[Harp-L] music and perception
Chris M writes:
"It's all a matter of what you've conditioned yourself to accept into
your reality. Music has rules for listening and most of the time if
you don't like the music then you don't understand it.
Bah. This has been the elitist theory of music ever since people
like Schoenberg started to write music which was sonically
challenging, intellectually complex and not obviously connected to
past forms or traditions. The reason most people tend not to like
Schoenberg, Sun Ra, Ornette Coleman and the like is not because they
don't understand it, it's because the music is often not pleasant to
hear--it often grates, often clashes and despite what are sometimes
very intellectually strong concepts appears aimless. The elite
theory has been to blame the audience, which I think misses the
significant point entirely: that this is music designed to be complex
and difficult to hear and play. The fact that it turns off most
people is not because they need to be educated or lack understanding,
rather it's because the music is in many ways designed not to be
easily accessible. Romantic music is easily accessible (even if it
took a while for people to warm up to Wagner's excessive
Romanticism"); Schoenberg's entire work was to find a way out of the
Romantic and to something new--which pretty much guaranteed that the
result wouldn't be easily accessible. Saying that it's merely a lack
of "understanding" which keeps people from falling in love with a
Schoenberg the way they love Mozart misses the main point of what
their musics were intended to do.
Now, this shouldn't be misread as a screed against challenging
musics. Schoenberg is one of my favorite "classical" composers,
Coleman and Ra two of my favorite Jazz musicians. But, in large part
that's because my initial reaction to their music was positive--I
just liked it. But the majority react in the opposite way when they
first encounter those artists, and to me it is the height of snobbery
to say "well, I like it because I understand it--if you [could]
understand it you would like it to." The "could" is usually unsaid,
but strongly implied.
Chris again:
"Furthermore not everybody is able to interpret highly complex sheets
of sonic information ie; jazz, prog rock, classical hindi, bulgarian
etc.... just because a person's brain can't process incredible
amounts of information doesn't mean he/she is dimwitted."
Um, it doesn't?
That said, I don't think there is anything to this argument about
"highly complex sheets of sonic information"--basically, the greater
the complexity of structure the less easily defined rhythms and
melodies can be heard. Guess what, some people like noise, some
don't. That's not a question of intellectual processing, it's a
question of personal taste. I happen to like noise; I can actually
listen to a slowly filtered noise generator on a synthesizer for
hours, hearing the various harmonics come in and out, preferably at a
random or semi-random rate. But that has nothing to do with
"processing power" of my brain and everything to do with the fact
that I liked to bang things together and see what sound they would
make as a child. I didn't pick out melodies or the like, I went for
loud and clanging. That's what I like, for whatever reason, and I
the only way it is more complex is in the harmonic content, but
that's something everyone can hear--just not everyone will like.
Ligeti wrote some pieces with "micropolyphony" about twenty or more
little melodies going around one another at once (very soft and slow
melodies, though). It's massively complex, but anyone can hear what
is going on--just most people find it boring. That's not for a lack
of ability to "process" things, just a reflection of the majority's
tastes.
"There's no problem with only liking "simple" or less sonically
saturated music, in a way it's very eastern and most people find
peace eating only vanilla ice cream."
Actually, there's nothing "eastern" about it--some of the most
harmonically complex musical forms come for "the East". People like
what they like. Part of that is culturally derived, part is because
we are all different and have different internal tastes which drive
us. I only like chocolate ice cream. Why? Because that's how I
am. I like Sun Ra. Why? Because it speaks to me. That's not
"eastern" or "western", it's just called being human--we are all
different and will all have different tastes.
Finally, I mean no offense when I say this, but that clip was just
horrid. I know the pedigree of the musicians--and love some of their
work in fact. But I found little of worth in that clip--random
noodling and scratching and not in a good way (trust me, I do know
what good random noodling and scratching is). Perhaps part of that
is because it was a bunch of prog-rock musicians trying to do a free-
jazz type thing. Prog-rock is amongst the most heavily of structured
rock formats, and while it often can have a similar sound to free or
avant jazz (in part because they are going for similar sonic
textures) I think this clip goes a long way to show that being good
in one genre does not guarantee being able to play in another genre.
I tried it several times, and it just didn't improve with listening.
Is that because I don't "understand" the genre or can't "process" the
"sonically saturated music"--somehow I think the contents of my iPod
would pretty much speak against those arguments.
()() JR "Bulldogge" Ross
() () & Snuffy, too:)
`----'
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.