home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!NETCOM.COM!METLAY
- X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
- Message-ID: <9212211646.AA09000@netcom.netcom.com>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.emusic-l
- Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 08:46:46 PST
- Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AUVM.BITNET>
- From: metlay <metlay@NETCOM.COM>
- Subject: Re: PHIL COMP
- Comments: To: EMUSIC-L@american.edu
- In-Reply-To: <9212211642.AA19520@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu>; from
- "WSCOTT@acs.wooster.edu" at Dec 21, 92 11:36 am
- Lines: 28
-
- >I agree fully. However, many sythesists take a "post-literate" stand concerning
- >compositions, and claim that the sound, in incoporating the structure, is a
- >more complete composition, and that simple structural notation is not
- >comprehensive enough to include the full work of a sound composer. I can
- >understand the sensibilities behind this point of veiw but continue to
- >feel dismay at its narcissistic implications. When a composer controls
- >every element of the composition down to patterns that occur in the
- >basilar membrane (and this is what the "sound composer" does), then
- >music loses all vestiges of being a communication art and is nothing
- >but expression. This forces music to be less than what it can be.
- >
- >(IMHO)
- >Bill Scott
-
- The last time we got off on this subject, Bill, with General MIDI as
- an innocent enough launch point, you were fending off barbs for weeks.
- This time I think I'll just agree to disagree with you and leave it at
- that. I understand your background and opinions as much as I care to,
- and respect if not agree with your approach. I trust you feel the same
- way about me.
-
-
- --
- mike metlay | Hey-YEH!
- atomic city | Walkin' in the Valley of Decision--
- p. o. box 81175 | Hey-YEH!
- pittsburgh pa 15217-0675 | Reap all the Wages of Sin!
- metlay@netcom.com | ('vouf, after d.dax)
-