"Timelessness" is irrelevant.
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=37359
Printed Date: November 26 2024 at 15:43
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: "Timelessness" is irrelevant.
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Subject: "Timelessness" is irrelevant.
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 21:07
|
I said it! Yes, it is completely irrelevant. It doesnt matter if an album is "Timeless" or not, some people, myself included, LOVE the sound of grainy audio and old instruements, music that sounds like it was made FOR a time period also. I also do not believe there is SUCH A THING as timelessness....Everything belongs to a time, not everything needs to "stand the test of time", some things are meant to meld with the power of their time and are further beautified by that! For instance, music, prog, golden age prog from the 60's and 70's...none of it is timeless, all of it is eternal, from an era that gave birth to it and deserves credit.
Timeless? Bollocks! (as british people would say, especially Tony R) -------------  "Only the sun knew why"
|
Replies:
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 21:43
|
I wouldn't say I "like" bad quality...but if the music is good, then it dosn't matter to me.
Kind of along the point you were making?
Maybe?
|
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 21:47
|
totally!!! ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 21:50
|
Niice, well then I have to say:
I agree!
 |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 22:06
The Lost Chord is finding himself as of lately!   ------------- 
|
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 22:08
 ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 22:10
|
That means, good post
gee, the lack of understanding amazes me!  ... -------------
|
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 22:13
I am Th Lost Cause afterall... ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 22:14
People, besides me, enjoying a TLC post?
 This world is truly going mad |
Posted By: Mikerinos
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 22:15
|
The Learning Channel is good and all, but Tasty Little Chewies are way better! ------------- 
|
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: April 27 2007 at 22:39
|
LMFAO!!!!
BTW, im crying hysterically right now after watching Justin Hayward perfroming New Horizons on the DVD An Audience with Justin Hayward. I dont understand why people dont get this emotional for this music, this is amazing to me, pure brilliance! ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 06:30
Lost Chord, it's good to have back here! 
Good thread. I do believe I'm in agreement with you. Music belongs to a time, eternal through it's excellence, although that is of coirse subjective. But, 'timelessness' is indeed a failry meaningless concept. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: tuxon
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 08:27
|
timeless music is an oxymoron, since music is "sound organised in time"
If however timeless music means music not specific for a zeitgeist, or music that doesn't need a specific time period/era to be enjoyed than a timelessness can be heard, however of course maybe the timespan of the era can be very large.so in our lifetime the music appears timeless, while infact it's specific for our century or eon. ------------- I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT |
Posted By: magnus
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 08:39
 ------------- The scattered jigsaw of my redemption laid out before my eyes Each piece as amorphous as the other - Each piece in its lack of shape a lie 
|
tuxon wrote:Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 12:19
|
^Yes, thats a fairly good point really.. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 12:58
Can't just cut TLC a break can you?
|
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 13:08
I hope this thread isn't about how I mentioned in my review of King Crimson - Starless and Bible Black that it is a timeless masterpiece. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 13:15
If timeless means being a product of a determined period of time......I agree with The Lost Chord (Never imagined saying this  must be a secondary effect of the Vicodin I had to take for 2 days due to my back pain  ) all the music is a product of a moment in evolution and the historical circumstances that surround the artistic event.
If timeless is understood as a a work with trascendence vocation or in other words that can be appreciated by the people of the 70's, 80's, 90's or 2050's.....then I believe there is music that will pass the test of time and of course will turn into timeless works.
Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: progismylife
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 13:17
That's what I think of when someone mentions timeless music. Something that does not sound dated or could be attributed to a certain time period by its sound. |
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 13:49
|
There are certainly more than one way to interpret "Timeless" im sure, but im just ranting more in agreement of the oxymoronic meaning. But, I agree, there is a way to be "timeless", thats true ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 13:58
|
There's plenty of music that appears to transcend the fashionable styles of the time it was written in that somehow has a timeless quality to it.
I haven't really thought about the mechanics of it - so this is a good question for me - but there is definitely something that I believe could be quantified as a timeless quality - or more likely, a set of characteristics that make a piece of music sound more advanced than other music of its time.
"Love Without Sound" from "An Electric Storm" by White Noise is a great example - not the best, but without a doubt it sounds at least twenty years ahead of its time - so not exactly "timeless", but it's something demonstrable at least.
I've freaked out many people by playing it to them, then casually pointing out it was recorded in 1969.
It's only irrelevant if it's a quality you don't care about.
I care about all qualities of music, so it's not irrelevant to me - a certain degree of timelessness can make a piece of music more interesting to me.
However, I agree with the original position - that timelessness is not the be all and end all - sometimes the fact that a piece of music feels like it's self carbon-dating adds to its charm. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: moonlapse
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 14:11
|
I have to disagree with LC totally. Timelessness is important and reflects quality of music. Think of 1920s or 1930s music (blah) - then compare to great classical music written well before that. A prog example might be I Talk to the Wind by KC - good song in its time but is hard to listen to now except on occasion, because it just sounds too much like the flower child/hippie movement of the 60s. Groovy man - not! |
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 17:09
Well, thats pure opinion though, I think I Talk to the Wind is amazing, and I can listen to it everyday if I felt like it. I actually also read about the hippies and watch videos on them and things, just because it happened a long time ago doesnt mean I cant get a great feeling from thinking about it. Hell, knowing that 90% of the music i listen to is about peace and love and hippies and things makes it all the better, I love that stuff! ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 18:58
So you believe:
Are "blah"???????? Wouldn't that be called taste and not a fact?
In music there are no dogmas, I choose a work by Rachmaninoff of Janaceck over Chopin because I don't like most of Chopin's works, but I wouldn't dare to qualifu his music as..."blah"
BTW: There's strictly no Classical music in 1920's or 1930's that genre only existed from 1750 to 1825 (More or less). But lets accept the extended use of a wrong term but making the mention before Cert kills us .Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 19:09
|
I Talk To The Wind hippie? where do you get that idea? nor the lyrics, nor in the musical ambient I find the hippieness ML. I love it because it's so clever in the chorus having the flute playing the major E scale (piano) while the background mostly did I-V loops, it creates such a great harmony... something I can't often find in pop music (even at that time).
In fact, it's my favourite song on that album ------------- Jesus Gabriel |
Posted By: moonlapse
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 19:48
Wasn't referring to classical in the 1920s/1930s, just music in general during that time compared to classical of the past. |
Posted By: moonlapse
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 19:59
It's a nice song I will admit and I like it on occasion. But it is very reminiscent of the 60s, primarily in the musical ambience and I do not want to listen to it too much because of this as it just feels too creepy if I do. Give me something like Can's Monster Movie over this any time. |
Posted By: moonlapse
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 20:04
Maybe. But then again isn't your original post? |
Posted By: The Lost Chord
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 20:05
Yeah but the key difference is you delibrately stated that yours was FACT. ------------- "Only the sun knew why"
|
Posted By: moonlapse
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 20:10
Ummm...show me exactly where I said that? |
Posted By: Sasquamo
Date Posted: April 28 2007 at 22:32
| Moonlapse is right. When I think of 1920's and 30's music, I'm thinking of swing and dance bands, which was basically the result of jazz being hijacked by white people and turned into a near parody, dance music, until bebop came in to save the day. |
Posted By: Chus
Date Posted: April 29 2007 at 00:05
|
You mean the Paul Whiteman era?. But Swing Jazz was started even before that, and was only danced by black people (before it became more famous) ------------- Jesus Gabriel |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: April 29 2007 at 02:17
I don't know how can Swing or Hollywood musicals (Al Jolson painted as a black musician) be compared with Classical music, this would not be a matter of time, but a matter of species.
If you want to compare Jazz from the 30's, you can compare it with Satchmo, Duke Ellington or even Chick Corea or Jean Luc Pontuy, all are the same specie.
Please Minnie the Moocher (No matter how much I like it) resists a comparison with Beethoven's Sixth Symphony.
But you can't compare Swing with Beethoven because it's not a matter of time, it's a matter of two totally different universes, like comparing apples and spaceships, totally absurd.
If you want to compare Classics like earlier Beethoven or Haydn, you can make comparisons with Bach (Baroque), Wagner (Romantic or whatever he is), Janaceck (Modern), Rachmaninoff (Modern also), even Ginastera and Shostakovich and their peers....Then it would be a matter of time, because al are Orchestral Cult Composers (What we wrongly know as Clasical Musicians)
But at the end it would be reduced to a matter of taste, for me The Mighty Handful are the peak of Cult Orchestral music, but it's only a matter of taste.
Iván -------------
|
Posted By: Sasquamo
Date Posted: April 29 2007 at 10:01
| I guess what I'm trying to say is that the 20s and 30s dance bands do not age well, while much from the bebop era will last forever. |
Posted By: heyitsthatguy
Date Posted: April 29 2007 at 14:09
|
free jazz is "timeless"
------------- 
|
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: April 29 2007 at 19:49
Maybe you should stop thinking like that and remember that there was a lot of good jazz, blues, ragtime, and "classical" music in that time. Just like any time period. As has been pointed out by Ivan. You don't like Django Reinhardt? Duke Ellington? Scott Joplin? Woody Guthrie? Leadbelly? Son House? Robert Johnson? Louis Armstrong? Stravinski? Ravel? Strauss? and many many many others who were composing and performing amazing music before and some after the 20s & 30s? I mean think about this situation....no Woody Guthrie, no Bob Dylan. No Bob Dylan, no later Beatles albums. No later Beatles albums = lots of prog band don't exist among other things. Timelessness means nothing to me. If it pleases my ears and mind then its ok in my book. |