On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:34 AM, David Santamauro <
david.santamauro@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On 10/27/2015 09:51 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:15:52 -0400, David Santamauro wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/27/2015 06:23 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>>
>>>> Resume: If you want to play hobby music in the style of other
>>>> artists some software tools make it easy to do so, but you never
>>>> will find your individual style. If you want to make art, you have
>>>> to find your own sound, this is time consuming and comes with a long
>>>> learning curve, you can't do it as easy as playing hobby music.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Simply amazing that the likes of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Berlioz,
>>> Chopin, Rosini, Paganini, Liszt, Brahms and numerous others (including
>>> myself) spanning 2 centuries used the same counterpoint "tool"
>>>
>>
>> To bad that you didn't quote me correctly.
>>
>
> I quoted the statement I wanted to respond to -- in its entirety, please
> re-read it. I didn't and don't want to comment on any other points you
> made. If you would like to respond to my metaphor concerning tools, mimicry
> and artistry, please do. If you want to question my use of the metaphor,
> contact me off list. There's no sense polluting this thread more than I
> already have ... my off-topic quota is almost full for this year :D
sympathetic as i am to your point, i'd also point out that on many levels,
the music of the composers you point to is notably non-diverse. The
constraints of easily available instruments, limited concepts of rhythm,
and a very narrow model of modes/keys means that when viewed against a
backdrop of all the world's music, the western classical period (which is a
convenient shorthand for the 2 century period you're referring to, i think)
is a fairly narrow palette. they didn't explore melody or rhythm as deeply
as other cultures (they explored rhythm barely at all). they did manage an
impressive dive into harmony that substantially expanded the possibilities
there in ways that weren't to be repeated until jazz blew the doors off.
the limits of their creative range doesn't matter in any absolute sense,
but it does actually indicate something close to the opposite of your main
point: these composers (and performers) were indeed constrained by (and
inspired) their tools in ways that had a huge impact on the music they
created. these constraints are a good thing, of course: creativity without
constraints is generally just pointless dithering.
shorthand: the tools ARE limits, but the limits are the wellspring of real
creativity, as imagination collides with the possible.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Tue Oct 27 20:15:01 2015
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 27 2015 - 20:15:01 EET