Re: [LAU] re Subconscious Affecting Music

On Mon, August 30, 2010 5:25 am, Julien Claassen wrote:
> Patrick!
> You still got the wrong end of the stick. I meant: The arrangements of
> good pop music are multilayered. But as even Genesis said: It's easier to
> make a long track, than a short to the pint song.

In this regard I agree with you that there is a technique of layering that
is being used. I don't agree that it is easier to make a long track than a
short track. It is hard to make a polished piece of work no matter what.
It takes time and effort. A polished long player piece will require more
time than a short player piece. Genesis had feet planted on both sides of
the issue so what Phil Collins said on the matter has to be taken with a
grain of salt. He obviously made a lot of money from short form pop so had
a vested interest in pushing the concept that a number one hit is more of
a work of art than a long player piece. In fact it could be argued that he
was assisting the establishment in it's goal of breaking down and subduing
society with statements like that. Although he also tried to portray a
significant message so it may not have been his intention when he made the
statement and may have been twisted and used to further the agenda of the
pop music industry.

> As to restrictions: I set myself some constraints to conform to a very
> specific type of pop music. But even that has been there since the middle
> ages. Baroque music had its forms, which were sometimes quite constrained.
> think of counterpunctual works around Bach's time. There were quite a few
> rules to be followed. As to innovative new music. Hm, even about baroque
> music some people say: It's always the same. Or mostly. And that's not
> always people, who have no idea about it.

All musical genres start to sound samey if you listen to enough of it.

> We've always had forms. And we had specific ways of delivering messages
> for a long time as well. If you go dwn that road: Think sonnets. Not only
> metrum/rhythm and rhyme schemes, but a certain style of language and ways
> to use that language. The romantique era was quite free, but even there,
> loads of people made a system for themselves and adhered to it.

Yes, I agree the basic formula for mindless drivel has not changed much
over the years. Perhaps that is why we have been dominated by a hereditary
elite for so long now?

> Yet I don't think it's all too subconscious still. It's quite plain, if
> you know the language used, or if you just have enough
motivation/energy > to delve into it. And that may be a problem. But
with any type of music,
> you will develope some form of communication and to be completely
> understood, the listener will have to take the time to learn. Because even
> with the popmusic we're talking about, there are the minds of the
> producers and writers, which bring in something specific. But you can
> live without it.

Certainly each producer adds a degree of personality to a production. What
I see is that recently there has been a wholesale assault on society by
producers using a specific version of the technique that is easily
absorbed by susceptible minds. For the rest of us we are expected to
endure the punishment of being immersed in this abusive mind fuck whenever
we step out into a public space again breaking us down and subduing us to
conform to the goals they want to promote as acceptable behaviour.

If we are accepting of this as the status quo then we get what we deserve.
I feel it's important that we actively counter it by going so far as to
attempt to subvert the technique and level the playing field, so to speak.

-- 
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user