| Saturday, June 7, 2008 |  |
| Steve Reich Program in Ojai, CA June 5-8 | 0 comments |
 7 Jun 2008 @ 07:48First I want to thank Tyler, founder of ojaipost.com, for posting the opportunity and Gina Gutierrez, the Marketing Director of the Ojai Music Festival, for allowing me to attend last night’s concert at Libbey Bowl. For me, particularly, it was a peak moment to listen to the music and meet the composer, Steve Reich, (Reich bio: [link]) who has been an enduring force in my life for thirty years. It was his brilliance, his approach to rhythm and harmony that inspired and influenced me to go to conservatory and get degrees in voice and composition. Last night Steve Reich returned to Ojai with his signature minimalist works of past and present; His new Daniel Variations, a tribute to the late American reporter Daniel Pearl, was paired with his earlier known pieces Eight Lines, Nagoya Marimbas and his unconventional Four Organs. We were treated to the remarkable talent of the Signal Contemporary Ensemble conducted by Brad Lubman. (Quite fun that Libbey Bowl borders Signal Street) Lubman founded Signal along with cellist and co-artistic director Lauren Radnofsky. These young musicians, mostly between the ages of 27-33, brought to life Reich’s music and infused it with their own vigor and enthusiasm. They are a force to be reckoned with. I highly recommend you get yourself to Libbey Bowl sometime this weekend and immerse yourself in this transcendent program of magnificent music and musicianship. When I say Reich's music transcends something for me, I'm implying that his design and structure of sound affects our brain chemistry and can take us into non-ordinary states of consciousness. I experience deep meditative states listening to the repetitive, percolating rhythms as they shift and change. This has always been the case for me with Reich's music. More > |
| Saturday, February 18, 2006 | |
| Clear Sudio Master Reference Turntable | 0 comments |
 18 Feb 2006 @ 13:21Okay. I'm a self admitted audiophile geek dreamer. It's been about 15 years since I've owned any "high end" audio, though it's all about matching components not price, I have this awestruck love of audio design. My last sytem, for those of you that may know branding was a pair of ADS M-20 speakers bi amped with a PS Audio250 (?) on the bottom and Sunfire amp on top, PS Audio Pre-amp, PS audio D/A, Nakamichi CD transport, Tara Lab TFA Return speaker wire (the only thing I have left) and Monster/Tara Lab interconnects. Some would say this was a midfi system, in price , yes, however it rivaled the clarity and imaging of systems many times the price. I used to work at a hifi store, thus I had a lot of opportunity to try out gear at home. Here's something that may only appeal to the die hard vinyl crowd, yet it's sure purty. ---------------------------------- Clear Audio Master Reference Turntable For those well-heeled folks who just can’t seem to shake off the idea of using an analog turntable, Clear Audio offers its Master Reference Turntable, a $19,000 precision instrument handmade in Germany. Let’s face it: If it doesn’t sound good on this turntable, it doesn’t sound good anywhere. The unit has three separate motors that are synchronized by a special Accurate Power Generator (APG) motor control system, and it sits on six legs that keep it perfectly resonance-free. This baby is called the best turntable on the market by those in the know, and had it been released 30 years ago, that might have actually been saying something. At $19K, most DJs won’t be doing a lot of scratching on this table. But as a piece of precision engineering and mechanical perfection, it’s second to none. Just as a design exercise, you can’t help but be impressed. |
| Tuesday, August 23, 2005 | |
| Synthesizer Innovator Robert A. Moog Dies | 1 comment |
| 23 Aug 2005 @ 05:12 Bob Moog, thnak you for all the creative tools you have given me. My adventures with sound and music were made possble through your genius and innovation. Synthesizer Innovator Robert A. Moog Dies By NATALIE GOTT Associated Press Writer Mon Aug 22, 6:03 PM ET He may not have been a rock star himself, but Robert A. Moog's influence can be heard in the music of bands from The Beatles to Yes, Herbie Hancock to Chick Corea. Moog, whose self-named synthesizers turned electric currents into sound and helped revolutionize rock, died Sunday of a brain tumor at his home in Asheville, according to his company's Web site. He was 71. "He brought electronic music to the masses and changed the way we hear music," said Charles Carlini, a New York City concert promoter. "He's like an Einstein of music." Moog's synthesizer allowed musicians to generate a range of sounds that could mimic nature or seem otherworldly by flipping a switch, twisting a dial or sliding a knob. His instrument stood out from others on the market because it was small, light and versatile. "I'm an engineer. I see myself as a toolmaker and the musicians are my customers," Moog said in 2000. "They use my tools." The Beatles used a Moog synthesizer on their 1969 album "Abbey Road"; a Moog was used to create an eerie sound on the soundtrack to the 1971 film "A Clockwork Orange." A childhood interest in the theremin, one of the first electronic musical instruments, would lead Moog — whose name rhymes with vogue — to create a business that tied his name as tightly to synthesizers as the name Les Paul is to electric guitars. As a Ph.D. student in engineering physics at Cornell University, Moog developed his first voltage-controlled synthesizer modules with composer Herb Deutsch. By the end of the year, R.A. Moog Co. marketed the first commercial modular synthesizer. "Suddenly, there was a whole group of people in the world looking for a new sound in music, and it picked up very quickly," said Deutsch, a Hofstra University emeritus music professor. "The Moog came at the right time." As extended keyboard solos in rock and funk — and later hip-hop and techno — took off, Moog's instrument was used in songs by Manfred Mann, Yes and Pink Floyd. "The sound defined progressive music as we know it," said Keith Emerson, keyboardist for the rock band Emerson, Lake and Palmer. Keyboardist Walter (later Wendy) Carlos demonstrated the range of Moog's synthesizer by recording the hit album "Switched-On Bach" in 1968 using only the new instrument instead of an orchestra. "Every time you listen to the radio, you listen to Robert Moog's influence," said Carlini, who staged Moogfest in May 2004 to mark a half-century since Moog founded his first company. But the synthesizer's ability to mimic strings, horns and percussion has also threatened some musicians. In 2004, musicians extracted a promise from the Opera Company of Brooklyn to never use an advanced kind of synthesizer, called a virtual orchestra machine, in future productions. Moog spent the early 1990s as a research professor of music at the University of North Carolina at Asheville before turning full-time to running his new instrument business, which was renamed Moog Music in 2002. The roster of customers includes Nine Inch Nails, Pearl Jam, Beck, Phish, Sonic Youth and Widespread Panic. Moog is survived by his wife, Ileana; three daughters, a son, a stepdaughter, and his former wife, Shirleigh Moog. A public memorial is scheduled for Wednesday in Asheville. More > |
| Wednesday, July 27, 2005 | |
| Harrison 'aided' Sir Paul's song | 0 comments |
 27 Jul 2005 @ 05:47 Harrison 'aided' Sir Paul's song Sir Paul McCartney has suggested late Beatles bandmate George Harrison helped him write a song for his latest album from beyond the grave. Sir Paul said he wrote Waiting For Your Friends To Go with help from Harrison, who died in 2001. "I just got this feeling, this is George," he told Tom Robinson on BBC digital station 6 Music. "I was like George - writing one of his songs." "It just wrote itself very easily because it wasn't even me writing it." Sir Paul said he was remained unsure about the meaning of the song's lyrics. "I thought, OK, the 'waiting on the other side' is also a little bit loaded, it can be crossing the river Jordan or whatever, that sort of thing. There's a little bit of double meaning there," he said. "It was funny, particularly the second verse: 'I've been sliding down a slippy slope, I've been climbing up a slowly burning rope.' I just thought - it's a George song." Sir Paul said the song was one of his favourites on his new album Chaos and Creation In The Back Yard, which is due out in September. The interview will be broadcast on 14 September. |
| Tuesday, April 5, 2005 | |
| How To Tell Good Music From Bad Music | 4 comments |
| 5 Apr 2005 @ 03:23 How To Tell Good Music From Bad Music by Neil Slade Overview What is good music? Who is a good musician? What makes "Musician A" great, and "Musician B" merely adequate? These are questions which both casual listeners and consumers, as well as professional critics must accurately answer with consistancy. Why? Music costs energy and money, as well as time. If one spends energy and time living with mediocre music, when one could be dining on fabulous music of all types, it is like eating all your meals at McDonalds; a ridiculous use of time, money, and ultimately bad for you. A steady diet of greasy hamburgers will rot your stomach. A steady diet of junk music will rot your brain. What this brief report will do is: 1) show how most consumers come to perceive commercial popular music, and 2) outline what exactly good, bad, and great music is, using a simple rating system. The rating system and its definitions of each category will allow you to make a more accurate appraisal of the value of the music you are hearing, and what you can expect in terms of "musical nutrition" from the artist and music over time. How We Percieve Music Accurate musical appreciation and perception is a valuable skill. This is because as much as ever, our perception of music is not based upon real musical worth, but based and manipulated by heavy commercial marketing, and often misleading critical evaluation of music in print, radio, and television media sources. For example, we see and hear "The Giant Banana Clones" on the cover of Rolling Stone, and Spin magazines; we see them on David Letterman, MTV, and Saturday Night Live; we hear their songs on our car radio; and finally we encounter lifesize cardboard replicas and multimedia exhibitions of "The Giant Banana Clones" at our local music store. We are conveniently offered a large portion of "Banana Clones" through music and information sources we habitually turn to. Mass marketing and production gets certain music RIGHT IN OUR FACE. More often than not, this sheer repetition of exposure produces the false notion that "The Giant Banana Clones" are a great group, or at least, very good and deserving of all the attention they are getting. If a musician or group is good enough to be on the cover of Rolling Stone, or on Saturday Night Live we automatically assume "They must be among the best". Unfortunately nothing could be further from the truth, and quite the opposite is true. Most record buying consumers make the easy mistake of confusing popular and well-advertised music with what is truly good in music. Who Is Popular In Music and Why These days, unlike the era when even groups like the Grateful Dead and The Mothers of Invention got exposure and record deals, almost all music groups that acheive widespread exposure in major media and become "popular" and sell millions of records do so adhering to two UNBENDING RULES OF POPULARITY: POPULARITY RULE #1) Popularity is BOUGHT. Musicians BUY their way into the hearts and minds of the public, in exactly the same way politicians buy their voluntarily elected political positions: with tons of money. In the case of music, this is done with the artist's record company's enormous capital investment, which of course the artist must pay back out of record royalties or they are dropped like a hot potato. As in politics, the general public's ability to discriminate between baloney and substance is not very great. If the ads and image look good, the public can be sold almost anything. Whoever spends the enough money, will likely get elected "King of Music". Record companies go to extraordinary measures to lobby for their groups' exposure. The groups and musicians that get the most money are the ones whom the record company feels best fit the critieria of what is currently "The Big Thing". First, the companies must invest very large amounts of money producing a material product that will be available on shelves in thousands of music stores across the nation. Second, they invest tens of thousands of dollars, or much more in the case of "major" artists, producing television music videos (really commercials). Then the companies spend more money in shmoozing and contacting radio stations so that their artist will be heard and seen on the airwaves and in print. Finally, huge in store displays and other advertisements are created as a last front line assault on the consumer. What the record company is hoping for is market saturation, and a musical chain reaction, so that everybody is talking about their group. Then, when 5 million people walk into Blookbuster Music with $15 to spend, they walk out with "The Giant Banana Clones Eat Chicago" CD. Not because it is particularly good music, but because it is a safe bet for the consumer. The record company has brainwashed the consumer's taste and perception of music with money. The consumer's brain automatically registers: "The Banana Clones are good because they are EVERYWHERE". Chances are 99 to 1 that the "Banana Clones" are merely mediocre. Why? POPULARITY RULE #2) POPULAR GROUPS ARE AS A GENERAL RULE NOT VERY ORIGINAL OR INNOVATIVE. This is simple to understand. Vanilla ice cream is the most popular. The lowest common denominator is bland. Everyone likes plain water. As we recongnize, millions of records are sold not because of innate talent or creativity, but because they are heavily advertised. So if you are a record company executive with millions of dollars to potentially lose, are you going to gamble all that money on something nobody has heard before that goes against the grain? Are you going to spend a $50,000 on a music video for a group of weird looking guys who play lyrics and scales that nobody is used to hearing? Almost always, no. The record company will go with a safe bet. They will spend their money on a group of pretty and attractive guys and gals who look good from any angle, who appeal to consumers the same way that the guys and gals on Baywatch appeal to TV viewers. And/or they will give a half million dollar advance to the group the looks and sounds just like the last success story. Thus, for the past five years we have been listening to "Nirvana #2" and "Nirvana #3", and #4, #5, up through "Nirvana #1,658". A common variation recently has been "Nirvana With Pretty Girls". The amount of musical sameness that is being mass marketed in 1996 is at a higher level than ever. Consumers are being sold and listening to an alarming number of twentyish something non-musical fashion models (whatever the current "look" is) with guitars. The black rap and music market is no better in it's lack of variety and invention. It is frightening. The Billboard Charts are filled with group after group after group of CLONES. Originality is as rare as the original Nirvana. When original expression does happen, and it does once every ten years or so, it does so because the record buying public has become so totally bored with the regurgitated slop the music industry has fed it for so long that people demand a change of menu out of starvation. Unfortunately, record company executives are not so much accurate judges of musical value as they are practical businessmen. As Frank Zappa has said "Most people wouldn't know good music if it bit them on the ass." This may be especially true of record industry businessmen who have large sums of money at risk. Original, stimulating, and thought provoking musicians do exist, and a very few, by sheer determination or plain luck do manage to break the barriers and are recognized by the masses. But this is sadly a very rare exception. The Beatles were literally turned down and rejected by every single record company in England before educated music arranger George Martin heard them and gave them a chance. Once they showed how big they could be, it spawned "The British Invasion" and hundreds of Beatles clones were the result, the vast majority of which we have long since forgotten. So, after examining "popularity" we can safely conclude that it is generally only an indicator of heavy advertising and average musical expression. Truly exceptional, inspiring, and innovative popular musical artists are exceedingly rare by the very nature and methods by which musicians now become popularly accepted. One final question: Must a musician in fact offer something new and original to qualify as a "good" musician? Absolutely. There is certainly room for "classic" tunes and familiar styles, old friends we know and love. But music is like air. It must change or it becomes stale, and you suffocate. If you don't replace your body's old cells and grow, you die. If you keep playing and listening to the same old thing over and over again, your ears will eventually fall off. What Is Worth Listening To? Once you finally begin to ignore the overwhelming barrage of mass marketed mediocre music, you can begin to listen and evaluate music on a more honest and aware level. This is infinitely more rewarding and exciting than blindly following the latest trend. Every type of music has its intrinsic value. The elementary school band concert with its out of tune clarinets and out of time drums can be appreciated in its own context. We don't expect to have exciting shivers run up and down our spine at such a performance. And we don't expect the perfect beauty of refined musical technique. It's just a bunch of kids having fun, and it can be a good time for all. But it is BAD music. Similarly, the most repetitive Top 10 popular hit can also be appreciated in its place, perhaps like a large order of greasy and indigestible but yummy musical french fries. It has a beat and maybe you can dance to it. However, the rarified air of inspired GREAT music is an aquired taste, and for the most part the guardian angel of appreciation will only let those pass who can discriminate between a few crucial parameters of aural content. This is not about style. Punk rock is not automatically good or bad. Classical music is not automatically good or bad. The ultimate true perception of music and extracting the most from it, regardless of style, depends on knowing what is what, and what to expect from what. BAD music can be compared to junk food; good only in small doses, not much there to keep you alive. GOOD music can be compared to real whole foods; it gives you lots of energy and power, and keeps you going for a long time. The ability to accurately hear musical energy and utilize it well is a skill dedicated musicians aquire with thousands and thousands of hours of musical practice. The following guide and rating system will easily help a non-musician and beginning musician discriminate between different levels of music in the same way. The result: you have more fun listening to music, because you know what to expect, when to stay put, and when to get up and leave. The Real Music Five Star Rating System * One Star (Really Bad) One star musicians and their music is the least complex, with no hidden musical vitamins to speak of. You can listen to one star music for the briefest amount of time (unless you are learning how to play music yourself). The longer you listen to it, the more annoying it becomes, usually within a matter of minutes or even seconds. Examples would be a 4th grade beginning saxophone student playing a solo on "Back To School Night". Or a twelve year old guitarist doing a bad rendition of "Stairway To Heaven". Many music hobbyists fall into this catagory, people who practice their instrument five minutes a week during the commercials of their favorite TV show. One star musicians are nice to listen to no more frequently than once every six months, and then, only if you've had a couple of drinks first. Then it is funny. ** Two Stars (Pretty Bad) Two star musicians are not nearly as common as one star musicians, but unfortunately, they are a lot more visible. These people have begun to accumulate a "repetoire" of sorts, they know a few tunes by heart. You can find two star musicians all over the place, more than you care to. Two star musicians frequent music stores trying out new music gear. The will play the two or three songs they can remember, pretending to the clerk that they may actually be interested in buying that new $1,200 Gibson guitar. Two star musicians can be seen in many open stages at bars and clubs around town. Their timing and pitch is not very good. They write tedious and boring songs devoid of melody. They "jam" a lot. Occasionally, more advanced two star musicians learn up to ten songs and then they form a band. They then will play at your local bar and turn their amplifiers up, and you can't tell how bad they really are because all you can hear is your ears ringing. They may xerox flyers and post them up outside record sores on telephone poles, and pretend they are really hot stuff. If they have a really big allowance or a steady job, two star musicans may even produce their very own CD that even looks like a real record. But upon hearing, you immediately realize that they still have bad timing, no pitch recognition, no melodic sense, and absolutely nothing original to say. Again, two star music can be tolerated for periods longer than one minute ONLY if: 1) you are in some way moderately intoxicated; 2) you are having a conversation with a very attractive member of the opposite sex, or; 3) you are friends with somebody in the band. All two star musicians imagine themselves as famous if they only get a good break. *** Three Stars (Stuffing) Three star musicians make up the bulk of popular music as we know it today. They create the most often consumed, attention getting music in western American culture. The Billboard Charts, and practically every other rating scale/chart/poll/award consist 99% of three star musicians and their music. These musicians have achieved the ability to sing in tune most of the time, and to keep a steady beat... as long as it is 4/4 time. They are great mimics, and can emulate other musicians with uncanny accuracy. They hallucinate that they are being unique. They may want to be like the best artists, but deep down, their interest in their art is equalled or surpassed by their interest in being popular and making money. Three star musicians take someone else's idea and juggle it around just a little, like making a milkshake; Take known safe ingredients, mix and pour. Take guitar, drums, bass, 4/4 time, add some lyrics that fit the mold, record at a fancy studio, and VOILA!.....a predictable three star musical milkshake. Three star musicians play the same song with minor variations over and over again, until everyone gets bored. Then they have to look for a real job. Many three star musicians get a hit record, the fodder of the music industry. This is the result of a fluke mutation of their habitual musical patterns that causes people to temporarily pay attention to this unusual sound. They may accidentally create a decent piece of music in this way. With proper marketing, this song becomes a "hit". This hit is immediately followed by endless attempts to clone this one song into more hits. Unfortunately, the record company and the three star musician are completely unaware of the accidental nature of the songs' composition, and they are unable to recreate the initial excitement of the first accident. After several more hit songs of diminishing quality, the three star musician fades away only to return fifteen years later on a reunion tour. Again, three star musicians can only regurgitate mild variations of other more creative musicians work. The sure sign to tell if you are listening to common three star music is if you can answer the question "Where have I heard this before?" in three seconds or less. Three star music makes fine backround music for when you are driving and cannot be too distracted that you run over a dog with your truck. It is good to listen to when you are cleaning your bathroom. It is good music when you don't want to offend anybody. Simetimes it is better than silence, but other times it IS NOT. Three star music makes a good present for someone you don't know very well, or as a present for a lawyer. Examples of three star music: Yanni, The Dave Clark Five, Blur and about a million other groups. **** Four Stars (Pretty Good) This is a small group of musicians and their music. Several superstars of musicdom fall into this category, although many more superstars are simply three star musicians with a big advertising budget, and a willingly hypnotic audience. Example: Madonna is a three star musician who dances hard in front of four star stage sets. True four star musicians are mostly dedicated to the narrow field of music. They have either: A) unusually well developed technique on their chosen instrument, or: B) a superior sense of form and construction of elements. Four star musicians and their legions of fans may think there is nothing better than the music they make. But there is a fair amount of nearsighteness in this perception, encouraged by the amount of media and critical hype many three and four star artists command. Four star musicians retain a certain amount of conservatism, and do not really push the boundries of their art, though they may be experts at what they do. They are not particularly creative or innovative composers, a requirement to be considered a five star musician. Fame is no indicator of four star music. In fact, many four star musicians gain no public recognition at all. These unknown-in-their-lifetime artists may not have the ability or the desire to promote themselves much. They may not live in Los Angeles. They may play instrumental music, in which case they are almost guaranteed obscurity and only death will likely bring them widespread acceptance. And then, only among a small group of educated listeners to which the music has slowly filtered down to after many years. Four star musicians care more about their music than marketing. They would play no matter what. In contrast, three star musicians quit when the wife gets pregnant and there are no more hit records on the horizon. Many outstanding classical, or world musicians belong in this group, people who have devoted entire lives to perfecting their craft. You can name many of them, but there are many, many more you will never know even exist unless you get up off your lazy ass and look. ***** Five Stars (Genius Great) This is the rare of the rare, the cream of the cream of the crop. Extra extra extra virgin organic olive oil fresh from the olive press. We only see a few of these people alive in any one of our lifetimes. The music these people create is a reward to those who have bothered to awaken from the stupor of conventional wisdom and taste. Five star musicians only very rarely make it through the filter of mass acceptance unless their speciality is rock and roll, and even that is a very rare occurance. Inevitably, the music of five star musicians survives long after they themselves are gone. They can be pioneering innovators, or the highest masters of their choosen style. Often, only an extremely well trained ear can tell the difference between a more common four star artist and a true five star musician at work. Five star musicians are frequently ahead of their time. Their work is so brazenly brilliant, that it goes completely unnoticed by most, like an alien formula for perpetual motion. In art and science we easily name Van Gogh, Picasso, and Einstein as representitive of this class. In music, most all admit Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and Stravinsky as examples of the very finest. They are almost all the anti-thesis of popularity. Van Gogh sold one painting in his entire life. Bach was considered "old fashioned" and was unknown 100 miles from his home during his lifetime. Both Einstein and Beethoven were told their work was "impossible". But today, with time and perspective, we see that these five star individuals laid the very foundations upon which we rest our current notions of reality, of what is good. How often have we heard the easily tossed about comparison of a contemporary artist with one of the greats? "The Giant Banana Clones are the next Beatles!" Or, "Wangwee Balmstead is the next Hendrix!" What is the criteria? Is the music as solid as a granite boulder? Are we still listening after five years with the same fascination as before? Will we listen at all after twenty, fifty or one hundred years? Has the artist left a totally unique footprint, like Louis Armstrong, George Gershwin, Charlie Parker? Most people really haven't got a clue because their reference of comparison is so limited. All they know is what is sold by big corporations on TV with elaborate and colorful exhibitions. Five star artists take the nice cushy chair you are sleeping in and yank it out from under you. "Try this on for size." They dare you. Charles Ives, Captain Beefheart, Kate Bush. They say "think or sink". They don't remind you of hardly anybody. Their voice is unique. They sit on the edge of the grand canyon and yell "Look at THAT view!" Five star musicians are in the front car of a roller coaster. Up is down and down is up, twist and turns, they lead you places you don't expect, you've never been. Do you like this or not? They are the lead party on the trip to Mars. The music of five star musicians continues to evolve. They keep exploring and demand that you keep up. Miles Davis, John McLaughlin. Nothing grows mold. Five star music is like clouds. It doesn't stay the same for very long. It is not revisited. You don't buy "The Greatest Hits" album because you have to move along with it as well, transforming and exploring. It is unbelievably deep, you can listen for hours, and days, and weeks, and still find something new. Five star music DEMANDS that you move on and grow. The pale three star music which is the steady diet of most Americans wants you to sit down and grow barnacles. More > |
| Thursday, March 3, 2005 | |
| THE MUSICIAN WHO CAN TASTE NOTES | 0 comments |
| 3 Mar 2005 @ 20:54 THE MUSICIAN WHO CAN TASTE NOTES IOL March 2, 2005 [link] PARIS - A Swiss musician sees colours when she hears music, and experiences tastes ranging from sour and bitter to low-fat cream and mown grass, astounded scientists say. Zurich University neuropsychologists were so intrigued by the case of E.S. -- a 27-year-old professional musician whose full name has been withheld -- that they recruited her for a year-long inquiry. They say she is the world's most extreme known case of synaesthesia, the phenomenon whereby hearing music triggers a response in other sensory organs. E.S. sees colours when she hears a tone, with for instance an F sharp causing her to see violet while a C makes her see red, quite literally. Even more remarkable is that she also gets a taste on her tongue according to the note she hears. A tone interval of a minor second induces sourness, while a major second leaves a bitter taste. A minor third is salty, while a major third is sweet. Other tastes, according to the tone, are of "pure water", cream (either full or low-fat, depending on the note), "disgust" and also of mown grass. To provide an objective test, the scientists applied one of four different-tasting solutions (sour, bitter, salty and sweet) to her tongue and then asked her to press a button on a computer keyboard corresponding to four relevant tones. She responded with perfect accuracy and much faster than five musicians, recruited for the same test, who do not have her synaesthesic gifts. E.S.'s "extraordinary" synaesthesia has probably been a boon in her career by attuning her to the right pitch, the researchers say. The study, led by Lutz Jaencke, appears on Thursday in the British weekly science journal Nature. |
| Tuesday, December 7, 2004 | |
| Bob Dylan Transcript From CBS 60 Minutes | 7 comments |
| 7 Dec 2004 @ 06:07 Dylan Looks Back Dec. 5, 2004 There is no living musician who has been more influential than Bob Dylan. Over a 43-year career, his distinctive twang and poetic lyrics have produced some of the most memorable songs ever written. In the '60s, his songs of protest and turmoil spoke to an entire generation. While his life has been the subject of endless interpretation, Dylan has been largely silent. Now, at 63, he has written a memoir called "Chronicles, Volume One." Correspondent Ed Bradley got to sit down with this music legend in his first television interview in nearly 20 years. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dylan is mysterious, elusive, fascinating – just like his music. Over more than four decades, Dylan has produced 500 songs and more than 40 albums. Does he ever look back at the music he's written with surprise? "I used to. I don't do that anymore. I don't know how I got to write those songs. Those early songs were almost magically written," says Dylan, who quotes from his 1964 classic, "It's Alright, Ma." "Try to sit down and write something like that. There's a magic to that, and it's not Siegfried and Roy kind of magic, you know? It's a different kind of a penetrating magic. And, you know, I did it. I did it at one time." Does he think he can do it again today? No, says Dylan. "You can't do something forever," he says. "I did it once, and I can do other things now. But, I can't do that." Dylan has been writing music since he was a teenager in the remote town of Hibbing, Minn. He was the eldest of two sons of Abraham and Beatty Zimmerman. How was his childhood? "I really didn't consider myself happy or unhappy," says Dylan. "I always knew that there was something out there that I needed to get to. And it wasn't where I was at that particular moment." In his book, Dylan writes that he came alive at 19, when he moved to Greenwich Village in New York City – which at the time was the frenetic center of the '60s counterculture. Within months, Dylan had signed a recording contract with Columbia Records. "You refer to New York as the capital of the world. But when you told your father that, he thought that it was a joke," says Bradley. "Did your parents approve of you being a singer-songwriter? Going to New York?" "No. They wouldn't have wanted that for me. But my parents never went anywhere," says Dylan. "My father probably thought the capital of the world was wherever he was at the time. It couldn't possibly be anyplace else. Where he and his wife were in their own home, that, for them, was the capital of the world." So what made Dylan different? What pushed him out there? "I listened to the radio a lot. I hung out in the record stores. And I slam-banged around on the guitar and played the piano and learned songs from a world which didn't exist around me," says Dylan. He says that he knew even then that he was destined to become a music legend. "I was heading for the fantastic lights," he writes. "Destiny was looking right at me and nobody else." What does the word "destiny" mean to Dylan? "It's a feeling you have that you know something about yourself - nobody else does - the picture you have in your mind of what you're about will come true," says Dylan. "It's kind of a thing you kind of have to keep to your own self, because it's a fragile feeling. And if you put it out there, somebody will kill it. So, it’s best to keep that all inside." When Bradley asked Dylan why he changed his name from Robert Zimmerman, he said that was destiny, too. "Some people – you're born, you know, the wrong names, wrong parents. I mean, that happens," says Dylan. "You call yourself what you want to call yourself. This is the land of the free." Click to read further More > |
| Tuesday, November 30, 2004 | |
| PRODIGY, 12, COMPARED TO MOZART | 0 comments |
| 30 Nov 2004 @ 14:34 PRODIGY, 12, COMPARED TO MOZART CBS News: 60 Minutes Wednesday Transcript November 28, 2004 [link] There is a composer studying at New York's renowned Juilliard School who some say is the greatest talent to come along in 200 years. He's written five full-length symphonies, and he's only 12 years old. His name is Jay Greenberg, although he likes the nickname "Bluejay" because, he says, blue jays are small and make a lot of noise. Greenberg says music just fills his head and he has to write it down to get it out. What's going on in Bluejay's head? Correspondent Scott Pelley spoke with him. ........... Jay wrote a piece, "The Storm," in just a few hours. It was commissioned by the New Haven Symphony in Connecticut. When the last note sailed into the night, Jay navigated an unfamiliar stage, and then took a bow. "We are talking about a prodigy of the level of the greatest prodigies in history when it comes to composition," says Sam Zyman, a composer. "I am talking about the likes of Mozart, and Mendelssohn, and Saint-Sans." Zyman teaches music theory to Jay at the Juilliard School in New York City, where he's been teaching for 18 years. "This is an absolute fact. This is objective. This is not a subjective opinion," says Zyman. "Jay could be sitting here, and he could be composing right now. He could finish a piano sonata before our eyes in probably 25 minutes. And it would be a great piece." How is it possible? Jay told Pelley he doesn't know where the music comes from, but it comes fully written -- playing like an orchestra in his head. "It's as if the unconscious mind is giving orders at the speed of light," says Jay. "You know, I mean, so I just hear it as if it were a smooth performance of a work that is already written, when it isn't." All the kids are downloading music these days. But Jay, with his composing program, is downloading it from his head. The program records his notes and plays them back - that's when the computer is up and running. Jay composes so rapidly that he often crashes his computer. "It's as if he's looking at a picture of the score, and he's just taking it from the picture, basically," says Zyman. Jay's parents are as surprised as anyone. Neither is a professional musician. His father, Robert, is a linguist, and a scholar in Slavic language who lost his sight at 36 to retinitis pigmentosa. His mother, Orna, is an Israeli-born painter. "I think, around 2, when he started writing, and actually drawing instruments, we knew that he was fascinated with it," says Orna. "He managed to draw a cello and ask for a cello, and wrote the world cello. And I was surprised, because neither of us has anything to so with string instruments. And I didn't expect him to know what it [a cello] was." But Jay knew he wanted a cello, so his mother brought him to a music store where he was shown a miniature cello. "And he just sat there. He ...started playing on it," recalls Orna. "And I was like, 'How do you know how to do this?'" By 3, Jay was still drawing cellos, but he had turned them into notes on a scale. He was beginning to compose, and his parents watched the notes come faster and faster. He was writing any time, anywhere. By elementary school, his teachers had no idea how to handle a boy whose hero wasn't Batman, but Beethoven. "He hears music in his head all the time, and he'll start composing and he doesn't even realize it probably, that he's doing it," says Robert. "But the teachers would get angry, and they would call us in for emergency meetings with seven people sitting there trying to figure out how they're going accommodate our son." Jay has been told his hearing is many times more sensitive than an average person's. The sounds of the city need to be shut out manually. But Jay can't turn off the music in his head. In fact, he told us he often hears more than one new composition at a time. "Multiple channels is what it's been termed," says Jay. "That my brain is able to control two or three different musics at the same time - along with the channel of everyday life." "This child told me, he said, 'I'm gonna be dead if I am not composing. I have to compose. This is all I want to do," says Orna. "And when a child that young tells you where their vision is, or where they're going, you don't have a choice." By the age of 10, Jay was going to Juilliard, among the world's top conservatories of music, on a full scholarship. At age 11, he was studying music theory with third year college students. Jay also takes high school courses at another school courses his parents say he will finish when he's 14. Elizabeth Wolff is a concert pianist who works with Jay on his piano technique. Jay writes things he can't even play, and he says he wants to perfect his piano playing, even though he doesn't need the piano, or any instrument, to compose. What happens when he first hears a tune? "At first, I just listen to it, and then I start humming it. And then while walking, and I like walking a lot when I am inspired," says Jay. "Because I walk to the beat of the music. For example, if the beat is (piano), I start rocking. ...And I often start conducting as well." Jay's not a usual 12-year-old, and he knows it. Catching onto baseball isn't as natural as playing piano. Even though Jay's a genius, he's still a kid. What happens when Jay gets bored? "He gets restless, and then he starts improvising. Last week, he took the Beethoven sonata we're working right now, and decided that everything would be kind of interesting upside down and backwards," says Wolff. "So he took the volume and literally did just that. He can do it for you right now. And I couldn't even follow it. But he actually took the clefs and inverted them. The treble became bass, bass became treble, and did it backwards." How does Jay rank among other child prodigies? "To be a prodigy composer is far rarer," says Zyman. "You have to conquer these issues. How do you notate this rhythm? What's the range of the oboe? Can this be played on the piano? How do you compose for the harp? There are hundreds of thousands of bits of information that you need to master to be able to write a piece of music." Talented composers might write five or six symphonies in a lifetime. But Jay has written five at the age of 12. When the music enters Jay's head, he has a lot of confidence about what he puts down on paper. Does he ever revise one of his compositions? "No, I don't really ever do that," says Jay. "It just usually comes right the first time." Sam Adler was a child prodigy himself. Today, he's an accomplished composer and professor of Jay's at Juilliard. He agrees Jay can be great, but only if he is constantly questioning his gift. "Let's take a great genius in the musical world, someone like Beethoven. When you look at a Beethoven score, it's horrendous. He didn't have an eraser. So, he had to cross it out," says Adler. "And it looks as if, you know, he was never satisfied. And that is something that comes with maturity. And I think that's going to happen to Jay." But is it fair to say the potential is there? "Absolutely," says Adler. "Without doubt." |
| Monday, September 20, 2004 | |
| My New Music Uploads | 3 comments |
| 20 Sep 2004 @ 01:14 I've recently uploaded some new music I've been working on. It's on the Broadjam site at This Address. There's three songs underneath my pic but click on more... and guess what, there's more. My favorites are It's A Matter of Space, Oudles of Noodles and Gong Along The Watch Tower. Let me know what you think. There are some new styles emerging from me that I'm really enjoying vocally. Yesterday I had the chance to sing on a CD of Hebrew Kirtans, call and response. Susan Diekman is the artist and she brought together some great musicians on tabla, bansuri, oud, bass, dumbek etc. I was part of the response choir but also had several solos throughout the recording. More > |
| Sunday, July 18, 2004 | |
| Music Plasma.com | 4 comments |
| 18 Jul 2004 @ 10:25 Music Plasma The site acts as a music recommendation system by placing pop music artists in a visual context near similar performers. Enter the name of bands you like and see what you think of the connections it draws. More > |
| Sunday, May 2, 2004 | |
| A New Life For An Ancient FLute | 1 comment |
| 2 May 2004 @ 23:07 Few Chinese people have heard of the yue, an ancient wind instrument that belonged to the flute family. However, this flute used to be an important instrument in many ancient ceremonial rituals. In The Book of Songs (Shi Jing), the most ancient collection of Chinese poetry, which was compiled in the 6th century BCE, yue is the most frequently mentioned wind instrument. After the Han Dynasty (206 BCE-220 CE) about 1,700 years ago, the yue seemed to have disappeared. The disappearance of the yue was a mystery, and even modern researchers had only a vague idea of what the yue might have been like. In 1986 and 1987, a number of wind instruments made of animal bones were unearthed in Wuyang County, in central China's Henan Province. These instruments, named gudi, are about 20 centimetres long and 1 centimetre in diameter, and could produce a complete seven-note scale. Dating tests indicated that these bone flutes were about 8,000 years old. The discovery pushed the history of Chinese musical instruments back a further 3,000 years, yet musicologists have not found any historical accounts of this instrument, and the blank of several thousand years in the history of Chinese instruments is hard to explain. However, the enigma of the mysterious yue and the bone flutes seemed to explain one another in the eyes of Liu Zhengguo, a scholar of Chinese music history who is also skilled in playing the transverse bamboo flute (dizi) and its vertical twin the xiao. Liu is convinced that the gudi is, in fact, the yue. Liu became interested in the ancient bone flute when he was teaching the history of ancient Chinese music at South China Normal University in 1992. Because Liu himself is a wind instrument player, he wanted to play the ancient bone instrument for his students when he was discussing it in his course. Similar to wind instruments with neither a mouth hole nor a notch, such as the bamboo chou of central China and the ney of the Tajik people, the bone flute has to be played obliquely. Liu always wanted to try the original bone flute but had had no opportunity. The opportunity finally came in 2001, when the archaeology team of the University of Science and Technology of China unearthed another group of ancient bone flutes also at Wuyang, in Henan, and invited Liu to play them. Liu was very excited when he tried the original instruments, playing about 10 tunes on them. "The original guyue had a uniquely sonorous sound because of fossilization," said Liu. "It is really amazing that an instrument 8,000 years old can still be played." In February 2001, Liu gave two concerts with the Hong Kong Chinese Orchestra in Hong Kong, where he introduced the ancient bone flute to the audience. Source: China Daily (26 April 2004) More > |
| Monday, January 26, 2004 | |
| Musicians Unveil Digital 'Manifesto' | 2 comments |
 26 Jan 2004 @ 18:57Musicians Unveil Digital 'Manifesto' AP, 01/26/2004 4:07 PM) By Angela Doland Rock veterans Peter Gabriel and Brian Eno are launching a provocative new musicians' alliance that would cut against the industry grain by letting artists sell their music online instead of only through record labels. With the Internet transforming how people buy and listen to songs, musicians need to act now to claim digital music's future, Gabriel and Eno argued Monday as they handed out a slim red manifesto at a huge dealmaking music conference known as Midem. They call the plan the "Magnificent Union of Digitally Downloading Artists" — or MUDDA, which has a less lofty ring to it. "Unless artists quickly grasp the possibilities that are available to them, then the rules will get written, and they'll get written without much input from artists," said Eno, who has a long history of experimenting with technology. By removing record labels from the equation, artists can set their own prices and set their own agendas, said the two independent musicians, who hope to launch the online alliance within a month. Their pamphlet lists ideas for artists to explore once they're freed from the confines of the CD format. One might decide to release a minute of music every day for a month. Another could post several recorded variations of the same song and ask fans what they like best. Gabriel, who has his own label, Real World Records, said he isn't trying to shut down the record companies — he just wants to give artists more options. "There are some artists who already tried to do everything on their own," he said, adding that those musicians often found out they didn't like marketing or accounting. "We believe there will be all sorts of models for this." A representative with the venture said other musicians had expressed interest in participating in the alliance, but did not provide names. One band that has found its niche online is the jam band Phish, which sells downloads of its concerts at www.livephish.com. The band's relationship with its devoted fans is often compared to that of the Grateful Dead, and the site is another chance for close contact. But it also generates plenty of money: more than $2.25 million in sales since 2002. What's driving the movement is the success of legitimate download sites such as Apple's Internet music store, iTunes, which sells songs for 99 cents a pop in the United States. Both Gabriel and Eno started their careers in the 1960s and remain immensely influential. As a means to help unsigned artists, their effort "is certainly going to be a valuable and interesting thing to do," said Josh Bernoff, principal analyst with Forrester Research in Cambridge, Mass. "But for anyone (already) signed it's almost certainly a violation of their contract," said Bernoff, who addressed the conference over the weekend. "It's not in a record company's best interest to have large pieces of music out there that they don't have control of." Gabriel co-founded a European company, On Demand Distribution, which runs legal download sites in 11 European countries. The company would provide the technology for MUDDA, though Gabriel and Eno are looking for online partners. Europe's sites haven't yet caught up to the success of the U.S. portals. Apple's iTunes, for example, is planning a European launch this year, which is expected to build interest in legal downloading in a market where many people don't realize there's even such a thing. Because both legal and illegal sites offer tunes a la carte, many in the industry believe they'll make albums less important by putting the focus on catchy singles. Eno and Gabriel both suggested they'd welcome a chance to make songs that stand alone. "I'm an artist who works incredibly slowly," Gabriel said. "If some of those (songs) could be made available, you don't have to be so trapped into this old way of being confined only by the album cycle." The former Genesis singer and World Music promoter is interested in putting multiple versions of the same song online. He's also looking forward to being able to hear unfinished music from other artists. "We tend at the moment ... to try to find a moment when a song is right. You stick the pin in the butterfly and put it in the box and you sell the box," he said. "Music is actually a living thing that evolves." More > |
| Tuesday, December 2, 2003 | |
| Exploding The Myth Of Mozart | 25 comments |
| 2 Dec 2003 @ 11:58 Exploding The Myth Of Mozart By Dr. Pei-Gwen South 12-1-3 As one of the most recognized composers of the Western musical canon, the music and reputation of Mozart is as celebrated today as it was disregarded in his own time. In fact, the eminent status he has come to enjoy, both in print and performance, has become so entrenched as to deflect any question or criticism of its deservedness; by its very magnitude (and the notion of value it invokes) it has cast a pervasive, and consequently detrimental, influence over the tone and direction of Mozart scholarship. But what if the image we have of the composer is a myth? And what if the assessment of his achievement has been inaccurate? Like so many myths, separate the fact from the fiction, the truth from the untruth, and there remains little of substance that is worthy of all the adulation. One has only to consider the authenticity of his works, the contradictions and incongruities which musical scholarship has uncovered (but largely failed to pursue), and the man himself, and the myth begins to crumble before our very eyes. Regarding authenticity, it is not a question of whether or not Mozart composed all that has been attributed to him - we know for certain that he did not, and that many of the works once thought to be his were actually written by other composers. The question is the extent to which this is the case. To date, musicologists and music historians have identified these spurious and doubtful Mozart works into their hundreds, among them songs, symphonies, serenades, concertos, chamber pieces, masses, requiems and smaller church works, an incomplete listing of which was published in the sixth Köchel edition in 1964. Since then, the number of Mozart works found to be spurious has continued to grow, and, as has now been acknowledged, includes many works that are well-known and cherished by musical audiences, such as the Sinfonia Concertante for four winds K.Anh. 9, the 'Paris' Overture K.Anh.8, the Missa Brevis in G K.140, and the 'Twelfth Mass', the latter of which is actually by the little-known German composer Wenzel Muller (Robbins Landon 1991: 351-352). To this list might be added Idomeneo and the 'Haffner' Symphony. More > |
| Monday, October 20, 2003 | |
| The Beatles, Let it Be... Naked | 0 comments |
| 20 Oct 2003 @ 22:45 The Beatles, Let it Be... Naked 5 stars EMI It could have been another McCartney vanity project. But, says John Harris, stripping away Spector's production and ditching a couple of tracks has let the final album shine at last John Harris Sunday October 19, 2003 The Observer We'll begin with a nauseating name-drop. I first heard official word about Let it Be... Naked back in February, when I was interviewing Ringo Starr in a South Kensington restaurant. He was making his way through a dressing-free salad, sipping mineral water and attempting to promote a solo album entitled Ringo Rama ; I, of course, was set on gently nudging the conversation towards The Beatles. With commendable grace, he soon resigned himself to the inevitable: we talked about the DVD release of the Anthology series, and then he tipped me the wink about his and Paul McCartney's next enterprise: the release of a new version of the Beatles album that was salvaged from miles of abandoned tape by Phil Spector and released as their last(ish) word in May 1970. 'It's the de-Spectorised version,' said Ringo. 'Cleaned up a little. Same tracks, same people.' He emitted a confident, though slightly forced laugh. 'I've been listening to it, and it's really great. It fills my heart with joy to hear that band that I was a member of. They were just great.' At this point, I think I nodded vigorously, keen to make it clear that I too thought The Beatles were quite a tidy act. 'Paul was always totally opposed to Phil,' he went on, 'and I told him on the phone, "You're bloody right again: it sounds great without Phil." Which it does. Now we'll have to put up with him telling us over and over again, "I told you."' It was at this point that I decided to bring up Spector's syrupy treatment of 'The Long and Winding Road' - which caused McCartney no end of annoyance - and remind Ringo that one of the alleged reasons he had so smothered the song was to cover up the fact that John Lennon's bass part was a plunky, out-of-tune disgrace. Ringo put his cheery bonhomie on temporary hold and looked rather irritated. 'Well, people say a lot of things,' he said. 'And even playing out of tune, he played better than most.' This is not strictly true. If you go back to Spector's arrangement, which grafts strings, horns and a choir on to what sounds like a demo, you hear Lennon indulging in something close to musical sabotage. How could stripping it all back do anything other than blow the gaff? Moreover, wasn't this the ultimate Paul McCartney vanity project - thumbs-aloft's belated attempt to pull off what his colleagues had long denied him? That lunchtime, however, was not the best setting for such harumphing. It Gets Better, Click for More > |
| Friday, October 10, 2003 | |
| The Thai Elephant Orchestra | 0 comments |
| 10 Oct 2003 @ 10:21 Thanks to Scott Hess for this interesting information: "A CD of elephants in the Thai jungle playing specially designed musical instruments. The elephants improvise the music themselves. The Thai Elephant orchestra was co-founded by Richard Lair of the Thai Elephant Conservation Center in Lampang and performer/composer Dave Soldier. Most of the profits will go to the Conservation Center. The CD includes a twelve page color booklet that details the project." ------------ A BAND WITH A LOT MORE TO OFFER THAN TALENTED TRUMPETERS By Eric Scigliano New York Times December 16, 2000 In the 20 years since a Syracuse zookeeper first encouraged an elephant's artistic impulses, pachyderm paintings have become fundraising fixtures at zoos. So it was probably only a matter of time before someone decided to try these highly intelligent animals out on another creative endeavor: music. Now the debut CD of the Thai Elephant Orchestra is scheduled for release this month. The band is the brainchild of Richard Lair, an American expatriate who has worked with elephants for 23 years and written an encyclopedic United Nations study of Asia's captive elephants, and David Sulzer, a neurologist who heads Columbia University's Sulzer Laboratory and works as a composer and producer under the name Dave Soldier. Together they organized six young pachyderm at the Thai Elephant Conservation Center, a former government logging camp near the town of Lampang, where elephants now earn their keep by giving rides, demonstrating logging skills and painting pictures for tourists. Elephants are natural candidates for music-making. Their hearing is much keener than their sight, and they employ a vast range of vocalizations, many of which are heard on their CD, to be released by the New York-based Mulatta Records. Ancient Romans and Asian mahouts, or elephant handlers, have noted elephants' ability to distinguish melodies, and today's circus elephants follow musical cues. In 1957, a German scientist, Bernard Rensch, reported in Scientific American that his test elephant could distinguish 12 musical tones and could remember simple melodies even when played on different instruments, at different pitches, timbres and meters. She still recognized the tones a year and a half later. There have been commercial ventures, too. In the 1850's a circus elephant named Romeo cranked a hand organ while "Juliet" danced, and the Adam Forepaugh and Barnum & Bailey circuses later fielded "elephant bands." These "probably sounded like a herd of angry Buicks," said Fred Dahlinger, research director for the Circus World Museum in Baraboo, Wis. "They were all novelty acts, characteristic of their times." The Thai Elephant Orchestra attempts something different. Its members play sturdier versions of traditional Thai instruments -- slit drums, a gong hammered from a sawmill blade, a diddly-bow bass and xylophone-like renats -- and a thundersheet and harmonicas. Mr. Sulzer said he and Mr. Lair merely showed the elephants how to make the sounds, cued them to start and stop, and let them play as they wished. After five practice sessions, they started recording. Mr. Sulzer admits he was skeptical at first. "I thought we would just train elephants to hit something, and I would tape that and have to paste it together with other things." Instead, he recorded the performances intact, without overdubbing, in a teak grove, pausing only when outside noises intruded. The players improvise distinct meters and melodic lines, and vary and repeat them. The results, at once meditative and deliberate, delicate and insistently thrumming, strike some Western listeners as haunting, others as monotonous. Mr. Sulzer wondered whether Prathida, a 7-year- old orchestra member whom he called "the Fritz Kreisler of elephants," would recognize dissonance. "I put one bad note in the middle of her xylophone. She avoided playing that note -- until one day she started playing it and wouldn't stop. Had she discovered dissonance, and discovered that she liked it? She outsmarted the researchers." Mr. Lair worked out a set of hand signals for the mahouts to cue the elephants while he was conducting. He discovered that some "figured out the meaning of the signals on their own, with no teaching whatsoever." But is it music? Mr. Sulzer insists it is. "I have no doubt they're improvising -- and composing, which is the same thing," he declared. To test out the proposition, he suggested something like the Turing test of artificial intelligence: play the CD without disclosing the performers' identity and then ask listeners the question. For Mr. Lair, it's simply a matter of interpretation, as in all art: "Just as there are a lot things they don't understand about our music, I am sure there are things we will never understand about theirs." The proceeds from the CD will go to a milk bank for orphaned elephants and a school to improve mahout training -- although Mr. Lair concedes that "profits are highly theoretical at this point." Nonetheless, Mr. Lair, who not only advises the Conservation Center but also trained the elephants for the Disney movie "Dumbo Drop," is sensitive to any charges of exploitation. Elephants should not be "incarcerated and made to do slave labor," he writes in the new CD's liner notes. With habitat vanishing and logging banned in Thailand, however, there's little alternative to tourist-camp work. At least, he says, making "gorgeous noises of their own volition" is light and pleasurable duty: "What better job than to be in the prison band?" Mr. Lair and Mr. Sulzer are devising new instruments and seeking new talent. They say one 3-year-old has already proved a prodigy, and another elephant camp is trying to develop an orchestra. Meanwhile, a second, "easy-listening" recording, "code-named the `Schlock CD," is on the way, Mr. Lair writes, mixed to be accessible to a wider audience. |
| Wednesday, October 1, 2003 | |
| Earthjustice Releases CD to Promote Clean Air and Water | 1 comment |
| 1 Oct 2003 @ 13:27 Earthjustice Releases CD to Promote Clean Air and Water Many of the world's most celebrated musicians have contributed tracks for a new benefit CD entitled "Where We Live -- Stand For What You Stand On." The project, released September 30th, will be distributed globally through EMI, a company with a proven commitment to the environment and sustainable development, and on EMI's Higher Octave label in North America. Proceeds from the CD will support Earthjustice's Where We Live campaign to promote the universal right to clean air and clean water... The benefit CD is a soulful collection of hard-to-find tracks that remind us about the importance of standing up for your rights, staying strong, and celebrating when ordinary citizens achieve victories in protecting the planet we live on. Artists include Mose Allison, Captain Beefheart, Ruben Blades, Bob Dylan, Michael Franti & Spearhead, John Hammond & Tom Waits, Norah Jones, Los Lobos, Maria Muldaur & Bonnie Raitt, Willie Nelson, The Neville Brothers, Karen Savoca, Pops Staples & Ry Cooder, Sweet Honey in the Rock, Tina Turner & Robert Cray, Dan Zanes (with Lou Reed & the Rubi Theater Company). "We are honored by the participation of these great musicians in support of the environment and public health," says Buck Parker, Executive Director of Earthjustice. "When people buy this CD they are helping Earthjustice clean up the air and water and provide a voice for people living with toxic pollution in their backyards." "Everyone should be able to drink clean water and breathe clean air. Our health is directly linked to the health of the planet," Matt Marshall, Higher Octave founder said. "That's why so many artists have contributed such amazing music. We are extremely proud to be a part of such a worthwhile benefit project." In the United States alone, more than 70,000 people die each year because of air pollution, and 40 percent of the nation's waterways don't meet basic water quality standards. Despite the urgent need for full enforcement, critical environmental protections are being reversed. Through its Where We Live campaign, Earthjustice has brought more than 50 cases to protect clean air and water in the United States. Earthjustice also works with international organizations to establish the universal recognition of the right to a clean and healthy environment. Earthjustice is a nonprofit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. Earthjustice donates its services to hundreds of organizations and communities, bringing about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws. Earthjustice is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization. More > |
| Saturday, September 20, 2003 | |
| Gospel truth: Hebrides invented church spirituals | 1 comment |
| 20 Sep 2003 @ 14:39 Gospel truth: Hebrides invented church spirituals By Paul Kelbie, Scotland Correspondent 20 September 2003 A study into the roots of gospel music by an American professor has lead the accomplished musician, who has played with Duke Ellington and Dizzy Gillespie, to conclude that the "good news" music sung in black American churches originated from Scotland, not Africa. Professor Willie Ruff, of Yale University, said the roots of the music derived from evangelical spirituals and blues and jazz, had more to do with the crofters of the Outer Hebrides than slaves on US plantations. For years the accepted wisdom has been that gospel music was born during the period of slavery in the Deep South. But Professor Ruff conceded that his findings have startled a number of elders in black churches. "They have always assumed that this form of worship came from Africa," Professor Ruff, an Afro-American professor of music, said. "Black Americans have lived under a misconception. Our cultural roots are more Afro-Gaelic than Afro-American. Just look at the Harlem telephone book, it's more like Edinburgh or the book for the North Uists. "There is a notion that when African slaves arrived in America they came down the gangplanks of slave ships singing gospel music - that's just not true. What I'm talking about here pre-dates all other congregational singing by blacks in America." Traditional psalm singing, or "precenting the line" as it is correctly known, in which the psalms are called out and the congregation sings a response, was the earliest form of congregational singing adopted by Africans in America. Even today, psalm singing and gospel music are the backbone of black churchgoers in the US, with CD sales alone worth half a billion dollars last year. But Professor Ruff, 71, a Baptist from Alabama, said: "I, like everyone else, assumed it was unique to black congregations in the United States, having grown out of slavery, but I began to wonder if it was performed by white congregations in the same way," he said. He began researching at the Sterling library at Yale, one of the world's greatest collections of books and papers, where he found records of how Highlanders settled in North Carolina in the 1700s. "Scottish emigrants from the Highlands, and the Gaelic speaking Hebrides especially, arrived in parts of North Carolina in huge numbers and for many years during the slavery period black Africans, owned by Scottish emigrants, spoke only the Gaelic language. I found, in a North Carolina newspaper dated about 1740, an advertisement offering a generous reward for the capture and return of a runaway African slave who is described as being easy to identify because he only speaks Gaelic. There is no doubt the great influx of Scots Presbyterians into the Carolinas introduced the African slaves to Christianity and their way of worship," he said. But it wasn't until Professor Ruff travelled to Scotland that he became convinced of the similarities after hearing psalm singing in Gaelic. "I was struck by the similarity, the pathos, the emotion, the cries of suffering and the deep, deep belief in a brighter, promising hereafter. "It makes sense that as we got our names from the slave masters, we carried the slave owners blood, their religion and their customs, that we should have adopted and adapted their music. There are more descendants of Highland Scots living in America than there are in the Highlands - and a great many of them are black. "I have been to Africa many times in search of my cultural identity, but it was in the Highlands that I found the cultural roots of black America." Jamie Reid-Baxter, a history research fellow at Glasgow University and a psalm expert, said: "The Scottish slave-owners would definitely have brought that style of singing with them and the slaves would have heard it. Both these forms of music are a way of expressing religious ecstasy." More > |
| Friday, September 5, 2003 | |
| Astronauts Love To Play Music In Space | 0 comments |
 5 Sep 2003 @ 09:41NASA Science News September 4, 2003 A surprising number of astronauts are also musicians--and they love to play in space. FULL STORY |
| Music Software Innovations | 0 comments |
 5 Sep 2003 @ 09:31Max/MSP Max/MSP is a graphical environment for music, audio, and multimedia. In use worldwide for over fifteen years by performers, composers, artists, teachers, and students, Max/MSP is the way to make your computer do things that reflect your individual ideas and dreams. Max/MSP Annotated Resource Guide M M is an updated version of the classic composition program originally published in the mid 1980s. Composing music with M is radically different from writing music on paper or recording into a tape recorder or MIDI sequencer. Instead of merely playing back what you've already composed, M becomes a part of the actual process of composition. You enter your basic musical ideas and materials as melodies, chords, and rhythms, and then work with M to transform those ideas into finished compositions. M's powerful tools and musical controls let you work so quickly and interactively that the line between composing and performing becomes blurred. You're composing and performing at the same time, and with a vast array of controls. You can control your music by clicking and dragging the mouse on the computer screen, by "conducting" in a Conducting Grid, by pressing keys on your computer keyboard, or by playing specific notes on your MIDI keyboard. When working with M, you hear the musical results of everything you do while you're doing it, so you can try new things and explore musical ideas without the computer getting in your way. radiaL radiaL is based on loop channels represented by circular displays, each with its own performable multi-filter and pitch shifting/time scaling. Almost every aspect of the system can be configured for live performance, studio recording, or sound exploration, controlled from a variety of sources (control surfaces, MIDI, keyboard or mouse). |
| Wednesday, August 13, 2003 | |
| Stopping the pop-swappers | 0 comments |
 13 Aug 2003 @ 21:08Stopping the pop-swappers DOT.LIFE - the weekly guide to changing technology By Mark Ward BBC News Online technology correspondent Stopping the pop-swappers internet downloaders. But the real pirates these days are crime bosses - and the rewards are plentiful. In America and the rest of the world the biggest culprit in falling music sales is large-scale CD piracy by organized crime. In just three years, sales of pirate CDs have more than doubled, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). Every third CD sold is a pirate copy, says the federation. They used to say "home taping" was killing music, now it's meant to be internet downloaders. But the real pirates these days are crime bosses - and the rewards are plentiful. The net has given rise to many novel ways of doing business but the methods of the Recording Industry Association of America has got every twisted e-commerce scheme beaten. Last month, the association began suing hundreds of its customers. For the RIAA - which represents the major US recording companies - this makes perfect sense. The people being sued are sharing music with millions of others via peer-to-peer networks such as Kazaa, Grokster and Morpheus. This tidal wave of subpoenas is the latest in a series of steps the RIAA has taken to stop "file-sharing" which, it believes, is causing CD sales to fall through the floor. According to the RIAA, CD sales dropped by 10% in 2001 and a further 6.8% last year, largely because of file sharing. But the figures tell a different story. In America and the rest of the world the biggest culprit in falling music sales is large-scale CD piracy by organised crime. In just three years, sales of pirate CDs have more than doubled, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). Every third CD sold is a pirate copy, says the federation. The IFPI's Commercial Music Piracy 2003 report, produced in early July, reveals pirate CD sales rose 14% in 2002 and exceeded one billion units for the first time. Not least in the East The pirate CD market is now so big, $4.6bn (£2.86bn), it is "of greater value than the legitimate music market of every country in the world, except the USA and Japan". In some countries it is hard to find legitimately produced CDs. Ninety percent of CDs in China, for instance, are pirate copies. Counterfeiters have forced the price of a fake CD down to about $4, which only makes CDs in the music shops look even pricier. Embarrassingly major record labels and distributors have been fined twice by the US Federal Trade Commission for price fixing their products. However, pirates are not solely responsible for the crisis in the music industry. After all, it is actually producing CD titles. Replacing vinyl According to the RIAA's own figures, over the last two years the US music industry has produced 25% fewer CDs. The peak of production was in 1999 when 38,900 individual titles were released. But by 2001 this was down to 27,000. Releases grew again in 2002 but were still below the previous high. Musician George Ziemann says if only 3,000 copies of each of the "missing" CDs were sold, the fall in sales would be wiped out. For Mark Mulligan, an analyst with Jupiter Research, the music is weathering a hangover after the 80s and 90s boom, when everyone was buying CD versions of their old vinyl records. "Now the CD replacement cycle has drawn to a close," he says. Also the global decline in CD sales is taking place against the background of a general economic recession that is depressing sales of almost everything. After piracy and the production of fewer CDs comes the changing dynamics of the music industry. Many of the people using file-sharing systems are looking for singles. By contrast the music industry is focussed on shifting albums. This is reflected in sales figures. In the US sales of CD singles generate only a few percent of the total market. In the UK, it's 10% of all revenues. Typically, singles are used to drum up support for an album, being hyped weeks in advance and played heavily on radio and TV long before they go on sale. With nowhere to get these singles and no desire to buy an expensive CD album just for one song, it is no wonder many fans turn to file-sharing systems. Finally, music just isn't as important to young people as it used to be. There is more competition than ever for the cash in a teenager's pocket. "Youths are no longer defining themselves by music in the same way they used to," says Mr Mulligan. New markets springing up Now, he says, brands, clothing and lifestyle are as important as music. Added to this is the rise of the mobile phone, the increasing popularity of computer games and DVDs. In the past the music industry had young fans almost to itself. Now it has to compete for the limited cash in a young person's pocket like never before. The music industry cannot hope to sue everyone using file sharing to find music as that would take hundreds of years and already the US legal system is complaining about the work the RIAA is heaping upon it. There is no doubt that some piracy is going on via peer-to-peer systems but maybe not to the extent the RIAA fears. Perhaps it is about time they sang a different song. |
Page: 1 2 Older entries >>