Could someone please explain anti-loop snobbery?

[aciddose]

Well it is interesting stuff though. I remember back around 2001 reading a webpage, I'm not certain but I suspect it was by the same author that talked about sampling as a distinct art-form. Sort of like how a DJ is supposed to read the audience and interact with them via the music. Of course in many ways this is quite limited, although there is no denying that the performance is indeed a performance although of a different sort than the music itself.

In terms of sampling a lot of creativity goes into selecting samples and loops that combine to sound pleasant, and I feel "the bran flakes" is a brilliant example of very refined skill.

In that sense it is not about the music itself, melody, rhythm or so on. It is about listening to the combinations of component parts themselves, not the parts but their combinations.

Not merely the combination of parts either! Observing instead the selection process and creativity associated with having made these combinations themselves.

How is this any different on an abstract level from for example selecting which strings to pluck in which manner, on which instrument in order to produce which notes, at which time and so on? In this sense these things are identical; utilization of circuits in our brain to make selections given many options.

Art: "utilization of circuits in the brain to make selections given many options, or the product of such a process."

[aciddose]

This is actually another example of the same thing. There are many component parts here, some of which may be original but some of which I know for a fact were taken from other sources. "Happy up here" is indeed an example of sampling more than composition by far, although some composition is certainly also present.

Likewise:

[whyterabbyt]

I don't even use loops. I wrote a program to make my loops for me.

meh. I hacked a custom version of the gcc optimiser with some opcodes from csound so I could unroll all my loops.

[vurt]

my aunty loop is a snob cos she thinks shes better than everyone else.

[debra1rlo]

I ended up at this thread because I searched the interwebz for antelope shrubbery... THANKS OBAMA!

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

no

[jancivil]

interesting stuff
sampling as a distinct art-form

In terms of sampling a lot of creativity goes into selecting samples and loops that combine to sound pleasant, and I feel "the bran flakes" is a brilliant example of very refined skill.

In that sense it is not about the music itself, melody, rhythm or so on. It is about listening to the combinations of component parts themselves, not the parts but their combinations.

Not merely the combination of parts either! Observing instead the selection process and creativity associated with having made these combinations themselves.

Obviously in the very broadest sense that is 'a composition'. That was just a lot of things already done and now regurgitated and the 'art' is in the combination/juxtaposition of past styles. It's an exercise in fashion rather than an interest in musical *creativity*, to my view

How is this any different on an abstract level from for example selecting which strings to pluck in which manner, on which instrument in order to produce which notes, at which time and so on? In this sense these things are identical; utilization of circuits in our brain to make selections given many options.

You can transform what this is into what's convenient for your point through this reduction, sure. It's the difference from what I was talking about as collage is different than painting. It isn't interesting musically to me because its parts are, its content is all very old-hat.

[She Changed Her Mind]

Yeah, music is like painting. I can't paint either

[aciddose]

It only seems uninteresting to you because you're valuing particular concrete instances of art above others and therefore due to your biases are incapable of recognizing and accepting that in the abstract these are all instances of the same fractal patterns.

It is easy to argue that there is more or less of "chi" associated with something as there is no concrete definition for it to begin with. My argument is that there is no chi, ever. The burden of proof lies with you.

[TrekStar]

no

[TrekStar]

Yeah, music is like painting. I can't paint either

haha ...lots of entertaining views in this thread.

[jancivil]

It only seems uninteresting to you because you're valuing particular concrete instances of art above others and therefore due to your biases are incapable of recognizing and accepting that in the abstract these are all instances of the same fractal patterns.

It isn't interesting to me particularly because I think there are more interesting things to do with my time. This word you keep using 'abstract' doesn't mean what you want it to mean at least twice now. This is pretty much word salad now. The difference between making a collage and painting is pretty clear, I feel confident of the analogy being good, and this lingo [in the abstract, fractal patterns] does not transform the two activities into the same activity or the same basic idea. I'm incapable of this thing, which really means I don't think like you. You want to reduce music pretty radically; an activity which takes quite a lot more interest in real involvement is fractally no better than, essentially your copy and paste? So you need to blur the boundaries. Why is that?
I would grant the craft of it, but there has be a difference between having musical ideas [concretely] and collating copies of ideas that already exist.

[jancivil]

How can my own thought only seem like that thought??? I assure you my interest in copies of extant records of old-hat music juxtaposed through a cutesy/hipster ironic aesthetic that needs a video to complete it is not high, that is simply a true statement.

[aciddose]

The difference between making a collage and painting is pretty clear

Just because you say so doesn't make it true.

All you've done in the two posts above is demonstrate anti-loop snobbery in all its glory.

[herodotus]

I love you Kvr.