Eno Quote

[TITBAG]

has eno found a way to prophesise hair back onto his head yet?

[EgAD]

i'm not to sure about that Angstrom, the proliferation of ameteur music indulgence is more out of (harsh words coming but not intended) failure, most music fans ie: the audience want's their artist to be successful and all artist for the most part want to be successful, now whether that means that you have a mouth full of platinum or just that you can survive off of your artform is a subjective notion, but what i'm saying is that society as a whole isn't seeking to live with *music* on that level not from the viewpoint of the artist or the audience, for example eno himself is far from looking for or wanting to be a part of that kind of society. what i think is that that is just his ramblings, as many artist ramble, but what we really want and do is often a different story all together. envisioning that kind of future is envisioning a future where we take the art out of music, I just don't think that will fly, maybe deep down i think it should be that way just like i believe that all music should be free, but that doesn't stop me from wanting to get paid for mine. being human is funny that way.

[Angstrom]

hhm, that's just weird.
You seem to be concentrating on the false dream that is sold to the musician of "making it big", hitting the "mass market audience". All bullshit.

The reality of human music making is that many people make music for pleasure and they will never get 'famous' no matter what anyone wants. People make music because they like music, they always will - and a large part of that is social aspect of creating something together.
Unless you are on a computer on your own in a home studio and then that social aspect is missing .

Even those lucky few who will 'succeed' and become 'successful' to their 'audience' .. even to those few, they need to start somewhere with like minded individuals, sharing musical ideas in a judgment free situation, experimenting and having a laugh. Out of small amateur seeds great art MAY grow, but 99 times out of 100 it will not, and that is nthe reality of making music. Fuck the audience and trying to appease them.

Or do you think that jamming should be limited to a geographical closeness, just incase some putative future 'audience' becomes upset by the amateurishness of experimentation?

That's just bizarre and unrealistic.

People play music to enjoy playing music, not always to satisfy some idea of appeasing others.

[EgAD]

not what I meant at all Angstrom, I'm talking about the aspirations of the amateur in the bedroom or elsewhere jamming with friends. my point is not that superstardom is or should be the focal point of anything, my point is that most artist who have the experience of success and most audiences that experience a successful artist don't want that artist to be an 'interactive michael jackson' and if that artist was to be so it would be a let down. I as an electronic musician don't think enos vision is the end all be all of anything, i don't think it's the ultimate musical evolutionary path or one worth seeking, and i think it's decidely non-musical.

the difference in the value of enos notions and what happened in society when recorded music came into being is that music has always been worth capturing even way before it was possible. a performance, or a piece actualy has a value in being recorded just like a photo or a memory and as musicians i think it's not necessary for us to debate the value of that concept,
but eno's vision is not about capturing anything it's more along the line of distorting music and i know that's a loose term to use but right now i can't think of a better one. I don't see the value in distorting music or artistry for the purpose of turning the whole concept of music into an interactive virtual game.
in effect i guess i'm saying that it's wonderful for a game to be musical but music is not a game.

[EgAD]

another thought, I guess everyone has their own definition of genuine. some people scoff at using presets and not making your own patches, others scoff at someone even using a synth in the first place, vinyL or digital
anyone?, and these issues plague song composition and artist performance.
I think everybody is right about this issue and that it's a line that you have to draw for yourself, i personaly draw the line when it comes to performance when there is no effort, and when it comes to composition when the artist is finally not a part of the process.
thats just me I know.....

[dj superflat]

i think you're failing to recognizing that your distinction between artist and audience is a relatively new one, most people used to be a part of a comunal music experience, whether singing in church/at work, playing in the local band while everyone dances and claps, etc. recordings took most of this communal music participation away, because you no longer had to be able to play music to hear it. so now most people don't play music, they just listen to others, which is less satisfying (as all the would-be musicians can attest).

put another way, everyone standing around watching michael jackson is the anomaly (in more ways than one, obviously), not eno's conception (which seems closer to the way just about everyone used to be able to play fiddle or guitar or sing, though translated into an electronic age).

[EgAD]

i totally agree that there use to be more musicians Dj superflat, but imho I think that's quite a lofty assumption, from all the evidence i've ever seen the audience has always out numbered the performers, I think that clapping and singing along in church is not that great of an analogy and no offense but everyone played the fiddle, I don't think so. the audience has outnumbered the artist in most cases long before the advent of recorded music, i'm talking about way BC, the paradigim ratio that we have right now is thousands of years old.

[EgAD]

sure there are today and have always been tribes of people where everybody gets a rock to beat on or something to shake or an instrument to play but this is certainly not the majority, and that's even in tribalism, there were designated people more so than not who did the dances and music.

[forge]

good thread

there is a time and a place for everything

I could definitely see this kind of thing happening in experimental/academic circles - in fact it already is - there are a few examples around - there was one I heard about not so long ago where everyone in the audience was given some kind of cheap disposable radio device that would remotely trigger the sounds and everyone was part of it, others where the floor is wired and movement triggers according to location and pressure

in fact didnt John Cage get into this kind of thing?

but I dont see this stuff as ever being 'mainstream' - because commercially successful music usually has some key elements and structure in it that takes the expertise of experienced musicians, producers and engineers to create

[Angstrom]

i think you're failing to recognizing that your distinction between artist and audience is a relatively new one, most people used to be a part of a communal music experience

I think it shows just how much this has been lost over the last 100 years that some people don't even recognize this!

Many cultures still have social music as a living thing, it is not at all unusual in Ireland (diddly diddly dee!) or in Spain , from what I have seen in Barcelona at least.

But as with many other forms of performance (theatrical / dance) it has been handed over to the professionals while the audience is expected to sit in awe.

Prior to the invention of cinema, radio, phonographs ... this was not the case.

Sure there was 'high art' where the Lords would have a select bunch perform 'classical music' or 'high art' for them, but for most common people music and entertainment was a collaborative affair. Whether that was dancing along, or in joining in.

Shakespearian theatre was raucous as the audience heckled and shouted at the players, whores and barkers competed for the attention and the players came back at them. Interactive!
When cinema, radio and phonograph arrived the public were told to shut the hell up. Not much point at jeering at the radio or the tv.

I'm amazed how brain washed the population have become in believing in this artificial division which has no basis outside of the last 100 years of crappy technology.

What "the audience wants" is a connection.

[forge]

i think you're failing to recognizing that your distinction between artist and audience is a relatively new one, most people used to be a part of a communal music experience

I think it shows just how much this has been lost over the last 100 years that some people don't even recognize this!

Many cultures still have social music as a living thing, it is not at all unusual in Ireland (diddly diddly dee!) or in Spain , from what I have seen in Barcelona at least.

But as with many other forms of performance (theatrical / dance) it has been handed over to the professionals while the audience is expected to sit in awe.

Prior to the invention of cinema, radio, phonographs ... this was not the case.

Sure there was 'high art' where the Lords would have a select bunch perform 'classical music' or 'high art' for them, but for most common people music and entertainment was a collaborative affair. Whether that was dancing along, or in joining in.

Shakespearian theatre was raucous as the audience heckled and shouted at the players, whores and barkers competed for the attention and the players came back at them. Interactive!
When cinema, radio and phonograph arrived the public were told to shut the hell up. Not much point at jeering at the radio or the tv.

I'm amazed how brain washed the population have become in believing in this artificial division which has no basis outside of the last 100 years of crappy technology.

What "the audience wants" is a connection.

I see your point but there is a whole other side to that

we are in completely different times and 100 years ago people didnt have VSTis on their home computers

it is now possible for people to make very refined unique music and put their entire being into it and make something that is special to them that is their statement - the last thing they may want is some pissed arsehole singing danny boy over the top

music is more broad and varied than ever before

having said that, I was at a party recently for a computational arts tutor from the Uni's birthday and it was full of music technology PHd types and they had wired up twister so that when people put their hands and feet on the circles it triggered sound

but when it all came down to it, come 3am when people started to dwindle we had out the ukelele, accordian and clarinet and were playing george formby and dixieland

[Angstrom]

I see your point but there is a whole other side to that
we are in completely different times and 100 years ago people didnt have VSTis on their home computers

it is now possible for people to make very refined unique music and put their entire being into it and make something that is special to them that is their statement - the last thing they may want is some pissed arsehole singing danny boy over the top

music is more broad and varied than ever before

sure, we make now make our mini symphonies, but that doesn't preclude having a drunken strum-along. The two things are not musically exclusive.

Now we have the option to sit in our ivory/silicon towers writing classics, but we do not have the ability to collectively make music for a bit of a laugh and a mess about. At least - not in any way that is different to 500 years ago. I still need to take all my equipment to a room where someone else is with their equipment if we both decide to make music. If anything it is more complex, when it ought to be simpler. The best we have is Ninjam ... which is a right pain to set up.

Now you made a bit of a straw man argument about "some pissed arsehole singing danny boy over the top" . That is fallacious because when a group of friends get together in the real world to sit around playing music - you don't invite a drunk tramp in too. You choose some friends or like minded people and have a fun time.

There is no reason that a digital version should be any different, open to a group of like-minded people. The idea that we are all now isolated digital beethovens too individually amazing to ever be sullied by the trashy ideas of others is a bit idealistic to say the least.

We are much more like the rowdy troubadours, full of a few too many beers and making a bit of a racket. Sure it might all be a bit more glossy - but a lot of it is just glossy racket.

it's fun to make a racket sometimes - but don't believe that a collection of VSTi makes it anything more than that

[ethios4]

I still believe the majority of music loves just want to press play . if at all.

I agree. Guitar Hero is the closest most people get. Musicians tend to see it as though everyone in the world wants to be a musician, whereas for most people it is a way to relax/feel something (ie - a passive experience). The other day I was going to explain to a friend how I achieved a certain sound in a track, and he stopped me because he didn't want to know, because he felt that would ruin the experience for him - by engaging the analytical side of his mind in his musical experience.

[EgAD]

i think you're failing to recognizing that your distinction between artist and audience is a relatively new one, most people used to be a part of a communal music experience

I think it shows just how much this has been lost over the last 100 years that some people don't even recognize this!

Many cultures still have social music as a living thing, it is not at all unusual in Ireland (diddly diddly dee!) or in Spain , from what I have seen in Barcelona at least.

But as with many other forms of performance (theatrical / dance) it has been handed over to the professionals while the audience is expected to sit in awe.

Prior to the invention of cinema, radio, phonographs ... this was not the case.

Sure there was 'high art' where the Lords would have a select bunch perform 'classical music' or 'high art' for them, but for most common people music and entertainment was a collaborative affair. Whether that was dancing along, or in joining in.

Shakespearian theatre was raucous as the audience heckled and shouted at the players, whores and barkers competed for the attention and the players came back at them. Interactive!
When cinema, radio and phonograph arrived the public were told to shut the hell up. Not much point at jeering at the radio or the tv.

I'm amazed how brain washed the population have become in believing in this artificial division which has no basis outside of the last 100 years of crappy technology.

What "the audience wants" is a connection.

it seems like you're overshooting a bit Angstrom, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the roots of your sentiment but laying it on a little thick, I'm not talking about 'high art' i'm talking about non-superstar artist like ourselves, your willingness to throw the everything into just two camps one where there was high art and the other where all the common folk in the land were musicians is a little fanciful. and you're still only talking about a hundred years ago, i've already stated that there were musical artist performing for us common folk thousands of years ago. now if you want to include being a raucous and dancing and heckling into the catagory of musicianship then ok everybody was a musician but then i don't know what kind of distinction you are really trying to make as even though shakespear is dead, there is still a raucous being made at most shows that are appropriate ie: mosh pits and everything else, and there's still alot of heckling going on at most comedy shows and small country gigs so with the examples that you've given I don't think there is any less of that kind of interaction today, albeit almost in the same places.

I think forge said it best when he said there is a time and a place for everything, i've attended some electronic installations like he spoke of myself and I do find it very intresting, but would I want the whole of musics persona to be like that ,,,,,,hell no., you say we have no way to interact as before in the times that you speak of, then what do you call the laptop jams
beat battles and the like that go on quite frequently, in this day and age I call stuff like that "the interaction', I'm just not crazy about the idea of going overboard to the point where when i go see my favorite artist perform I have to play their music instead of them.

[EgAD]

inter action here you go


http://www.ableton.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=83723