What is the difference between music and noise? [years-dead slappyfight revived]

[whyterabbyt]

"There are lots of makeshift wonders, seven in the world
Five of them will not be noticed, and three will not be heard..."

[hibidy]

i'm going to try interactive sculpting

Uggggg, please no more "ghost" scenes........

[whyterabbyt]

i'm going to try interactive scalping

hair hair.

[debra1rlo]

i'm going to try interactive scalping

hair hair.

i thought the idea was a cut above the rest.

[rlahalla]

i'm going to try interactive sculpting

Uggggg, please no more "ghost" scenes........

Me and deb were actually going to do a re-creation of that particular ghost scene but nude

[eduardo_b]

Conversely, even though I like listening to something like Zyklus by Stockhausen, I really don't know if I think it's music. The problem I have is equating "music" with good and "not music" with bad. Something can be an audio experience, not be music, and still be worth hearing.

Worth hearing would seem to extend the meaning of the term music. Sitting in field or forest listening to the sounds of nature can be pleasurable and worth hearing, but not fit music as an organized effort. It's not music but still good. Noise that's unpleasant, however, wouldn't be good and wouldn't be music.

[debra1rlo]

i'm going to try interactive sculpting

Uggggg, please no more "ghost" scenes........

Me and deb were actually going to do a re-creation of that particular ghost scene but nude

as fun as that sounds i doubt i'm ever going to pass that pottery class at this rate.

[whyterabbyt]

Me and deb were actually going to do a re-creation of that particular ghost scene but nude

[eduardo_b]

But some categories -- such as opera, jazz, chamber music, etc. -- are readily accepted as music by people who don't like these genres. For more experimental (as a general term) music, they don't just simply dislike it but now also don't consider it to actually be music.

I once checked out from the public library a book [edit: writ by an actual musicographerologist, not just some git going on about the good old days] that quite seriously explained that bebop was NOT MUSIC but an abomination. Stephen Foster -- now that's real music.

Has anything changed since then except people's attitudes and opinions? Did the music change?

The difference is whatever you say it is. For you.

So, one could say that some forms of music are an acquired taste that many do not acquire, whereas other forms are popular because they're easy to like. And this does seem to play out in life. The more challenging art is, the smaller the number of people who appreciate it...because they can, because they want to. For many, it would indeed be an abomination.

[jancivil]

which one is necassary for music to exist? the composer or the listener?
only the composer, the listener is merely an afterthought

So the composer doesn't need listeners, the painter doesn't need viewers, the author doesn't need readers? I would think most of these creators of art want and expect their work to be accessible to others. It seems an essential aspect of the impetus to create.

I guess you're not a creator then.

I'm not saying one has to have an audience to be creative, but it's the interaction of creator and audience (which includes other creators and critics as well as consumers of art) that takes the art to it's ultimate level.

But, you don't even make a case in support of that opinion. (And you just contradicted yourself, it *was* 'an essential aspect of the impetus...', and now it isn't.)

Why is that 'the ultimate level'? Do you think someone needs to see a critique to find something she missed about what she has done? Generally music or art critics are self-serving and out trying to improve one's cachet in the journalistic profession. To improve the status of a career. And that goes for the most highly regarded ones as well as Roving Stove. It goes for music cafe comments, it goes for all input from outside of the process. Sometimes you can get good input, it helps, but at a certain level, we're on our own, unless we are just that insecure, or lack some essential self-critical apparatus.

(An audience can be a factor in the energy of a performance, that's clear to me from experience. But in the realization of a recorded work, it's a non-issue. Input from a band can be a factor in decision-making even for a person who never involves them in the initial impetus. But to assert that this is the way to achieve the ultimate ignores too much reality, too much music history. Beethoven did not require the band or the journalist to help out in *the composition*. In fact a poorly prepared orchestra could give one a bad idea compared to what's in one's head.

By this argument, 'art by commitee' is the best move to make. Which is quite problematic.

[whyterabbyt]

So, one could say that some forms of music are an acquired taste that many do not acquire, whereas other forms are popular because they're easy to like. And this does seem to play out in life. The more challenging art is, the smaller the number of people who appreciate it...because they can, because they want to. For many, it would indeed be an abomination.

6.

[eduardo_b]

I do music I need to hear. Period. That's the *essential*.

Good point. Personal creativity that results in music you want to hear, but doesn't seem to exist, is a worthy enterprise even if no one else hears it. The critical issue would be the ability to actually create that music for yourself.

[debra1rlo]

Me and deb were actually going to do a re-creation of that particular ghost scene but nude

[rlahalla]

Me and deb were actually going to do a re-creation of that particular ghost scene but nude

lol Wait, am I scooby or shaggy?

[jancivil]

Thank you.

That speaks to music as an act of criticism; there are critics to pay attention to because they do the thing that they critique; I'm not saying ignore everyone, just that other people are not a proper impetus.

An exception on some level would be, "I know this person in the band features these strengths, and I'll tailor to that" or, "I'll suggest some cliches to the band today and what they'll do will be quicker work than what I'd do at the computer". Or sometimes a band writes something together that is more than the sum of parts.

But as a necessary part of impetus, isn't reasonable IMO. The Ultimate might be achieved alone; which isn't to say in any vacuum.