Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
>>Repeated phrases, with rising and falling intensity, have been a part of >>music for a long, long time I think. Its in music from all over the >world, >>in all different cultures. If anything, a bit less in European Classical >>music, but its certainly present there too. > >Amazing, isnt it: As if Europe had "escaped" form the "barbarian" >repetitive music and then got lost in intelectual ateism until in the >60ies >the "stupidity" in the music broke through again and cures the stiffness - >a rather radical view, easy to see the oposit if one wants. Bach's chorales and fugues are based on variations of a melody, ie. permuting a melody by shitfing pitch, time scale, direction of flow, etc, and then playing the permuted melodies at the same time as the original one, creating endless varieties of entertwining melodic interactions -- not to mention some improvisation thrown in. This isn't pure repetition, but isn't purely linear either. >>I may even hazzard that this sort of repetition is an important part of >>making something "musical." I know I often find myself losing interest in >>music that keeps going on to something new with out ever repeating >>anything, while music that does repeat on various levels keeps me >involved. Yes, I think listener involvement is a very important aspect to music. When there is a "pattern" underlying a musical composition, and the listener is aware of that pattern, it brings a new dimension to the music - certainly on the intellectual level -- but probably on the emotional level, as well. Reich's Phase music (violin, piano) is interesting to me intellectually, based purely on the concept (I was excited about this music, upon hearing ABOUT it, before I actually even HEARD it) -- but then upon listening to it, I was also impacted on a more emotional level. When I first experienced a live performance of an (North Indian Classical) raga, I was stunned by the complexity of the piece and the musicianship of the performers. But even more importantly, I was blown away by how the audience was "in tune" to what was going on. For example, when one performer would "go-off" on an incrediblly complex "solo", he would (climactically) hit the sum, (and go back into the basic theme) -- and the audience was ready for it! To me, it was comparable to John McLaughlin stopping in the middle of a raging solo, and the audience knowing, expecting that was going to happen. I didn't see the pattern, so to me it seemed as if there was some sort of "magical" communication going on between the performer and the audience. --> But the audience was merely aware of the underlying pattern of the music. Apparently, Bach never "finished" his more complex fugues, ie. he never carried out the piece to its logical completeness. He left that open for the listener to do. If one was aware of the underlying pattern of the music, he could finish the piece himself. I guess the point I am trying to make with all this is that there is a dimension to a musical performance which involves how a piece is meaningful to the listener. Music can be meaningful in so many ways. To me, looping music (in particular) can be meaningful on an emotional level (perhaps, repetition has something to do with this, like a mantra) and on an intellectual level (perhaps, due to the complexity which results by combining simple, fundamental parts). - chris --------------------------------------- Chris Chovit cho@gomez.jpl.nasa.gov ---------------------------------------