Ok. I am 19. Thank you Steev for redeeming my faith in 32 year olds. I
haven't followed this thread very well because it seemed a bit
self-agrandizing, and didn't want to defend my taste for catchy music here.
I'm not sure if you're talking about pop music or mainstream music. The two
are very different things. Or if you're just lumping all non-collage music
together.
Look at groups like Atari Teenage Riot, Autechre, Le Tigre, Add n to X,
Outkast, or Magnetic Fields. Independent of their artistic merit, 1985 bands
did not in anyway resemble these guys.
Don:
I think this whole "curve of sound innovation" business is nonsense too. It
seems a rather arbitrary line has been draw regarding the "evolution" of
sound.
>> >>invention. Everything that CAN be music (categorically speaking) has
>> >>reached our ears by now (it only took a few thousand years to exhaust
all
>> >>sonic precedents for music within the range of human hearing!)
Prove this statement dude.
Are you accounting for new music and sound technologies?
What about traditional music? Account for Astor Piazolla. Would you say that
his music was regressive because it incorporated traditional instrumentation
and lent from Argentine folk music? Or would you say that it's avant-garde
because of the new form? What about Bartok, Shostakovich and Dvorak? All
regressive I suppose?
Are you just talking about "sonic" or musical forms, or popular music? I
don't have any idea what's going on...
ok
angela
>From: Steev Hise <steevATdetritus.net>
>Reply-To: rumoriATdetritus.net
>To: rumoriATdetritus.net
>Subject: Re: [rumori] curve of sound innovation
>Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:45:10 -0800 (PST)
>
>You have to compare equal time spans for it to be fair,
>don't you think? But even if you do, just to devil's
>advocate - this seems like a pretty subjective measure, and
>tho i agree with you, I don't trust my own opinion to make
>the judgement. It's a very generational attitude. If you ask
>someone young, like someone now 18 or so, to compare 1995
>with 2000, i suspect they might say there's a HUGE
>difference. BEcause they lived the music and it mattered to
>them. But the pop music that really mattered to me was
>87-92 (I'm 32 years old) and then i pretty much stopped
>paying attention to it (or tried), and even if i did hear it
>it didnt MATTER to me as much, i had grown out of it. so i
>can't speak to that later period.
>
>I mean this all sounds like adults in 1958 saying Elvis was
>just "noise"....
>
>any 18-year old pop fans on this list want to speak up?
>
>smh
>->
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori, the Detritus.net Discussion List
to unsubscribe, send mail to majordomoATdetritus.net
with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori list archives & other information are at
http://detritus.net/contact/rumori
----------------------------------------------------
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
N© Detritus.net. Sharerights extended to all.