Re: PETER HUEBNER: Prolific ea composer (?)


Subject: Re: PETER HUEBNER: Prolific ea composer (?)
From: Michael Gogins (gogins@pipeline.com)
Date: Mon Apr 18 2005 - 09:30:51 EDT


I listened to the beginning of one mp3, but then I stopped listening after a few minutes. At first the music seemed interesting because it was "big" and full of detail, but then it kept on being "big" without contrast, and after a while I found some of the details to be a little cheezy to my ears. The ultimate impression was one of banality.

I certainly did not find the piece I listened to compelling or captivating.

However, it's dangerous to offer judgment on such a hasty and superficial listening, and the first bit was interesting, so I will give Heubner some more listening, and if I reverse my judgment I will let you know.

The Web site (acually, there were several) struck me as hyperbolic in the worst sense of the word. I wondered if in fact it was satirizing itself.

At the same time, Heubner raises some important issues, including the importance of EA technology in the classical music process.

I am familiar with the guru mentality and guru manipulations, and Huebner's sites were full if it. You're sick or you're not living up to your full potential, and I (and probably only I) know the secrets for healing you and unlocking your potential. I am at one with the all, and I can help you to be one with the all as well. It takes enormous resources to do what I do, but I (and probably only I) have those resources. Stuff like that. I've impressed a lot of important people... etc., etc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dominique Bassal <dominique.bassal@videotron.ca>
Sent: Apr 18, 2005 12:10 AM
To: cec-conference@concordia.ca
Subject: Re: PETER HUEBNER: Prolific ea composer (?)

Yes, how could one disagree with that? The question really is: has
someone - Peter Huebner & al - at least partially succeeded in doing
it? For example, does it "work" on you? In what type of monitoring? I
think it is fairly important to find out, with a good sample of
"out-of-the-cult" listeners. Anyone?

Best

Le 05-04-17, � 23:29, John Nowak a �crit :

>
> On Apr 17, 2005, at 10:45 PM, Dominique Bassal wrote:
>
>> Even more scary/interesting: their "research" at least partially
>> works, because even in the cheesiest, more stupid and repetitive
>> "harmonies", one continues to be captivated by a truly
>> captivating-but-empty, purely audio bliss. Worked with all examples I
>> tried.
>
> I don't like psychology whatsoever: using music like a drug is
> stupid. One shouldn't do that : music is the product of the highest
> human
> intelligence, and of the best senses, the listening senses and of
> imagination and intuition. And as soon as it becomes just a means for
> ambiance, as we say, environment, or for being used for certain
> purposes,
> then music becomes a whore, and one should not allow that really; one
> should
> not serve any existing demands or in particular not commercial values.
> That
> would be terrible: that is selling out the music. - Stockhausen
>
> - John
>
>
- -

Dominique Bassal



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:07 EST