Soloman Tump wrote: ↑Mon Mar 07, 2022 11:00 am
All art is subjective.
I think this really only became an issue once "abstraction" came about. My point is that "music" is made up easily defined structures. If one is sculpting or painting a portrait and it looks like the person then that is objectively considered art. The irony being perhaps when photography came about which of course made that objectivity easy to obtain and was at first not considered art which seems to have inspired certain artists at the time to push that notion of art is my interpretation of what I see or think I see rather than sticking with representation.
In post modernism it gets more complicated or in some cases easier to define what's art.. does the artist claim it's art? Is it in a museum? The subjectivity comes more into play as to what is good art or good music.
Noise generally rejects all norms as to what could be considered music, let alone good music. Technically speaking it's not music as there aren't notes or any classic structures to look at objectively but if you look at the whole of what noise has been produced then you could check off the boxes and say yes this tape of noise with murderer art is in fact a "noise tape" and then from there it becomes subjective as to whether its good or not
Basically anything that's centered around extremely piercing frequencies is an immediate no for me. I get the appeal of sounds that physically hurt to listen to in the "metabolic music" tradition, but also why am I not supposed to listen to this audio recording? Even masochists tend to make more of an art of it than just grabbing hot pans.
Note, this is not me dismissing high frequencies in general, I specifically mean stuff optimized to be not just high-pitched but physically uncomfortable.
Even if you took a few years and learned all the chords you'd still have a limited number of options. If you ignore the chords your options are infinite and you can master guitar playing in one day. - David Fair
The Mysterious Creep wrote: ↑Mon Mar 07, 2022 1:20 pm
Basically anything that's centered around extremely piercing frequencies is an immediate no for me. I get the appeal of sounds that physically hurt to listen to in the "metabolic music" tradition, but also why am I not supposed to listen to this audio recording? Even masochists tend to make more of an art of it than just grabbing hot pans.
Note, this is not me dismissing high frequencies in general, I specifically mean stuff optimized to be not just high-pitched but physically uncomfortable.
I'm not sure if I follow you .. I mean did somebody say this recording is painful to listen to don't listen to it? "why am I not supposed to listen to this audio recording?" .
I guess if somebdoy sets out to make somethign uncomfortable and for most people it makes them uncomfortable then they were successful.
I've made music that was intended to be uncomfortable and was in way extreme that made some people have strange reactions to it.
The hardest thing to do is to make music that is pleasing to most people.. there's cultural barriers for one thing. I guess classical music comes cloest to acheiveing this.
maybe a lot of this is about failed arts education. a lot of people go to university, don't study science or business, and fail to achieve their goals. these people need to be policed. they are not, imho, always stupid
falc0nhoof wrote: ↑Mon Mar 07, 2022 9:10 pm
great to see shit don't change. Anything that's not timestretched is pure bliss!
Reference: Kpop noise and the idea they(dont know who 'they' are) created noise.
Every generation thinks the crap(crap because I'm not young) they are making and enjoying is new.
Using 5 seconds of a Shangri-las song on tiktok makes them(the kids) think they made the band famous. Or some new song using a little Richard song..not even a sample but large chunks of the song somehow just 'made' little richard famous.
