A frame could be art like 4'33 could be art. But a frame is no painting just like silence is not music.
Ah but an empty frame is a painting...it's a painting of nothing and nothing is something it's nothing.
I still beleive it can be anything the artist wants to say it is, whether or not you as the viewer and/or listener can choose to disagree but you can't tell me what my beliefs as an artist are...there are no boundries.
King - I agree to disagree about the tree. Your correct the falling tree will make vibrations in the air (which is what sound is) the fact that a human didn't actually hear those sounds doesn't mean they don't or didn't exist. It's just no one heard them. Does that mean anything not witnessed by a human didn't really happen?
You guys are way over my head in these philisophical discussions. Personally I think it's all a bunch of crap but if someone wants to call a rock art or silence music go for it.
"It's all about stickin it to the man!"
It's a long way to the top if you want to rock n roll!
this all reminds me of my art history class back in college,
the prof put a stool (the 4 legged kind) up on a table and set an apple on it and asked us all "is this art?"
#4491....
King - I agree to disagree about the tree. Your correct the falling tree will make vibrations in the air (which is what sound is) the fact that a human didn't actually hear those sounds doesn't mean they don't or didn't exist. It's just no one heard them. Does that mean anything not witnessed by a human didn't really happen?
No, the vibrations happen. But they aren't sound by themselves. I don't require a human listener. But "sound" is an auditory event, that means it exists only when a brain interprets vibrations as sound. It happens in the interaction between a hearing agent and an environment.
However, Cage would not be a musician and nothing he did or didn't do would have any influence on any music present for the simple reason he had nothing to do with the tree falling
Is sampling music?
How is what Cage does different from sampling?
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
1) Possibly.
2) Samples produce sound. Cage doesn't.
And don't bother to start about samples with nothing but silence.
This is very fundamental thing. I don't care who says what why, what defines music is a very subjective thing. I am not going to accept a lack of sound as music just like an empty page isn't literature and an empty frame isn't a painting. You would need atleast one sound, word or drop of paint for that. Art maybe, but not music, literature or a painting.
1) Possibly.
2) Samples produce sound. Cage doesn't.
And don't bother to start about samples with nothing but silence.
This is very fundamental thing. I don't care who says what why, what defines music is a very subjective thing. I am not going to accept a lack of sound as music just like an empty page isn't literature and an empty frame isn't a painting. You would need atleast one sound, word or drop of paint for that. Art maybe, but not music, literature or a painting.
I've never heard a silent auditorium. Even with no people in it you still hear sound. So I really part with you at the start that what's involved here is 'silence.' What's inolved is ambient noise.
Do you disagree with Noteboat's defintion of music?
If you do, how do you not see what Cage did as music.
Note that Cage doesn't claim to be the artist playing the piece. He claimed to be the composer and the conductor. What he wants the audience to hear is, in effect, a real time sample of themselves and their surroundings. He lets them be the performers. It's entirely an improvisational piece, no doubt, but it has form and it is an arrangement of sound in time.
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
1) Possibly.
2) Samples produce sound. Cage doesn't.
And don't bother to start about samples with nothing but silence.
This is very fundamental thing. I don't care who says what why, what defines music is a very subjective thing. I am not going to accept a lack of sound as music just like an empty page isn't literature and an empty frame isn't a painting. You would need atleast one sound, word or drop of paint for that. Art maybe, but not music, literature or a painting.
I've never heard a silent auditorium. Even with no people in it you still hear sound. So I really part with you at the start that what's involved here is 'silence.' What's inolved is ambient noise.
Do you disagree with Noteboat's defintion of music?
If you do, how do you not see what Cage did as music.
Note that Cage doesn't claim to be the artist playing the piece. He claimed to be the composer and the conductor. What he wants the audience to hear is, in effect, a real time sample of themselves and their surroundings. He lets them be the performers. It's entirely an improvisational piece, no doubt, but it has form and it is an arrangement of sound in time.
What confuses me is that everything you claim you hold music to be applies to the piece in question. But as soon as we turn it from what you claim music to be to the piece you deny that the piece is music.
You agree that ambient noise is music -- except when Cage uses that ambient noise as the music and asks you to listen to it. I just don't understand that move. How can it be music except when it's used as music?
I suppose at this point we're just talking past each other but I really don't understand your view.
You don't think music has to be intentional.
You don't think it has to be man-made.
You don't think it has to have an audience even.
You agree it has to be given an arrangement in time.
You agree that it doesn't require notes.
You agree that ambient noise is musical.
So someone comes along and says "listen to the music of the ambient noise from this moment until 273 seconds from now." And you say "that's no music."
I don't get it. I'm sorry if I'm bein gdifficult or you think I'm being argumentative, it's not my intention. I just am honestly confused about why what he does isn't music but you'll admit that a robot randomly playing sounds you can't hear is . . .
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
it is an arrangement of sound in time.
An arrangement of silence in time.
A void.
A fruitless husk.
A frame.
"Everybody got to elevate from the norm."
it is an arrangement of sound in time.
An arrangement of silence in time.
A void.
A fruitless husk.
A frame.
Have you ever heard a silent auditorium filled with people?
I haven't.
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
From Noteboats definition you can logically reason 4'33 is music. I don't think 4'33 is music. So I don't agree with his definition.
Even with no people in it you still hear sound. So I really part with you at the start that what's involved here is 'silence.'
No, it is about the silence, if it weren't then I could 'cover' it all I'd want: the ambient noise (according to you the actual music) is different every single time so it would be a completely different song. Or am in trouble every single time I record a song that happens to be 4'33?
I'm willing to go so far as to accept that in some ways there was music during the performance of 4'33. However, 4'33 isn't music nor a musical performance itself. It was a guy doing nothing while the audience listened to the ever present ambient noise, which can be considered music. Cage lack of performance merely increased people's attention of the uninentional and unpreventable performance of noise by others. I do not find it acceptable that you can divide a timeframe in three parts and call it a song just based on that unless the actual silence is the music, in which case it stops being music.
Or short and simple: just because Cage was present doesn't mean he performed anything.
Where's Taso? i figured a true Sienfeld fan would really appreciate this.
#4491....
Twisted,
Kramer has been banned from all discussions on this subject.
King - What do you call sub-sonic sound then?
"It's all about stickin it to the man!"
It's a long way to the top if you want to rock n roll!
From Noteboats definition you can logically reason 4'33 is music. I don't think 4'33 is music. So I don't agree with his definition.
I realize this is a difficult request, but ...
could you provide a definition that you'd agree with that allows for sampling to be music, allows a robot playing sounds you can't hear to be music, but doesn't allow for 4'33" to be music?
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
it is an arrangement of sound in time.
An arrangement of silence in time.
A void.
A fruitless husk.
A frame.
Have you ever heard a silent auditorium filled with people?
I haven't.
Where does it specify that 4'33 be presented only in auditoriums filled with people?
And even if it did, that would involve random ambient sound, not necessarily music. I do not accept that all sound is music.
I do, however, accept that music may contain silences, under Noteboat's definition.
"Everybody got to elevate from the norm."
Where does it specify that 4'33 be presented only in auditoriums filled with people?
An interesting point, and I'm not sure that it does anywhere specify that.
However, Cage very much thought it was a piece to be performed in front of an audience, and he wrote frequently about the role of the audience in the piece. I think it's something he took for granted.
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- HST
