KVR Audio

sonicstrav · Post by **sonicstrav** » Tue May 30, 2017 8:36 pm

Last one...thousands and thousands of notes....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sMVrmnufPo

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Tue May 30, 2017 8:39 pm

Taron wrote: on your own two feet!

So only "rebels" such as you, liberated from musical context and meaning entirely are their own person. :slow_clap:

donkey tugger · Post by **donkey tugger** » Tue May 30, 2017 8:39 pm

It's nice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GcdtkSPdPw

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Tue May 30, 2017 8:40 pm

I rather like the Xenakis. Unrelenting total dissonance with unvarying texture via a piano not so much.

Taron · Post by **Taron** » Tue May 30, 2017 8:48 pm

You're just having fun to argue, jan. I'm familiar with folks like you, since you're not alone...sadly.
I just wonder, if you're kidding yourself, believing you weren't offending or provoking me, or you're that far gone to realize when you're acting like an arrogant prick.
I most certainly hadn't bounced into this conversation to pick a fight. My motive was the naive conception that I might have something to contribute. But, oh, was I wrong. It's like I soiled your sacred temple by not adhering to your intellectual standards, daring to talk about the physics and mathematics of music rather than verbally convulsing in deliberately unapproachable adaptations of Latin fragments to describe the most rudimentary concepts.
Anyway, by everything you've said and everything you keep saying, you sacrifice more of your dignity. As do I!

...so, keep going, if you wish. I don't need this nor you, thankfully.

And, no, my friends have no need to become educated musicians as they are literally all highly skilled professionals in their respective fields. Some of them just love having some musical moments and no interest in having to face smug trolls in a conversation about it.

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Tue May 30, 2017 8:56 pm

I just downloaded the score for this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O8RkwEREkY

The last sonority is, bottom to top Eb D Db C B Bb.
Most of his spellings make sense to me. The piece is full of (A and P) 4ths and 7ths, he likes a distributed cluster via major 7ths. So, why Bb?

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Tue May 30, 2017 8:58 pm

Taron wrote:You're just having fun to argue, jan. I'm familiar with folks like you, since you're not alone...sadly.

Yeah, I am. So you're being this argumentative yet it isn't fun? I'm not going to read more of your post (of you) than that, your insults are not interesting, you're just being seriously dull. Not to mention a posturing, projecting hypocrite.

Taron · Post by **Taron** » Tue May 30, 2017 9:08 pm

jancivil wrote:
Taron wrote:You're just having fun to argue, jan. I'm familiar with folks like you, since you're not alone...sadly.
Yeah, I am. So you're being this argumentative yet it isn't fun? I'm not going to read more of your post (of you) than that, your insults are not interesting, you're just being seriously dull. Not to mention a posturing, projecting hypocrite.

Lovely! How am I the hypocrite? How am I posturing?
I normally dislike quoting, but I'd like to keep this one for posterity. It baffles me a little, but not too much.

Next time you solicit others with your superiority, remember that they didn't invite you to. I sure didn't!

jancivil · Post by **jancivil** » Tue May 30, 2017 9:10 pm

Speaking of distributed clusters...

In "Metamorphoses of Musical Form",[19] Ligeti developed the concept of musical "permeability" according to which a musical structure is "permeable" if it allows a free choice of intervals and "impermeable" if not. Ligeti here considers Palestrina’s music as having "perhaps the lowest degree of permeability" because its handling of consonance and dissonance was the most sensitively defined of all historical styles.[20] Ligeti saw permeability and impermeability of groups, structures, and textures in serial music as substitutes for the form-shaping function of melodic lines, motifs, and harmonies in older styles. Some textures could be layered and juxtaposed; some musical structures will mix with others seamlessly, while other structures will stand out.[21]

Atmospheres exemplifies much of Ligeti's theory suspending harmony in favor of sustained sounds. The piece opens with a "fully chromatic cluster covering more than five octaves, held by strings and soft woodwinds", out of which various groups of instruments drop out successively, followed by various "strands of sonic fabric" reenter the composition, first white notes then black notes along with shifts in timbre and duration of notes which drive the piece forward. Consequently, Griffiths writes, "the whole piece is a study in what Ligeti's essay had called the 'permeability' of musical structures, how some will mix with a great many others, some stand always apart; it is also a demonstration of what can be achieved when all the usual regulators, being so finely tuned at the time by other composers, are left open."[23]
[19-21 is Ligeti's essay, 1960; 23 is 'Paul Griffiths 1990']

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QSuXpzNDs8

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Tue May 30, 2017 9:13 pm

I love the fractal nature of Ligeti's composition, it's like something organic and alive.

nordickvr · Post by **nordickvr** » Tue May 30, 2017 10:02 pm

jancivil wrote:Speaking of distributed clusters...

In "Metamorphoses of Musical Form",...

Thanks for sharing.

Atza · Post by **Atza** » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:34 am

If it sounds pleasant than how can it be bad?
Cacophony on the other side...

Ricky Rocko · Post by **Ricky Rocko** » Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:25 pm

Dissonance is the best thing, you need it for chord inversions to keep a progression interesting.

incubus · Post by **incubus** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:52 am

Guitar Center sounds bad. Much dissonance there.

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Mon Oct 16, 2017 5:23 am

I love how the dissonant opinion (mathematics) is rejected in the thread about whether dissonance is bad by arguing that it isn't possible to define dissonance (not if you're 'tarded) and going into a ridiculous diatribe via philosophy.

I suppose that answers the question: Yes it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AEMiz6rcxc

fmr wrote:This is more about sound,

Wikipedia wrote: A distinct use of the term sound from its use in physics is that in physiology and psychology, where the term refers to the subject of perception by the brain. The field of psychoacoustics is dedicated to such studies. Historically the word "sound" referred exclusively to an effect in the mind. Webster's 1947 dictionary defined sound as: "that which is heard; the effect which is produced by the vibration of a body affecting the ear."[11] This meant (at least in 1947) the correct response to the question: "if a tree falls in the forest with no one to hear it fall, does it make a sound?" was "no". However, owing to contemporary usage, definitions of sound as a physical effect are prevalent in most dictionaries. Consequently, the answer to the same question (see above) is now "yes, a tree falling in the forest with no one to hear it fall does make a sound".

jancivil wrote:
Taron wrote: on your own two feet!
So only "rebels" such as you, liberated from musical context and meaning entirely are their own person. :slow_clap:

jancivil wrote: The only area of music where "intervals" are this abstract - ...

... is where you define everything as subjective and without meaning, right? Your absolute rejection of any objective definition of an interval as a ratio (reality) vs. your incorrigible subjective definition (fantasy) is extremely curious. It appears your frustration is justified by your inability to comprehend abstraction and experience the revelation that it is objective and carries valid meaning, while the subjective notions you cling to in desperation to find meaning are in fact meaningless.

(As an aside, this is often a symptom of a disorder related to schizophrenia and so it isn't incomprehensible to think an individual may genuinely lack the ability to comprehend abstraction.)

Fortunately we have managed to advance greatly by rejecting this notion based upon evidence from the physical world. Nihilists are wrong because they are self-defeating. The nihilist philosophy can not be right; it attempts to define reality as being impossible to define.

A bit of a paradox don't you think?

Is dissonance bad?