Re: CIMESP-Results Fwd:


Subject: Re: CIMESP-Results Fwd:
From: Morgan Sutherland (skiptracer@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Nov 06 2005 - 12:06:34 EST


I just feel that your opinion and the "information theory" are not
incompatible.

On 11/6/05, Morgan Sutherland <skiptracer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > So it's hard to see how the theory is wrong - although it's also hard
> > > to argue that it's complete.
> >
> >
> > It's also hard to see what the theory is trying to explain. In my
> > thinking, the shapes of music are
> > analogues of other perceptions that relate to things in the real world.
>
> I think it makes sense when those "perceptions" are not "in the real
> world", but are of other music.
> When music is recalling bits and ideas from other pieces, if you
> recognize them, that's where the "reward" occurs. When you do not,
> that's when the "surprise" occurs. This also follows with references
> to "shapes...analogues of other peceptions that relate to things in
> the 'real world'"
>
> So, with your overdeveloped bias towards "surprise", you have a lust
> for choices in music that are not derivative of other musical
> choices/cliches often referenced. You also prefer music with
> references to "shapes..." not often referenced.
>
> Does that make sense?
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:14 EST