Mixes: art or product

[Radiophonic]

What is this covid19 and where can I get it?

[Arpangel]

Ah yes, the FollowTheHerd 19 virus . . . .

With maybe an Arpangel mutation.

[Watchmaker]

Personal judgments about quality are made all the time, you don’t necessarily have to agree with them, I’m always very wary of those who are too certain about what they talk about, bordering on proselytising.
Nothing is certain, no way is right, all I know is that you can always smell a turd.

I ran across an interesting article on a totally different subject but with a completely relvant discourse on exactly the ideas we've been bandying about and I'll put a link to that thread at the bottom of this post. I'll even move beyond a repartee to the witticism.

Still, I was thinking about your perspective - at least what I understand some portion of your perspective to, perhaps, be (if I may be so bold as to paraphrase) that some people like David Bowie or Adele, seem to have a greater ability to form abstractions than mere plods like us.

I think that there are other factors in cognition and personality that drive behaviors and create that impression, for example, the desire to communicate with others or experience social relationships through the creation of art.

I know lots of very smart people that loathe public speaking, for example, and many public speakers, your PM and our President, by contrast, who seem to have an impaired ability to think in abstractions. Or rather articulate abstractions that have less to do with complexity (art) than they do with conformity.

I submit that both populations are qualitatively on par in the "ability" to form abstractions, but that the way each child's mind forms itself - and it's relationships to the assumptions underlying all of life and thought, is what leads to the appearance of varying outcomes. But have a go at the essay attached as he's a much better presenter of ideas than I am.

https://www.ecosophia.net/the-unmanageable-future/

[Arpangel]

Personal judgments about quality are made all the time, you don’t necessarily have to agree with them, I’m always very wary of those who are too certain about what they talk about, bordering on proselytising.
Nothing is certain, no way is right, all I know is that you can always smell a turd.

I ran across an interesting article on a totally different subject but with a completely relvant discourse on exactly the ideas we've been bandying about and I'll put a link to that thread at the bottom of this post. I'll even move beyond a repartee to the witticism.

Still, I was thinking about your perspective - at least what I understand some portion of your perspective to, perhaps, be (if I may be so bold as to paraphrase) that some people like David Bowie or Adele, seem to have a greater ability to form abstractions than mere plods like us.

I think that there are other factors in cognition and personality that drive behaviors and create that impression, for example, the desire to communicate with others or experience social relationships through the creation of art.

I know lots of very smart people that loathe public speaking, for example, and many public speakers, your PM and our President, by contrast, who seem to have an impaired ability to think in abstractions. Or rather articulate abstractions that have less to do with complexity (art) than they do with conformity.

I submit that both populations are qualitatively on par in the "ability" to form abstractions, but that the way each child's mind forms itself - and it's relationships to the assumptions underlying all of life and thought, is what leads to the appearance of varying outcomes. But have a go at the essay attached as he's a much better presenter of ideas than I am.

https://www.ecosophia.net/the-unmanageable-future/

Thanks, that looks good, but needs time to take in, I’ll give it a full read later.
I can tell from the first few lines it’ll get me.
Another thing to throw in the barrel, in the meantime, is that do we, not just Bowie and Adel us too, know that what we are doing is "on the right track" when we are actually doing it, I get the impression that the Bowies do, it’s almost like they have a vision, and are very confident about carrying it out, and seem to know that they are in the process of creating something very special.
I don’t, even though I think that some of my music may have hit the mark, after the event, when I’m actually making it I have no idea, often I hate it.
I have no confidence that I’m doing anything special at all, it’s a very ad-hoc and random process, with a low hit rate.
Judgement after the event comes in, and context, can dramatically change if something works or not.

[Drew Stephenson]

Another thing to throw in the barrel, in the meantime, is that do we, not just Bowie and Adel us too, know that what we are doing is "on the right track" when we are actually doing it, I get the impression that the Bowies do, it’s almost like they have a vision, and are very confident about carrying it out, and seem to know that they are in the process of creating something very special.

I don't know about the 'creating something special' side of things* but I'm generally pretty clear about the vision when I'm working on something.
There are exceptions, some stuff just grows organically, but one of the tracks I'm struggling with at the moment is, I think, a victim of the fact that I'm not clear on what the vision is.

* well, I do know really, but I don't like the answer.

[RichardT]

Another thing to throw in the barrel, in the meantime, is that do we, not just Bowie and Adel us too, know that what we are doing is "on the right track" when we are actually doing it, I get the impression that the Bowies do, it’s almost like they have a vision, and are very confident about carrying it out, and seem to know that they are in the process of creating something very special.

I don't know about the 'creating something special' side of things* but I'm generally pretty clear about the vision when I'm working on something.
There are exceptions, some stuff just grows organically, but one of the tracks I'm struggling with at the moment is, I think, a victim of the fact that I'm not clear on what the vision is.

* well, I do know really, but I don't like the answer.

Interesting question! I would expect there are almost as many ways of creating music as there are artists. One thing I think the best artists have is a short-cut route to good music - they come up very often with great ideas which might come to other artists only occasionally.

[Arpangel]

Another thing to throw in the barrel, in the meantime, is that do we, not just Bowie and Adel us too, know that what we are doing is "on the right track" when we are actually doing it, I get the impression that the Bowies do, it’s almost like they have a vision, and are very confident about carrying it out, and seem to know that they are in the process of creating something very special.

I don't know about the 'creating something special' side of things* but I'm generally pretty clear about the vision when I'm working on something.
There are exceptions, some stuff just grows organically, but one of the tracks I'm struggling with at the moment is, I think, a victim of the fact that I'm not clear on what the vision is.

* well, I do know really, but I don't like the answer.

Interesting question! I would expect there are almost as many ways of creating music as there are artists. One thing I think the best artists have is a short-cut route to good music - they come up very often with great ideas which might come to other artists only occasionally.

I had an interesting experience.
A friend of mine, who I haven’t seen for many years now, so friend is a strange word.
He asked if he could come round to my place, and spend a few hours recording, I’d just got an Eventide H3000, and he was interested in seeing what he could do with it,
My friend was a founding member of a very influential punk band, many hits, a very talented writer, so I was interested in experiencing first hand his writing and recording methods.
He normally played electric guitar, but he turned up with an acoustic, which surprised me, what happened next was "extremely" interesting.
The sound that came out of the acoustic, was exactly the same sound that came out of his Gibson/Mesa Boogie combo, close your dates and it was him on his hit records, whatever he played, on whatever, it was always him.
We ended up filling up a whole two hour DAT tape, in one afternoon, all amazing stuff, he "produced" it, and had strict guidelines, about effects etc, what impressed me was how without even thinking about it, this stuff just came out of thin air, amazing judgement, I’ll never forget that session.
It taught me a lot about the creative process, demystified it in a way, very strange.

[Radiophonic]

Why is classical 'high art' music that gets recognition today essentially a historic cataloge. Is music a dead art?

[awjoe]

Because the people who drive and fund composers in that genre (aristocracy) don't/won't/can't anymore? No... thinking about it, that explanation doesn't work. The answer's gotta be because people who write in that genre aren't producing work that appeals to modern listeners. ("Just play us the old hits - we don't have the vocabulary or patience for new stuff.")

[RichardT]

Because the people who drive and fund composers in that genre (aristocracy) don't/won't/can't anymore? No... thinking about it, that explanation doesn't work. The answer's gotta be because people who write in that genre aren't producing work that appeals to modern listeners. ("Just play us the old hits - we don't have the vocabulary or patience for new stuff.")

I think that’s it. Contemporary classical music doesn’t appeal to a lot of people. Even classical and romantic classical music has been in serious decline. It accounts for only a few percent of music revenues.

[Radiophonic]

Because the people who drive and fund composers in that genre (aristocracy) don't/won't/can't anymore? No... thinking about it, that explanation doesn't work. The answer's gotta be because people who write in that genre aren't producing work that appeals to modern listeners. ("Just play us the old hits - we don't have the vocabulary or patience for new stuff.")

Thank you for your answer.

Do you see the decline in composers vocabulary in a loss of composers/audience culture, is it physical/mental decline of the populus as a whole, both or something else?

I think that’s it. Contemporary classical music doesn’t appeal to a lot of people. Even classical and romantic classical music has been in serious decline. It accounts for only a few percent of music revenues.

Why the disconnect?

[Drew Stephenson]

Maybe it just doesn't relate? Bob or Kate jumping between multiple content sharing sites with stuff made by and for people like them are probably going to need a big push to try something that's not written, played, or listened to by their peer group.

[Watchmaker]

Context.

Much is different now than then. Electricity, road infrastructure, frozen fish. Seriously. The human context is vastly different, in terms of what we learn, from whom, what society values, so art, being a reflection of human emotion, which is contextual, must also be contextual.

The daily experience I think in some ways is less reflective, more reactive. The tools available are different, often requiring less degree of skill to enjoy patronage and human mating rituals have evolved from a nice waltz into something I'm too old to know about

But I think, empirically, it is fair to say we live in a dark age artistically, in music, visual art, dance and writing. Certainly there are truly amazing people doing inspiring, comforting and scary things, but there seems to be a dearth in proportion to the vastly larger number of people alive at any given moment.

Arpangel, to the point about people seeming to have clarity, just knowing what they're about, my cousin is a very famous Aussie artist who's played the same guitar forever and doesn't give a farthing about gear because, as he says, he always sounds the same no matter what you put in his hands...

[awjoe]

Because the people who drive and fund composers in that genre (aristocracy) don't/won't/can't anymore? No... thinking about it, that explanation doesn't work. The answer's gotta be because people who write in that genre aren't producing work that appeals to modern listeners. ("Just play us the old hits - we don't have the vocabulary or patience for new stuff.")

Thank you for your answer.

Do you see the decline in composers vocabulary in a loss of composers/audience culture, is it physical/mental decline of the populus as a whole, both or something else?

I think it's the audience. I think the modern audience is less musically literate than the 18th century audience, so if a modern composer comes up with something new, it's way harder to find an orchestra to take a chance on it and a public to appreciate something new and unrecognized. Plus, back in the 18th and 19th century, classical music was the most sophisticated, most beautiful music on the planet. Everybody who could listen to it did listen to it, because it was the best around. But now, there's lots of alternatives. I'm really moved by Bach and Vivaldi and Beethoven, but I'm equally moved by Doc Watson or Dr John, Steely Dan or Miles Davis.

[awjoe]

And this isn't just a priori, either. I'd base it on experience.

I'd put Rickie Lee Jones on the Old Grey Whistle Test in Tottenham Court Road up against Bach any day. I'd be embarassed about having done it, but it would have been worth it.

https://youtu.be/OPHMKSOeifU

I get different versions of this when I click on the link, but both of them do the trick. But the one with the bass sound less so. If you get the long one, just go to the 28.00 mark. It's better than nothing. But if you get the version with just that last tune... mm-m! It's really good.

[Airfix]

Product is art - they are not indifferent.
When it comes to 'mixes' - there is craft. Some skilled - some not so.
I'm hearing excellent pop production --- just a sweet sweet fantasy baby - Pops not dead yet.

[Arpangel]

I was taking about art, creative stuff, equipment, monitors etc to my partner yesterday, there was a big silence, she turned and said, you know what? this doesn’t mean anything to us anymore, does it? I just said, no, it doesn’t, I think you’re right.
She said it’s all tacky, and just "OK" isn’t it, life gets like this as you get older, you see the same things coming around again and again, things repeat themselves, and become increasingly more boring, and uninteresting, and it’s not just creative stuff, it’s most things, we just haven’t got the patience to listen to people who think they are the first ones to do something.

[RichardT]

I was taking about art, creative stuff, equipment, monitors etc to my partner yesterday, there was a big silence, she turned and said, you know what? this doesn’t mean anything to us anymore, does it? I just said, no, it doesn’t, I think you’re right.
She said it’s all tacky, and just "OK" isn’t it, life gets like this as you get older, you see the same things coming around again and again, things repeat themselves, and become increasingly more boring, and uninteresting, and it’s not just creative stuff, it’s most things, we just haven’t got the patience to listen to people who think they are the first ones to do something.

That’s not my experience at all. I don’t see things repeating much - we’re going through technological change at an astonishing rate and new things are becoming possible all the time. I remember seeing the first video of the SpaceX rockets returning to earth and landing on their pads automatically and feeling that science fiction was becoming true. And the astonishing success of the James Webb telescope deployment is going to lead to fantastic new discoveries.

Technological change is also having a massive impact on the arts. Speaking personally, the impact has been that I can do things now that I couldn’t do 20 years ago, possibly even 10. I expect that’s true of quite a few other people in the forum too.

I’m not saying that all the consequences of new technology are good, btw, it looks like it could lead to increased inequality in society as fewer people can do things machines can’t.

[Arpangel]

I was taking about art, creative stuff, equipment, monitors etc to my partner yesterday, there was a big silence, she turned and said, you know what? this doesn’t mean anything to us anymore, does it? I just said, no, it doesn’t, I think you’re right.
She said it’s all tacky, and just "OK" isn’t it, life gets like this as you get older, you see the same things coming around again and again, things repeat themselves, and become increasingly more boring, and uninteresting, and it’s not just creative stuff, it’s most things, we just haven’t got the patience to listen to people who think they are the first ones to do something.

That’s not my experience at all. I don’t see things repeating much - we’re going through technological change at an astonishing rate and new things are becoming possible all the time. I remember seeing the first video of the SpaceX rockets returning to earth and landing on their pads automatically and feeling that science fiction was becoming true. And the astonishing success of the James Webb telescope deployment is going to lead to fantastic new discoveries.

Technological change is also having a massive impact on the arts. Speaking personally, the impact has been that I can do things now that I couldn’t do 20 years ago, possibly even 10. I expect that’s true of quite a few other people in the forum too.

I’m not saying that all the consequences of new technology are good, btw, it looks like it could lead to increased inequality in society as fewer people can do things machines can’t.

Human beings are fast becoming redundant, and technology, I’m just really cynical about it, yes, we can do more, but more isn’t good, they always flog you more, more is best, I’d rather have less, in every way.
Technology isn’t the issue, it’s who’s controlling it, vested interests, that will determine who it benefits, the way I can clearly see it, those that are making the real money, are trying to get rid of as many human beings in the workplace possible, we are a nuisance, they can make more money, with less people, more efficiently.
I can see a time coming like a train, when the gloves will be off, like a science fiction movie, we will no longer be needed, the workers, the "ordinary people"

[RichardT]

I think you’re right, technology is going to cause great social dislocation. It has done ever since the industrial revolution, but the changes in the next 50 years could be enormous.

In an ideal world, this would lead to greater wellbeing for everyone and the planet, but I doubt that’s going to happen, or at least the benefits will be concentrated on a small group of people whose skills are needed to manage and implement the changes, and those who already have wealth.

What could happen is that more and more people will find their jobs replaced by machines and those jobs which still need the human factor, such as caring for others, won’t grow in number, so that more and more people will be competing for fewer jobs, leading to lower wages. What that will lead to is anyone’s guess.

In the very long term we could have an anti-machine jihad, as in ‘Dune’, or we could reach an ‘era of plenty’, as in Iain M Banks’ Culture novels.

[Watchmaker]

Technology, such as it is, also has a hard stop via one mechanism or another and those who've developed "archaic" skills, like farming, carpentry, masonry, knitting, etc. will fare better than those who learn how to use electron microscopes and fly spaceships.

I know here at SOS there is little appetite for views that take technology with a grain of salt but as hard as it may be to acknowledge, progress is not infinite in a world of finite resources. Humans will never conquer outer space or live on other planets absent a profound change in understanding and capability. Possible? sure, likely? - I'll just go get some popcorn.

There's an aphorism I like: no electricity, no civilization. It may come to pass, sooner than we'd like, that electricity in Western nations will become as much a luxury item as it is in most of the world...in which case art will be limited to the traveling circus, the village fete and pub crawls.

[Drew Stephenson]

As with most things, the technology exists to solve these problems. But it would require long-term planning, international co-operation, and a focus on mutual rather than personal benefits.
So it really doesn't stand a chance.

[Arpangel]

There's an aphorism I like: no electricity, no civilization. It may come to pass, sooner than we'd like, that electricity in Western nations will become as much a luxury item as it is in most of the world...in which case art will be limited to the traveling circus, the village fete and pub crawls.

This could happen, in my lifetime, on second thoughts, two weeks is pushing it a bit, a friend died today, so I’m feeling more doom laden than ever.

[Watchmaker]

My deepest condolences