Mass Producing Mediocrity?

[vurt]

By the way, I'm a process person.

i think i am too, ask anyone who has watched me at play, face like getting even more smiley the more mayhem i create

[eduardo_b]

It's a popular sport on KVR to denigrate what others listen to as if it proves a point regarding where quality music is found. But it proves nothing.

you are the one who claims to know about differentiating quality from mediocrity, im uneducated and just think lily allen is shite.

Not about being educated, or not. It's personal taste and whatever appreciation each of us brings to the music we listen to and like. If you dislike Lily Allen but are into the Jonas Bros., that's just fine.

[vurt]

It's a popular sport on KVR to denigrate what others listen to as if it proves a point regarding where quality music is found. But it proves nothing.

you are the one who claims to know about differentiating quality from mediocrity, im uneducated and just think lily allen is shite.

Not about being educated, or not. It's personal taste and whatever appreciation each of us brings to the music we listen to and like. If you dislike Lily Allen but are into the Jonas Bros., that's just fine.

at least i know who lily allen is.
never heard of the brothers.

[eduardo_b]

What I find so odd is the assertions I keep seeing that the music business has damaged music, restricted what we can buy and kept so many from making a living at music.

That's not what I was saying at all. The music business hasn't reduced what we can buy, we're in a consumer paradise.

I'm sort of surprised to read this, but in a good way. I know there's lots of things about the music industry that could be better, but the many large and small labels have produced an extensive variety of music that we would otherwise never have an opportunity to enjoy and appreciate. That they support jazz and classical, which they almost certainly lose money doing, is something to be appreciated.

However, there was a time before recorded music became popular when no educated adult would be incapable of at least some semblance of a musical performance. If you read novels from the 19th century it's amazing how often the adult characters are expected to demonstrate their ability to sing or play an instrument just as a matter of course (I can look for some examples if you're really curious).

Okay, let's agree that this is true (I'm already aware of this to some degree). That was then and this is now. There have been so many significant changes in how we live that it's more reasonable to recognize the evolution of daily life and not try to return to things that existed as much for circumstance and convention at the time as anything else. Educated adults now also rarely have a liberal arts background, but we don't expect most to for multiple reasons.

Now people can only play the radio and their CD player. This is a slope we've been descending for about 100 years. Many adults now are reluctant to even try to participate in music, because the culture of making music is far less developed than it used to be.

Descending implies strongly a negative change, whereas I'd say we've simply acquired other skills and interests as part of the availability of entertainment that one used to have to provide for one's self and those spent time with. It's not really any different than preparing meals from scratch rather than buying food that's already prepared in some way or only requires adding other ingredients and applying heat. There are some who still do it from scratch, but most do not (if only for lack of time) and may not even know how. Those who actually enjoy the process, be it music or cooking, will do so, but most will not.

And I do blame this squarely on the commodity status of music. More technology won't increase the average quality of recorded music, of course, but it will increase the quality of musical life for the average person who can now actively understand what skilled musicians are doing.

As commodities go, music is at least an aesthetically pleasing one that is more available than at any time in human history -- both in quality and variety -- because of the commerce in music. And I could make the argument that this actually does increase the quality of musical life for most people. No, they won't actively understand what the musicians are doing, but actively listening is certainly involvement.

I may be thinking of technology differently than some are here, because I'd even include music education software in the category of "technology helping music."

Music education itself has become close to a thing of the past as money and focus are placed on those things that are not part of the arts. It's about money, priorities and values, and the lack of music education says that adults as a whole see other things as more important for their children to learn. Music education software (what would this be, by the way?) could be the most cost-effective way to replace the more formal education that was part of elementary school and then an elective in higher grades. Again, it's part of the many changes in how the average person lives his or her life in a very different culture from that a century or two ago. Or even half a century ago.

[eduardo_b]

It's a popular sport on KVR to denigrate what others listen to as if it proves a point regarding where quality music is found. But it proves nothing.

you are the one who claims to know about differentiating quality from mediocrity, im uneducated and just think lily allen is shite.

Not about being educated, or not. It's personal taste and whatever appreciation each of us brings to the music we listen to and like. If you dislike Lily Allen but are into the Jonas Bros., that's just fine.

at least i know who lily allen is.
never heard of the brothers.

Probably because you're not a young woman or girl. They are very popular with this demo, and some adults as well. From Disney, by the way.

[jopy]

Music education itself has become close to a thing of the past as money and focus are placed on those things that are not part of the arts. It's about money, priorities and values, and the lack of music education says that adults as a whole see other things as more important for their children to learn. Music education software (what would this be, by the way?) could be the most cost-effective way to replace the more formal education that was part of elementary school and then an elective in higher grades. Again, it's part of the many changes in how the average person lives his or her life in a very different culture from that a century or two ago. Or even half a century ago.

Both of my children have access to music education in public schools (that's state schools for the British readers), and I know many other people who still do the old fashioned piano or violin lessons. There's also a thriving percussion shop in my town that does a ton of outreach. So, although I don't have any data on the issue at hand, I don't think music education is really in any more trouble than it was in since the 1970's, and increasing evidence that music education can improve math scores may lead to something of a renaissance of music courses in schools.

I actually wonder if guitar hero is prompting more people to consider checking out guitars for real, but that might just be wishful thinking on my part.

For music education software, we're currently using this with our kids:

http://www.harmonicvision.com/products_home.htm

...which is a lot cheaper than traditional lessons, and has units covering rhythm, ear training, keyboard facility, harmony, and sight reading. It's a great starting point for getting kids interested. There are a lot of other options along these lines.

I still think there's plenty of evidence that just listening is a 2nd rate music experience. Cognitive neuroscience studies consistently show that little is learned by osmosis, and music is hardly an exception to the rule. If people were actively listening to all the recorded music they get that would be one thing, but I think for many people their exposure to music is the soundtrack to buying a latte and maybe a background distraction while they're caught in traffic.

[eduardo_b]

Both of my children have access to music education in public schools (that's state schools for the British readers), and I know many other people who still do the old fashioned piano or violin lessons. There's also a thriving percussion shop in my town that does a ton of outreach. So, although I don't have any data on the issue at hand, I don't think music education is really in any more trouble than it was in since the 1970's, and increasing evidence that music education can improve math scores may lead to something of a renaissance of music courses in schools.

I don't have children, but the articles in newspapers seem to indicate that in the US the money for arts in public schools (same meaning as in UK) is the first to be reduced and the last to be restored. In California, the governor (you know, Arnold S.) has been vocal about increasing funding for the arts, but he's not typical.

still think there's plenty of evidence that just listening is a 2nd rate music experience. Cognitive neuroscience studies consistently show that little is learned by osmosis, and music is hardly an exception to the rule. If people were actively listening to all the recorded music they get that would be one thing, but I think for many people their exposure to music is the soundtrack to buying a latte and maybe a background distraction while they're caught in traffic.

Wasn't thinking of learning but of enjoying the details of music. That is, active listening rather than background music. So, I certainly agree with your evidence if we're talking about a deeper experience with music from the creative side of things. But if music is only something in the background, then it really doesn't matter much to those who take so little interest.

Did you see the thread here a few months ago about lyrics, and how they receive too much attention? I understand the importance of melody, but much of the emotional involvement for many is the lyrics, whether that's singing along in the car or at a concert. Of course, it's easier to fake a guitar lead using a sample library than a voice singing words, so perhaps that was the reason for the irritation with vocals in that thread.

[jopy]

Did you see the thread here a few months ago about lyrics, and how they receive too much attention? I understand the importance of melody, but much of the emotional involvement for many is the lyrics, whether that's singing along in the car or at a concert. Of course, it's easier to fake a guitar lead using a sample library than a voice singing words, so perhaps that was the reason for the irritation with vocals in that thread.

Yes, I was tempted to reply to that one. As you may have guessed from my other comments, I am sort of a "naturalist" about music; since music began with vocal styles and very little music in the world has been purely instrumental in form or inspiration it seems odd to bash on singing and vocals. There are instrumental forms, like sitar playing in hindustani music or classical symphonic music, but even these are closely linked to a vocal melodies (e.g., Mozart basically wrote operas for symphonic instruments). I've always thought the voice is an incredibly expressive instrument with a nearly infinite range of possibilities. It's also, like you say, the real test of a musician because it doesn't easily lend itself to faking. You can cover up a bad singer somewhat, but no amount of technology is ever going to make someone with a tin ear a real singer. You can only do Britney vs. Christina for so long before you hear them both live and realize that only one of them has a real talent for music.

And here I am listening to Palestrina as we speak. I'm super conservative in some ways. And I think I just wrote a positive comment about Christina Aguilera. Let the fur and feathers fly!

[eduardo_b]

You can only do Britney vs. Christina for so long before you hear them both live and realize that only one of them has a real talent for music.

Christina's got the pipes, which was obvious (at least to me) way back when Britney was getting all the attention. Don't think too many here would disagree with your assessment. She doesn't need any technology.

[Ubiety]

After all this back and forth, it all comes down to the fact that mediocrity is in the care of the beholder. For some, the concept of mediocrity means little. For them, any work created represents an opportunity to create more works of art. Works that elevate the sum of its parts.

http://thru-you.com/

[eduardo_b]

After all this back and forth, it all comes down to the fact that mediocrity is in the care of the beholder.

Yes, but we needed 10 pages to get to this conclusion.

[vespers75]

After all this back and forth, it all comes down to the fact that mediocrity is in the care of the beholder.

Yes, but we needed 10 pages to get to this conclusion.

No we didn't...I alluded to this back when Mancivil was trying to argue with everyone.

[debra1rlo]

After all this back and forth, it all comes down to the fact that mediocrity is in the care of the beholder.

Yes, but we needed 10 pages to get to this conclusion.

Gee, I knew that and didn't even have to read one page. You guys are slow.

[eduardo_b]

After all this back and forth, it all comes down to the fact that mediocrity is in the care of the beholder.

Yes, but we needed 10 pages to get to this conclusion.

Gee, I knew that and didn't even have to read one page. You guys are slow.

Compared to you, everyone's slow...if you know what I mean...and I think you do.

[herodotus]

Here's what this all comes down to:

There are people who think that the music that gets played on the radio, the music that gets sold (or used to get sold) at places like Sam Goody and Best Buy and so on, is really good as a general rule.

There are people who are OK with such music, but who think that the real good music was the kind that you heard on the radio and bought at places like Sam Goody back in the 70's and 80's.

There are many people that only like the music that gets played on certain radio stations, eschewing all others, perhaps with a certain disdain.

And there are people who find commercial radio of every sort to be a form of aural rape.

Now, if you are a member of one of the first three groups you are going to approach these things with a different attitude then if you are a member of the fourth group. This really ought to be acknowledged, and kept in mind during these discussions. It might help to avoid some of the more pointless crosstalk that always takes place.

Because as a member of the aforementioned fourth group, let me tell you, I find it much easier to find new music that interests me now then ever before.