Re: CIMESP-Results Fwd:


Subject: Re: CIMESP-Results Fwd:
From: Rick (ricknance@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Nov 07 2005 - 03:12:14 EST


What you're saying is that EA _music_ is a genre as orchestral _music_
is a genre. It looks from here not to be so much of a misnomer than a
grammatical problem.

It seems a bit funny to me to see a piece of music labled "This
sTough" for electroacoustic music. You wouldn't see "Blacks Angels"
for string quartet music. It's Black Angels for string quartet.

Calling it EA 'for short' on a list like this means that a lot of
people understand what you mean, but if anyone actually wants to talk
about electroacoustics, then the conversation goes pear shaped. Also,
if someone wants to call KMFDM (or MDFMK) electroacoustic music no one
gets confused and starts analysing under the same criteria as Silver
Apples of the Moon.

Even below it's said "orchestral music is a genre". Why not
"orchestral is a genre"? Because it doesn't make sense.

r

On 11/7/05, Michael Gogins <gogins@pipeline.com> wrote:
> EA is a genre in the same way that orchestral music is a genre. EA is music
> where the instrument is a computer or electronic gear in the sense that
> without the computer or the gear, the pieces do not sound so good.
>
> There are many styles from many periods with this genre (EA, or orchestral
> music) and yet, there are obvious commonalties deriving from the
> possibilities of the instrument.
>
> Best,
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Austin" <kevin.austin@videotron.ca>
> To: <cec-conference@concordia.ca>
> Cc: <cec-conference@concordia.ca>; "bill thompson" <innerd00r@yahoo.com>
> Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 10:30 PM
> Subject: Re: CIMESP-Results Fwd:
>
>
> >I would ask those who use the term ea to 'define' it in some way. I have
> >provided a specific but very wide definition. When I read the postings
> >here, I sometimes think of the mute giving directions to the blind person.
> >
> > My proposition is that ea is not a genre, and ask that perhaps a better
> > set of terms be found to speak about pieces that go from Presque Rien to
> > Silver Apples of the Moon to I of IV (Oliveros).
> >
> >
> > At 05:20 -0800 2005/11/05, bill thompson wrote:
> >>i wonder if the issue really is that ea, at least in academic
> >>circles/world is now a genre,
> >
> >
> >
> >>much as any other music style,
> >
> > IME (and the model I propose) with ea, the terms "music" and 'style' may
> > not be fully applicable.
> >
> > What aspects of Presque Rien are 'more' musical than the RTE 'reading'
> > (sic) of Circe, the Nighttown Episode (XV) -- including the extensive use
> > of vocoding (a short example is at 28:47 in the radio program),
> > reverberation / echo effects (30:27- 31:10, 32:54 - 33:26, 36:34 - 36:55,
> > "the word!" 38:48 - 38:57, 39:56 - 40:14; etc) --
> > http://www.rte.ie/readingulysses/episode15.html .
> > http://www.rte.ie/readingulysses/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>my own frustration though is when this idea of it being a genre/style is
> >>not recognized or when/if ea is tauted as the supreme/ultimate form of
> >>electronic/computer based musics. it's not. it's just one branch. it's a
> >>good branch, well developed, lots of intelligence within the work, but
> >>sometimes i feel a bit myopic.
> >
> > I continue to get the sense that your use of the word "ea" relates to the
> > acousmatic tradition, for which I might suggest a quick reading (!!0 of
> > Francois Bayle "musique acousmatique, propositions ... positions" INA-GRM
> > 1993. http://www.ears.dmu.ac.uk/articleBiblio.php3?id_article=598
> > (although EARs seems not to give any detailed explanations of a number of
> > terms found in this book).
> >
> >
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Kevin
> >
>
>
>

--
======================
Rick Nance
De Montfort University
Leicester, UK
RickNance.org



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