 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: CPW
Date: 2004-05-01 17:36
Look on the bright side....no circular breathing necessary
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2004-05-01 19:14
GREATGREATGREATGREATGREATGREATGREATGREATGREATGREATGREATGREAT
Intriguing,this idea of mikro-listening made possible by extrem enlargement.
On with it!
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-05-01 21:12
Markus Wenninger wrote:
> On with it!
But it's old hat; it was done to contemporary music in the late 60s by the Vanilla Fudge - and live, not with any special electronic equipment. One of the remakes also made the top 30 if I remember right ("You Just Keep Me Hanging On") and is still played today.
It just brings up the old adage ... there's very little new under the sun.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2004-05-01 21:28
Mark Charette wrote:
> But it's old hat; it was done to contemporary music in the late
> 60s by the Vanilla Fudge - and live, not with any special
> electronic equipment. One of the remakes also made the top 30
> if I remember right ("You Just Keep Me Hanging On") and is
> still played today.
Yes!! Vanilla Fudge ... One of my all time favorite rock bands from my area (Long Island, NY). As a teen, in my own rock band, I saw them play live twice. We all quickly realized that they were light years ahead of us.
Their classic album:
http://shopping.yahoo.com/p_vanilla-fudge-hyperspace-_music_1921923502;_ylt=AsuzqDUxGUhBFDhgkLqeJTkbFt0A;_ylu=X3oDMTBuMTdwNmdoBF9zAzk1OTUxMTEzBGx0AzQEc2VjA3Ny?&clink=dmps/vanilla_fudge/ctx=mid:2,pid:1921923502,pdid:2,pos:3,spc:14489115,date:20040501,srch:kw,x:1,test:DFLT
A history of Vanilla Fudge;
http://www.classicbands.com/vanilla.html ...GBK (still a child of the 60's)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2004-05-02 15:38
Anton Bruckner meets Morton Feldman! ![[rotate]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smiley25.gif)
... but seriously, the possibilities are limitless. Imagine:
reverse the process for a one-hour "Ring" cycle,
the Beethoven 9th expanded and contracted back to its original length 100 times (in theory, it should sound the same as the original but in practice?)
mind-boggling!
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Markus Wenninger
Date: 2004-05-02 17:47
Uups, didn´t know this "Vanilla fudge" -combo (though I looove to eat this fudge-sweets-stuff...). Stockhausen anyways is always mumbling about this concept of extrapolating/condensing of a given formula of notes, seems to be in his line of work.
Markus
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Liquorice
Date: 2004-05-02 22:15
David Bedford has already condensed Wagner's Ring cycle into one minute. Seems like a nice idea in some ways, but these things are just gimmicks.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2004-05-04 00:48
Has anyone actually listened to any of this? I decided to put aside my initial prejudice to dismiss it as a gimmick and download the files. I am shocked at the beauty of some sections; in particular, the 3rd movement blew me away.
I recently began to re-study Harmony (I highly recommend the just-released 2nd edition of Robert Gauldin’s Harmonic Practice in Tonal Music). Listening to this piece, I feel as if I am inside the harmonies and can clearly hear the vertical relations of every note to each other. I am amazed at the spectacular dissonances that are brought to the fore in the 3rd movement as the rhythmic elements no longer push them into the background. In fact, the movement seems to be small islands of consonance in a sea of dissonance. The closest experience I can relate to this is first hearing Terry Riley’s In C 35 years ago.
I’ll bet that many folks listening to sections of this unawares would simply dismiss it as empty, new age, ambient music. But it is, in fact, still Beethoven’s 9th, note for note. Is the result invalid as a musical experience just because Vanilla Fudge had the idea before?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-05-04 00:59
Phat Cat wrote:
> Is the result invalid as a musical experience just
> because Vanilla Fudge had the idea before?
The question is more - is it new or derivative?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2004-05-04 01:36
I think the real question is, does the result work as a musical experience for the listener, regardless of the origination of the methodology used to create it. One can certainly make the statement that the artist was not “original” in his concept, but I don’t think this invalidates the work itself.
We don’t question whether Bach was the first to construct a fugue, Mozart a classical concerto or Miles Davis a jazz trumpet solo. We don’t dismiss all twelve tone music because it is derivative in its basic underlying compositional technique. An individual cubist or impressionist painting is no less valid because the artist was not Picasso or Monet.
I went back and re-listened to Vanilla Fudge, since I only vaguely remember them from their original performing days. I see the concept, but I personally find the result much less interesting. Chacun a son gout.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-05-04 01:45
Phat Cat wrote:
> One can certainly make the
> statement that the artist was not “original” in his
> concept, but I don’t think this invalidates the work itself.
No one has claimed that, I believe, only that it's not as an original a technique as one might assume.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2004-05-04 02:19
As I read the article, the implication of originality is in the use of digital sampling/interpolation to extend the original wave forms over a greatly expanded time interval (a factor of 24, in this case). This is quite different from what V.F. did, which was basically to draw the piece out by lenghtening the notes/measures in performance. The two approaches lead to vastly different sonic textures.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2004-05-04 03:17
Phat Cat wrote:
> As I read the article, the implication of originality is in the
> use of digital sampling/interpolation to extend the original
> wave forms over a greatly expanded time interval (a factor of
> 24, in this case).
The scale of stretch is the originality; time expansion/contraction without pitch shifting isn't (as the article tells us). The nice part is that any one of us can exactly reproduce this since it's digital, so we don't have to buy this recording.
> This is quite different from what V.F. did,
> which was basically to draw the piece out by lenghtening the
> notes/measures in performance. The two approaches lead to
> vastly different sonic textures.
Yes, that's true; Vanilla had to do it live in concert; Inge doesn't.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2004-05-04 03:41
I much prefer the original work, call me old fashioned.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2004-05-04 10:32
>The two approaches lead to vastly different sonic textures.
This is really the point
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
![[grin]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie5.gif)
