c
o
o
l

l
o
l

Wisniewka,

I'm a little under the weather, as they say, so forgive me a possibly inferior post.

Yup, I did study both (thumbs up to your memory), but finished neither. Nonetheless, you picked the right person for sure.

"Food for thought" could be subjective, but I made the comparison with fast food before: is it purely subjective to rate a hamburger at McDonalds lower than top notch French cuisine? Or would it be possible to give some objective grounds? Hm.. sadly I never studied cooking. Maybe "lower than" isn't the right choice of words, but I do believe there's a difference in the way one appreciates either. And I can see a similarity between how fast food and most chart pop is conceived (and appreciated), versus a piece of art (sorry ) and a meal carefully prepared by a great chef. Even if you call the lyrics to, say, Hit me Baby One More Time deep (or at least don't oppose when others think that), I still believe they weren't conceived that way. I'm not Max Martin, but I think he just got down and tried to write something that gets stuck in your head and has you humming for days, yet leaves you cold after a few months, because that's when the new single comes out, and they want you to buy that one too. And of course, a song isn't catchy because of the melody alone. The lyrics have to be simple, and easily remembered, for it to work. So, isn't the purpose of the creator a somewhat objective point to take into consideration?

Lack of "real" instruments:
We'd have to make a distinction between live music and a studio recording. In the latter, I feel that you can be creative with just about anything. It's only when you want to take it to a stage that an aspect of creativity might get lost. I don't necessarily oppose to a studio recording where the voice is the only real instrument (do you?). And live, well, sorry once more, but I still believe in that distinction. You don't go to a Christina or Britney concert (just) for the music, but you go for the whole thing, the huge show. It's a totally different experience from going to a classical concert, a good jazz gig, etc (where extensive use of prerecorded material would be more easily frowned upon). But you'll beg to differ, I'm sure.

Nah, I was serious about Dusty. Would never dare to mock you. ( ) Try Dusty in Memphis if you have the time. Who knows, it might be a hidden gem in your parents' collection.

I brought up Goodrem because I thought it was an interesting case. I tried listening to her album once, but I gave up about halfway. But what I heard was fairly reminiscent of some Celine Dion stuff, and so on (and I know you don't like Dion). So I was wondering... you prefer Goodrem's music because you think she's more talented? Does it really matter though, who's behind it all? As I said before, what if you see it as a team effort, and consider Dion's voice to be just a part of a "band"? And that's why I mentioned Dusty Springfield, and my thought that you might like her: I don't think it matters that Goodrem does more on her own than some of her colleagues. Whether several people are behind it or not: if it's good it's good, if it's bad it's bad.

quote: "You don’t see any non-classical composers (I’m not counting producers and songwriters writing material for pop artists) creating pieces for anyone else on such a scale."
That confused me. Why aren't you counting those producers and songwriters? Isn't there a valid comparison between Max Martin writing a song specifically for Britney Spears, and Penderecki writing a concerto specifically for Anne-Sophie Mutter? What you said sounded a bit like "Porsche has never made a SUV (if you don't count the Cayenne)".

And that brings us to cars, briefly. I don't consider automotive design as a form of art, strictly speaking. A piece of art, in my view, is created purely to get a message across, or purely for its beauty etc. Functionality deeply interferes with that (for instance, a sportscar designed entirely with the best possible aerodynamics in mind, a family car with the most possible interior space, safety regulations...). I'm not saying things like beauty, controversy... are never taken into consideration for a functional product (of course they are), but they're not the main target. A car has to go from A to B, right? Having said that, this is not entirely true for some concept cars, which I might consider to be art. And then there are a whole bunch of cars which sort of balance inbetween. The Rolls 100EX could see the light of day in an altered form, but as it was displayed in Génève, it surely was rather.. arty (and all the more so, of course, because it wasn't built to be driven, but to be put on display). It evoked images and emotions that don't necessarily have much to do with cars (the nautical touches, the aura of 30s and 40s Hollywood). In other words, they used an object ("car") to portray things not innately linked to that object. They put various totally separate emotional elements together, to create something new. Which is an aspect of art. Anyway, that's how I see it. This could be an interesting topic in Car Design Talk btw.

To some degree, different renditions of a classical piece can be compared to a modern artists live performance, because most of them sound completely different live since it's impossible to wring the result in real-time through the production process.
This is making me dizzy at 7am. I might try again after a well deserved nap. All I know is I'm not yet inclined to agree. You have the aspect of different performers in classical music, of course, who each inflict their own view on a certain piece. That way I liked to compare it more with pop cover versions etc. And you also seem to be implying there's no noteworthy difference between a classical studio recording or live performance.

... it’s understandable that you didn’t experience that with classical music. I assume that you don’t hear it often in your environment besides in your own place.
Valid point. Besides, I try to avoid it as much as I can. Restaurants which play classical music in the background give me the shivers.

(Sorry for briefly discontinuing the little trend Xx Designer xX started...)

Hope you had a great nap

I knew it was you!

Just out of curiosity, what did your musicology classes cover? I believe you mentioned once that both subjects were rather not to your tastes.

By the way, I'm writing this while not having slept for over 17 hours. I think that I'm now as sleepy as you must have been, so now we're even

Regarding the top-notch cuisine, there are people who would prefer a regular McChicken burger with its dubious content including anti-foaming agent to snails or sparrows drowned in white wine any time of the day. See what I mean? It all depends on the menu, and it’s the same with music. As difficult as it is to believe, there are people who are listening to B. Spears that say that her songs are works of art (most of ‘em are 10 year olds, but anyway). In my opinion, music that is made by ‘entertainers’ should be exposed to the same sort of merciless criticism like music that is made by people who have a high(er) amount of talent. Why should they get concessions?

Regarding the pop song writing, of course mainstream-oriented songs are written with the intention to be stuck in your head, but then you have to ask yourself if, for example, ‘Fignter’ by Aguillera would have been written by a different artist that happens to produce ‘deep’ or ‘artsy’ music, would you still considered it to be ‘fast food’? Are you trying to say that it’s not the quality of lyric itself that matters if you are deciding whether to view it as deep or not, but its purpose or the intention it is written with?

I don't necessarily oppose to a studio recording where the voice is the only real instrument (do you?)

I took the liberty of ‘borrowing’ your idea with the colourful quotes. Sorry, I don’t get the sentence, what do you mean with the voice being the only real instrument?

Of course there are fundamental differences between a Spears live gig and for example an opera (the people in the latter don’t have to mime, for example), but I believe that ‘artsy’ music can be as entertaining as a half-naked girl dancing her way through a show. Would you go to tho opera just to appreciate the live rendition aurally (not sure if that is the right term in this sense) or to be entertained as well? Me, I would find it quite amusing to watch the voluptuous Hildebrand sing a part in The Ring of Nibelungen

Nah, sadly my mom doesn’t listen to Jazz, Blues and Soul. Ironically, - and I’m not making this up - she mainly listens to American hard rock and heavy metal. She even bought herself Marilyn Manson’s The Golden Age of Grotesque!

I haven’t heard anything from Goodrem’s album besides the singles, but isn’t Dion’s music more electronical and her singing a bit more over the top?

It might not matter to you or anybody else if someone makes music on her or his own, it just matters to me. I just love the idea of several artists producing one piece of music together, because such music is the result of people being in constant confrontation and clash of opinions. In short, the artists’ individual and characteristic styles boil down to a diverse mixture, and that’s why I’m mainly interested in groups not single artists. But even if pop artists would write their own material and if they would not be as artistically depended on their producers, this would not guarantee that I would appreciate it on a greater scale, because it simply is not my kind of music. Individual taste is a beautiful thing, isn’t it?

By the way, we have to be careful with the term ‘pop music’ because it isn’t a genre, but rather an accumulation of music that is popular with the general public / in the charts. For example, Metallica’s St.Anger single went straight to #1 in the local ARIA charts, but most people (including me) wouldn’t describe them as being in the same league as N’Sync.

I’m not counting producers that write material for mainstream artists because that is a phenomenon that seemingly only appears in contemporary popular music on that scale. As far as I know, there is no such trend in rap (at least the independent and non-pop sort), alternative music genres, rock and metal. I’m not quite sure about jazz, blues and soul though, because like I said I don’t know a lot about these genres.

Yeah, the paragraph about automotive design was a very brief one . I haven’t thought it through from this particular perspective. I have to say that this makes me think more about the differentiation of art and design then I have thought about art in general in a very long time.

There are some bands that are covering other songs during their live performances (for example, Audioslave have covered The White Stripes Seven Nation Army, and surprisingly enough, they managed to butcher it) that might be more akin to different renditions of a classical piece. Besides that, I’m not implying anything

It's your shot, and you're free to write your reply after 7am in the morning

Damn you guys type alot.

I agree!

ermm...no, I don't wanna read thru all that

so now...I just got Massive Attack's Mezzanine-Album! GREAT!

other than that, I found a Rob Dougan Remix of Moby's "Porcelain"...great, too!

and...I found myself a GREAT mp3player ( program, not portable device):

BeoPlayer 3.1 !!! Bang & Olufsen made a mp3-player!!! yeahay!!! it's not really userfriendly, but it's just...stylish. I've been looking for that kind of simplistic design everywhere!

So now...that's it

You guys do post alot, my PC forbids me to read it all......................

Keane - Somewhere only we know

Keane

Vexed & Glorious