Nobody appreciates small time electronic music makers/electronic musician for most is a lonely life
-
- KVRian
- 880 posts since 26 Oct, 2011
Gotta admit that I hate utilitarian philosophy. Even when applied to music - it just is no good. No way to measure the amount of joy from audience and more importantly, no way to measure what would have been lost without a specific artist for example.
Utilitarianism in all forms makes assumptions that, in our event horizon, are impossible to measure and thus understand. Whenever someone considers this specific philosophy as something to be taken seriously, thou should be careful for there are dodgy elephants trying to make their way into the room!
Utilitarianism in all forms makes assumptions that, in our event horizon, are impossible to measure and thus understand. Whenever someone considers this specific philosophy as something to be taken seriously, thou should be careful for there are dodgy elephants trying to make their way into the room!
-
- KVRist
- 44 posts since 19 Sep, 2014
Now that's what I'm talkin' about, Functional.
-
- KVRian
- 880 posts since 26 Oct, 2011
Yeah I've often come by some arrogant capitalists who never really read any Popper and there they are telling me how the state-assisted any kind of musical project (Opera etc.) should be dismantled because they provide joy only for selected people.
Then again, it soon turns out that there are also other state funded/assisted stuff that they themselves benefit from but not that much the rest. And that's the part where they temporarily ditch this philosophy because it can be used against them. Ad hoc reasoning, gotta love it. That special blend of philosophy which can be described as a bricolage.
Really the sad part about this is that in one way or another, pretty much all of us fall victim to such behavior.
Then again, it soon turns out that there are also other state funded/assisted stuff that they themselves benefit from but not that much the rest. And that's the part where they temporarily ditch this philosophy because it can be used against them. Ad hoc reasoning, gotta love it. That special blend of philosophy which can be described as a bricolage.
Really the sad part about this is that in one way or another, pretty much all of us fall victim to such behavior.
-
- KVRAF
- 2938 posts since 18 Jul, 2005
Not taking a position, but I'm fairly sure fmr means utilitarian in the non-philosophical sense. I.e. music made for dancing to, shaped by and framed within the limitations of that utility (generally ultra-gridded 4/4 in the case of EDM).
-
- KVRian
- 880 posts since 26 Oct, 2011
Maybe, I just wanted to bitch about utilitarianism. Anyway music to serve a purpose is pretty dodgy as well. Sure such exists, can be interesting etc. but mostly is pretty boring should no creativity be involved eg. mainstage edm.robenestobenz wrote:Not taking a position, but I'm fairly sure fmr means utilitarian in the non-philosophical sense. I.e. music made for dancing to, shaped by and framed within the limitations of that utility (generally ultra-gridded 4/4 in the case of EDM).
Also I don't like the way term EDM is used, because there's a lot of EDM fads which have little of the obnoxious habits that mainstage EDM has which usually is referred at when term "edm@ is used as a slur.
-
- KVRist
- 44 posts since 19 Sep, 2014
Whatever fmr meant by "utilitarian," he implied that dance music isn't art simply because it's made for you to dance to. Anyone who's ever experienced an EDM festival knows this is far from the truthrobenestobenz wrote:Not taking a position, but I'm fairly sure fmr means utilitarian in the non-philosophical sense. I.e. music made for dancing to, shaped by and framed within the limitations of that utility (generally ultra-gridded 4/4 in the case of EDM).
The art part comes into play when we experience the piece of music. It's up to the listener to make value judgments based on the level of emotions and thoughts the piece evokes. Not fmr nor his fancy word.
Ascribing utilitarian value to music is the death of music. It's a prejudicial viewpoint which limits the way we experience music. It has no significant purpose in a discussion about music. When fmr uses the word to make distinctions about what music is art and what music is not art, he sounds like an accountant, not someone who truly appreciates music.
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
I would not assert art qua art is the only art. That seems to be fmr's POV but I would state it differently.AudioPhile2 wrote:What are you even talking about? I slapped together a song that can stand on it's own within a few hours just last night - whether it's good or not is up for discussion, but that's not the point we're making here.fmr wrote: Your example brings up many of the concept problems that pretty much f**ck these things:
1. First - assembling a bunch of loops in Ableton is NOT electronic music. Actually, it will likely ending not being anything worthing AT ALL.
As for your definition of art, again: what are you even talking about?
So, video games have been recognized as an art form. They are meant to be played and the player is welcome to explore their options within the bounds of the game, but regardless the game is meant for enjoyment and to be played. That is it's job, so by your logical is is utilitarian and therefore no longer an art form?
"I'm pretty certain any piece of media cannot only play a role, but be art at the same time."
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who took issue with his narrow-minded definition of art.
It involves the intent, if the intent is to provide a noise to dance to, that is other than a straight musical end in mind. The strictures of it follow this intent, and the result tends to be it something that stands for music hardly at all. It can go on and on and do next-to-nothing musically and the 'audience' is not worried.
Maybe the sentence itself isn't fully traveling in english: let's say 'When a piece of media is made only to serve another role than art, we shouldn't say 'here's an artwork'.
If your graphics are directly suited to a bubblegum wrapper, the content and form of that follow that restriction. It isn't like 'art' in a certain sense. But we can claim anything as art, here after the fact; as I said before that is 'framing'. I don't know how you're going to frame some of dance music as musical art for me. I don't need to control someone else's definition though.
I don't think 'narrow-minded' is precise, actually. I think this suggests a little a fallacy of open-mindedness, it can become like a sieve.
- KVRAF
- 11093 posts since 16 Mar, 2003 from Porto - Portugal
Never mind, let the kids play It's recess time in this threadrobenestobenz wrote:Not taking a position, but I'm fairly sure fmr means utilitarian in the non-philosophical sense. I.e. music made for dancing to, shaped by and framed within the limitations of that utility (generally ultra-gridded 4/4 in the case of EDM).
Fernando (FMR)
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
That's actually a pretty empty statement. What about it is art?AudioPhile2 wrote:Whatever fmr meant by "utilitarian," he implied that dance music isn't art simply because it's made for you to dance to. Anyone who's ever experienced an EDM festival knows this is far from the truthrobenestobenz wrote:Not taking a position, but I'm fairly sure fmr means utilitarian in the non-philosophical sense. I.e. music made for dancing to, shaped by and framed within the limitations of that utility (generally ultra-gridded 4/4 in the case of EDM).
AudioPhile2 wrote: The art part comes into play when we experience the piece of music. It's up to the listener to make value judgments based on the level of emotions and thoughts the piece evokes.
Great, but what if I come away with 'well this sure isn't art'? the art part didn't come into play. I don't pay close attention to EDM, but the things KVR people want in a sample pack to sound like famous EDM exponent x I know from, and product of x is largely not filled with art [ie., music], IME. They evidence a lack of care as to music qua music.
You're not going to define it for me by 'it's up to the listener's emotions'.
This is some bullshit. If it's music to you I can kill it as music with one fell swoop? So Fernando 'ascribed utilitarian value' to something that is largely utilitarian in order to dismiss it and something died. Sounds like your position isn't very secure then. It doesn't limit how 'we experience music' unless you let it. And that's you, there is no 'we'.AudioPhile2 wrote: Ascribing utilitarian value to music is the death of music. It's a prejudicial viewpoint which limits the way we experience music.
You're not talking about music, you're talking about words, though.AudioPhile2 wrote:It has no significant purpose in a discussion about music.
- KVRAF
- 11093 posts since 16 Mar, 2003 from Porto - Portugal
Actually, nojancivil wrote: I would not assert art qua art is the only art. That seems to be fmr's POV but I would state it differently.
You can't, but there some aesthetic, creative and artistic goals that have to be reached for something to be considered art. These standards tend to change with cultural and civilizational background evolution, and they are not the same anywhere. But usually, time is a good judge on that. Something that survives the aging is something that deserves to be considered with some more attention.jancivil wrote:But we can claim anything as art, here after the fact; as I said before that is 'framing'. I don't know how you're going to frame some of dance music as musical art for me. I don't need to control someone else's definition though.
There was always "utilitarian" music (music that was created for extra musical purposes, like dance, or protest). Sometimes, this music has an intrinsic artistic value, therefore it can be considered art (like "Le Sacre du Printemps" for example, which was created for a ballet, and survived as pure music).
Other times it hasn't, therefore, it is just "a product". Most EDM is basically "a product". And it certainly is not more electronic music than almost anything else done nowadays.
Fernando (FMR)
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
Ok, that's all quite clear now.
I would however say that ballet and music are entwined in intent per se so that 'dance music' is doing something quite different than 'disco' or what-have-you.
And I'm sure that such a composer of Le Sacre intended the music to work beyond that programme.
I would however say that ballet and music are entwined in intent per se so that 'dance music' is doing something quite different than 'disco' or what-have-you.
And I'm sure that such a composer of Le Sacre intended the music to work beyond that programme.
-
- KVRist
- 44 posts since 19 Sep, 2014
EDM is an arrangement of symbols that evokes, at least, emotions. What about it isn't art?jancivil wrote:That's actually a pretty empty statement. What about it is art?AudioPhile2 wrote:Whatever fmr meant by "utilitarian," he implied that dance music isn't art simply because it's made for you to dance to. Anyone who's ever experienced an EDM festival knows this is far from the truthrobenestobenz wrote:Not taking a position, but I'm fairly sure fmr means utilitarian in the non-philosophical sense. I.e. music made for dancing to, shaped by and framed within the limitations of that utility (generally ultra-gridded 4/4 in the case of EDM).
What about your statement isn't vacuous?
AudioPhile2 wrote: The art part comes into play when we experience the piece of music. It's up to the listener to make value judgments based on the level of emotions and thoughts the piece evokes.
I mentioned the listener's emotional response as one important aspect of music criticism. You're the one doling out a hard line definition of art which excludes EDM. (By the way, it's wonderful to hear you don't follow the genre closely in the same sentence in which you discredit it).jancivil wrote: Great, but what if I come away with 'well this sure isn't art'? the art part didn't come into play. I don't pay close attention to EDM, but the things KVR people want in a sample pack to sound like famous EDM exponent x I know from, and product of x is largely not filled with art [ie., music], IME. They evidence a lack of care as to music qua music.
You're not going to define it for me by 'it's up to the listener's emotions'.
"Music qua music." Right. Look if people are going to have to Google the words you use, there's probably a better way -- mutatis mutandis -- of phrasing whatever pedantic blather you're trying to get across.
AudioPhile2 wrote: Ascribing utilitarian value to music is the death of music. It's a prejudicial viewpoint which limits the way we experience music.
Now I find you relying on a vulgarism to prop up a petty semantic point. Fine, if you insist.jancivil wrote:This is some bullshit. If it's music to you I can kill it as music with one fell swoop? So Fernando 'ascribed utilitarian value' to something that is largely utilitarian in order to dismiss it and something died. Sounds like your position isn't very secure then. It doesn't limit how 'we experience music' unless you let it. And that's you, there is no 'we'.
Since you're incapable of getting past the hyperbole of the expression, "the death of something," I'll put it into less drastic terms. Your way of appreciating music bores me. Your claim that EDM is not art because it's intended to make people dance bores me. Your use of Latin is boring me. Not just that -- now I'll have to be hyperbolic -- you're boring me to death.
And believe me, I'm not the only one.
AudioPhile2 wrote:It has no significant purpose in a discussion about music.
Whatever you say, pal.jancivil wrote:You're not talking about music, you're talking about words, though.
-
- KVRist
- 44 posts since 19 Sep, 2014
AudioPhile2 wrote:EDM is an arrangement of symbols that evokes, at least, emotions. What about it isn't art?jancivil wrote:That's actually a pretty empty statement. What about it is art?AudioPhile2 wrote:Whatever fmr meant by "utilitarian," he implied that dance music isn't art simply because it's made for you to dance to. Anyone who's ever experienced an EDM festival knows this is far from the truthrobenestobenz wrote:Not taking a position, but I'm fairly sure fmr means utilitarian in the non-philosophical sense. I.e. music made for dancing to, shaped by and framed within the limitations of that utility (generally ultra-gridded 4/4 in the case of EDM).
What about your statement isn't vacuous?
AudioPhile2 wrote: The art part comes into play when we experience the piece of music. It's up to the listener to make value judgments based on the level of emotions and thoughts the piece evokes.I mentioned the listener's emotional response as one important aspect of music criticism. You're the one doling out a hard line definition of art which excludes EDM. (By the way, it's wonderful to hear you admit that you don't follow the genre closely in the same sentence in which you discredit it).jancivil wrote: Great, but what if I come away with 'well this sure isn't art'? the art part didn't come into play. I don't pay close attention to EDM, but the things KVR people want in a sample pack to sound like famous EDM exponent x I know from, and product of x is largely not filled with art [ie., music], IME. They evidence a lack of care as to music qua music.
You're not going to define it for me by 'it's up to the listener's emotions'.
"Music qua music." Right. Look if people are going to have to Google the words you use, there's probably a better way -- mutatis mutandis -- of phrasing whatever pedantic blather you're trying to get across.
AudioPhile2 wrote: Ascribing utilitarian value to music is the death of music. It's a prejudicial viewpoint which limits the way we experience music.Now I find you relying on a vulgarism to prop up a petty semantic point. Fine, if you insist.jancivil wrote:This is some bullshit. If it's music to you I can kill it as music with one fell swoop? So Fernando 'ascribed utilitarian value' to something that is largely utilitarian in order to dismiss it and something died. Sounds like your position isn't very secure then. It doesn't limit how 'we experience music' unless you let it. And that's you, there is no 'we'.
Since you're incapable of getting past the hyperbole of the expression, "the death of something," I'll put it into less drastic terms. Your way of appreciating music bores me. Your claim that EDM is not art because it's intended to make people dance bores me. Your use of Latin is boring me. Not just that -- now I'll have to be hyperbolic -- you're boring me to death.
And believe me, I'm not the only one.
AudioPhile2 wrote:It has no significant purpose in a discussion about music.Whatever you say, pal.jancivil wrote:You're not talking about music, you're talking about words, though.
-
- KVRAF
- 2290 posts since 18 Oct, 2010 from Japan
This actually makes sense, although when applied to the mainstream EDM scene, it's sort of a cynical view on it all - justifiably of course.jancivil wrote:
Maybe the sentence itself isn't fully traveling in english: let's say 'When a piece of media is made only to serve another role than art, we shouldn't say 'here's an artwork'.
.
Per fmr;
At this point I feel like your scrutinizing music under some sort of academic levels. Just because it doesn't have X, or it doesn't have Y it is no longer considered art? My question is; who are you to say it isn't art?
You're welcome to have your own dictionary to define your own rules, but when you change the meaning of wanker to a greeting and you start going around calling people wankers, you may find your dictionary to be causing people to get rather annoyed with you.
In contrast to what I mentioned in quoting janicivil, while it's a cynical view, indeed, on the mainstream EDM scene (such as Garrix, Deadmau5, Avicii) and I whole heartedly would not doubt for a second their isn't a glimmer of heart put into their music, they just churn it out to make a buck and get the girls -and guys (we're not sexist here) to scream over them, but, that doesn't mean we have the right to say it, and all forms of it that crop up in the mainstream EDM scene, are not valid forms of art. Perhaps the art of it comes down to how generic it can sound while still churning the cash/bum machine.
Last edited by ntom on Tue Sep 23, 2014 2:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 2290 posts since 18 Oct, 2010 from Japan
whoops, double post.