Why composers give names for their pieces? [Archive]

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 10:08 AM

I would hasten to presume that composers give names to their pieces for purposes of identification, whereby one can say "Have you heard Mozart's Symphony no 9"?

If composers didn't do this the would have to say "Have you heard a symphony by Mozart?"

Your question is analogous to asking why parents label their children with words used to identify one person from another, in other words why parents name their kids.

If parents didn't do this, then the above question would be asked "Have you heard a symphony?" (With no easy way of determining which symphony is being referred to, or by which artist).

Further to the analogy, why do we label different styles of music, such as "Symphonies" or "Operas" and so forth?

If people didn't do so, then we would have to ask "Have you heard some music?", which further complicates the task of identifying which music, by which author.

And continuing on, at the risk of sounding ridiculous, why do we differentiate between our senses, such as "hearing" and "feeling", and so forth?

If we did not, the question being asked in this hypothetical scenario would become "Have you sensed music?"

Furthermore, why do we label ourselves as "I" and others as "you" and a collective as "we"?

If we did not, then how would we address another person to ask a question in the first place. If there were no distinction between ourselves and others, the need to ask a question would become irrelevant. We would merely think to ourselves "Have sensed music?"

And to carry on this farce to its penultimate extreme, why do we differentiate between "have" and "don't have"? Is there a reason why we label states of being in such a way?

If we did not act in such a way, then we would perhaps ponder the question "sensed music?".

Almost at the extreme of this tangent, why do we label some things differently, like why do we call "music" music, or "doors" doors? Is there a reason that we do this?

I guess if we didn't, then everything we perceive would be simply a "thing", so we would ponder to ourselves "Sensed thing?"

But even the act of sensing itself, how come we make a differentiation between sensing and not sensing? Why do we make this distinction?

My take on this is that if we didn't, then we would have no way of identifying our present state of being, and would merely be impassive to the universe around us. We would think "thing" whenever anything of interest crossed our vacant minds.

And now, at the extreme of this seemingly irrelevant answer to your question, why would our minds label something as a "thing" or a "nothing"? Why make a distinction? What possible use could it serve?

Perhaps because, without this ability, our reaction and interaction with the universe would be guided by this thought: " ".

Composing_automat

01-03-2008, 11:08 AM

Or

because music doesn't have semanctics or meaning, doesn't represent anything, composers try to give some pseudomeaning to their pieces ...

JCL

01-03-2008, 12:20 PM

Quite often, a composer's work is "named" by someone else, and the name sticks - for one reason or another. The 'namer" is just as often forgotten, so naming pieces that are not your own is apparently not the fast track to fame.

Thomas Regin

01-03-2008, 12:33 PM

Perhaps because, without this ability, our reaction and interaction with the universe would be guided by this thought: " ".

ROFL! Pure genius! Douglas Adams himself couldn't have explained this better! ;-)

/Tom

Composing_automat

01-03-2008, 12:45 PM

Why not only
piece 1, piece 2, piece 3 ...

Or
opus 1, opus 2 ....

Why using words having meaning when the pieces can't have any?

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 12:46 PM

Or

because music doesn't have semanctics or meaning, doesn't represent anything, composers try to give some pseudomeaning to their pieces ...

Or

because a name serves to identify the music as a unique entity
in the same way a childs name identifies the child as a unique entity

In the same way every word and symbol in this sentence is different which allows a semblance of meaning to coagulate.

However, since a system based on naming individual musical compositions seems inferior to you, what more efficient and useful alternative do you propose?

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 12:52 PM

Why not only
piece 1, piece 2, piece 3 ...

Or
opus 1, opus 2 ....

Why using words having meaning when the pieces can't have any?

Because I want to.

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 12:56 PM

Composing Automaton,

What is your motivation for this discussion?

Composing_automat

01-03-2008, 12:56 PM

Because I want to.

Yes, but why? To bluff the audience and critics?

XGener8or

01-03-2008, 02:15 PM

Why not only
piece 1, piece 2, piece 3 ...

Or
opus 1, opus 2 ....

Why using words having meaning when the pieces can't have any?

That would show a complete lack of imagination :)

I always have stories in my mind for the music, and give proper names to the music according to what is "happening in the story" even if it is not a real story, just in my mind.

Much nicer to have a "The March of the Undead Warriors" than "Piece4"

persentio

01-03-2008, 02:48 PM

Or

because music doesn't have semanctics or meaning, doesn't represent anything, composers try to give some pseudomeaning to their pieces ...
Reply With Quote

So very very untrue for composers like me.

If you take a listen to Australis (http://www.australiscanticum.com), listen to some orchestrated pieces like "The little clockmaker" and "Turning Point". They are not meaningless pieces. They have been so painstakingly orchestrated as well as had carefully chosen instrument sounds to go with the piece to tell a story; to depict an image. The titles represent a little snapshot of that piece.

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 03:10 PM

No, tell the truth, the titles are there merely to create a hypnotic suggestion in the mind of the listener, so that when they hear the music the suggestion will take root and influence any visual imagery and cause hallucinations.

You fucking evil bastards, how dare you name music! How dare you deceive and twist the minds of the poor, downtrodden, naive listener by GIVING A SONG A NAME!

How very dare you.

Give me a break!

persentio

01-03-2008, 03:51 PM

Why not only
piece 1, piece 2, piece 3 ...

Or
opus 1, opus 2 ....

Why using words having meaning when the pieces can't have any?

Can't have any? That simply means you aren't putting any effort or imagination or creativity or even love into your pieces then. You may be living ON music but you are not LIVING, BREATHING (http://www.sympheramusic.com) music.

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 04:02 PM

Dude, I should have added a sarcasm warning to my post. I am agreeing with everything you said, and expressing my frustration at simply not being able to understand for the life of me why Composing Automat is being critical of us.

I basically feel like he is trying to tell us that we ARE evil twisted freaks who get our kicks out of deceiving people, so in a moment of blind wrath I posted the perspective I feel he is trying to force upon us.

If this has upset you I am sorry, but I don't know how to approach his perspective. It just seems ridiculous to think that someone is questioning why we name songs!

Doesn't it?

nickysnd

01-03-2008, 04:05 PM

Composing Automaton,

What is your motivation for this discussion?

Uhmm... perhaps - trashing music, as usual ?

persentio

01-03-2008, 04:14 PM

Dude, I should have added a sarcasm warning to my post. I am agreeing with everything you said, and expressing my frustration at simply not being able to understand for the life of me why Composing Automat is being critical of us.

I am reaaaaallly very very sorry about that MrAlex. I am quite bad at picking out sarcasm and everything from text... Sincere and heartfelt apologies from me to you.

but I don't know how to approach his perspective. It just seems ridiculous to think that someone is questioning why we name songs!

Doesn't it?

And yes from my previous post which I have already edited, I find it absolutely ridiculous.

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 04:14 PM

Uhmm... perhaps - trashing music, as usual ?

Yes, perhaps, but I just gotta hear him have the self awareness and decency to be able to say it for himself. I'm all for judging a person based on observed actions but I do enjoy reading a persons self assessment.

I don't know why, perhaps I am a masochist :)

In truth I simply try my hardest to understand perspectives regardless of how offensive to my "common sense".

If this carrying on of these distasteful discussions is annoying you then I am sorry, don't worry if I don't get some sense out of him soon I'll just ignore him.

MrAlex

01-03-2008, 04:21 PM

I am reaaaaallly very very sorry about that MrAlex. I am quite bad at picking out sarcasm and everything from text... Sincere and heartfelt apologies from me to you.

It is really alright Persentio, it was good to see the passion with which you stand by your views.

I'd hate to see popular music releases go something like this:
Computer makes music. Automatically generated filename from random seed = "Buttock Cleavage"
Critic reviews rate music = Acceptable.
Public acceptability rating = 85%

Time to next release: 35 seconds...

persentio

01-03-2008, 04:23 PM

It doesn't really matter though. Just let him carry on naming his pieces the way he wants to. Seriously there's nothing wrong with the naming issue on second thought. However his 'bluffing of the audience' and stuff is really... Ugh.

Oh second thought I shouldnt have cleared out my flaming post. SHould have redirected the line of fire to automat. You still happen to have the notification email on what I posted before?

Thomas Regin

01-03-2008, 04:37 PM

I think this is one of the funniest discussions ever on SOL forums! :D

A Danish composer, Ib Nørholm, once developed some kind of serialism system for entering notes in a coordinate system in a very mathematical way. This resulted in some very strange pieces that never really pleased the general crowd, although music professors and teachers still use many of his pieces as examples when teaching others (including me when I was a student).

The problem with music is that you cannot define art. The reason why we name our pieces is obvious, but from a completely eccentric and artistic point of view I realize that names can be used to fool the listener although I doubt that it's a big problem in today's music industry (or art world). I do understand the need to be controversial - and it's important that we still have composers that consider themselves artists and who dare to push the boundaries.

Funny thing is that back in the "old days" composers rarely named their own pieces. They were merely a number in an opus. Fans of the music would later come up with popular names such as the "Moonlight Sonata" or Chopin's "Revolutionary Etude" and many more.

I prefer names to nothing though. MrAlex said it all in his long "existentialism" post earlier - names are good for telling something from something else.

But I do find this discussion very funny anyway. :D

/Tom

nspaas

01-03-2008, 09:11 PM

Answer: Score/soundtrack albums :D

nikolas

01-03-2008, 11:45 PM

Yet another bullshit discussion initiated by the usual duo (while the second twin is absent atm, I'm sure he'll appear never the less later on!)

They are simply trying to prove that machines can write as "good" music as any human being.

In the end, Automat and synesthesia, it's about liking or not liking the music. If you have audience that like the music, what the hell do you bother from your peers? Do a simple test guys: Take a third account by a normal name and post a track. See the reactions. Here or in other forums. Don't advertise that it was made in 5 secs, by a program. See how people react to the music. The ultimate test...

Composing_automat

01-04-2008, 12:45 AM

Never heard about these? You can look at the Table of contents of the books! Seems familiar? Read any books last year?

Philosophy of music:

http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/0198250487/103-3155606-6540605?SubscriptionId=0AM07842GGE1QVDN6KR2

Psychology of music:

http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/0122135652/103-3155606-6540605?SubscriptionId=0AM07842GGE1QVDN6KR2

Rethinking music:

http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/019879004X/103-3155606-6540605?SubscriptionId=0AM07842GGE1QVDN6KR2

chest

01-04-2008, 03:46 AM

In the improvisation group that I play in, we usually record everything we improvise (whether in private or in performance). These go by titles such as "Imrovisation No 123", until someone gives a piece (or an extract) a fairly arbitrary name if it's made publicly accessible. The names mean nothing at all to me, but they're more convenient for reference than (eg) "Improvisation 123 Extract 4 Edit 5".

It would be (slightly) interesting to know whether the name of a piece affected listeners' reactions to it - eg how three well-matched groups of listeners who liked a particular musical genre would react if they heard the same piece (in that genre) with a different name in each group. I'd imagine there'd be no difference unless the name was strongly suggestive of how the piece would sound - then, if the sound didn't match the expectations raised, I'd expect a less favourable reaction than would be produced by a neutral name. Alternatively (and very disappointing, if this proved to be the case), perhaps they'd prefer a piece if it's name was somehow appealing?

nikolas

01-04-2008, 03:51 AM

Never heard about these? You can look at the Table of contents of the books! Seems familiar? Read any books last year?

Who are you talking to, please?

Composing_automat

01-04-2008, 04:23 AM

It would be (slightly) interesting to know whether the name of a piece affected listeners' reactions to it - eg how three well-matched groups of listeners who liked a particular musical genre would react if they heard the same piece (in that genre) with a different name in each group.

It is a well know fact that names of pieces manipulate the context of the listeners. Changing the name changes the context and listeners "can hear" different "thoughts" in the music.

Let me add that I have absolutely nothing against giving names for pieces. But it is good to know that music experiences are not based on only the music itself. The listener himself creates part of the experience. Part of it being his cultural background and context, not forgetting the collective and personal cliches. Instrumental cliches being very popular among composers:

http://www.synestesia.fi/2007/03/boat2.mp3

nikolas

01-04-2008, 04:38 AM

It is quite irretating to ignore posts you know, automat!

Never the less, I do think that you have a point, and recall that Debussy in his preludes for piano, had the titles in the end, so that the audience and pianist would not be influenced, which is pretty close to what you say.

Personally, when I write music, I write for a purpose, or with a plan in mind. If I write music for a specific scene in a game, I put the title of the game. Makes sense. It gives "identity" to the track. When I write classical music, for example a big orchestral piece, I wrote last, I put the tittle "Pier 6". Pier 6 is an airbridge in Gatwick airport, where I drew inspiration. I don't think that there is much connection to the said piece and the title, especially for the audience, as I was not aiming to bring out the "sense" of walking to that bridge, but simply to be sincere and state where I started off. Nothing else.

In the end, why is it important for synesthesia to post the pictures along the mp3s? Or the names as well? Isn't it all music? As I said, previously take everything out, hide yourselves behidn the anonymity of the internet and post the music alone!

But then again, knowing how rude you can get, I'm ready to get ignored once more. It's lovely to know that a post, some thoughts and the time taken to make the post is not appreciated the least. :(

Composing_automat

01-04-2008, 04:51 AM

But then again, knowing how rude you can get, I'm ready to get ignored once more. It's lovely to know that a post, some thoughts and the time taken to make the post is not appreciated the least. :(

Never been "rude" or never will be. Facts are sometimes irritating for some people.

persentio

01-04-2008, 05:10 AM

It is a well know fact that names of pieces manipulate the context of the listeners.
And those pictures with synestesia don't?

Alright everyone... Time to upload your tracks with SOLELY a format like this: "Your full name_X"; where X is a number.

And if you plan on releasing a commercial album, sell them in blank jewel cases. Or better still; a plain CD sleeve! NO ALBUM ART, NO Booklet, NO print on your CDs. Nothing. Just plain ol' good music. Now, who will join me!?

Composing_automat

01-04-2008, 05:18 AM

And those pictures with synestesia don't?

Definitely they do manipulate people. Also the art Exhibition in local Art Gallery showed that clearly. Only the piece "Water life" was not accepted as such. People thought it to be "Jungle life." Of course they were right:

http://www.synestesia.fi/2007/11/waterlife.mp3

I would have given that watercolor the name "Singing Oysters" but the artist didn't like the idea.

But generally scores are only part of the "story", music. Computers can compose but ONLY PEOPLE CAN LISTEN TO MUSIC.

MrAlex

01-04-2008, 07:05 AM

Never been "rude" or never will be. Facts are sometimes irritating for some people.

Is it really your honest opinion that you're not rude, simply that people are hypersensitive to your expression of truth?

Like a murderer saying he doesn't kill people, people just die too easily?

persentio

01-04-2008, 07:18 AM

I would have given that watercolor the name "Singing Oysters" but the artist didn't like the idea.So I ask YOU now: why do artists name their artwork? (not in the "picture 1" kind of way)

But generally scores are only part of the "story", music. Computers can compose but ONLY PEOPLE CAN LISTEN TO MUSIC.
Same thing as computers can randomly create abstract art but only people can appreciate the work of art.

So what's with all the griping of "Titling" of pieces? You might as well walk up to Steve Jobs and remark: "Why do you brand the 'iPod' as such? Why not 'SteveJob's MP3 player'? You are steering the public in some subliminal way to buy your music player by giving it a catchy name!!!"

Composing_automat

01-04-2008, 08:06 AM

Why is the Sky Blue?

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html

nikolas

01-04-2008, 08:36 AM

Never been "rude" or never will be. Facts are sometimes irritating for some people.

The only way I can read this quote is this:

"Never been rude or never will be. Facts are sometimes irritating for ME and thus I choose to ignore very large chuncks of posts from Nikolas and other people" ;)

dcoscina

01-04-2008, 10:37 AM

These are not FACTS but one person's perspective on things. Do not have the arrogance to presume your opinion is more objectively correct just because you cloak it in a veil of convoluted adjectives and cryptic half baked philosophical regurgitation's posited by Cageon intellectuals from the '60s. Sad thing is, John Cage had formal chops- he just wanted to take a different look at the perception of music. You composing_automat are that guy from Good Will Hunting who merely took original ideas from other people (almost 3 decades old too) and wield them to compensate for some huge insecurities you have about creativity. Or maybe you just would rather spend all of your time provoking talented and SKILLED musicians on this forum with your half baked conceptual art bullshit rather than sit down and learn music the old fashioned way.

Sorry Doug and Nick about the expletive but I'm sick of this guy's self-importance.

Edx

01-04-2008, 10:39 AM

Cool question.

For me I got interested in orchestral music with film scores, so for me naming pieces makes it more personal than simple "opus number 9" or something. In fact, Im instantly turned off just because its not named properly!

Composing_automat

01-04-2008, 10:48 AM

"Why is the Sky Blue?
http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html"

Perhaps you didn't understand the idea behind those lines. When someone makes that question, he is NOT claiming that the sky SHOULD NOT be blue.

When I made this question: "Why composers give names for their pieces?" for this thread I did not claim that composers SHOULD NOT give names for their pieces. Just wanted to collect opinions.

PS.
About pieces composed by my computer. This piece

http://www.synestesia.fi/2007/12/lilies.mp3

has been download from two of my domains about 2200 times during last two weeks. Don't know why. It would be interesting to know what are the normal numbers of downloads of other participants of this forum!

2 x platin pro, 2 x SC, 2 x RA, Colossus, 2 x Bösendorfer, Stormdrums, 2 x VOP, 2 x Gypsy, waiting Play Pianos, 2 ILoks
Sonar 7, Cubase 4, Logic 7, Kontakt 2, Kontakt 3
Mac, 3 PCs, Vista 3GHz, 4G of 800 MHz RAM, 3 x 10000 rpm hard disks

Niccko

01-04-2008, 11:56 AM

Why is the Sky Blue?

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html

In my opinion the name of a composition or of a picture is itself a part of the art-form. Think for a moment to "Persaeus", the statue of Benvenuto Cellini situated in Signoria Square, Florence, or think to Leonardo Da Vinci's fresco "Last supper".
How could you differently entitle a statue of a man that raises the head of Medusa? Persaeus and only Persaeus.
And how we could differently entitle a fresco that represents Christ seated to table with the 12 apostles? Tle Last Supper and only the last Supper.

So, many times a name derives directly from the concepts that art expresses.
IMHO of course.

Have a nice day.

dcoscina

01-04-2008, 01:13 PM

"Why is the Sky Blue?
http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html"

PS.
About pieces composed by my computer. This piece

http://www.synestesia.fi/2007/12/lilies.mp3

has been download from two of my domains about 2200 times during last two weeks. Don't know why. It would be interesting to know what are the normal numbers of downloads of other participants of this forum!

Oh dear, I am so sorry. You are obviously a very talented...er, algorithmic programmer. I have never had as many downloads of my music. Boy am I glad you set me straight. In fact, I may as well sell off all of my gear, get a lobotomy and sell insurance (sorry Mr. Ives, I didn't mean it that way!).

Thanks for your enlightened opinions and insights. We surely have seen the light now. :rolleyes:

DallasComposer

01-04-2008, 03:15 PM

Why composers give names for their pieces?
Because for me, I just feel so damn sophisticated and artsy when I do and I get confused by like, 'ok, what did Piece #423 sounds like again?'

Is the purpose to tell something that the music itself can't tell? Yes, it tells you what I want you to think because I wrote it damn it!

Or is it just marketing the piece?
Well hell yes! - it works like this, no marketing, no sales, no sales, no income, no income, no food, no food then death, with death, no marketing and it starts all over again tomorrow.

Walker T

01-04-2008, 03:41 PM

Why composers give names for their pieces?

That's a dumb question. You truly are an idiot and I'm using that as a descriptive term, not to flame you. Either you're trying to devalue music (again) to justify yourself, or you lack understanding of the most basic principles of communication. Either way, I'm not interested, and I certainly won't waste my time explaining to you something so rudimentary in anthropology.

dcoscina

01-04-2008, 03:46 PM

That's a dumb question. You truly are an idiot and I'm using that as a discriptive term, not to flame you. Either you're trying to devalue music (again) to justify yourself, or you lack understanding of the most basic principles of communication. Either way, I'm not interested, and I certainly won't waste my time explaining to you something so rudimentary in anthropology.

god bless ya my fellow Canuck!

nickysnd

01-04-2008, 04:07 PM

That's a dumb question. You truly are an idiot and I'm using that as a descriptive term, not to flame you. Either you're trying to devalue music (again) to justify yourself, or you lack understanding of the most basic principles of communication. Either way, I'm not interested, and I certainly won't waste my time explaining to you something so rudimentary in anthropology.
Man I wish I wrote that! Also - what David said!

Composing_automat

01-04-2008, 10:52 PM

This question is not merely academic.

One of the top modern art music composers in this country
http://www.fimic.fi/fimic/fimic.nsf/mainframe?readform&tiensuu+jukka

has declared that the giving names for pieces takes away the absoluteness of music and doesn't give listeners the possibility to have the own impressions of the piece.

He still gives names for his pieces. Those name are like words in Finnish but they don't mean anything. He also writes almost no texts for concert brochures.

Let the music speak, not words ?

dcoscina

01-04-2008, 11:11 PM

nothing like invalidating all of the programmatic works of liszt, Sibelius, Berlioz, and their ilk.

MrAlex

01-04-2008, 11:28 PM

You will find many of the world's greatest paintings are housed in ornate and intricate frames, rather than having no frames or cheap, simple frames.

This is because the art is not just the painting, it surrounds the painting and doesn't just stop at paint on canvas. It extends into the invisible consciousness of those who enjoy the art.

Such is music. A name can be more than just a label, it can also be viewed an extension of the music, and part of the artistic whole.

Walker T

01-04-2008, 11:43 PM

Have you read any of the posts that have been made? Or do you take pride in being stubbornly ignorant so that you can continue to post argumentatives?

... has declared that the giving names for pieces takes away the absoluteness of music and doesn't give listeners the possibility to have the own impressions of the piece.

First, I declare that nickysnd can fly. Does that make it true?
Second, you suppose that by reading that a piece is named 'A Dream' it's completely impossible for the listener to disregard the name and make their own interpretation? Then the problem is the recipient's lack of creativity.
Third, had you actually read the posts you'd now know that one of the functions naming a piece can have is to attempt to guide the listener into a certain path. This practice is in no way wrong or misleadning. In fact, it's the opposite, it's leading. Intentionally. Maybe the artist wants people to think of a sunset when listening to his piece 'A sunset'. Wow. Now that's controversial and evil hypnosis.

This question is not merely academic.

Do you really think that anyone thought that it was?

He still gives names for his pieces. Those name are like words in Finnish but they don't mean anything. He also writes almost no texts for concert brochures.

If you were looking at a triangle and a circle, which of them would you name Kiki and which would you name Bouba?

All language have connections to impulses, so even if this guy names his pieces with made up words, the minds of the listeners will still react and form impressions thereof. Like 'Anivaea' might suggest something based solely on the assumed pronounciation even though it has no meaning.

Using such naming policy is just another way of branding your music. I'm willing to bet that he names his pieces with words that 'fit'. And therefore it's just like using actual words. 'Forgiven' isn't a popular name for songs because of the benevolent nature of the word, but because the pronounciation has inherent aesthetic value.

If you're advocating absolutely no names, then you have to remove all kinds of distinction, because even numbers (Was it 4'33 by John Cage?) have aesthetic and guiding value. Opus Fifteen sounds pretty nifty to me and the number suggests various themes.

It's like MrAlex said (I think, correct me if I'm mistaken), if there were no names, every single piece would just be called 'music'.

Let the music speak, not words ?

If music has lyrics, then the music and words speak together, forming 'lyrical music'. Then the intention is for the words to speak. This is not wrong or misleading.

If music has no lyrics, then it doesn't speak. It's not guided by the name the composer's given it, unless the listener intentionally does so. Even if a piece is called something, that doesn't mean anything to a lot of listeners. They regard that the composer's given this name and either they find that they agree with it or they don't, and form their own interpretation. There's also a large group of the population that doesn't care either way, and doesn't form interpretations of musical works.

Please note, that nowhere along the line is there any sort of mind control involved. People are always perfectly capable of forming their own idea of any aesthetic impulse. We're not Nazis or Thomas Aquinas, we don't dictate that every listener has to think this and that.

To me, it's clear that you're trying to use a Finnish composer of indeterminate fame to qualify your own views. Unfortunately, his practice is substantially different from what you're advocating, and even if he's world famous, that doesn't indicate that he's more intelligent or right than you or me, at all. Everyone knows who George Bush is, but the more famous he gets the more clear it becomes that he's a dunce.

There. Now, do you have any argument that's logical or well thought out? That makes sense? You seem very keen on asking question after question without offering any sort of answers. I haven't heard any construct of knowledge coming from you, just a linear sequence of queries as if this was Jeopardy.

chest

01-05-2008, 06:46 AM

Here's a game to play using discussion forums:

1) "Light the fire", ie post a short, quick-and-easy-to-write controversial statement

2) Wait for several long, well-thought-out, time-consuming replies (no need to read them)

3) "Poke (or stoke) the fire", ie add another short, quick-and-easy-to-write controversial statement

4) Go back to step 2

Enjoy the knowledge that others are expending so much time and effort in a pointless exercise and are getting angry and frustrated, while you are calm and amused by all the wasted time, effort and emotion, and are spending your own time productively.

persentio

01-05-2008, 08:17 AM

Everyone knows who George Bush is, but the more famous he gets the more clear it becomes that he's a dunce.ROFLMAO!

And chest has a point though... But then again; they are merely defending what Im sure most of us here are passionate of: Music. And a seemingly genuine 'idiot' posting threads like these just crosses our boiling point. We can't help it I suppose.

MrAlex

01-05-2008, 06:26 PM

I wonder if Software and Laundromat have a forum of their own?

Chest's advice could come in mighty useful.

Composing_automat

01-06-2008, 11:33 PM

I wonder if Software and Laundromat have a forum of their own?

http://www.kolumbus.fi/lauri.grohn/
http://www.omasana.fi/ylivaltiosihteeri
http://www.kolumbus.fi/lauri.grohn/yk/index.html
www.synestesia.com
www.synestesia.fi

MrAlex

01-07-2008, 12:24 AM

Where's the discussion forum for synestesia?

Walker T

01-07-2008, 12:41 AM

Where's the discussion forum for synestesia?

I think you're looking at it. It's not much, but maybe that's because synesthesia is actually spelled with an 'h'. Smart move to have a typo in your product name.

The lack of response to the actual issue is consistent with not having any more arguments and being too proud and/or stubborn to admit it. What a relief. No more of this to worry about.

MrAlex

01-07-2008, 01:04 AM

Well the thing is I'm planning a hot air balloon trip around the world, so I'm trying to generate as much as possible ;)

Walker T

01-07-2008, 01:11 AM

Well the thing is I'm planning a hot air balloon trip around the world, so I'm trying to generate as much as possible ;)

Why would you want generate a lot of discussion if you're not going to be here to read it? I mean... Wait, it was a joke! Oh, I get it.

Composing_automat

01-07-2008, 02:40 AM

I think you're looking at it. It's not much, but maybe that's because synesthesia is actually spelled with an 'h'. Smart move to have a typo in your product name.

In many European languages synesthesia is spelled without 'h'. Just to evaluate the value of your voice, could you please show the statistics of how your pieces have been played last December. This is the statistics downloads on one of my two domains, synestesia.com:

MrAlex

01-07-2008, 04:39 AM

I had 38,174 hits in december, and 499,435 in the whole of 2007.

The important part (which you have not shown) is unique visitors. How many unique visitors (I.E. Different people on different computers) visited your site?

I had 904 unique visitors in December, and 8491 over the entire year. Thats different people, not just hits.

When you visit a page that has 10 pictures on, 2 javascript files, the document HTML code and 1 CSS file, that one visit = 14 hits, so hits are a misleading indicator of popularity.

Also, how long to people stay on your site?

And do they like what they see? The statistics won't tell you whether your voice actually has any meaning to people.

Anyway, just so I'm not pissing in the wind, I've attached my stats for December and the whole of 2007.

note that each visitor in december downloaded on average 1.5 megabytes (the graphics on my site are only about 100 Kb, so subtract that from the total average), which is equivalent to about 2 minutes of sound, so overall about 1800 minutes, or 30 hours of listening time.

Thats not bad considering I don't go around begging people to visit my site.

Now I noticed your sites are heavily graphics intensive, meaning that a lot of those KB will be downloads of your images.

Ok so what point were you trying to prove?

Walker T

01-07-2008, 04:52 AM

In many European languages synesthesia is spelled without 'h'.

In the English language, synesthesia is spelled with an 'h'. Being the most prevalent language, it's not particularly clever to label a product with such a name that will by so many be seen as a typo. Judging by your general linguistic mistakes (and gross misunderstandings) it's not surprising that you didn't make this connection.

Just to evaluate the value of your voice, could you please show the statistics of how your pieces have been played last December.

Now this part is so juvenile and pretentious that I'm actually laughing. The value of my voice? Gosh, you may be stupid but you are entertaining. There are just so many ways I could devalue this. Assuming that you're trying to make my 'voice' - as in anything I have to say - seem as without 'value' by pointing out either my lack of intelligence of experience. Let's see.

Your argument is that what you say is inherently better than what I say because you have a print of web statistics showing non-specific network traffic.

First, the printout doesn't prove anything. Just that a certain individual has accessed a file. Are you really suggesting that every single person liked the piece? Accepted it as good music? Kept it on their drive for further listening? The reaction you've gotten at this forum by real experienced music hobbyists/professionals proves that the chances of the first said statement being true are not good. Even a common person of low to mediocre intelligence can identify that your 'creations' aren't music. And that means only those that like listening to the binary beeps of the motherboard speaker are going to frequently enjoy your 'creations'.

Second, even if a significant amount of people enjoy your 'creations' that does in no way, at all, what-so-ever, prove your intelligence level. Nor is it a basis to build a level of reasoning or stabile personality on (This is proven by the large amounts of artists (including, but not limited to musicians) being mentally unstable. Quite a few of them were schizophrenic and commited suicide).

Third, if your 'creations' have reached more ears than mine, does that make them better? I recently made a point that fame is not corrolated to the quality of the art (or whatever product of craft that the individual in question produces). This is proven by how many bad famous artistic works there are (included, but not limited to motion pictures). I have a relative that makes an incredible serving of a particular culinary dish. Maybe two dozen people have experienced it. That doesn't make it bad. This is proven by how much I and all the others enjoy it.

Fourth, you're an idiot. This is not proven, but very likely judging by the lack of disagreement of anyone on this forum (including you) and the significant approval of two forum members when I said it the first time, as well as some of the displays of particularly low intelligence you've made on this forum. Again, I'm using it as a descriptive term, not to flame you. Also, it is not an opinion. It's a result of deductive reasoning in accordance with the pattern your various displays of communication has forumed (formed. Pun intended).

I could also point out that a downloaded file from your server doesn't mean that the individual knew what they were downloading. The watercolour paintings are nice, and their aesthetic value is misleading. The paintings trick the viewer into thinking that the quality of the 'creation' will be similar, that they will hear a beautiful musical interpretation of an autumn scene when really they haven't got the faintest clue what the heck they're downloading, because a program that creates music out of pictures is not something of the public's prevalence. By your logic, forcing the world's population to listen to a thirty second piece of trash song makes it the best because it's reached more ears.

It's clear to me that the surprisingly high traffic that your site has had this month has given you a false sense of your ability and an equally false perception of superiority. Suddenly you have statistics (admittedly non-specific and 82% of the traffic is unresolved or to a peer of unknown origin. Maybe your 'creations' are what music sounds like on Mars.), something concrete that may lead others to thinking that your 'art' is good. Your enthusiastic reaction and use of this particular piece of statistics is a classic sign of it being just about everything real you have in your favour.

You seem to be under the impression that if my music hasn't been heard by as many as yours have, that means I'm not qualified to comment on product naming principles and linguistics. Actually, I think you're referring to musical aspects and subjects that require higher reasoning skills and experience in various aesthetic areas. The other does sounds a tad dumb, doesn't it?

As for how much my music is played, maybe I should ask every single one of those that have heard it to chart down how many times they've accessed one of my pieces from a web server. Or how many times they listened to it. Or I could be constructive and ask them what they think of my music.

The value of my voice isn't about my music's reach. It's about my personality, the reliability and application of my musical opinion, my intelligence, my use of language and just about everything else that's related to how I interact socially and interpret aesthetic impulses and various forms of any pyramidal structure of communication. The fact that you try to plaster it under one single variable dependent on statistics is a gross simplification, so much that it probably doesn't make any sense to anyone but you.

Setting aside that this entire post is irrelevant to you because 5% of my audience isn't from China.

Get out of here.

Daryl

01-07-2008, 05:07 AM

One of my CDs sold over 500.000 copies a couple of years ago. That must mean that I'm a superior composer. The fact that the music on it was cr*p is irrelevant. :D

D

MrAlex

01-07-2008, 05:08 AM

I could also point out that a downloaded file from your server doesn't mean that the individual knew what they were downloading.

Exactly my point.

And Walker - his hits might be up in the thousands, but when as I said you load 1 page with 10 pictures and 2 javascripts and a CSS file, that one visit becomes 14 hits. More if there are more pictures. So saying I had 1400 hits this week, would be almost equivalent to saying I had 140 visits. Then, each of those visits could be from the same person, namely, me, reloading the page to see how many hits I can create. 1 person can create 1400 hits.

So the stats are meaningless.

I am inclined to agree that our laundromatic friend lacks the odd screw. It's one thing to be good with numbers, its another thing to understand their value.

And its very dangerous to base an opinion of statistics without thorough investigation and explanation.

Like the saying goes, "There's statistics, then there's statistics, then there are damn lies."

MrAlex

01-07-2008, 05:10 AM

One of my CDs sold over 500.000 copies a couple of years ago. That must mean that I'm a superior composer. The fact that the music on it was cr*p is irrelevant. :D

D

Seriously? How did you swing that?

Composing_automat

01-07-2008, 05:12 AM

note that each visitor in december downloaded on average 1.5 megabytes (the graphics on my site are only about 100 Kb,

Your traffic 1.6 Gbytes, my traffic 24 Gbytes from 58 countries on synestesia.com site, synestesia.com music site has only 7 pictures. How many countries did you have?

MrAlex

01-07-2008, 05:19 AM

Ah, so a few hundred megabytes of pictures on your site.

That means that a very large portion of your 24 Gigabytes is people looking at pictures which makes your statistics meaningless if you're trying to discuss the relevance of your penis size *cough* I mean music to the world.

Walker T

01-07-2008, 05:21 AM

... the relevance of your penis size *cough* I mean music to the world.

I must be tired.

Daryl

01-07-2008, 05:25 AM

Seriously? How did you swing that?
Lot's of gullible people with money to spend, I guess. ;)

D

MrAlex

01-07-2008, 05:28 AM

But will my shocking use of subtle insults be enough to show composing automat that its not nice to be disrespected?

Maybe being disrespected is a part of friendship for him.

Who knows, but I'm signing off from this one, got some real work to focus on, as fun as this is.

Nevertheless, my air balloon is almost ready to go.

See you on the other side.

Composing_automat

01-07-2008, 05:33 AM

Walker T

01-07-2008, 05:43 AM

How wrong you are:

Even if people have downloaded your songs, the statistics are still meaningless due to the points that have been explained to you in detail, if you'd bothered to actually read what people write.

I think that's enough of time wasted on this one.

Enrique

01-07-2008, 05:57 AM

LOL, this is HILARIOUS. I R ROBOT just pulled the e-peen card on everyone here, making him look that much better.

The most important thing that statistics has taught me is to never trust them.

Tossing a lot of crap around the world isn't going to make it stink any less.

Software and friend, you should have kept your musings to yourself and promoted your software as a tool in aiding composition rather than a replacement and maybe a forum of composers would take you a bit more seriously or at least give you some respect, but it's a little too late for that.

dcoscina

01-07-2008, 10:00 AM

Face it guys- we're just losers in the eyes or ears of Software or Composing Automatic or HAL9000 or whatever screen name this guy goes by.

I think the best thing to do when he posts more ridiculous idiotic questions like this is to simply ignore him, like we did with the kid in elementary school who liked to interrupt the class all of the time and eat paste.

It's clear that he does not read what we put forth and simply uses this forum as a vehicle to support his own site. In fact, the only thing intelligible about him is that he never outright phrases things that would have him tossed from this site.

nikolas

01-07-2008, 12:25 PM

Composing_automat

01-07-2008, 11:39 PM

LMAO

Can't keep myself quiet. Have to share some statistics as well:

CGEmpire get's more than 2,000,000 hits per month and last month had around 250 GB of traffic. Have fun automat.

So you seem to be GARRITAN man?
How many hits for your own pieces?

Automat you tend to show more and more your *ahem* views and mind thinking... Just let it be... It was a nice thread in the very first page... That's all! And an interesting idea, but you keep failing to make your threads work.

Yes. Comment #10 shows why. And why that? Some people are just doers. They hate theoretical discussions. Its ok by why commenting at all in that case? Isn't this an open forum for all opinions, I mean opionions of matters, not persons?

persentio

01-07-2008, 11:45 PM

They hate theoretical discussions. Its ok by why commenting at all in that case? Isn't this an open forum for all opinions, I mean opionions of matters, not persons?

This wasn't even a discussion / opinion thread to begin with but rather an exceedingly dumb question.

Composing_automat

01-07-2008, 11:49 PM

This wasn't even a discussion / opinion thread to begin with but rather an exceedingly dumb question.

Is this better when leaving out two question marks:

Why composers give names for their pieces?

The purpose to tell something that the music itself can't tell.

Also is it just for marketing the piece.

Daryl

01-08-2008, 01:52 AM

I give my pieces names, because when a client says "We want to pay you a gazillion pounds to licence your piece" they would rather talk about "Flatulence in the Marsh" than "Piece Number 1074B Revision 2".

D

MrAlex

01-08-2008, 05:12 AM

nickysnd

01-08-2008, 07:25 AM

What is your reasoning behind these two statements?
MrAlex, is it your belief that every human utterance is backed by reasoning? What I see, even in mathematics, is that: you first establish some unprovable beliefs, and only then you can start your reasoning. Beliefs, and not logic, is what makes us agree and disagree. Thinking that things should make sense, that's just another belief.

What this automatic guy does is: establishing here his beliefs, which are clearly nonnegotiable from his part. Problem is, his beliefs are hardly acceptable for most of this forum's members. It is all a matter of belief clash, like in religious fights: who's holier, Mohamed or Buddha? How about Jesus then? Or Moses?

Also, MrAlex, my mother is a professor of physics and I have made her accept that there are no better arguments to prove that the Earth is moving around the Sun, than arguments to prove the exact opposite. It's all a matter of point of view. She had to admit in the end that Sun and Earth are only moving around each other, and that we can also say that they are both moving around the Moon - actually I can "make" those objects move around any point I want to arbitrarily declare as fixed. There is no fixed point, of course. So, my (fixed ;) ) point is: Sciences and logic are all based on beliefs. Exactly like religions. Therefore, MrAlex, your belief in logic and reasoning is only that: a belief. And my previous statement is also a belief. And so on. Got the point? Hmm, I doubt you can grasp it, for there's no fixed point... :rolleyes:

Besides that, MrAlex, take notice that I am holier than thou. Period. If you believe otherwise you are plain wrong.

:p

DrDr

01-08-2008, 07:38 AM

Besides that, MrAlex, take notice that I am holier than thou. Period. If you believe otherwise you are plain wrong.

:p

This point goes to Canada!!! :D

DallasComposer

01-08-2008, 09:33 AM

... who's holier, Mohamed or Buddha? How about Jesus then? Or Moses?

None of the above for there is only ONE who is the HOLIST

http://www.venganza.org/

come, let us pray ....

:p

Niccko

01-08-2008, 10:34 AM

Is this better when leaving out two question marks:

Why composers give names for their pieces?

The purpose to tell something that the music itself can't tell.

Also is it just for marketing the piece.

For marketing?!?!? Composers give names for their pieces from centuries.
I don't believe that "Tristan und Isolde" or "Nessun dorma" are marketing strategies :eek:

Composing_automat

01-08-2008, 10:41 AM

For marketing?!?!? Composers give names for their pieces from centuries.
I don't believe that "Tristan und Isolde" or "Nessun dorma" are marketing strategies :eek:

I guess we are not speaking about museum music now. Or are we?

Composing_automat

01-08-2008, 11:01 AM

In the English language, synesthesia is spelled with an 'h'. Being the most prevalent language, it's not particularly clever to label a product with such a name that will by so many be seen as a typo. Judging by your general linguistic mistakes (and gross misunderstandings) it's not surprising that you didn't make this connection.

Your may check it here:
http://www.bluecatsandchartreusekittens.com/Blue_Cats_and_Chartreuse_Kittens_Rel.html

I wonder if you spell the letters for your links. I prefere clicking. And the official side name of my company is just Synesthesia Software Music. By the way, European Union has 23 official languages.

PS.
My spell checker proposes "Synaesthesia".

Niccko

01-08-2008, 11:03 AM

I guess we are not speaking about museum music now. Or are we?

There's no museum music, i believe: why Wagner or Puccini music is a museum? Perhaps i am a mind-closed, but i only can distinguish between the music i like and that transmit to me something and the music that i don't like.
But i don't understand why you assign to the word "museum" this negative "face": when we enter in a museum we are not viewing something old or dead, but something from which we can learn. Something that improve us not only as painters or musicians, but above all as men. Or no?

Composing_automat

01-08-2008, 11:09 AM

But i don't understand why you assign to the word "museum" this negative "face": ?

No, definitely I don't negatively. I visit art museum quite often as also in other museum. But usually I am attending concerts if at least one piece of living composers is played. Or music of Bartok or Ligeti and about 10 others.

Why should we deny that there are too much museum music around?

Niccko

01-08-2008, 11:23 AM

No, definitely I don't negatively. I visit art museum quite often as also in other museum. But usually I am attending concerts if at least one piece of living composers is played. Or music of Bartok or Ligeti and about 10 others.

Why should we deny that there are too much museum music around?

I respect your point but still i deny this subdivision between museum music and non-museum music. In fact, if a living composer tomorrow will die, his music become a museum?
Have a nice evening.

Composing_automat

01-08-2008, 11:25 AM

I respect your point but still i deny this subdivision between museum music and non-museum music. In fact, if a living composer tomorrow will die, his music become a museum?

Actually quite a lot already is. Don't tell where...;-)

Raphael

01-13-2008, 07:18 AM

I give my pieces a name because I have to. If you work with computers you must save your pieces with a name;)

Beethoven didn't have a computer, so his Symphonies got only the name 1, 2, 3 and so on:D

greenhorn999

01-14-2008, 03:34 PM

In many European languages synesthesia is spelled without 'h'. Just to evaluate the value of your voice, could you please show the statistics of how your pieces have been played last December. This is the statistics downloads on one of my two domains, synestesia.com:

I'll spare three words for you then get back to work:

You're a moron.

dcoscina

01-14-2008, 07:40 PM

I give names to my compositions BECAUSE I CAN!!! HA HA HA HA. I'm the god of my world and can create and taketh away what and when I like! ;)

Software

01-15-2008, 12:41 AM

I give names to my compositions BECAUSE I CAN!!! HA HA HA HA. I'm the god of my world and can create and taketh away what and when I like! ;)

http://www.kolumbus.fi/lauri.grohn/cd02/mafia.mp3

Software

01-16-2008, 10:38 PM

You can test the effort of give a name to a piece for a piece by first listening to this:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/lauri.grohn/old/v081nokia.mp3

The you can look at the name of the piece here (piece on the right):
http://www.kolumbus.fi/lauri.grohn/old/old1.html

Listening now the second time may show you something you didn't expect!

Why composers give names for their pieces? Is the purpose to tell something that the music itself can't tell?

MrAlex

01-17-2008, 02:54 PM

The first run (without knowing the name) conjured up images of telephones and confusion, with the static coming in and out like some kind of crossed wire, something broken, a sense which was enhanced by the randomness of the ringing phone sounds. I could see this working as an art gallery installation, perhaps a large hanging "mobile" with heaps of mobile phones hanging off it, just spinning around randomly in the breeze like a wind chime. People will walk past and wonder at the message being given by the strange apparatus and sounds.

I don't think knowing the name made any difference to this impression. I also don't think knowing it is generated by software makes a difference, because ultimately a human chose the samples, chose the picture, tweaked the software settings and "played" the software to achieve a desired result.

I don't know if the piece would have worked if just default settings were used, or if the programmer chose random fart samples and blood curdling screams.

Anyway, my main point is that the software is "played" by a human, so it's really just an instrument like any other, although at the same time very different to other traditional instruments. I don't believe it is any better or worse than ordinary instruments, it's just a matter of taste. I like stringed instruments playing soft chord progressions with some kind of percussive rhythm personally - other people might enjoy reading a book or making love to the sounds of your software.

Who knows, what difference does it make? Only time will tell.

Software

01-21-2008, 07:51 AM

Anyway, my main point is that the software is "played" by a human, so it's really just an instrument like any other, although at the same time very different to other traditional instruments. I don't believe it is any better or worse than ordinary instruments, it's just a matter of taste.

Synestesia SW generates (composes) a midi file. That's not much playing, isn't it?

dcoscina

01-21-2008, 08:01 AM

Rautavaara is rolling in his grave at this thread and the frickin' guy ain't even dead yet. Our Finnish friend here ought to know who that is!

dcoscina

01-21-2008, 08:04 AM

Oh, I am actually writing an algorithmic program that names my music pieces based on a precise mathematical logistical side-tracked watchamacallit humdinger-of-a-thingy that analyzes the intervals used in the piece and then ascribes a pictorial or narrative name for it. Neat huh? I don't know whether to call it "Namestesia" or else "Just Stupid"....still trying to find an appropriate name..hmmmm ;)

Software

01-21-2008, 08:06 AM

Rautavaara is rolling in his grave at this thread and the frickin' guy ain't even dead yet. Our Finnish friend here ought to know who that is!

Eino-Juhani Rautavaara is still living. And many of his Angel pieces had first an other names but were LATER changed for marketing reasons.

PS.
Rautavaara has been using piano when he is composing. He has said that he has got many good ideas when pressing wrong piano keys...

PS2.
I have these Rautavaara's piece on CD: Angel of Dusk, Angel of Light, Angels and Visitations, A Requiem of Our Time, Cantos I-III, Cantus arcticus, Cello Concerto, Concerto for Harp,Epitaph for Bela Bartok, Hommage a Frans Liszt, Hommage a Zoltan Kodaly, Ikonit, Isle of Bliss, Lintukoto, Regular sets of elements, Symphonies 1,4,5,6,7,8, Sonetto, Song cycle for voice and string quintet, String Quarte 2, Violin Concerto

dcoscina

01-21-2008, 09:48 AM

Uh, yeah, I know he's not dead, hence my line "he's rolling in his grave and he's not even dead yet".

I also like Cantus Articus, especially the pre-recorded use of migrating bird sounds. An amazing piece. Although Rautavaara sounds a little too much like American-Armenian composer Alan Hovhaness to my ears.

Software

01-30-2008, 01:22 PM

I also like Cantus Articus, especially the pre-recorded use of migrating bird sounds. An amazing piece. Although Rautavaara sounds a little too much like American-Armenian composer Alan Hovhaness to my ears.

Some audios samples of Rautavaara's music, Cantus Arcticus included:

http://www.fennicagehrman.fi/comp_rautavaara_mp3.htm

dcoscina

01-30-2008, 01:53 PM

Some audios samples of Rautavaara's music, Cantus Arcticus included:

http://www.fennicagehrman.fi/comp_rautavaara_mp3.htm

Can you tell me where you get the drugs you're on? Seriously they must be good stuff!

I KNOW RAUTAVAARA's CANTUS ARCTICUS! I OWN IT!!! Why would I need links to a piece I know so well?????????????

I'm beginning to honestly think that Software is indeed just that- a computer prompted to respond through a series of basic triggers that result in the weirdest posts I have ever read.

Software

01-30-2008, 05:17 PM

Sorry. Didn't know you are the only only one who is reading these forums.

MrAlex

01-30-2008, 07:53 PM

Sorry. Didn't know you are the only only one who is reading these forums.

When you quote someone in a reply it seems very much like you're talking directly to them.

Dcoscina, some things aren't worth getting upset about, I think (but I may be wrong) that this is one of those things.

Software

01-31-2008, 01:14 AM

Question to all.

Is this great music (click "Play all"):

http://www.nokia.com/A4425426

Or is there something to make it better?

Doesn't money speak?

DallasComposer

01-31-2008, 10:37 AM

For the context of what it was designed for. yes, the music fits.
It's marketing. Nothing more or less, music designed for the visuals
to market Nokia brand concepts. And yes money does speak.

Money speaks to my mortgage company so
I can have a place to live and raise a family

Money speaks to the grocery store so I can
have food to nourish my body and thus continue
to live

Money speaks to the electric company so I can
heat my house during winter

Money speaks to the water company so I can flush
my toilet

Money speaks to East/West so I can have tools
to make m-o-n-e-y to contunue to achieve all
of the above and more

Believe it or not you can make music/art and money together!

nickysnd

01-31-2008, 12:01 PM

JaapVisser

01-31-2008, 12:29 PM

Empty spaces are very difficult to click or to read so I need to put at least one symbol (whether it is a letter, symbol or a figure)

Software

01-31-2008, 12:45 PM

For the context of what it was designed for. yes, the music fits.
It's marketing. Nothing more or less, music designed for the visuals
to market Nokia brand concepts. And yes money does speak.

It could, it should, but it doesn't. The music is just standard rubbish. The kind used for thousands and thousands video presentation.

DallasComposer

01-31-2008, 01:43 PM

... The music is just standard rubbish. The kind used for thousands and thousands video presentation.

Lauri,

With all due respect, I do believe you have a chip on your shoulder, meaning, it's as if you think all other 'musiques' are rubbish and you are proposing that your music is not. I will not engage in some meaningless argument or throw out childish personal slanders but it seems there are some things you just don't understand or are perhaps resentful about and most of your comments are really beyond reason.

Again please read what I wrote in my previous post and think 'business'. The music for that flash marketing piece fits what it was designed for. I did not say it was great music because for one, I dont' just listen to the music as music, it was not designed for that. It was meant to support and lead the viewer along to experience and (hopefully) sell you on using Nokia. Being someone who works as a creative director and makes these kind of decisions (what works, what doesn't) for major companies in the U.S. I look at it, listen to it in the context of, does it support what we are trying (us advert/marketing people) communicate. It doesn't matter if I 'like' the music, I seperate myself from that, it matters if it fits the campaign, Again, I think the people behind the Nokia ad did a great job, and the visuals are well done also. It sells a brand. Yes, it's money, it's business. Period.

Now, if you are, as I assume from your attitude, proposing that your music would be 'better' (in your mind, more 'artful') I, as a creative director, would throw you out of my office (especially if you came off with that attitude) because your music wouldn't work for the project. Now, please understand me, maybe some of your music would work on some other project, but in this particular case, it wouldn't.

So, one thing I try and do with people I work with (employees, contractors, consultants etc.) and a general life philosophy I try and live by is ... if you think this is rubbish, then what would you propose? See? When someone comes in and expresses a strong view of how something is 'rubbish' I propose right back to them, 'show me what would work', go present a better possibility to me, and funny thing is, only a very select few can ever deliver and those people, I highly respect and we work as a team. The others, just go spatting on about 'rubbish' but never deliver a viable option.

I think you take a 'high' art perspective, I have been there done that myself and still really appreciate 'artful music' but hey, I also have to earn a living and live in the real world.

So, what would you propose would fit better musically for that advert?

If you remember, I suggested to you in another post/thread that you should organize your pieces and set up an online catalog for producers/directors etc. i.e. a music catalog for licensing. People could then use your music for various projects (film/video/ads etc.). Think about it, your music being used in an ad. No more rubbish and you could make some money. In fact, I will offer myself to help you set this up if you would like and I'm serious. So, are you ready to get the music out there for the media industry to use or are you going to just keep rendering out boring (sorry, they are pretty boring) watercolors and calling everything else 'rubbish'.

Bottom line is, in common, simple english ... what is it your trying to achieve with your music/softeware and by being critical of everything else?

I am trying to achieve ___________________. (fill in the blank)

Software

01-31-2008, 02:04 PM

nikolas

01-31-2008, 02:16 PM

Lauri,

you know that I'm open minded but please answer the mans question. :)

Other than that, also it could be useful to quite being so insulting to everyone else and what they do, but that's just me and my thick greek skin ;)

Software

01-31-2008, 02:41 PM

Sorry, I thought I already answered implicitly to this question:

"So, what would you propose would fit better musically for that advert?"

I have no idea, but Nokia should afford more than small metal shops can afford for video presentations. Nokia should use real composers and real orchestras or EWQL ;)

Yes. We are used to that kind of video music. That's why I called it "rubbish".

nikolas

01-31-2008, 03:00 PM

I was talking about the following question:

"Bottom line is, in common, simple english ... what is it your trying to achieve with your music/softeware and by being critical of everything else?

I am trying to achieve ___________________. (fill in the blank)"

DallasComposer

01-31-2008, 03:02 PM

Now we are speaking about Nokia who sells 40 % of the mobile phones on this globe.

Similar music is used in thousands of video presentations of small metal shops in the country side. Now this presentation was about NOKIA's strategy. Unbelievable! I guess the problem is that Nokia's people justs didn't think it at all. They just selected the music as a matter of routine.

Lauri,

Let's try and discuss this ok.

What 'small metal shop(s) (sic)'?

I think you are saying that in a broad sense of it's common music right?
The kind of music that is found in a lot in ads etc. right?

I agree. It is. Nothing really special about it. Agreed.
It's not going sell big on iTunes or be heard in a concert hall, I agree.

Do you understand it wasn't designed for that?
There is a difference between art and design.
A difference between doing something for commercial purposes and
doing something for 'art'. Sometimes the work can be good enough
it crosses both worlds.

So again, the ad agency comes to you and asks 'Lauri' we need some music for this,
what would you do? how would you musically represent what Nokia wanted to say in this ad?
Give me that answer and then we can have a discussion, but if you want to just spit on about how it's rubbish and never answer my questions, then as someone once said in here 'we're just pissing in the wind my friend'. If you aren't interested in doing this kind of work or engaging in busines or commerce with your music or software tool and think of your work as 'art', then go do that, I support you in that. Send me an invite to an art show (please no watercolors) and we'll enjoy some wine, act all 'arty' and discuss algorithms but just going around dropping little posts, 'this is rubbish' without and better solution and never answering my questions? wWhat's up with that?

Can you dig it?