Subject: Re: Mixing it...
From: Kevin Busby (email@example.com)
Date: Fri May 07 1999 - 09:26:30 EDT
Alexandra Hettergott wrote:
> Mat.Adkins wrote:
>>Trying telling them about the CMJ and .....
>...and why *not* ?, isn't this yet a heating up of the separation
>discussion >you mention first? Is the exclusion/neglection from the one
>side any better >than the other way round?
The way I read Mathew's email, it wasn't he who was doing the exclusion: he
seemed more frustrated by the intransigence of the pupils...?
>And does it further bringing the discussion in question to any
>Much better to mention both journals, as you're just doing, in one breath
>(aesthetically, ideologically) heterogeneous facets of producing
>(different) >sounds by using the same means...
True, although there are significant differences in ideology or perspective
which perhaps need to be highlighted. When a news stand publication talks
of "computer music", it is understood by the public as referring to music
which is made using a computer; to the academic/"serious" world, "Computer
Music" is a genre, or even stylistic tradition. Similarly, "electronic
music" does not refer to the "Electronic Music" tradition (who outside the
electroacoustic set uses the term "electroacoustic"?).
Just my 2 Euros...
-- Kevin Busby, Studio Manager, Department of Music, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, England. Tel: +44-(0)121-414 5785. Fax: +44-(0)121 414 5781. If your email to me bounces, please see http://web.bham.ac.uk/busbykg/contact.html. No to GE crops.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:08:57 EDT