains the word "towel." And the sentences shorten to three words. Example 3: "She left the towel by the DAT. It smelled clean. In the 1600's, counterpoint/harmony left." To get into algorhythmic prose, without a whole lot of fuss and bother, just go to Yahoo and enter "Babble" as a search term. You'll find it there or here. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 16:26:42 CST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Michael V. Briggs" Subject: Re: "Babble" on A-M-P Roger King Wrote: | | Example 1: "Don't exaggerate commitment to Shamantic | training. The Masks of Monteverdi's operas | probably qualifies. Choruses wail your notes. | who needs rests and jabs. Maybe you don't | have more than your eyes. MT has good friends | gather to take place what must be poised." Makes as much sense as some of the A/M/P threads. I wish you hadn't told us this was "Babble" generated. It would have been fun watching people respond to it. Michael Briggs mbriggs@nexrad.osf.uoknor.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 15:12:19 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: re[3]: art/music/ > Out of curiousity, what was the religious significance, if any of > the fugue? as a form i do not believe it had any specific significance, having grown out of earlier compositional practice which sought to establish coherence and continuity via imitation. mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 15:19:18 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: art/music/power/e > You're kidding, right? Dance music (and dancing itself) was specifically > forbidden in the church. Do you think for a moment that common folks in > the dark ages sang chant while getting plastered at the local watering > hole? Sacred and secular music were plenty distinct long before the > Council of Trent. actually this is demonstrably false. there is an enormous body of evidence to disprove your assertions from the motets which use chant as a basis for all kinds of humorous display to the parody masses which led to the council of trent. the council itself ended by making no technical comments whatever on the use of music in church, but solely on the behaviour of musicians.... which contests the first point you are making. > The point of blacklisting things of value is being demonstrated > right now...... agreed, but i see little evidence of it prior to this century in the way many are projecting it onto the past. in the past the media actually had much less power than they do now, so there was less to deal with. (yes i know about verdi and his problems with the censors - but he seems to have gotten around it quite easily too). > One can't show you a recorded history of music whose history wasn't > recorded, or at least preserved. in otherwords your entire point rests on no evidence and is speculative???? mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 15:12:17 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: art/music/power > I concede that categorisation takes place in people's minds. But I still > think that cultural attitudes might have even precluded certain > musics from even being considered as anything (even existing). > ..... All I'm > saying (and it's easy to forget this in these still relatively enlightened > times) that some music might simply have been "beyond the pale". In some > forums, this sort of exclusion still operates. i suggest to you ver strongly that the mindset you are here expositing is very recent and was not possible during earlier ages. true you can distinguish between hindu and european music, but these were just different languages. if you study them closely you will find the same sorts of archetypes projected onto the music from different dimensions. furthermore the lack of direct contact and ease of communication rendered any kind of cross-fertilization all but impossible. however within the sphere of european music it is very difficult to point to any superior composer (of the level of bach, mozart, wagner, etc.) who did not ultimately outdistance his colleagues, no matter what the circumstances of politics or life. it believe it is only in this century that taste in music is so deeply circumscribed that many consider large parts of what is available to be irrelevant. > A tradeoff between harmonic 'richness' (if you like) and rhythmic richness. > Now that's an interesting idea. I don't think anyone here would find them > mutually exclusive, but I wonder if anyone knows of studies on this. (Or, > more generally, why certain cultures seem to favour certain features of > creative expression over others.) Is there a cognitive foundation to this > I wonder (limits to comprehension of complexity, etc.) ? a couple of things come to mind: recent research suggests that rhythm and pitch though physically the same phenomena (periodic repetitions through time) are actually treated differently by the brain. i.e. rhythm evokes response from the hair cells of the ear while pitch demands neural processing. thus harmony would appear to evoke activity in the brain that cannot be reached any other way. as for the complexity thing, it is difficult to establish harmony as a time independent parameter (which research suggests it is) which remains in the background and represents deeper levels of psychological motivation while tying it to very active foreground irregular rhythmic activity. the problem may not be solely in the complexity, but rather in the effectiveness of harmonic symbolism when it is too closely allied to something not consistent with its nature. mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 14:49:18 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: A/M/P In-Reply-To: from "Nick Rothwell" at Dec 4, 95 09:40:15 pm Nick Rothwell writes-- >If one *does* achieve context-free thinking, how does one know, and how >does one prove it to anyone else? Chocolate! Harris, toggle the frammis bleat! The light...THE LIGHT! GREENS!! zrgynl -- "Some of these guys are violently attached to their synths, aren't they?" "They have to be. They don't have any ideas to be violently attached to." ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:47:03 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marcus Hobbs Subject: Re: EMUSIC-L Digest - 7 Dec 1995 to 8 Dec 1995 In-Reply-To: owner-EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU "EMUSIC-L Digest - 7 Dec 1995 to 8 Dec 1995" (Dec 8, 1:00am) Hi all, Anybody on the list using Korg's Trinity? I got to see a demo at Guitar Center and it's neato-burrito. Thanks, Marcus ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:31:07 PST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Tom Pellicer Subject: Re: D4 >I hope this isn't too gear-headish... (Please forgive me if it is.) >Aren't those trigger inputs considered a performance interface? Just >out of curiosity, why would one need two D4s? I imagine two responses: >(1) Need for more than the twelve trigger inputs one unit provides. >(2) Need for more polyphony than one unit can provide. >If not 1 or 2 above, then what? In any case, I'd like to hear about >what you're doing that requires two D4s. (I'd like to HEAR what you're >doing, too!) > >Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com The D4 has 4 outputs. When I'm using a sequencer, I'll typically set up a second D4 on an alternate midi channel and send 'toms' and 'auxilary percussion' to this unit. That way, I can have independent fader, eq and effects control on my mix console for these voices: first d4: snare mono kick mono cymbals stereo second d4: toms stereo perc stereo Tom Pellicer tom_pellicer@netframe.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 19:08:12 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: RE[2]: ART/MUSIC/POWE > Clara Schumann and Fanny Mendellsohn come to mind. you mean to say these two were better than felix, robert, brahms, wagner and verdi? give me a break. i would suggest that if they weren't related to their respective family members they would be no more known than loewe, etc. > as far as i know there were a number of composers who were extremely > audacious in their work who were successful and whose music has not > survived due to its ridiculous complexity (e.g. the mannerists of > the french courts ca 1400). a specious statement. anything that can be written on paper can "survive" in that sense. it is mildly interesting but was surpassed by simpler music expressing a higher level of organization. mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 00:06:05 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Alex Kharlamov Subject: Re: Sample Rate Conversion >Has anybody on this list ever >converted 48 to 44.1? How did it sound? Were there any bad audio >artifacts? It depends on what program you use to do that. For PC, Wave Convert is OK, but if you can lay your hands on Sound Forge 3.0, go for it. It's the best choise for your purposes. It should sound OK. For MAC, S-Link by Synclavier is the answer. If you still have too many side effects, go to your original audio, and convert all of your files to a higher rate (with Sound Forge, you can go up to 60 kHz). The higher the better. Then, convert all of them to 44.1. This should take care of the problem. But this is just a fix. First try converting files directly into 44.1. Also, make sure you're not working on one of those Sound Blaster cards or regular MAC audio output. That will always give you problems, no matter what software you use. Best choice -- CardD or MultiWav for PC, and pretty much any Digi for the MAC. Good luck, Alex Kharlamov Planet House Music Corp. Compozytor@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 01:08:33 GMT Reply-To: jetman@tunanet.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: jetman Organization: tunanet Subject: Re: Sample Rate Conversion Comments: To: homer!AMERICAN.EDU!EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU Bill Fox wrote: > I'm mastering a project (a compilation tape for another music list) where the submissions are on DAT (48kHz), CD (44.1kHz), and cassette. I'd like to have the final product at 44.1kHz so I would need a sample rate converter. QUESTIONS: Has anybody on this list ever converted 48 to 44.1? How did it sound? Were there any bad audio artifacts? > > Yes, I've converted probably hundreds of files from 48k to 44.1k and to other formats as well. I can only vouch for the Mac platforms Sound Designer II v.2.8 (current version), as well as some earlier versions of SDII, as to quality and reliability. (I have worked with both ProTools DSP and Sound Tools II DSP boards in conjunction with SDII, not the Audiomedia II board.) In general the quality is good, but an occasional squared wave file does occur and it is very evident as a click/pop/scratchiness or some other bit of added noise. This might happen in one song out of dozens. I would avoid as much as possible doing a double conversion which can be very noisy - and you actually have no choice, other than going analog and resampling at a lower rate with SDII if you are trying to get from 48k to 22.05k. You should also use dithering if available in your SR convert. Best luck, Jeff Talman jetman@tunanet.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 19:36:27 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: RE[3]: ART/MUSIC/POWE > c) do you mean to imply that organum and motets were invented as styles of > composition because of political reasons? > No, but the ability to save them, the "mode of production" of the books that > record them is the direct result of political charecteristics of the time. > "Who has the gold, rules" or in this case selects what is important > to support what to save. can you tell me how organum could be performed without it being written down, or motets that require different texts in different languages with strict rules of consonance characteristic of medieval composition? your argument appears uninformed and ridiculous to me. do you imagine three people improvising in different languages always doing perfect fifths while not knowing what the others are doing? > I was > merely using the Councol of Trent as an example of a political body > having clear effects on the art world. but it failed to have any effect. that is the whole point. the effect it chose to consider and then abandoned was achieved by an amateur group for entirely different reasons. the council itself was unable to make any decisions in the face of the works themselves. (by the way, as i remember that whole palestrina thing is not exactly correct. the council heard complaints on the behaviour and attitude of choir members, on the use of secular tunes as bases for mass settings, and on polyphony. the final decree was that the house of god should be purged of everything "impure or lascivious", that it might "rightly be called a house of prayer" no mention was made whatever of any technical point whatever. implementation was left to the bishops. thus things continued as before from a purely artistic standpoint.) > > > none of this holds up under specific examination. > nice try. everything is political. the fact that we are > writing to each other is in itself a political (or at least economic) > statement. if you believe everything is political there is no possibility of discussion. in addition, the fact that all your responses are full of holes and redefinitions of your original posts makes it difficult to carry on a logical conversation. e.g. Machaut writing politically motivated music does not mean his music survived because of political choices about saving it. (it didn't survive in fact, it has been resurrected by academics). the case of machaut is far different from that of say JS Bach whose music disappeared for some generations from the public, but continued to inspire composers and eventually returned as one of the cultural icons of the modern era. mt ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 09:57:55 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Just 4 Laffs >Attachment converted: Gresham:DRUMJOKE.WRI (????/----) (00016A7A) Oh, some DOS-type file which perhaps contains a list of drummer jokes. I bet I've not heard *them* before. EMUSIC-L subscribers are such oases of pertinent information. Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 15:12:06 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: n HI Marshall... > why do you want proof? why do you care? I would have thought that Nick needs proof to know _that_ he's done it _when_ he's done it! Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 7 Dec 1995 23:38:18 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Brian Adamson Subject: Re: Sample Rate Conversion % EMUSIC-L: % I'm mastering a project (a compilation tape for another % music list) where the submissions are on DAT (48kHz), CD (44.1kHz), and % cassette. I'd like to have the final product at 44.1kHz so I would need % a sample rate converter. QUESTIONS: Has anybody on this list ever % converted 48 to 44.1? How did it sound? Were there any bad audio % artifacts? % I've recently written some code that does a conversion with a similar rate conversion ratio 22.05 kHz -> 8 kHz in my case ... there's a good paper (on the net is PostScript on the technique I used ... it's called "Band limited Interpolation - Introduction and Algorithm" by Julius Smith. I'm very please with the results I've gotten ... this technique can be used for somewhat arbitrary sample rate conversion factors ... if you know the specific rates ahead of time (as in my case) there are a number of tricks you can do to make it computationally efficient and high quality. If you're not worried about computational efficiency, you can do a full blown up conversion, low pass filter and down conversion using integer rate conversion factors and _theoretically_ suffer very little loss of quality (especially if you make your low pass filter very large) % Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com Brian ___________________________________________________________________ R. Brian Adamson adamson@itd.nrl.navy.mil ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 14:21:21 G+3 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Hattan Subject: Billboard For those asking about the last Billboard. This the latest international for the last week: 1. The Cat From Outerspace. M. JACKSON 2. Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. SHAGGY 3. Aristocats MADONNA 4. Thundercats-Ho ROLLINGSTONES 5. The Cat Who Wants to Be a Mouse. ELTON JHON 6. Chitty Chitty, Bang Bang. GLORIA ESTIFAN 7. Red Tears. MUZEL FARHAN 8. The Zar. SAD JOMA 9. Made in India. ALISHA 10. Sabboha. DURAN DURAN I will be more than happy to send you the international Billboard regularly every week! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 12:04:56 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mary Charlene Moody Subject: Re: A/M/P Comments: To: Mark Hodgson In-Reply-To: <199512080724.CAA126957@acs-mail.bu.edu> On Fri, 8 Dec 1995, Mark Hodgson wrote: > > >jazz is not what i am talking about. there is no element of popular music > >since elvis which is not directly derived from black musical practice, > > Earlier, MT stated (to paraphrase) that the music of the African slaves in > the antebellum South was an example of how an art form could thrive > regardless of the ruling class-- ***ignoring that it was, if anything, ENCOURAGED by the plantation owners.*** All right I understand MT's statment, but please explain yours to me. Thanks Mary Moody ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 18:22:12 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: art/music/power/e > > One can't show you a recorded history of music whose history wasn't > > recorded, or at least preserved. >in otherwords your entire point rests on no evidence and is speculative???? >mt Well, you started it. Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 06:33:52 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: art/music/power/e Hi Marshall... > > The point of blacklisting things of value is being demonstrated > > right now...... > >agreed, but i see little evidence of it prior to this century in the way many >are projecting it onto the past. Right on this one. It's all too easy to allow a revisionist analysis of historical events to become inlfuence what we think those events actually are. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 19:06:54 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: a/m/p > > >jazz is not what i am talking about. there is no element of > popular music since elvis which is not directly derived from black musical > practice, > > > > Earlier, MT stated (to paraphrase) that the music of the African slaves > >in the antebellum South was an example of how an art form could > thrive regardless of the ruling class-- funny, i don't recall saying that. as far as i know slave musicians were used because their masters were able to make a profit off of them in the antebellum south, but they certainly weren't playing african music - the book "puttin on ole massah" includes a long autobiographical account by one such musician. > > > ***ignoring that it was, if anything, ENCOURAGED by the plantation > owners.*** see comment above. i would like to see some evidence of encouragement of african music among slaves. the sources i have read state categorically that slaves were soundly punished for indulging in any kind of africanisms. > > > All right I understand MT's statment, but please explain yours to > me. Thanks yeah, explain it to me too! mt ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 19:14:39 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: art/music/power/e > > > One can't show you a recorded history of music whose history > wasn't > > > recorded, or at least preserved. > > >in otherwords your entire point rests on no evidence and is > speculative???? > >mt > > Well, you started it. i did? i believe i can reference every point i have made here.... i have certainly never once referred to music i have not seen in print, read theoretical treatises on or heard..... what makes you think i am speculating? mt ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 20:52:02 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Pesach Lattin Subject: Re: Billboard > > 1. The Cat From Outerspace. M. JACKSON > 2. Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. SHAGGY > 3. Aristocats MADONNA > 4. Thundercats-Ho ROLLINGSTONES > 5. The Cat Who Wants to Be a Mouse. ELTON JHON > 6. Chitty Chitty, Bang Bang. GLORIA ESTIFAN > 7. Red Tears. MUZEL FARHAN > 8. The Zar. SAD JOMA > 9. Made in India. ALISHA > 10. Sabboha. DURAN DURAN > >I will be more than happy to send you the international Billboard regularly >every week! A lot of cats? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 20:52:00 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Pesach Lattin Subject: Re: D4 In a message dated 95-12-08 14:52:20 EST, you write: > One of the effects of this non-support is that both instrument banks >cannot be used simultaneously. (Either General MIDI or the 100 programable >instruments can be used, but not both.) If you want to switch which bank >you use, you have to erase all MOTU programs and re-install. > I beleive one of the other effects is non-support of the COMBIs >on the X5. I think that when the X5 support is written, this will be >possible, but will take some more advanced work. Freestyle is written >to be a "trackless" sequencer, and the idea of a COMBI makes you specify >tracks. > I know that isn't probably a very positive response, but I hope >I've helped to answer your question. No wonder I have been having problems with the support -- very few people have been able to accurately read my midi files! Perhaps you can reccomend a program for me that will work well with the X5 (please E-mail information anyone) with any attachments. Also, if possible, could you give me some suggestions in how I can save my files, so it will sound right (Midi Files). I have composed for years, but just recently started to use electronics as a media, and frankly I love it, but most people hear "junk" because they don't get the same instruments... ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 9 Dec 1995 20:52:06 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Pesach Lattin Subject: Re: art/music/power/e In a message dated 95-12-09 14:45:15 EST, you write: >Right on this one. It's all too easy to allow a revisionist analysis of >historical events to become inlfuence what we think those events actually >are. I.E. Holocaust Revisionists! Pesach Lattin REKIA@AOL.COM ----------------------------------------------- REKIA ® >[SERVICES UNLIMITED]< [DIGITAL PAGER]:> [718.942-3546]< [MESSAGE PAGER]:> [800.645.8776]< [PRIM.E-MAIL]:>[REKIA@AOL.COM]< [ALT.E-MAIL]:>[PHKBC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU]< ----------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 09:31:18 G+3 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: hattan Subject: Re: Billboard In-Reply-To: Message of Sat, 9 Dec 1995 20:52:02 -0500 from Howdy... I am tooo intresting to,c, more about your opineon in the Saudi Billboard So, Im waiting...... ,chaw, kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk k kkkkk k dttttttyujhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh kkkkk k llllll k tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttiuyyyyyytttt kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkikkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 09:45:05 G+3 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: barnawi Subject: Re: Billboard In-Reply-To: Message of Sat, 9 Dec 1995 20:52:02 -0500 from What's about cats? Don't you like them?? Keep on Hattan, I like cats! ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 09:46:12 G+3 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: hattan Subject: Rap and new wave songs Hi,,, I will be glad to find someone intrested in rap & new wave songs so. If there is anyone ,have any information about these songs I will sooo glad to seeeeeeeeeeeee it ,THANKs, ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 13:14:25 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Martin Russ Subject: Admin FAQs V1.2 (Last changed 9 July 1995) Comments: To: SYNTH-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU This is the sixth posting of the V1.2 Administrative FAQ document. V1.3 is now in preparation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Warning: Long Document (411 lines, 3119 words, about 7 pages)-------------- EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L Frequently Asked Questions: Administration This document is posted approximately every few weeks. It is intended that this document should answer many of the questions asked by newcomers to the lists. Comments and corrections should be sent to the maintainer, Martin Russ, at: mruss@midi.dungeon.com This is Issue 1.2. 9 July 1995. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Added since issue 1.1. 11 June 1995: - Reply to List or Author (messages, 2/3) - Mike Metlay returns as list co-moderator (background, 1/3) - Rough index of topics covered (index, start) Added since issue 1.0. 14 May 1995: - AOL subscriber problems with unsubscribing and digest changes (subs, end) - Contributor list (end) TOPIC INDEX**************************************************************** - Background - Max - Soundcards - Music mailing lists - Messages - Subscriptions etc BACKGROUND***************************************************************** "What are the EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L lists for?"***************************** EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L are for the discussion of electronic music in general: its history, practitioners past and present, equipment, techniques, trends, research, development, resources, you name it. They exist as a 'post-moderated' alternative to the rec.music.makers.synth newsgroup. (post-moderated means that the moderators monitor what is posted, and sometimes remind posters about the 'rules': see below for the 'rules'). A digest is also available for each list. This collects all the postings for a day into one e-mailing. "Who are the moderators?"************************************************** Joe McMahon and Mike Metlay have been on here for over seven years. Their aim is to keep the mail flowing and the illegal and blatantly out-of-line traffic to a minimum. Joe can be contacted at: mcmahon@clark.net Mike can be contacted at: atomic@netcom.com "So, can I post anything I feel like?"************************************* Well, no. There are some RULES. The basic thrust of EMUSIC-L is to provide a forum for the discussion of music made by electronic means. The actual means is secondary (and more the subject of SYNTH-L). What we are concerned with on EMUSIC-L is the music, composing, and related topics. Therefore: 1) Ads are not permitted on EMUSIC-L. Advising someone as to whether they are getting ripped off *if they ask the list* is permissible; otherwise, use private mail. Requests for addresses of mail-order firms, etc. are OK. Cutting deals on your own personal equipment is not OK. Please do it privately, or subscribe to SYNTH-L, where you'll reach a more responsive audience. Requests for advice as to whether a price is good or not are marginally OK, but would probably reach a more knowledgeable audience on SYNTH-L. Prices really aren't so much of interest unless either the entire world (literally) should know about this great deal, or you have inside information on a new product or upgrade. Exception: if someone has gone through the trouble of composing, recording, and pressing a CD or tape, submitting an article describing the process and their experiences and mentioning that the tape or CD is available for purchase is OK. Posting repeated ads for the CD is not. (A single mention is marginally acceptable; a short mention in a signature file is fine.) Here's a quick summary (it goes from 'admirable' to 'not acceptable'): - A ONE-TIME post mentioning that you have completed a CD or tape and a summary of experiences/etc. in making the recording is admirable. - An article which contributes to the discussion on the list AND contains a signature file which mentions CD/tape/album availability is acceptable. - Repeated postings saying nothing but "My recording is available" are bad. - Outright ads for records you did not make, hardware, software, used cars, etc. are very bad. 2) Discussions as to the relative merits of hardware/software/etc. are permissible, as long as the reviewers state evidence supporting their opinions. Ad hominem attacks will not be tolerated. Arguments based solely on personal taste are not acceptable. It is preferable to request private mailings, which you can summarize and post back to the list. Reviews are useful. Mutual admiration societies are not. 3) All members *will* be treated with kindness and respect. There is no such thing as a dumb question on this list. If you can answer, answer, and be nice about it. Otherwise, say nothing. If you've got a problem with what someone has had to say, discuss it in a civil manner. If you can't do that, take it to e-mail, or just forget about it. 4) EMUSIC-L is meant to be for the discussion of electronic music, in the studio, the classroom, in performance, and on recordings, including techniques, resources, user reviews and experiences, and speculation on futures. Some divagations will be tolerated, as it's rather nice to have a little humor on the list; however, the list owner(s) (Joe McMahon at the moment) will maintain the final say as to the subject matter on the list and will move to terminate off-topic, pointless, and (especially) rancorous discussions. 5) Please refrain from adding to the noise level by commenting about accidental private posts to the list or the accidental sendings of SUBSCRIBE requests or suchlike to the list. That is the administrators' job. If you must pour out your wounded feelings ;-), either to Joe, or to the offender, use private mail. 6) The listowner(s) are permitted to be as arbitrary as they please. We have only once had to take action against a member of the list for breaking these rules, even when they hadn't been stated explicitly. We will notify offenders via private mail and will wait for a response. But we don't have time to play Politeness and Germaneness Monitors. We will remove users from the list only if we must, and we always give people the benefit of the doubt when possible. But be assured that we will act to preserve the quality of discussion on this list. "How did EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L start?"************************************** Perhaps a bit of ancient history is in order here, to show where these lists come from and why they are the way they are.... Many moons ago, when there was for all practical purposes no such thing as the Internet (and there were certainly few or no commercial online services), people had access to cyberspace only through a set of large but mutually exclusive network protocols, generally provided by and germane to their place of education or work. One of these was the USENET hierarchy of UNIX machines at universities and laboratories and a few commercial sites; another was BITNET, an international mail system for mainframe computers used by scientists. Communication between the two systems was possible only in a crude and roundabout manner, so they developed separate systems for dealing with the same needs. In a rough, very general sense, USENET developed the news hierarchy and BITNET developed list servers and mailing lists; in the subfield of electronic music, USENET had the once-quite-small newsgroup rec.music.synth and BITNET had EMUSIC-L. The 'feel' of these groups was in concert with the sort of people using them; rec.music.synth was more open, with college students and commercial users, whereas EMUSIC-L tended toward academic users. This tended to shape the level of discussion and the topics covered, but keep in mind that early on, the overlap between the two groups was relatively small. Some time later, as reliable gateways between BITNET and the rest of the growing Internet allowed for the redistribution of newsgroups as mailing lists, SYNTH-L was launched as a gateway of rec.music.synth posts, so BITNET users without USENET access could enjoy the news there. It was a short, hard-learned lesson; the lack of moderation and the huge number of news articles delivered as email (!) knocked many prospective users for a loop. It wasn't all that long before the USENET feed was cut and the gateways to the news hierarchy were removed, isolating SYNTH-L and effectively removing its reason for existence. At that point, with Joe's blessing, Mike stepped in as conceptual 'parent' of SYNTH-L, and began to promote it as a nice middle ground between EMUSIC-L's often rarified discussions and the daily mayhem on rec.music.synth (now rec.music.makers.s). It was semi-moderated, so postings stayed (by and large) polite and focussed, but long discussions of gear, software, technical problems, and so forth that were considered a waste of time by many EMUSIC-L readers were encouraged, and over the years since then a de facto division between the two groups, and a healthy relationship, has settled into place. It's true that the divisions between topics for the two groups are occasionally blurry, but that's something most folks simply learn to live with and get a feel for. "Is SYNTH-L supposed to be technical discussion of synthesizers?"********** "Does EMUSIC-L cover electronic music in general?"************************* Very roughly, SYNTH-L is for the detailed technical talk, like gear for sale, where to download patches, whether synth A is better than synth B (whatever 'better' means), technical problems and solutions, and so on. SYNTH-L is the stuff that people on EMUSIC-L don't want to have to wade through to discuss electronic music. Conversely, EMUSIC-L is for all the serious (and sometimes not so serious) philosophical discussion on electronic music in its widest sense. EMUSIC-L is the stuff that people on SYNTH-L don't want to have to wade through to discuss gear. In both cases, one could say that this sort of discussion has its place, but people sometimes like to see it, and sometimes don't. All the EMUSIC-L/SYNTH-L division purports to do is allow an approximate separation between the snobs and the plebs. Where people take that is up to them. It's true that there seems to be no set focus or set of aims in these lists. That's deliberate. We are like-minded individuals looking for someone intelligent and knowledgeable to talk to, and the topics range all over the place, as well they should in such a forum. One shouldn't expect any kind of focus in an environment where anything is a potential topic for discussion. "What's the point? It's not what I expected!"****************************** The point is that we don't want you to have unreasonable expectations of what EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L are 'for'; they are what they are, and most people seem content to enjoy them as they are or guide them elsewhere, either for a while or for good... A good starting point for finding out what the electronic music of EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L is all about is the EMUSIC-L World Wide Web page at: http://sunsite.unc.edu/emusic-l. MAX************************************************************************ "What is MAX, anyway?"***************************************************** MAX is a software toolkit which gives a real-time, interactive, graphical development environment for multimedia, music (and more). Programs are 'written' by connecting together graphical objects, rather than typing text. Typical applications for MAX include: Editors and Librarians for MIDI equipment; Compositional Tools; Utilities for analysing musical performance; and much more. MAX is often mentioned in these lists. It currently exists in variants for the Unix environment and on the Apple Macintosh, although a petition has been mentioned within these lists for a Windows version - contact JOEL STERN on stern@email.loc.gov or j.stern11@geis.genie.com for details. For more information on the Macintosh version, you should try contacting your nearest Opcode dealer. (Opcode distribute MAX for the Mac). Opcode also have a World Wide Web page at : http://www.rahul.net/opcode/index.html. There is also a MAX listserv. Send a message to listserv@vm1.mcgill.ca with a Subject of: Subscribe Max, and the message text: SUBSCRIBE MAX You will then receive daily digests of postings to the MAX list. SOUNDCARDS***************************************************************** "Where do I find information on Soundcards?"******************************* Information on soundcards for personal computers can be found in the following Usenet newsgroup(s)" comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard.GUS. MUSIC MAILING LISTS******************************************************** "Anyone know a good MUSIC discussion group on ?"********* The best place for discussion of almost any group, band, artiste, performer, musician (you get the idea), is the Usenet newsgroups. Try: alt.fan. MESSAGES******************************************************************* "Should I respond to a message on the list?"******************************* The whole point of this list is that we attract people who are smart enough to make these decisions for themselves, and do. You can be one of them, if you let yourself. Think and decide for yourself, make mistakes, correct them, learn, move on, and enjoy the trip. Or, if you're paralyzed by fear of doing or saying something wrong, you can choose to lurk forever. Please also read the "So, can I post anything I feel like?" 'Rules' section of this document before posting anything to the list. "How do I send a message to the list?"************************************* For EMUSIC-L, you send your posting to emusic-l@american.edu. It will be automatically sent to all of the other subscribers. You will not receive a copy of your own mail; LISTSERV does this to decrease mail traffic. For SYNTH-L, you send your posting to synth-l@american.edu. Should I reply to the List or the Author?********************************** Questions posted by people who are not long-term subscribers to a mailing list often say something like 'please reply privately' or 'please respond off-list'. This usually has two effects: (1) Probably lots of repetition in the responses! (2) The rest of the list never hearing about what might be an interesting topic. Replies are a valuable asset to the list members! So an unsubscribed person contributes very little to the list, and probably wastes quite a lot of time sorting through the responses. An unsubscribed person is also unlikely to post a summary of the received replies back to the list. Edited summaries can be very valuable assets to the list members. Unless a response is really private in content, it is probably best to post it to the List, not the Author. This encourages people to subscribe; provides a wide variety of potentially useful information; and discourages unsubscribed people from posting queries to a list. Most importantly, it is often replies to a question which trigger off some of the most useful discussions. Replying privately just short-circuits this process. Sometimes adverts are posted to the SYNTH-L list (EMUSIC-L does not welcome adverts) as part of a 'shotgun' approach, where all the music-related lists and newsgroups receive the same advert. In this case it is best to reply directly to the Author of the original advert rather than the List. Off-topic advertisements, chain letters, and other annoyances will be dealt with by the list administrators. There is no need to reply to or comment on these - it just adds extra 'noise' to the mailing list. The SYNTH-L and EMUSIC-L mailing lists went to 'subscriber-posting-only' on the 6th of July 1995. This means that postings are only accepted from people who have formally subscribed to the lists. This will not prevent all adverts, chain letters etc (see above), but it should help to keep the list clear of many of them. "Where is the archive of FAQs kept?"*************************************** This is a new document (as of May 1995). As the maintainer adds new questions this document will be revised, and some questions and answers may be removed. You will be able to ftp the full FAQ file from the Internet. SUBSCRIPTIONS************************************************************** "How do I unsubscribe?"**************************************************** For EMUSIC-L, you send mail to listserv@american.edu with the text UNSUB EMUSIC-L as the body. No special subject is required. For SYNTH-L, you send mail to listserv@american.edu with the text UNSUB SYNTH-L as the body. Again, no special subject is required. If this does not work, you will get a message saying that no entry was found for your ID. Please contact Joe McMahon (mcmahon@CLARK.NET) directly. Do *NOT* post unsubscribe messages to the list. They don't help, and simply irritate other readers. AOL subscribers may experience some problems with unsubscribing from the listserv. This may be a communications problem or an incompatibility... If you cannot unsubscribe then please save any messages that you may receive from the listserv and send them to Joe McMahon (mcmahon@CLARK.NET). "How do I subscribe?"****************************************************** To join the discussion group on a message-by-message basis, send a mail message to listserv@american.edu with the text SUB EMUSIC-L where "" is your actual first and last name (at a minimum; LISTSERV insists on at least two blank-separated words here). Do not send subscription requests to the list address, as they only serve to annoy the other list members. For SYNTH-L, you do exactly the same, but replace the text 'EMUSIC-L' with 'SYNTH-L'. "How do I subscribe to the daily digest?"********************************** If you would like to get daily digests of the mail to EMUSIC-L, send the following mail to listserv@american.edu: SUB EMUSIC-L SET EMUSIC-L DIGEST where "" should be replaced by your first and last name (at a minimum; LISTSERV insists on at least two blank-separated words here). Note that these two commands should be on separate lines: SUB EMUSIC-L SET EMUSIC-L DIGEST so that the listserv will interpret them correctly. Do not send subscription requests to the list address, as they only serve to annoy the otherlist members. For SYNTH-L, you do exactly the same, but replace the text 'EMUSIC-L' with 'SYNTH-L'. "How do I unsubscribe from the full list and subscribe to the digest?"***** If you would like to get daily digests of the mail to EMUSIC-L instead of the message-by-message form, just send the following mail to listserv@american.edu: SET EMUSIC-L DIGEST You will then get one message per day, which consists of a list of topics, followed by all the messages which have been posted in the previous 24 hours. For SYNTH-L, you do exactly the same, but replace the text 'EMUSIC-L' with 'SYNTH-L'. AOL subscribers may experience some problems in changing their subscription details via the listserv. This may be a communications problem or an incompatibility... If you cannot change to a digest then please save any messages that you may receive from the listserv and send them to Joe McMahon (mcmahon@CLARK.NET). Contributors:************************************************************** Mike Metlay, Joe McMahon, Ned Kartchner, Clive McFarland and others --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Martin Russ EMUSIC-L & SYNTH-L Admin FAQ Maintainer mruss@midi.dungeon.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Martin Russ Reviewer & Columnist for Sound On Sound Magazine (UK) mruss@midi.dungeon.com Hi-Tech Music Technical Author & MIDI Consultant http://www.dungeon.com/~midi Macintosh & Synthesizer Programmer ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 09:46:54 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "i.s.o.r. magazine!" Subject: um, synths used on Joy Division records In-Reply-To: <199512100722.CAA406437@atlanta.american.edu> ok, if you don't remember i'm the person that always asks 'anyone know what synths were used on * (wildcard for group that no one else likes). OK, so "love will tear us apart" is / was very popular. So what did that synth sound like. If it helps the record was probably recorded around 1978, but i really don't know. while i'm typing, can anyone think of artists that have been on record (yea, i have a record player) that have played very obscur, home-made, one of a kind synths that i can sample and inspect. (that is i want to hard disc record very rare (analogue) syths, zoom way down so i can see cycle at various points and then go to Cool Edit and generate .5 second wav files to loop and dump into my sampler for VERY low resource using super phat sounds. (actually .5 seconds is way to damn long)) ~eric (edgar) allen seale (poe)~ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 12:42:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Roger King Subject: Re: art/music/power/e At 07:14 PM 12/9/95 -0600, you wrote: >i did? Nope. Bruce Edwards did. >i believe i can reference every point i have made here.... >i have certainly never once referred to music i have not seen in print, >read theoretical treatises on or heard..... > >what makes you think i am speculating? Well, for one thing, Marshall, where's the "phud" after yer name? I'm certain that has much ado widdit. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 10:03:43 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ron Hillman Subject: Re: A/M/P >On Fri, 8 Dec 1995, Mark Hodgson wrote: > >> >> >jazz is not what i am talking about. there is no element of popular music >> >since elvis which is not directly derived from black musical practice, >> >> Earlier, MT stated (to paraphrase) that the music of the African slaves in >> the antebellum South was an example of how an art form could thrive >> regardless of the ruling class-- > > >***ignoring that it was, if anything, ENCOURAGED by the plantation >owners.*** > > >All right I understand MT's statment, but please explain yours to me. Thanks > >Mary Moody > >Hey how about country western music. I don't think it got its roots from Africa RON HILLMAN ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 13:03:22 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mark Hodgson Subject: Re: AMP Earlier I wrote: > > MT stated (to paraphrase) that the music of the African slaves > >in the antebellum South was an example of how an art form could > thrive regardless of the ruling class-- and Marshall responded: >funny, i don't recall saying that. as far as i know slave musicians were >used because their masters were able to make a profit off of them in the >antebellum south, but they certainly weren't playing african music So, to set the record straight, what Marshall DID say in response to Mike Metlay in the digest of November 29, verbatim, was: >the opposite of your argument (loss of power >and supression of language haveing the power to destroy an artform) is >also questionable, witness the experiences of the african slaves who >maintained much of their native musical traditions and successfully took >over the pop music industry through infusion and synthesis. I am a digest subscriber, and when I received the message from Mary Moody > All right I understand MT's statment, but please explain yours to > me. Thanks today presumed it was off-list, so I sent her a response. Now, Marshall says >yeah, explain it to me too! Here is a verbatim copy of what I sent Mary: Hi Mary, I should have been more explicit I suppose, but God knows I was going off at the mouth enough in writing that last bit. Anyway, the role of the music as a means of relieving the misery of enslaved life is well known--it was an integral part of helping ease the work in the fields, and of providing some kind of entertainment. Indeed, mixed with religion in spirituals, it provided far more than entertainment, but a powerful source of hope and strength. And the plantation owners weren't ignorant of these facts, and (at least I thought) encouraged the music because it actually helped the slaves be more productive. Had the music turned to lyrics of rebellion in a big way (or in a way obvious at least to the plantation owners--I'm sure there must have been a lot of cloaked defiance in the lyrics, but I'm hardly an expert here), don't you think they would have suppressed it as much as possible? NOW, IF I HAD IT TO DO OVER AGAIN, I first would have consulted chapters 3 & 4 of LeRoi Jones' _Blues People_ (which everyone should read on this topic). The chapters are entitled "African Slaves/American Slaves: Their Music," and "Afro-Christian Music and Religion." In chapter 3 he makes it quite clear that the slave owners did MUCH to suppress African musical expression, attempting to sever any remaining cultural ties of the slaves to Africa. I stand corrected--but this supports the broader concept that a ruling class can and will suppress art, which I have argued in this thread. But, LeRoi Jones describes the adoption of Christianity by the slaves, at first suppressed by the owners but later treated with ambivalence, encouraged by some even if discouraged by others. He quotes Fannie Kemble, in her journal from 1838-9, that "... some planters and overseers go even farther than toleration, and encourage these devotional exercises and professions of religion, having actually discovered that a man may become more faithful and trustworthy, even as a slave, who acknowledges the higher influences of Christianity . . ." Jones later writes that the Christian ethic first preached to the slaves was a "slave ethic. It acted as a great pacifier and palliative, although it also produced a great inner strength among the devout and an almost inhuman indifference to pain." These passages are probably where I was coming from in my careless remark about "encouraged," not having looked at this topic in over twenty years. And they are contrary to the general spirit of what Jones writes in the two chapters, which clearly demonstrates the suppression of original African musical traditions by the plantation owners. So to avoid being "context-free," I stand unsupported by this example on a sub-point regarding the encouragementof a potentially opposing non-material culture by the material powers that be, but supported on the much broader point that political power historically has heavily influenced the development of art. Again, I highly recommend this book for its comments on the misunderstandings engendered by ethnocentrism and the prejudice that the Western approach to music is somehow "superior" to other approaches. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 14:02:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Roger King Subject: Re: um, synths used on Joy Division records Dear Edgar Allen Poe, >(yea, i have a record player) that have played very obscur, home-made, >one of a kind synths that i can sample and inspect. The best home-made synth stuff on CD is THE HUB. THE HUB build their own stuff and, like, string them together. Very intelligent. Way cool. The only trouble is, gee whiz, you gotta order direct from Artifact Records. But there's nothing wrong with that unless they think you're a suspect for crimes against humanities. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 11:42:12 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ron Hillman Subject: Re: um, synths used on Joy Division records >ok, if you don't remember i'm the person that always asks 'anyone know >what synths were used on * (wildcard for group that no one else likes). >OK, so "love will tear us apart" is / was very popular. So what did that >synth sound like. If it helps the record was probably recorded around >1978, but i really don't know. > >Maybe you are taliking about the Captain and Tenille," Love will keep us together" If thats the one I think that was an Arp Odyssey. >while i'm typing, can anyone think of artists that have been on record >(yea, i have a record player) that have played very obscur, home-made, >one of a kind synths that i can sample and inspect. (that is i want to >hard disc record very rare (analogue) syths, zoom way down so i can see >cycle at various points and then go to Cool Edit and generate .5 second >wav files to loop and dump into my sampler for VERY low resource using >super phat sounds. (actually .5 seconds is way to damn long)) >~eric (edgar) allen seale (poe)~ > >That sounds interesting I have a sampler but use it strictly for sequencing and live performance. I have tried sampling I have to use a dat machine. RON HILLMAN