Re: Why Computer Music Sucks


Subject: Re: Why Computer Music Sucks
From: KEVIN AUSTIN (KAUSTIN@vax2.concordia.ca)
Date: Sat Jul 17 1999 - 09:43:45 EDT


>From: Anomalous Records Eric <eric@anomalousrecords.com>

posted:

>have you read this piece that Bob Ostertag wrote called "Why computer music
>sucks"? The first line in his article is "Computer music per se is, at
>least for the moment, at something of a dead end. This is the result of a
>bizarre sort of inverse development over the last few decades."

Does he delimit "computer music" or is it just a 'meta-semantic' word,
designed as a strawman. An 'inverse development' ... is this like looking
down a telescope from the other end? By the "last few decades", does he
mean 10 years (sic) or 50 years.

> He goes on
>to point out "as the technical capabilities have expanded, the range of
>musical possibilities which are being explored has become increasingly
>restricted."

Is there a connection here, related to 'computer music', or is the
connection related to commercialization? It is my view that the range of
musical exporation is wider now than ever before -- at least much more is
available to a wider group of people. But also, the passage of time has
allowed the 'contectualization' of previous musical explorations.

> And later on "If, however, we leave the confines of the
>Computer Music tower and look at what is happening outside in the rest of
>the world, what do we see? Computers are revolutionizing the way music is
>made."

Wow! Really! Why hadn't someone told me!? That's one of the problems of
living in the Ivory Tower ... no one ever tells me what's really going
on. Thanks Bob. You've changed my life!

Have a nice day.

Best

Kevin
kaustin@vax2.concordia.ca



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:09:02 EDT