Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[malice]

maxim wrote on Mon, 26 December 2005 04:19

bob o wrote: "The only thing anybody can expect to get paid for is entertainment value." you amaze me with your cynicism did your first wife make sculptures only in order to get paid? and while we're not on your forum in the marsh pit, i'll say this too: MUSIC IS FREE!

In order to explain one or two things to some of the people that totally missed the cleverness of Bob O statement I wish to start a new thread and make his detractors realize that they should always think twice before disagreeing with the man ( that would apply to Dan Lavry : "you can disagree and be wrong forever... ever...ever...ever....)

In France, we had a very popular songwriter and singer name Serge Gainsbourg that even you americans might have heard of that made a distinction between "minor" art and "major" art that was quite controversial at the time.

to resume : minor art is an art that does not require education to be understood (punk rock would applied) and major art does (like Bob O wife's work, Mozart, Miles Davis etc ). It's not that an ignorant lad could not be "touched" by Michelangello sculptures, it's only that he doesn't have a clue about understanding "why".

Pretty elitist but true nevertheless.

Are american Idol participants artists ?

Well, I'm not sure. Looks like a football team with coaches and an armada of "media specialist" to me.

I would consider most of the music we are working on in our craft as "marketing" more than "art".

Now to respond to maxim and every poster here that really thinks music is indeed free as the air we are breathing, I will say this : Free for you to hear music out of the wind in the trees or the sea waving on the beach, but still there is such a concept as intellectual property.

While you can be an artist in your bedroom, making or not a living out of it is irrelevant to this debate: Your music is free if you, as an artist decide (or not) it is so. If you think otherwise, you are indeed close to retardation.

"The only thing anybody can expect to get paid for is entertainment value."

indeed it is true, and not even remotely cynical.

To close this post, I might remind you that we, as recordists and mixers, are NOT artists (we're not all musicians here, right ?). Merely artisans providing quality tools to the artists when we have the chance to meet them. And it is not everyday, sadly.

malice
Marsh Pit moderator (or whatever smartass title you think yourself clever to have found)

[Linear]

It has been said many times that music is the purest form of art. I've always believed this to be true because unlike many other artforms, you don't have to be a musician (nor educated) to appreciate good music - plenty of uneducated, non-musical types appreciate Mozart.

On the other hand, I have been to many contemporary dance performances and I have a tough time noting the exceptional from the exceptionally bad. I (and most others I know) gain a sense of what is good by reading the reviews & counting the standing ovations.

I think to believe that within the artform of music there is 'major' and 'minor' works is being rather subjective and narrow - regardless of the genre (punk, metal & thrash included) there are always those whom are looked up to by their peers as being frontrunners in that particular genre. I guess you could say it's importance is in the ear of the beholder.

Drawing the line between 'major' and 'minor' music based on education and appreciation is not what Bob O meant, nor anyone else who really cares about music and respects others tastes and opinions.

If you have to classify music in this way, then there is alot to be said about the intention of the music that is created. Music for TV and radio ads is music all the same, albeit minor. American/Australian Idol is majorly minor because it's throwaway, prepackaged, convoluted, commercialised, talentless made for tv/money/profits crap. Conversely, music created with passion, hard work and a sense of achievement is 'major', with the level of 'major' in a way decided by peers.

While I do think that Maxim is retarded, if his music is 'major' in his opinion, and if others in that genre appreciate it then it is most definitely not 'minor'.

Mais, ayant dit tout cela, que sais-je vraiment?

Chris

[Ron Steele]

Great post Malice.

I'd like to add the idea that anything that is copyrighted or protected is "minor art". It's just intellectual material, like the McDonald's "I'm loving it" song, It was created to provide an instantly recognizable tone that people associate with MCD to sell burgers.

That's no different then the build up of Hillary Duff and Lindsey Lohan on the Disney channel before they let them break out. They are a manufactured item just like a MCD cheese burger. They could obviously be considered "Bb minor artists", but they do serve a purpose in the MARKETPLACE.

1. Minor art is:

MARKETED "Pop" art

2. Major art is:

A love and appreciation of something that holds a TIMELESS and intrinsic value for future generations of the  world.

[Bob Olhsson]

The purpose of copyright is to encourage the creation of major art by giving every creator an equity position in everything they create rather than forcing them to rely strictly on some employer or patron for financial support. It is a basic right to freedom of expression that predates freedom of the press. It is the ONLY property right guaranteed to individuals in the US constitution.

This idea that copyright is purely for the purpose of enriching media corporations is new-speak right out of George Orwell because large media corporations would be the major beneficiaries of any "leveled playing field" where all artists get paid the same government mandated royalty with no exclusive relationships allowed.

[j.hall]

Bob Olhsson wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 10:04

....is new-speak right out of George Orwell......

i think our society and art in general have become oh too Orwellian.  sort of sad how easy it is to be controled..........

[bbkong]

Ah, Linear. hehe

An Aussie with a brain.


"Would you like some fries with that iPod?"

Yeah, the state of the industry has hit a low point and we're splitting hairs with sledgehammers as it continues the spiral.

It's funny how the gear keeps getting better and the product keeps getting worse. Orwellian indeed.

At some point craft slips into art, crossing a fine line that even the artist can't pin down since it is by nature a fluid thing.

Major/minor, high/low, the distinctions have become blurred in the avalanch of marketing and there is no litmus test or time to apply it.

It's all subjective, eye and ear of the beholder regardless of the time, effort and training of the artist.

Had a band in last night and there's no friggin way I'd call that art. Nor would I call them artists. Purveyors of moronic noise created with instruments?  That's a lot closer to the truth.

I'm gonna triple my day rate and get another cup of coffee.  

[Invisible Member]

I thought Bob Olhsson was basically saying that when Art becomes a business it ceases to be Art?

Even if that wasn't his intention it certainly caused me to evaulate somethings personally.

I once had a song over at the MARSH critiqued and I spent some time trying to incorportate the comments the best I could. But would it still be considered art if I modified it to meet some predetermined criteria such as "length".

Is all art pretty? No.

So why modify music to be "pretty" or "pleasing" if it is art?

This also makes me think about another thread about what sounds natural to a person verses processed and unreal. A painting is usually considered to be art more often than a photograph taken without color correction and filtering. Movies are more pleasing on average at 24 rather than 29.97...

What do you think?


Peace,
Dennis

[Ron Steele]

Mr. Thorazine wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 13:13

What do you think? Peace, Dennis

"Dude, this is like, a rock song, can you crank up the phones?"

Sure.

"Dude, the phones sound all distorted now."

Yep.


It's only rockin roll....... but I like it.

[McAllister]

I do not like the distinction between Major Art and Minor Art. I smacks of egalitarianism; an "o, the reason you don't like it is because you don't have enough information."

Fuck that.

Art is. You like it, or you don't. For reasons you might understand; or not. Period.

There is already too much slicing and parsing and stereotyping and catagorizing and putting-people-in-boxes for us to start doing that crap too.

I'm a musician, not a researcher working on a thesis. I don't want things explained; I don't want to have to have a certain amount of knowledge to appreciate things; and I certainly don't want my opinions of what I like (or don't like) to be devalued based on a demonstration of my knowledge of the topic at hand (i.e. proving that my opinion is a worthy one).

Art is.

Let's go make some.

M

[Invisible Member]

Ron Steele wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 10:17

Mr. Thorazine wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 13:13 What do you think? Peace, Dennis "Dude, this is like, a rock song, can you crank up the phones?" Sure. "Dude, the phones sound all distorted now." Yep. It's only rockin roll....... but I like it.

Somebody needs to cut back their visits to Banjo Center

I got some mono headphones if it will help

Peace,
Dennis

[dikledoux]

bbkong wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 12:31

At some point craft slips into art, crossing a fine line that even the artist can't pin down since it is by nature a fluid thing. <and> It's all subjective, eye and ear of the beholder regardless of the time, effort and training of the artist.

I'm flashing back to my art-school thesis days...  And I believe that BBKong hit the nail squarely on the head.  Maybe I can dredge up the lessons from those days...

High art and Low art can be better defined in terms of the training of the artist, such that a schooled artist brings a quality of intellectualism to their work no matter how hard they try to dumb it down - whereas an unschooled artist will always be working largely from the "gut".  High art and Low art are not to be confused with good or bad art.  You can have bad high art and great low art, and vice-versa.  Muddy Waters is great low-art, Ynqwie Mlmsteen is very bad high art.

Art is the act of expression.  The artwork is the artifact of that expression.  That's how performance art came about, and why theatre and music are arts - there's a level of expression in the performance of the work.  Expression is a creative act by it's very nature.

I believe that Steve A's stance as non-artist is correct in that he himself has said he's not trying to put his stamp on a piece of music, he's not expressing his view of that music or how he thinks the music "should" be expressed.  He views himself as a means for an artist to create a record, which is the artifact of their art.

When an engineer is purposefully working in a collaborative sense, they are in fact contributing to the art.  The engineer that twists knobs, places mics and then says to the band "there, now THAT'S a drum sound", is acting at the level of artist.  The engineer that twists knobs, places mics and then says to the band "is THAT what you were looking for?" is acting as a facilitator, a craftsman, but not an artist.

Both are valid, but the collaboritive effort is only valid if the band was looking for a partner in the art-making process.  Otherwise, the engineer is sticking their nose where it doesn't belong and I believe that's the problem Steve A has with the term "producer" and producers in general.

Like anything else, it's my opinion.  It just so happens that one of the things I've had formal training in is art.  I'm probably one of the only knuckleheads in here with an art degree, so I've been through this whole discussion about a gazillion times with people who live and breathe it directly.

dik

[edit: note - I've just realized how gay it looks (NTTAWWT) that I'm quoting SA in my sig...  and then going off on how I think I know what he means.  It's a little stalkerly looking.  Be advised that I'll change my sig as soon as I find something else that strikes me. <g>]

[maxim]

malice wrote:

"In France, we had a very popular songwriter and singer name Serge Gainsbourg that even you americans might have heard of that made a distinction between "minor" art and "major" art that was quite controversial at the time."

in my mind serge walks a very thin line between art and entertainment, and, one thing, for sure, he's a major provocateur

those distinctions are meaningless

there is good art and there is bad art, and there's suff in between

people will make up all sorts of reasons why they think art is good or bad, but, ultimately, it's very simple:

it either works or it doesn't



"like Bob O wife's work"

i really wish the poor woman was left out of this discussion (by her ex-husband in the first place)

besides, that's a psychofantic assumption



"I would consider most of the music we are working on in our craft as "marketing" more than "art"."

i feel sorry for you, but speak for yourself



"I might remind you that we, as recordists and mixers, are NOT artists"

once again, speak for yourself, you'll find there's a whole bunch of people in another forum who'll disagree with you



" Your music is free if you, as an artist decide (or not) it is so"

ahhh, so you did read some of my posts

i'm glad you agree

[Linear]

maxim wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 11:00

"I would consider most of the music we are working on in our craft as "marketing" more than "art"." i feel sorry for you, but speak for yourself "I might remind you that we, as recordists and mixers, are NOT artists" once again, speak for yourself, you'll find there's a whole bunch of people in another forum who'll disagree with you

Not likely.

From your posts you have made it clear that a) you don't make a living out of recording and b) you recorded your own work using outside engineering assistance. Fair enough, but you're missing the point.

There should be no debate that an 'engineer' that records another artists work for remuneration is not an artist himself.

Chris

[jetbase]

define "art"... just kidding.

the best advice i received about how to approach engineering was "don't fuck it up". maybe that's an art form to some people.

glenn

[Tidewater]

Cavemen would be dazzled by the Sistine.. they might not grasp the respect part, and might dig holes looking for grubs, but they'd appreciate it.

"Hey dood, nice cave."


M

[Linear]

jetbase wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 11:34

define "art"... just kidding. the best advice i received about how to approach engineering was "don't fuck it up". maybe that's an art form to some people. glenn

I'd say that's more professional competence. I'd expect an engineer or doctor to 'not fuck it up', but that doesn't neccessarily make them artisans.

Chris

[maxim]

chris wrote:

"While I do think that Maxim is retarded"

nice play of the ball

", if his music is 'major' in his opinion, and if others in that genre appreciate it then it is most definitely not 'minor'."

i didn't put up that preposterous distinction

imo, my music is art

whether it's good or bad or entertaining is not up to me to decide

"Mais, ayant dit tout cela, que sais-je vraiment?"

et voila

[maxim]

chris wrote:

"There should be no debate that an 'engineer' that records another artists work for remuneration is not an artist himself."

i like the fascist tone of that statement

"I personally have always considered myself an artist, but not THE artist."

bill mueller

"As far as the last record goes, aside from co-writing, co-arranging and even playing instruments, I would say that picking out which instrument to be played that will best suit the track, from which bass, which guitar, which amp, which drum, which cymbal, tuning each drum myself, deciding how best to record each and every instrument, deciding where they sit in the mix, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum, are all parts of the 'art' of recording. These are not merely technical abilities. These are matters of instinct, perception, taste, experience, skill and talent, and that is what makes them art, not science, IMHO."

jj blair

"The artist hires a producer, the producer hires an engineer, and they all work together to make something fantastic which will resonate in the now, and let the chips fall where they may. It's all art, and everything is connected."

eric vincent

"I personally believe that engineering is an art"

ross hogarth

"Engineering is an art, or a science, and both"

miles hendrix

"Obviously I agree..."

william wittman

"Of course Producing is an art form. And in many ways, although more science-related, Engineering can be an art form too."

terry manning

i could go on

but there MUST BE NO DEBATE!

[Bob Olhsson]

I don't think there is any connection between art and commerce at all!

Some people are pretty good at one or the other and a tiny few are really good at both.

[Tidewater]

here we go..


M

[chrisj]

McAllister wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 14:23

Art is. Let's go make some.

The next question (and a very different one, by these terms) is: "Major' craft vs 'minor' craft?

I'm more and more drawn to the 'craft' point of view as I work on developing my ability to do exactly what's needed, and especially as I practice my ability to subjugate my notion of what's needed and cram it into the tight box of what other people I'm working with need from me.

Which makes me a budding goddamned studio hack.

But there have always been goddamned studio hacks I totally like. Drums, Jim Keltner, Rick Marotta, Purdie. Guitar like Larry Carlton or Dean Parks. Bass like- well, James Jamerson blurs the line, as did Purdie, because he would do stuff that was so much like him and exert such a powerful directing force that it's less like a studiohack.

But to me that's the distinction between art and craft. Art, you can lay it on the listener that they just don't get your concept, are too uptight, whatever. You can weasel. Craft, you give up part of the freedom of choice of pure Art because you're obligated to do stuff that is competent in some specific ways, but in return for that you can claim some objective virtues- like "well, you might not like this but by God I played it properly and there aren't any mistakes".

I did Art guitar leads on 'If This Is Where It Is' and it was too noodly though it hit some really great moments and woulda worked. When I redid them I did the whole thing with the intent of doubletracking everything very tightly, a total nod to Craft, and I didn't have any further trouble over the parts. I actually think the guitar work was way stronger that way, though it is also quite a bit less like 'woo, check ME out!'. I like to think that those who care would listen to it and go 'yeaaaaah'.

In a way, art means those who DON'T care might listen and go 'whoah!'. I gave that up, to an extent. It wasn't wrong for that gig (Team Campfire)- a lot of people really liked that track. Most of them didn't say anything about the electric guitars, but there are quite a few places where the focus is on electric guitar and the ball isn't dropped. It's not grabbed away from, say, the lead vocal, but it's not dropped either.

Craft is like that kind of teamwork.

[maxim]

bob o wrote:

"The purpose of copyright is to encourage the creation of major art by giving every creator an equity position in everything they create rather than forcing them to rely strictly on some employer or patron for financial support."

maybe, it is now, but let's keep in mind the history

copyright law was created by the catholic church to protect the bible from being interpreted (even though, that's how the gospels were written in the first place... not he first hypocritical act from the vatican, nor the last)

"It is the ONLY property right guaranteed to individuals in the US constitution."

and i'm sure happy to collect the monies owed to me, and  enjoy moral rights over my work



"This idea that copyright is purely for the purpose of enriching media corporations..."


remember morris levy?

he was small fry

" large media corporations would be the major beneficiaries of any "leveled playing field" where all artists get paid the same government mandated royalty with no exclusive relationships allowed. "

this time, i agree

[maxim]

bbbkong wrote:

"Ah, Linear. hehe

An Aussie with a brain."

surprise.... a racist without one

[maxim]

bob o wrote:

"I don't think there is any connection between art and commerce at all!"

art dealers might disagree, as will, perhaps, most publishers

the only ones who might agree with you are artists themselves

which field are you in?

"Some people are pretty good at one or the other and a tiny few are really good at both. "

sad but true

[maxim]

chris j wrote:

"Craft is like that kind of teamwork."

there's a lot to be said for craft

[wwittman]

The only difference between major art and minor art is the minor sounds sadder.

It's all relative.

[rnicklaus]

wwittman wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 22:05

The only difference between major art and minor art is the minor sounds sadder. It's all relative.

Or

Major Art is in the army and minor Art is 13.

And yes they are relatives.

[Tidewater]

-rim shot sample-


M

[John Ivan]

Bob Olhsson wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 21:22

I don't think there is any connection between art and commerce at all! Some people are pretty good at one or the other and a tiny few are really good at both.

I can relate to this in that, I have always been a shitty business man. I have always hated dealing with money and I've always hated the "dog and Pony show" aspect of the music biz. Having said that,I make my living doing it some how. I think it's because people other than me are out selling {promoting} me.

I never seem to have a problem coming up with a tune or showing up at a studio to do the creative stuff. {play,print,mix etc.}. So, in that regard, I see what your saying.{maybe that's not what you meant though.}

Ivan.

[malice]

maxim wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 01:00

malice wrote: "In France, we had a very popular songwriter and singer name Serge Gainsbourg that even you americans might have heard of that made a distinction between "minor" art and "major" art that was quite controversial at the time." in my mind serge walks a very thin line between art and entertainment, and, one thing, for sure, he's a major provocateur those distinctions are meaningless there is good art and there is bad art, and there's suff in between

To be perfectly clear to you and others, there is no scale of value or quality between "major" and "minor" art, you can have good "minor" art and bad "major" art. This terminology was used for the sole purpose of demonstration by Mr SG.
I was merely trying to elaborate on what Bob was saying.

Quote:

"like Bob O wife's work" i really wish the poor woman was left out of this discussion (by her ex-husband in the first place)

Why, you don't like sculptors ?

Quote:

besides, that's a psychofantic assumption

http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/search?p=psychofantic& searchmode=normal&x=25&y=13

Quote:

"I would consider most of the music we are working on in our craft as "marketing" more than "art"." i feel sorry for you, but speak for yourself

Can you post some of the work you have done, I'll be curious about that.
Don't feel sorry for me, being realistic does not make me sad. And I had the chance to work with real artists myself so I consider myself lucky.

Quote:

"I might remind you that we, as recordists and mixers, are NOT artists" once again, speak for yourself, you'll find there's a whole bunch of people in another forum who'll disagree with you

They can disagree with me and be wrong forrever ...

Quote:

" Your music is free if you, as an artist decide (or not) it is so" ahhh, so you did read some of my posts i'm glad you agree

Don't tell me this as if they were literature. Now try to do better than read some of mine, try to understand the meaning of them.

malice

[malice]

maxim wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 05:01

bbbkong wrote: "Ah, Linear. hehe An Aussie with a brain." surprise.... a racist without one

You realise you just made his point ...

malice

[malice]

maxim wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 03:15

"The artist hires a producer, the producer hires an engineer, and they all work together to make something fantastic which will resonate in the now, and let the chips fall where they may. It's all art, and everything is connected." eric vincent

Maxim,

You were doing so good...

LOL

malice

[Slipperman]

Gimmie enough knobbies und slidumz and I'll make Berlioz sound like Slayer.

Is it art?

I dunno.

Don't give a rats-ass either.

It's grown men changing air pressure level.

Close enough for the midgets I'm slam-dancing with.

SM.

[Ron Steele]

Slipperman wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 05:53

Gimmie enough knobbies und slidumz and I'll make Berlioz sound like Slayer. Is it art? SM.

SM,

this could be considered a major imposition on Berlioz, but so could pulling a rabbit out of your ass, very often..... {ouch}...... to make something or somebody sound great, and make them feel like it was their idea.

The art of stroking a music artist does not come easy. It goes beyond the sliders and Putons. But like a puton, sometimes you have to stroke a certain way to get the desired result that will satisfy you and the "artist".

[bbkong]

Stroking great performances out of musos has more to do with phenomenal insight than art. Our late brother Loudist was a master at finding the right buttons to push for that, but it does fall under the art of producing.

I think there's a defined line when the engineer (craft) step out from behind the board and injects his first comment into the proceedings (producing, art).

But to stay on topic, the biggest difference between 'Major' and 'minor' trolling is that minor trolls will frequently quote someone's comment and add a huzzah just to see his name on the page. Minor trolls also lack any kind of creativity in coming up with insults and in doing so often find themselves a target, a pitiful arse-up gutter gobbler with ten gallons of sand pounded up their ass.

[Roadster]

Quote:

-rim shot sample-

 Very artistic humor...gotta say.

[Ron Steele]

post deleted by: RS

[maxim]

malice wrote:

"I was merely trying to elaborate on what Bob was saying."

by psychofantically regurgitating serge gainsbourg's guilt ridden ravings?



"Why, you don't like sculptors ?"

some of my best friends are sculptors, but, i'm sure, even bob would like to see his ex-wife finally leave this thread



" http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/search?p=psychofantic& searchmode=normal&x=25&y=13"

that's a neologism

means a more intense form of sycophancy, where the sufferer fancies their idol so much they share in their delusions (type of folie a deux)

most commonly seen by this author in the roger nicholls forum


"Can you post some of the work you have done, I'll be curious about that."

i'll atach a sample if i can

now if you're really interested, my penis is about 12 cms long and 5 cms wide when erect

show me yours?


"They can disagree with me and be wrong forrever ..."

how post-ironic

[idylldon]

jetbase wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 16:34

define "art"... just kidding.

Take the "f" out of "fart."

Cheers,
--
Don

[Charles Dye]

maxim wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 18:59

"psychofantic" that's a neologism

no, it's a spelling mistake

[malice]

maxim wrote on Sat, 07 January 2006 00:59

malice wrote: "I was merely trying to elaborate on what Bob was saying." by psychofantically regurgitating serge gainsbourg's guilt ridden ravings?

That' is your assumption. Personally, I think you're a dick. But you might say I'm psychofantically regurgitating what most of the other posters think of you by now.

Quote:

"Why, you don't like sculptors ?" some of my best friends are sculptors, but, i'm sure, even bob would like to see his ex-wife finally leave this thread

So how about YOU leave her out of this. Bob is a friend, he's moderating in the same forum as I am. Don't you think he would have pmed me if he had a problem with me ?

Quote:

"   http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/search?p=psychofantic& searchmode=normal&x=25&y=13" that's a neologism means a more intense form of sycophancy, where the sufferer fancies their idol so much they share in their delusions (type of folie a deux) most commonly seen by this author in the roger nicholls forum

You see, I even can learn something from you. This day is starting great for me.

Quote:

"Can you post some of the work you have done, I'll be curious about that." i'll atach a sample if i can now if you're really interested, my penis is about 12 cms long and 5 cms wide when erect show me yours?

Mine is 18,5 cm / 7. But it's not the size that matters. Oh, you were talking about my work ?

Sorry, you will have to put your boots on and go to the MARSH swamp. Then you can hear one of my mix. It's in the Nexus, under the CAPE contest. I did the mix, moog synth and bass for team Chardonay. It was fun, and it is free for everyone to listen. As for my professional work, well, they are under copyright control, sorry. Although if you clic the link in my sig, you can find some of the work I have done with my wife as composer, musician and arranger (the latest work she has done).

As for your tango. I won't comment on this.

The bottom line is, don't feel sorry for me for the people I have worked with.
I'm fine thank you. I only asked you about your work because you seemed so disrespectful about mine.

Quote:

"They can disagree with me and be wrong forrever ..." how post-ironic

What is ironic is your total lack of humor.

Have a nice day

malice

[Goes211]

maxim wrote on Sat, 07 January 2006 00:59

"Can you post some of the work you have done, I'll be curious about that." i'll atach a sample if i can

Did you try to quantize those guitars or something ?
Prolly not the appropriate term for a tango, but it definitely lacks "swing".

No match for the Mouse, I'm afraid.
Carry on.

[Aardvark]

maxim wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 18:59

my penis is about 12 cms long and 5 cms wide when erect

If this Tango is your allegorical penis then you sir, are hung like hamster.


Cheers,
Aardvark

[maxdimario]

In Europe there is a distinction between light-music and serious-music.

classical music would be considered serious as well as any kind of music tied to the world of fine arts (and establishment).

This is largely a form of class-distinction utilized by journalists and the political class to keep the  working classes and the upper classes separate.

I used to listen to classical music when I was a toddler and I remember seeing the Serge G.-type Italian artists (which are common both in France and in Italy) on B/W TV.

I remember distinctly associating a sensation of repulsion at that music even though I was in my pre-school years.

Later on I have come to realize that the music was not intrinsicly beautiful, but tied to a political movement (euro-communist) and largely based on clever lyrics.

the truth of the matter is that anyone can appreciate a melody, be it Mozart or Rachmaninoff or the Beatles or 'Killing me softly'. The 'complicated' part is the arrangement, which is only there to support the melody and does not need to be 'understood'.

I remember in the eighties there was an LP record that put famous classical melodies to a 4/4 beat in america and it was quite successful.

so you don't have to be cultured to appreciate music..

either you like it or you don't.

depending on your cultural backround you will gravitate towards one form of music or another, but there are as many types of music as there are cultures (and in the end, individuals).

You need to consider that historically, it has been the object of large corporations to homogenize cultural barriers in an effort to have predictable markets, so it's a bit of an uphill battle trying to get people to understand that music is tied to their community or a to an independent scene.

[Goes211]

maxdimario wrote on Sat, 07 January 2006 14:47

In Europe there is a distinction between light-music and serious-music.

To this day, when registering your tunes for copyright in some european countries they fall under either serious music (classical) or light music.
It has always amused me to no end that Mozart's "Eine Kleine Nachtmuzik" falls under "serious", and that Sepultura, Motorhead, and all the scandinavian devilworshipping metallers fall under "light". We could argue about the artistic value of the respective contenders, but how interesting is that ? I guess we have always been suckers for labels. Like "alternative" which has never been so close to meaning "mainstream".

Old habits don't die fast.

[Sahib]

malice wrote on Thu, 05 January 2006 12:46

In France, we had a very popular songwriter and singer name Serge Gainsbourg that even you americans might have heard of that made a distinction between "minor" art and "major" art that was quite controversial at the time. to resume : minor art is an art that does not require education to be understood (punk rock would applied) and major art does (like Bob O wife's work, Mozart, Miles Davis etc ). It's not that an ignorant lad could not be "touched" by Michelangello sculptures, it's only that he doesn't have a clue about understanding "why". Pretty elitist but true nevertheless.

Malice forgive me for saying but this is load of crap. You do not have to have an education to understand and appreciate arts. Don't forget, you can have all the education and think that you "appreciate" a load of shit put in front of you. And the idea of that load of shit is also given to the "artist" through and education. Now, I am not being foul mouthed here when I say shit, I actually mean shit. I do not remember who that was in, I think 60s but he/she actually tinned his/her shit and people with "appreciation through education" bought it. An ignorant lad did not becasue he knew it was a pile of shit.

So the only thing I agree with you that it is elitist. But not true.

Quote:

Are american Idol participants artists ?

May be not all of them but one can be. Perhaps the person is looking for a way in. There were a lot of talented actresses that had almost full time job in BJ'ing the film executives with the hope that they would make it but never got anywhere. Did this make them less talented than Maryln Monreo?

Quote:

To close this post, I might remind you that we, as recordists and mixers, are NOT artists (we're not all musicians here, right ?). Merely artisans providing quality tools to the artists when we have the chance to meet them. And it is not everyday, sadly.

You are being modest and I like it. But you are wrong again.

Description of art is; the expression or application of creative skills.

Now if AEs or producers or whatever you call, can help in expressing a piece of music through application of their skill then they are artists.

[bblackwood]

I suppose I'm on the dumb side of the discussion - to me art is art, there is no hierarchy to it. Some of it speaks to me, some does not. But I'm not about to automatically pigeon-hole someone's work as being 'major' or 'minor' due to some silly gov't regulation...

And BTW, those of you having trouble keeping things on topic need to double your efforts. Steve is a very cool guy but we're not going to allow you to crap on his lawn. I hope this is the last time I have to address this.

[wallace]

It's an interesting notion. I think there is such a thing as artistic perfection.. kind of like a magnet that has more pull the closer you are.

The thing is that, IMO, a lot artist all think that what they're doing is the greatest and justify people not agreeing as the fact that it's over their head. Music always has a base in something, however, whether it's cultural or genre based. Some music is based on tradition while others are based on "ideas" (think blues music compared to Yes). Sometimes those groups of ideas are self-generated and sometimes they're learned (and of course blended).

I personally like music and art that messes with the fundamentals of the aesthetics, and structure. People who can mess with structure (Miles Davis and Picasso in art) while at the same time, using simple means to do so are the most intriguing.

[Sahib]

I (and Barish) might be working on an art project which is actually about explaining a scientific law in artistic form.  If that happens, I'll be designing and making loads of hardware as part of the visuals in order to convey the message to the audience.

Here you go Malice, how are we going to deal with this?

Will I be qualifying as an artist or remain as a techie?    

This is serious.

Anyhow, I have just re-read your first post and it occured to me that this might be going out of topic. If so please delete the post.

BR