Why not look to the group of composers who worshiped the music of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven for your answer?Sometimes I wonder if Bach, Mozart, Beethoven had been the generation right after Brahms, Debussy, and Mahler, what would they have done?
Well, they are not the trinity themselves, so they will react differentlyWhy not look to the group of composers who worshiped the music of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven for your answer?
The trinity could only exist in their own time. If they came after they would not be the same people because the circumstances that contributed to them becoming who they were would not occur.Well, they are not the trinity themselves, so they will react differently![]()
Is this the old "historically necessary and inevitable" theory of artistic evolution rearing its head, or just something that looks suspiciously like it?The trinity could only exist in their own time. If they came after they would not be the same people because the circumstances that contributed to them becoming who they were would not occur.
If they did turn out to be composers I don't think they would do anything too different from what you see composers doing today. Even with brilliant composers the music still sounds of its time - they did not invent their styles out of nothing. The music is built on whatever came before it.
I didn't say anything about what is necessary or inevitable in music - simply pointing out that if you look at Bach, Beethoven or Mozart's (or any other famous composers music) it sounds of its time. Some composers add more new elements than others, but it is pretty easy to detect the influences.Is this the old "historically necessary and inevitable" theory of artistic evolution rearing its head, or just something that looks suspiciously like it?
No! With this many monkeys, sitting in front of that many typewriters (computer music programs), and creating random music data, I'm sure that one of them will come up with a new masterpiece in a thousand years or so.Have we already exhaustively explored all the possibilities of tonality?...before moving into atonality.
Please discuss![]()
La Monte Young hasn't ascended a higher plane, he just thinks he has because he believes in all the guru ********. As far as the higher EDOs go, people are writing in them and no one seems to be that interested... Also, if you look into the history of those propositions it is to reenable tonality not to stretch atonality. It is a conservative wet dream.The less notes, the more definite the tonality. Therefore, if "less is more," we can't "exhaust" the possibilities of an ever-shrinking system. We are headed towards "one note" as we get nearer to ultimate tonality. La Mont Young is already there.
Atonality, on the other hand, has an ever-increasing index of possibilities, if we divide the octave further than 12 notes. We can have 19-tone, 31-tone, or 56-tone music. Just think of the possibilities!
Ah, so your true colors emerge. Sic 'im, Morimur!La Monte Young hasn't ascended a higher plane, he just thinks he has because he believes in all the guru ********. As far as the higher EDOs go, people are writing in them and no one seems to be that interested... Also, if you look into the history of those propositions it is to reenable tonality not to stretch atonality. It is a conservative wet dream.
I'll bite: what do you think my true colours are?Ah, so your true colors emerge. Sic 'im, Morimur!
Oh, I don't want to accuse you of any biases. That might get me reported. Morimur posted the Lamont Young and Pandit Pran Nath composer threads, so why don't you ask him about that guru ********.I'll bite: what do you think my true colours are?