Why modern music has lost its humanity

Very interesting topic.

I am waiting for Luca Cavaliere's response (he always knows one more thing than the devil) and then I will dive (right) in.

Viola wrote:

[. . . ] and then I throw myself (away).

And why ever???

Since that great gentleman from Frank has even proposed Mambo of the bats to us.

Even if - those - are upside down . . .

Of course, I have read the translation of the interview with Brian Eno . . . it's just that I wanted to meditate on it until the autumn equinox

LucaCavaliere wrote:

And why exactly???

Since that great lord Frank has even proposed us Mambo of the bats.

Even if - they - are upside down . . .

Of course, I read the translation of the interview with Brian Eno . . . it's just that I wanted to meditate on it until the autumn equinox

Frank, dear Luca, should have asked us the question without posting the interview with the little mr.

What can we add? He said everything himself. He has taken away from us the pleasure of making a mistake.

Well ... Viola... it's not that the little gentleman ( ) has the truth in his pocket. His is also a point of view.

i, not now, but I will not fail to give my own little point of view on the matter.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

Well ... Viola... it's not that the little gentleman ( ) has the truth in his pocket. His is also a point of view.

i, not now, I will not fail to give my own little point of view on the matter.

Mine was a (semi) boutade, Luca.

A way to stimulate the lion's swipe, which I await, naturally, at twilight.

In the meantime,

have a good day.

Frank wrote:

What do you think about the topic and Brian Eno's interview?

I don't believe that a musical composition necessarily loses humanity due to the massive use of technology by the composer. It is always the human (the composer) who makes choices, discards, selects, takes paths, develops this or that... while making use of much technology.

In short: for me, the resulting product is always 'an absolutely human thing' (which can be liked or not liked, obviously, but that is another matter).

i see the loss of 'humanity' more in the difficulty of performing live music based on a significant use of technology.

Perhaps I am oversimplifying the discussion, shifting the focus from what Frank intended (and maybe bringing up clichés for those who work with music), but I see great difficulty in reproducing in a 'live performance' something that is composed using sounds that cannot be reproduced by any 'physical' instrument available on the market, utilizing execution speeds that no human being, no matter how virtuous, can achieve, etc...

For goodness' sake: everyone is free to use whatever they want to follow «l'intenzion de l'arte» and create their musical product... on a more or less rigid and durable medium.

But if they also care that their composition can be presented in a live performance...

well, in that case there are two possibilities: either one is willing to bring so much of the technology used onto the stage (even if it can be expensive), or one settles for more 'acoustic' versions.

Oh no! a small addition: there is a third possibility >>> not caring whether your composition can be performed live (it's not like there's a legal obligation).

Oblique Strategies have made history; they would be a great topic for discussion. Regarding the matter of the topic, however, I will add an observation: although since Stockhausen's time there has existed the myth of absolute composition (from performance), and today this is widely possible and practiced in many genres, the true boom of musical technologies lies in instruments with new and creative interfaces. That is to say, there are few who program music; there are many more who play instruments, playing with strange interfaces that from an organological point of view are always synths or samplers or controllers but which, from a practical point of view, are musical instruments.

...I am not sure I have conveyed the idea quite right...

Viola wrote:

Mine was a (semi) boutade, Luca.

A way to stimulate the lion's paw, which I await, naturally, at twilight.

In the meantime,

have a good day.

Edit to my post:

from (semi)boutade to bout(an)ade.

thallo wrote:

...I am not sure I conveyed the
idea...

not me . . . . . . I'm sorry

My boyfriend bought a little keyboard called the OP1. The keyboard is actually a synth, meaning it only emits synthesis sounds, but it does so with buttons, knobs, and innovative mechanisms. Potentially every sound on that keyboard is recreatable with a computer audio synthesis program, but part of the beauty lies precisely in the knobs. That is, the interface. It's like the difference between Linux and Windows. Giving an intriguing interface to a synth means making it playable, even live. Eno was very deep into studio electronic music, but the trend is precisely electronic music with instruments that can be played live. What not everyone is prepared for is the evolution of interfaces, or rather, the way of playing those instruments.

ok thanks

I can imagine that part of the beauty is precisely the 'birulini' [little birds/quirks].

However, I somewhat understand those who are not prepared for the evolution of interfaces (let's just say that - humanly speaking - I understand them very much).

If you look at this aspect even in eras where one played with a wig, it wasn't as if the interface changed once a year.

When a novelty is introduced in the interface of an instrument, it must also have time to be tested. Whether it is then accepted or rejected can be seen "by reflection" by considering the consistency of the repertoire, which requires the indispensable presence of the benefits provided by the introduced innovation.

An interface, upon closer inspection, is not just an interface: it conditions the approach to the instrument: what you can do easily, what you can do with difficulty, and what you simply cannot do.

Therefore, once a technological novelty is introduced, in order for it to become 'currency', it must be used enough by those who compose... Thus, someone else (in a teaching setting) will take care of developing an executive technique so that the 'novelty' becomes less and less of a "novelty"... and is used to its full potential.