Re: What we listen for


Steve Latham wrote:
> "Michael Mossey" <michaelmossey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1138466955.171213.310950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [snip]
>
> ...I tend to listen to the way it was recorded in recordings too.
> >> Plus I listen for bow noise, breath, and stuff like that in live
> >> performances (I don't listen FOR them, but maybe I'm inclined to notice
> >> them
> >> more than others). So I think it would vary greatly depending on the
> >> person.
> >
> > The things you mention here might be described as 'intellectual' or
> > 'analytical', if we were to fit them into a category.
>
> Why do so? Do they need to be categorized? :-)
> But I mention these becuase they are concrete things that can be heard by
> others. The Aesthetic values of a work are not something I "listen for" -
> they either just hit me or they don't. So I tend to listen for bow noise
> whether I care for the work or not. Caring for the work only causes me to
> remember it longer, or listen to it repeatedly. Doesn't necessarily have the
> same effect on others.
>
>
> >
> > Just wondering if you have noticed this variable youself. In other
> > words, music is a process and as such can evoke other processes in the
> > world,
>
> No, the music doesn't do that. YOU do that. Music is just sound. What it
> evokes is what I choose to let it evoke (though some of those choices are
> based on learned patterns of response). Give 10 people from different
> cultures who have not heard Ravel's Bolero adn don't tell them even the
> title, and it will evok different images in all of them.

I don't know why you think my sentence implies that the evocation of
music is absolute. You used "music" and "evoke" 3 times as
subject/object pairs, no different than what I typed. I might disagree
somewhat that "what music resonates with" is entirely a choice.



>
> and processes can include the operation of a machine on the one
> > hand, or something quite different such as the movement of an animal.
> > There are any number of other processes.
>
> Sure. Ravel said Bolero is supposed to evoke (or at least it was inspired
> by) the machines in has father's factory. But most people don't think of
> that. Just the title leads them into various directions. I tried it in class
> one time (though some students had heard it, but not many as they were
> non-majors) and got everything from a caravan slowly treading across the
> desert into battle to waves lapping the shore and then a storm blowing up. I
> imagine a lot of the responses were guided by films they had seen with
> similar musical effects during certain scenes (though no one got Bo Derek
> :-)


KUSC (University of Souther California public radio) Jim Svjeda
describes Bolero as "erotic".. you know, the rhythmic movement building
to a sudden noisy shift of tonal center. I think the performance can
bring out such qualities, or impede them. (I imagine you will think
this statement somehow implies that we all agree on the qulaities of
the performance.)

Mike

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What we listen for
    ... ....I tend to listen to the way it was recorded in recordings too. ... So I tend to listen for bow noise ... evokes is what I choose to let it evoke (though some of those choices are ...
    (rec.music.compose)
  • Re: What we listen for
    ... > ...I tend to listen to the way it was recorded in recordings too. ... So I tend to listen for bow noise ... > evokes is what I choose to let it evoke (though some of those choices are ... human feelings or relationships. ...
    (rec.music.compose)