The Tyranny of Pop Music

[ahinton]

I think one of the places his argument falls down is where he appears to be objecting to music having a function other than the one he ascribes as 'superior'.

Much here depends, I think, on the intended meaning of - and/or that ascribed to - his use of the word "superior" which can be seen to embrace unfortunate "I'm-better-than-you" overtones; to me, it's more a matter of the content than the function of music that's intended to be listened to with concentration in order to get the most from it and I assume him to mean that he perceived this kind of music as "superior" beause it has more content than either the kinds that customarily relayed as "piped music" or the kinds of "pop" the material of which is heavily dependent upon repetition and simplicity of utterance and which is therefore less likely than other kinds of music to excite the brain and the emotions.

So, in many ways he is no different to someone who expresses the view that "music starts and ends with hip-hop, everything else is sh*t".

That would surely depend upon a correct understanding of precisely what he means by "superior", a word that, for reasons given above, was arguably not the most appropriate to endorse his cause because its use could be so susceptible to unwitting or wilful misinterpretation. It's not a word to which I'd have had recourse in such a context.

Yesterday I was listening to this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66ZyGAU1pbc&list=PLIY53gFblUDk1AhVDn3Lj0C_91FaangFu&index=2

Which is inspired by this seminal work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KGMo9yOaSU

also re-imagined as this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWXAP_L3pZg

Even music designed to be functional in the way that Scrote finds objectionable can be a source of much more.

Such functions and content are, however, quite different to those of music that is designed to get the intellectual and emotional juices going and invites listener concentration in order to achieve that; I recall Elliott Cater being interviewed in advance of the première of the central movement of his Symphonia and being asked (in an inane though not obviously pejorative manner) how he expected his listeners to absorb it and replying simply that all he asked was that they concentrate on it in the same way as he did when composing it - ask an absurdly simple question and you risk getting an even more absurdly simple answer, peut-être. But, that said, what particular "functions" do you see the examples that you posted as having - and why - and what particular importance would you seek to ascribe to them?

Now look here, Tammy - if you call Roger Scruton "Scrote" again I'll send a PM to FF and request that you be given the sac(!)...

[ahinton]

I suspect MrGG ... like many a composer, come to think of it ... is referring to a particular 'dream' set to music, ahinton, though only he can verify that suspicion.

Indeed so, although it is a suspicion that, for some as yet unaccountable reason, I happen to share - for the time being, at any rate...

Despite the aforementioned MrGG being very much an avid republican I further suspect that 'royalties' are the likely solution to the 'tamtamian riddle', ahinton.

I've often admitted to hypocrisy in my need for royalties although have sought to excuse it by claiming that the term as used in an intellectual property rights context is both antediluvian and misleadingly inappropriate; did you know, incidentally, that PRS stands for Pay Royalties Swiftly? Neither did I...

[NatBalance]

What are you listening on?
I know you probably don't think it matters, BUT there can be a huge difference in the ears ability to discriminate between different frequency bands dependent on the equipment you are using to move the air into different patterns.

Oh I have noticed a slight difference with different equipment, depending on how much base and treble can be heard, but it does not make that much difference because I am referring to relative volumes. The relative volume of the presenter and the music, and different equipment will add or take away from both i.e. it won't only add more base to the presenter. I have both small portable radios and a Hi-Fi and I have to adjust the volumes significantly when listening on both.

Put it this way, do you agree that the volume of the presenter on the radio will be the same, or virtually the same, as that of an orchestra / choir at full volume?

Missing where? Who really cares? Would you really prefer that I rename myself with those capitals for the sole purpose of forum membership and, even if so, does that really matter as much as the Wagner spelling to which I drew attention and would it in any case make any difference to what I post here or how you might react thereto?

Now now AHinton, of course it matters just as much as the miss spelling of the Wagner. The only way to define a proper name in the written word is with a capital letter. No capital, no proper name. In some circumstances it will alter the whole meaning of a sentence, such as 'I came across a ford in the road' - 'He had an orange phone' - 'She always took an apple to school' - If only I could remember the brilliant one they came up with on I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue.

[french frank]

I think one of the places his argument falls down is where he appears to be objecting to music having a function other than the one he ascribes as 'superior'.

Is there, would you say, a distinction between a function which the individual listener gives to it, and a particular 'function' which the composer intended for it?

What counts as a 'function'? Is music for a song/opera/film a function? To dance to? What about CFM's Music for Babies? CFM's Relax and Escape? Is there any difference between these types of 'function'?

NatBalance - as far as the relative volume of presenter and orchestra on Radio 3 is concerned, this is a frequent complaint that the presenter is TOO LOUD. Once the music starts, there should be no need to adjust the volume. The engineers are supposed to get it right so that on reasonable equipment the quiet bits sound very quiet and the louds bits sound loud without the listener having to do anything.

[MrGongGong]

Oh I have noticed a slight difference with different equipment, depending on how much base and treble can be heard, but it does not make that much difference because I am referring to relative volumes. The relative volume of the presenter and the music, and different equipment will add or take away from both i.e. it won't only add more base to the presenter. I have both small portable radios and a Hi-Fi and I have to adjust the volumes significantly when listening on both.

Put it this way, do you agree that the volume of the presenter on the radio will be the same, or virtually the same, as that of an orchestra / choir at full volume?

Bass as in "tasty fish"

It makes a HUGE difference but you really need to find out about things like frequency response and phase to really understand why (I usually ask someone who does rather than guess!).

The radio (or any recording) isn't the same thing as being "in the room" BUT you are stubborn in your insistence that somehow they should be.
There has been much research into speech perception which IS not just relative to volume but also to which frequency bands are dominant etc.
Some of the folks who used to listen to the Russian "number stations" talked about how the female voice was easier to differentiate from noise.

Your obsession with "relative volumes" and the idea of a "natural balance" is fundamentally flawed (as has been pointed out at great length by many people).

[ahinton]

Now now AHinton, of course it matters just as much as the miss spelling

Is she a forum member? Either way, shouldn't she likewise be capitalised (even if she's not a coapitalist)?

The only way to define a proper name in the written word is with a capital letter. No capital, no proper name.

Then I confess to being improper. The mere fact that my forum ID is uncapitalised does not preclude its revelation of my identity (at least to the extent to which it does this). In any case, such non-capitalisation is not the only issue, in that, in other circumstances, a space between the A and the H might also be expected.

In some circumstances it will alter the whole meaning of a sentence, such as 'I came across a ford in the road' - 'He had an orange phone' - 'She always took an apple to school' - If only I could remember the brilliant one they came up with on I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue.

But examples of this are legion, especially in English, besides those involving capitalisation/non-capitalisation; to recognise this, one has only to consider the differences in meaning afforded by placing emphases on different words in a sentence, such as (to use your own example, which some might argue should have been italicised) I'm sorry I haven't a clue, viz:
I'm sorry I haven't a clue implies that others might not be sorry about that,
I'm sorry I haven't a clue suggests some contrition rather than cavalier disregard of the fact of my having no clue,
I'm sorry I haven't a clue might be taken to mean that I am not or would not be sorry if someone else had a clue,
I'm sorry I haven't a clue might mean that I wouldn't be sorry if I had one,
I'm sorry I haven't a clue could indicate that I'd rather have the clue (whatever it might be) and
I'm sorry I haven't a clue could suggest that I might not be sorry about having something else besides a clue.
A not dissimilarly anomalous situation arises with pronunciation; consider the various ones for "ough" in the examples "through", "cough", "bough", "tough", "ought" and, of course, last but by no means least, "Ferneyhough".

Ough with you, sir!

Now, back to the topic, which about the tyranny or otherwise of twelve tones screwed in such a way as to make them equal to one another...

[ahinton]

Bass as in "tasty fish"

Indeed (and the very thought thereof gets some other juices going!) - especially in relation to five string double ones whose lowest strings are usually tuned to C, hence sea bass (although I've never observed anyone playing a line caught one).

Some of the folks who used to listen to the Russian "number stations" talked about how the female voice was easier to differentiate from noise.

Oh, dear; might such a statement encourage FF to consider merging this thread with the one about women and music?

[jean]

[ahinton]

Well, she hasn't done so yet and, if she does, I doubt that she'll rename it The Tyranny of Women Composers!...

[NatBalance]

NatBalance - as far as the relative volume of presenter and orchestra on Radio 3 is concerned, this is a frequent complaint that the presenter is TOO LOUD. Once the music starts, there should be no need to adjust the volume. The engineers are supposed to get it right so that on reasonable equipment the quiet bits sound very quiet and the louds bits sound loud without the listener having to do anything.

Well, if that is so why can't I hear the quiet parts, and why are not the loud parts actually loud? The most important question regarding this that I would like answering is my question in #319:-

Put it this way, do you agree that the volume of the presenter on the radio will be the same, or virtually the same, as that of an orchestra / choir at full volume?

AHinton - the whole premiss of your post #322 is that because there is already confusion within the English language it is perfectly alright to add more.

[MrGongGong]

Well, she hasn't done so yet and, if she does, I doubt that she'll rename it The Tyranny of Women Composers!...

"Blue" Gene?

[Bryn]

... The only way to define a proper name in the written word is with a capital letter. No capital, no proper name. ...

As in E. E. Cummings, eh? Actually the man himself used both the standard orthography and the lower case alternative without punctuation.

[ahinton]

You quoted yourself as having posted
"Originally Posted by NatBalance View Post
Put it this way, do you agree that the volume of the presenter on the radio will be the same, or virtually the same, as that of an orchestra / choir at full volume?"
and then wrote
"AHinton - the whole premiss of your post #322 is that because there is already confusion within the English language it is perfectly alright to add more"

"Premiss" should read "premise" and the only confusion here stems from the lack of obvious connection between the two, methinks.

[ahinton]

"Blue" Gene?

Not knowing our esteemèd member jean's view of the blues, I could not say...

[ahinton]

As in E. E. Cumming, eh? Actually the man himself used both the standard orthography and the lower case alternative without punctuation.

"cummings", surely? - der Dichter, after all...

And did you identify the author of the quote about Beethoven and policemen following your mug of tea?...