Is There A Line Between Noise & Music?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=43395
Printed Date: December 04 2024 at 20:38
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Is There A Line Between Noise & Music?
Posted By: avestin
Subject: Is There A Line Between Noise & Music?
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 09:14
|
I listen to many varied styles of music; from the most catchy and bland through more "sophisticated" and complex, heavy and brutal to the experimental, disjointed and diossonant up until what is called Noise.
I like them all, meaning, I like bands/musicians belonging to all those disciplines/styles/schools.
At times I am having thougts on whether there is a line between what I'd call music and simply noise which has no musical value - therefore I, like everyone else, need to define to myself what I perceive as music and from that, by rulling out what is not included, define noise or what isn't music to me.
However at times I have hard times making up my mind, as can be evident from listening to bands like these:
http://www.myspace.com/orchestranonorchestra - http://www.myspace.com/orchestranonorchestra
http://www.myspace.com/turdusmerula - http://www.myspace.com/turdusmerula (I like this style very much, by the way)
http://www.myspace.com/blackdicemyspace - http://www.myspace.com/blackdicemyspace (I love this as well)
http://www.myspace.com/merzbow - http://www.myspace.com/merzbow (one of the prominent figures)
http://www.myspace.com/therealwolfeyes - http://www.myspace.com/therealwolfeyes (also getting to like them)
http://www.supersilence.net/ - http://www.supersilence.net/ (love those as well)
And there's many more....
There are times when I think that maybe any series of noises one makes can be recorded and presented as music.
Nevermind now the progressive tag, how many of you would consider this by your definition Music?
Where is your personal line between Noise and Music pass?
Do you have such a line?
How would you define Music and Noise?
Thanks for responding
 ------------- http://hangingsounds.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - Hanging Sounds http://www.progarchives.com/ProgRockShopping.asp" rel="nofollow - PA Index of prog music vendors |
Replies:
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 09:28
|
Anything that can be digested through the ears is music. At least, John Zorn thinks so. Mike Patton agrees. |
Posted By: jikai55
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 09:51
|
I think there is a very fine line.
I go on if the sound is "organized". i.e., is that noise there for a reason? Or is it just noise? ------------- 
I like cheese and I like metal! --Mikael Åkerfeldt |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 09:57
|
nice thread Assaf.... though I am not as wild and crazy and
adventurous as you the RIO/Avant guys are...I have listened to a few in
my RPI explorations. it is a very fine line.. one that exsits in the mind of each indidual listener... and of the artist in question. Music is art... and we all interpret it differently. another reason why prog talibans really piss me off... take these albums.. ../artist.asp?id=3046 - DEMETRIO STRATOS
 Review | ../album.asp?id=15802 - Album details | ../album.asp?id=15802#reviews - All reviews | ../Review.asp?id=127255#buymusic - Buy Music
Review by
../Collaborators.asp?id=4823 - micky
[Special Collaborator Italian Prog and Art Rock Specialist] Posted 10:06:19 AM EST, 7/1/2007 
Demetrio Stratos is well known as the front man of the fiery Italian
prog group Area. Outside of Area he released a series
of solo albums. I picked this album up a couple of days ago on one of
my search and destroy missions in Rome looking for
RPI gems. I had recently really got the bug for Area and found this
album and immediately scarfed it up. I was hoping to
find a another incendiary mixing of jazz, rock, electronic, and
mediterranean music. Whoa.. was I surprised when I put this in.This review is a warning...yet still a recommendation. As I found out later after an interesting first listen hahahha, and as is noted in Stratos' bio. He was student of Fluxus and John Cage. His solo albums are very avant and are explorations into the use of the human voice as an instrument. Be warned.. again... THIS IS NOT EASY LISTENING. But it a funny way.. this ties into RPI quite well. As I noted this morning in a thread, I am a non-speaker of Italian, so an overall portion of the albums is lost upon me. The literal meaning of what the group is trying to say. What that in fact has done has prepared me for an album like this. The voice in Italian prog for became not a vehicle for literal meaning but rather a instrument in itself. Full of emotion and expression like any instrument. That is exactly what Stratos was intending to explore. To review this album track by track is sort of pointless. Before reviewing this I read some reviews of his solo album on other sites.. I was curious just how you would review something like this. Most reviews, while entertaining in their lofty language, really say little about the music. This is an album that to me is beyond a standard review, it is indeed like trying to 'review' a painting. What you get out of this will be highly personal. There are no instruments to rave over the quality.. no way to contrast the dynamics between the way the instruments play off of each other. This is just an experience between you and Stratos. If you feel like taking a walk down the Fluxus side of life. I strongly recommend you check this out. It intriqued me to check out other of his albums, which as some of you who know my musical tastes.. should probably say more about this album that any song by song analysis could. Giving the album three stars..and down the road may adjust that to reflect what I think of his other albums. Which I will be checking out. For serious students of 'art' and avant music only. Michael (aka micky) ../artist.asp?id=1841 - FRANCO BATTIATO
Review | ../album.asp?id=9601 - Album details | ../album.asp?id=9601#reviews - All reviews | ../Review.asp?id=126940#buymusic - Buy Music
Review by
../Collaborators.asp?id=4823 - micky
[Special Collaborator Italian Prog and Art Rock Specialist] Posted 3:27:44 PM EST, 6/27/2007 
Now before you read this review...please understand that I love the work of Franco
Battiato. All phases of his creative explorations. As a musician and amateur
painter in my youth I feel a kinship with an artist, and make no mistake Battiato is a
musical artist and genius of the first order, and their desire to express themselves
through their work. Sometimes art can connect with its audience... and sometimes it
doesn't. The true mark of a connoisseur of art is appreciating the effort, even when
the attempt leaves you baffled or colder than hell.This album is probably the most notorious of Battiato's albums.. the most infamous in a string of albums that are hard for even fans of him to appreciate. During the late 70's, as I've noted in previous reviews, Battiato put out a series of albums that explored minimimalist compositions. I do say compositions with a bit of irony of course. Consider sonic experiments.. albums that were made not for the record buying public in mind, but for the sole purpose of expressing an artist's desire to push the boundaries.. both the public's and his own. The album released in 1978 consists of two side longs. The self titled track takes up the first side. A typical listening experience can be summed up as the following.... 00:01 nice intro.. an ascending run of 6 acoustic piano notes played fabulously by Antonio Ballista 00:07... again.. the same 6 notes 00:13 ...ahh....the same 6 notes 1:03... ahhhh... how much did I pay for this album... same 6 notes 1:30.. wonder what Raffaella is making for dinner? 2:09... damn she looks good in that dress 3:10 .. HAH!!!!! he only played FIVE notes that time 4:00... same six notes... the weather sure was beautiful today 4:57 wow.... two quick 6 note patterns by the time you reach the 14:14 mark with the thunderous conclusion where the same 6 notes sections are split into two 3 notes parts. You are trembling with the release of dramatic tension. Now we move the side two with...you guessed it.. another side long titled Sud Afternoon. Here we have two pianist trying to outdo each each other by how little they can play. Just kidding... there is more going on with this track. Variations on a root chord.. with long pauses between them. Slightly more interesting than side 1. The unofficial word from Raffaella as she sits on the couch... god this is terrible.. bah.. she's a metal-head. This is art hahaha. *kiss* Anyway.. no room for 'air' piano on this. An easy album to review... I give it one star for the site. For fans.... I mean FANS of Battiato only. For myself.. again...I enjoy putting it on. If only to remember that if not for albums like this.. I might really think Genesis were boring hahha. 2 stars for me. Michael (aka micky) ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: sircosick
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 10:00
|
^ LOVE that second review ------------- The best you can is good enough... |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 10:06
| This is an interesting question. Personally I feel that Merzbow has a lot more artistic value than the stuff they play on MTV, which to some (or most?) people sounds more like music. However, not all noise is music. The thing that makes some noise music is that it's not just random noise, but a composed sequence of sounds that's designed to form a musical piece. Even if the piece was improvised or put together of seemingly random noise, the fact that the artist accepts it as a complete and finished work, makes it music and art. Or, from a commercial point of view, everything that's sold as music, is music. |
Posted By: fungusucantkill
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 10:24
|
I am a fan of the mainstream prog scene as well as the underground experimental noise rock. Personally, i treat them both the same. They both are done by respected artists. Unfortunetly, even the MTV band of the week that has that crappy catchy tune is still music. Everything is music. Its just a matter of opinion which is appealing to the listener.
-------------  
|
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 10:46
As my old aesthethic professor would say, elements that occur naturally or randomly can provoke an aesthetic experience, but do not qualify as art (or in this case music) until they are arranged into some form of order.
Genesis -- The Waiting Room. Exploring the fine line between music and noise.
|
Shakespeare wrote:Posted By: Bj-1
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 10:52
I agree on this too. I love noise, random sounds and feedback. And combining that with music makes it even better. Otomo Yoshihide and Ground Zero are good examples, combining noise, sampling and music (often jazz influenced) and making it interesting and great overall. I definitely think it's a line between noise and music, you just need the ears to handle it. ------------- RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on! |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 11:15
|
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder to be sure. Regarding harsh dissonance, there are times when I can appreciate it, and often I respect it and am interested in what it means intellectually. But for pleasure listening I'll take more traditional melodic sound. It's like food. Sure I'll try any new thing, and I can enjoy some weird stuff at the gourmet restaurant. But for comfort food, Mom's spaghetti or stroganoff wins every time. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 11:31
Yes, especially when he calls me a metalhead     ....Well, I have to say that, although I prefer some melody with my music, I also like quite a few pieces of music in which noise plays an important role - such as, for instance, Pink Floyd's "Interstellar Overdrive" or "A Saucerful of Secrets", or the whole of TMV's Frances the Mute album. However, for me the trick lies in the right balance between noise and melody, as in the aforementioned compositions. I know my aural limitations, and I am quite aware that a whole album made up of noise would put me off big time. |
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 11:34
Is disorder a form of order? |
Posted By: chamberry
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 11:45
I agree with both of these ideas. Personally I don't think there's a line between music and noise. This reminds me when I play prog in my house, My mom thinks its noise while I know it isn't. Her line between music and noise is pretty high because that kind of "sound" isn't appealing to her. The same thing can be taken to extremes when talking about Masonna, Merzbow, Sachiko, etc. So what I'm trying to say is that the line between music and noise is subjective. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 11:56
|
Everything that is disturbing or painful to the ears is noise.
To me, that's extreme Avant, Merzbow, Most Zeuhl and more...
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 12:02
Absolutely - ever listened to motorway traffic filtered by a row of houses? The sound of a water fall? Waves lapping the shore? A babbling brook? The wind blowing through autumn trees? The crackle of a roaring fire? The Air-conditioning in a grubby hotel on a hot day? The hum of a lift? The drone of the engines on a cruise ship? (it was actually an Aircraft carrier, but few have heard that)
Still can't understand why I paid good money for Sylvian and Czukay's Plight & Premonition though  ------------- What? |
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 12:05
ZEUHL!!?!?!?!?!?! |
Posted By: goose
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 15:58
|
Ah, if it's fun it's fun, that's all that matters to be. I like bleepy bloppy sounds and I like noise but I also like pretty tunes and harmonies, and there's definitely a spectrum between them. Music, or "sound organised in time," or whatever other label you'd care to slap on it, has a lot of different functions (or even sound not intentionally organised). Some people might want music to dance to, some people want music to take drugs to, some people want music to write treatises on, some people want music to fill the background, some people want music to wind down to... some people listen to recordings of birdsong! If you choose to listen to a certain sound, be it a Mendelssohn concerto or the wind rushing through the trees, or even a foghorn, who's to say it's any less valid as music than anything else? And who's to say a foghorn isn't less valid than a concerto? Many people would fiercely argue one way or the other, but I have learnt to relax and accept that not everyone wants to listen to the same things as me  . |
Posted By: andu
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 16:34
|
All (well, most...) Music, Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Poetry, Prose, Dance, Theatric Performance, etc., is Art, but not all Art is Music, Painting, Poetry, or whatever. Some Art is created beyond any limits of specific techniques and aesthetics, and is usually made to strongly, painfully contradict all we have come (at a point) to think about them; this Art (whether it was Dada, Neo-Dada, Performance Art, New-Media Art, Anti-Art) was always impossible to be perceived and liked as Painting, Theatre, Poetry etc. by the people from the respective eras, though it was always drawing itself from them. We owe to these forms of intellectual courage a lot regarding creativity & renewal. It's an essential part of the cycle consisting of innovation -> masterpiece -> trend -> stagnation -> regression -> renewal. We may not like it, but it deserves a lot of respect. That's my answer to this topic.
------------- "PA's own GI Joe!" 
|
Posted By: Bj-1
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 17:39
Zeuhl? Noise?! Unless you refer to Koenjihyakkei's second album (which isn't noise either really). Listen to Kultivator, Magma, Dun and Eskaton and you'll see that Im right.
Zeuhl is often very jazzy and melodic, but also with avant tendencies. NOT noise  ------------- RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on! |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 17:43
and a good answer it is  ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: avestin
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 17:44
|
A great read so far, I find my opinion to correlate with some here and getting some different perspective from others (which is what I was looking for obviuosly).
Carry on, it's an interesting discussion.
------------- http://hangingsounds.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - Hanging Sounds http://www.progarchives.com/ProgRockShopping.asp" rel="nofollow - PA Index of prog music vendors |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 17:52
|
indeed Asssf... a great read so far. Beats the normal sh*t that passes for topics around here.
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: cynthiasmallet
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 18:07
|
I think there is a line, but it's a ragged one. For instance Frank Zappa's "Didya Get Any Onya?" From "Weasels Ripped My Flesh" is a cracking listen, and many others think so. However, music that is (arguably) far better put together such as ANYTHING by The Ramones, I find unlistenable due to the sheer looseness and grit of the music. So there's my two cents ------------- Would you like to watch TV, or get between the sheets, or contemplate the silent freeway, would you like something to eat? |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 18:17
|
De-Loused in the Comatorium: Music Frances the Mute: "The line" Amputechture: Noise So yes, there is a line between music and noise. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 18:18
|
Well Assaf, interesting thread, very welcoming
 Of course there is a line between noise and music but it's so subjective. I am always intrigued by the choices of progheads, why do prog metal fans love the endless scale acrobatics, why do electronic fans love the hypnotizing sound of sequencers and synthesizers, why do King Crimson fans love the nerveracking improvisations, why do Gentle Giant and Frank Zappa fans love the complexity and unorthodox approach, why do I love to be carried away by Trons, Moogs and Hammonds? And why some progheads prefer dark music with agressive lyrics and covers while others like mellow sounds and fairy tale covers? Personally I am stunned by the huge amount of prog metal fans on Prog Archives because after 15 minutes most prog metal (in the past I worked for a Dutch rock magazine, I was offered dozens of prog metal to review
 ) is close to noise for me but Mike En Regalia & Co. will disagree about that ! |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:05
well said Erik... another vote for the art/music ... prog.... is subjective and not written in stone all jokes aside... do you listen to much of the 'wacky' avant stuff Erik.. for personal or for that mag of yours. If so what do you think of it? ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:12
I really don't see (er....hear...) Zeuhl as "disturbing or painful to the ears" is all. |
Posted By: Proletariat
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:21
|
All music is noise, but not all noise is music. If somthing is made for the purpose of listening its music if its just a biproduct of another activity and not intended to be listened to then its not. ------------- who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob |
Posted By: andu
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:21
|
Great reviews btw micky, seriously hahaha
------------- "PA's own GI Joe!"
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:23
thanks.... if you are going to review a one star album...make it one you like...and do it with style. interesting albums though... I just rate them differently that most it seems. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:24
Why no, they are opposites. You either have one or the other. It isn't art until some form of order, however loose, is imposed on it. That's why I chose to use The Waiting Room as my example. The first part of it sounds very random, with the band members producing various noises. But they are hearing and reacting to what each other does and making decisions about what they are going to do or not do and that provides the structure. But the point is that you can't call the waves crashing on the beach or wind whistling through the trees art because nobody has imposed any order (meaning) upon the experience. Art isn't art until it is filtered through someone, however loose that filtering might be.
Of course that doesn't make something GOOD art, necessarily. It's just a requirement for something to be art.
And that doesn't mean that you can't appreciate the waves crashing on the beach or even in your own mind impose some meaning or order on that. It just means that that ISN'T art.
|
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:29
I respectfully disagree. I think that making "random" noise is in a form of order, and that order is disorder. And I do think that the sounds of waves crashing on the beach is art. If someone recorded it, would you consider it art? Or, more specifically, music? If it was used as a song intro or as a track in an ambient song? Yes, right? (Maybe not, but just bear with me.) But does that mean that before recording equipment was available, this sound was not art? I think that it is art - and music - even without being filtered through a human being or one of his many devices. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:31
|
Not only is it subjective, I would say that it is also relative, the closer you are to a particular style of music the further away that line becomes. If you dislike a sub-genre then everything is noise, yet if you are a fan then only the most extreme will be noise to your ears.
Yes fans would never describe them as noise, yet my favourite Yes album, Relayer, is pure cacophony to me and could be pure noise to a non-fan.
In the realms of Avantgarde and Musique Concrète the boundary has been pushed so far to the left that it has disapeared from view, here it has been accepted that music can be dissonant, discordant, atonal and arrhythmic and still be music...
So by that could you state that any collection of sounds is music? No, not quite. It is only music when the artist says it is and presents it as such. (As Andu has mentioned Dada ) Duchamp's famous "Fountain" is Art because he presented it as a work of art - every other urinal ever manufactured, sold and installed is not displayed as a work of art, therefore is not Art.
If a seemingly random collection of found and created sounds is presented as an Artform then it is music, however if it is presented an CD of sound-effects then it is not Art and hence not music. It does not need to be modified, filtered or ordered to become music - the act of recording is enough. Once a sequence of random sounds are commited to "tape" they stop being random.
It does not matter whether the sounds were arranged or produced with any purpose or plan, just how they were presented. ------------- What? |
Posted By: andu
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:42
|
Excellent post , Dean. And regarding to the debate from the upper posts: there is such a thing as "structured chaos". This is one:  And another:  Now these paintings are almost a century old, the first one, and over half a century old, the second. Considering what has come after them, I could say they are very well organized chaotic structures... ------------- "PA's own GI Joe!"
|
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:48
| That's what I was getting at, Andu. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:52
 Kandinsky ... I had a framed print of that over my fireplace for years.  ------------- What? |
Posted By: andu
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 19:53
No. As Dean puts it, art is only that what comes from artistic intentions. What you are describing is natural beauty (as opposed to artistic beauty). BTW you're the drummer here and you should know, waves can be imitated by drums and percussion, why don't you give it a try? ------------- "PA's own GI Joe!"
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 20:18
Going back to the Waves on a Shore noise (since I introduced it  ) ... this can be regarded as music if the listener decides that it is - that would be a subjective assessment, two people sat on the beach listening to the sea would have differing views. But now the artistic intention is in the act of listening, not presenting.
However, if I recorded it and (tried) to sell it as music that would be an objective statement.
It's like the famous quote from Dracula...
------------- What? |
Posted By: rileydog22
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 20:21
|
Any art in audio form is music. If an artist records noise, or even silence, that's music. When someone says "that's not music!" it merely shows ignorance as to what music truly is. I think John Cage summed it up best: "You don't have to call it music if the term offends you." -------------   |
Posted By: Apsalar
Date Posted: November 11 2007 at 21:06
|
my ideas come very close to what Dean has said above. From an objective viewpoint, music is sound recorded for musical purposes. An interesting point 'bout natural sound in the natural environment. for me, nature is quite musical, upon many occasions I don't like listening to music in a natural environment as I feel the are so many interesting sounds I'm missing out on, especially when in under-ground train stations. While in other cases these extra additives can certainly enhance this style of anti-music. There recently was a concert in Sydney, where a group of improvisational musician played a concert on a rock platform in the bush near my parent house, integrating environmental sounds along with audience interaction into their performance. Disorder in an interesting question. A recent concert by 'leafcutter John' demonstrates this approach quite well, imo. The instruments consisted of a laptop computer and a bike. Placed under the floor boards of the concert hall were electronic censers, which sent signals to a program (MAX/msp) running on the computer. Setup in the program were numerous pre-recorded sounds, which were triggered by John riding over the censored sections of the floor. Again the audience were encourage to participate in the undertakings, left free to meander 'round the concert hall. Just though I would leave everyone with this interesting video 'bout the no-input musicians from the onkyo scene. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl8IMc-8-N8 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl8IMc-8-N8 |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 02:55
But that interference is there, and it's an introduction, it makes a statement (of a kind.) I think we have to quantify that as art, however minimalistic the actual artistry might be. And there lies the difference between art and noise. Intelligent editing of some kind. The insertion of some form of order upon chaos. When you find something you think of as artistry in nature, your own mind is imposing it's own order upon what you perceive. Like I said earlier, it's possible to experience an aesthetic experience directly from nature. But in such cases it is your own mind imposing order and meaning upon what you perceive. And it is not artistry because that requires an Other who imposes that stuff. Now in aesthetic theory there is also a requirement that ssuch a structure imposed appeals to one or more types of emotion, but we won't get into that, because if you are perceiving something as art, it appeals to you and that requirement has been fulfilled already.
P.S. I got an A in aesthetics for citing Yes's Perpetual Change as an example, oh so many years ago.
 |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 03:02
Art comes from the order or structure imposed upon the medium, but not necessarily from the INTENTIONS of the artist. Surely you have experience a work of art that meant one thing to you and something strikingly different to someone else. An artist just arranges the material to the best of his ability to lead to a cohesive whole, what those materials build is ultimately determined by how you put them together.
Is Hamlet a coward? Is he brave? Is he reckless?
All three of those answers have been given and voluminously supported with examples from the text. It's how you put together the pieces that you are given in your own mind that determine meaning.
An accepted meaning is not required for art. A structured presentation that evokes an emotional response is all that is required.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 14:17
|
I'd say consciously organized noise is music. ------------- 
|
Posted By: andu
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 14:19
I bet that does not apply to Kayo Dot if I ask you ------------- "PA's own GI Joe!"
|
Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 14:21
I said "SOME"!
Some Zeuhl, like Ruins & Magma can be enjoyable at times.
But when i heard Koenjihyakkei: PAINFUL!
 |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 14:24
I've never said KD is not music...
I've asked whether it's GOOD music, though...
And as the definition of GOOD music doesn't exist, then I'm the only one able to define if it's good or no for me.  -------------
|
Posted By: Bj-1
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 14:29
It's still not "noise" genre speaking ------------- RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on! |
Posted By: Abstrakt
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 14:30
Maybe not Noise. But it's painful to listen to, just like Noise
|
Posted By: heyitsthatguy
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 14:45
I know you hate Amputechture, people have opinions, fine with me...but to call it not music? I think your ears would bleed if ever subjected to Merzbow ------------- 
|
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 15:38
This thread could also have been named "Is there a line between musical adventure and noise" For example, take King Crimson on stage, how many times their improvisations were close to cacophony or 'organized chaos'? And what about Fred Frith his music, very innovative but to me it sounds nerveracking! I am delighted about Keith Emerson his Moog explorations but I know progheads who call it quite noisy. I love Pink Floyd but at some moments it WAS noise like on Ummagumma but to others it sounds as interesting musical ideas  ...
|
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 15:47
Actually, you said MOST. |
Posted By: Bj-1
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 15:49
Pwnd  ------------- RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on! |
Posted By: avestin
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 16:15
|
I have received a promo cd from a group called Random Touch which can serve as a good example for this discussion.
I find this to be creative, progressive and original music. I am sure other will say this is just noise made some unusual instruments and has no artistic value.
http://www.randomtouch.com - www.randomtouch.com
By the way, Dean, great posts, very interesting and thought provoking (and Andu and Ghost Of Murphy as well).
------------- http://hangingsounds.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - Hanging Sounds http://www.progarchives.com/ProgRockShopping.asp" rel="nofollow - PA Index of prog music vendors |
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 16:26
That band is absolutely brilliant. I think I may have to get their album.
...and Shakesy? AND SHAKSEY? |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 16:31
|
We are trying to draw the line (or locate it approximately) between
music and noise, but how if we are not even able to define these two
(sub) sets? What is music? As someone said, music is a set of organised sounds. I agree. If I play a harpsichord, if I program a sequencer, if I yell and stump my feet, these are all sets of organised sounds. But if I fight with my parents, if I whisper to my girlfriend, if I ask my friend a favour , that's also a set of organised sounds. Is the purpose the same? In both cases - I'm trying to provoke a emotion, reaction. We know that the first case is art, and the second one is not. Why is that so? As Andu mentioned, art is only that what comes from artistic intentions. But what on Earth is an artistic intention?!? Anyone? Please!? ------------- |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 16:32
|
Music is sound organised in time.
If the sound is not organised in some way, it's only noise.
Sound may be organised by the beholder - so what constitutes noise is anyone's guess.
Unwelcome sounds? ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 16:34
In my opinion, no. Lots of music that I don't like are "unwelcome sounds", but I know that is music. ------------- |
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 16:40
The waves crashing on the beach are (not) art no more or less than a piece of branch that looks like a human figure, or cliff that looks like a whale. Of course, you can record ambient sounds, but in a same way you can add your signature under a mountain. ------------- |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 17:16
Really?
To whoever is listening to it, maybe - but if I'm trying to get some sleep, then I'm telling you - that's noise. ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 17:20
It would only take an artist with a "name" to do just that.
As to waves crashing on a beach, there are about 20 minutes of those on Camel's "Harbour of Tears" - and it's part of the album, therefore it's part of the music as the artists intented.
Maybe I should go back through this thread, but time is short...
>Is John Cage's 4'33" music? ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 17:21
Assuming that it evokes a response in somebody, I'd say that you are right.
|
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 17:22
|
Clarke2001: ironical anology that Vincent Van Gogh painting (in your zig) because in those days his style was considered as quite 'noisy' but nowadays his style is 'hot'
|
Posted By: Shakespeare
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 17:29
Yes t is organized silence. |
Posted By: Chris H
Date Posted: November 12 2007 at 17:36
|
Personally, I think it's all about opinion.
Any music can be considered noise and any noise can be considered music. That's about all there is to it really. ------------- Beauty will save the world. 
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 03:12
Christo and Jeanne-Claude effectivelly did that in Austrailia:
 ------------- What? |
Posted By: goose
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 03:25
Logically, if you allow that any piece of music can contain rests, this is just a piece of music with four (?) consecutive, very long rests. I don't think it would be said that the use of a general pause for effect in a piece is unmusical, and these are certainly pauses used for effect. |
Posted By: A B Negative
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 06:06
Soundgarden's version is my favourite (although they did play it a bit faster than most people are used to).
I agree that music is organised sound (or silence) but I don't know why I love AMMMusic and can't stand Revolution #9 by The Beatles. It may be that I get the idea that The Beatles are just playing at being avant garde, so my preconceptions as a listener are having a bearing on how I respond to the music.
I've just heard that a group called Zeitkratzer has released an orchestral version of Lou Reed's Metal Machine Music. I'm going to look for it in the local HMV at lunchtime... ------------- "The disgusting stink of a too-loud electric guitar.... Now, that's my idea of a good time." |
Posted By: A B Negative
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 08:13
|
...HMV didn't have it. What a surprise! ------------- "The disgusting stink of a too-loud electric guitar.... Now, that's my idea of a good time." |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 08:38
Theyre not rests - they're movements.
Don't miss the point - the music is generated in the ambience - it's not a series of pauses at all - and it's not about silence, it's organised sound. It's simply that the sounds themselves are random - that doesn't make them any less intentional.
This was a logical extension of Cage's experiments with randomness in music - random factors applied to pitch, duration - even timbre, by attaching various objects inside a piano to create the "prepared piano".
In 4'33", we have organisation - a specific (although entirely optional) duration for the piece - and we have sounds which occur within that organised structure.
Don't confuse the piece with Fünf Pittoresken by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Schulhoff - Erwin Schulhoff , written 14 years earlier - that was just rests - and a Dadaist experiment rather than a true composition.
If you can't get it at HMV, try Amazon; http://www.amazon.co.uk/433-John-Cage/dp/B000003070/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1194961059&sr=8-1 - http://www.amazon.co.uk/433-John-Cage/dp/B000003070/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1194961059&sr=8-1
ah... you meant this; http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h_?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=+Zeitkratzer+Metal+Machine+Music.&Go.x=10&Go.y=9 - http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h_?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=+Zeitkratzer+Metal+Machine+Music.&Go.x=10&Go.y=9 ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 09:01
(not trying to pick on your posts, you just ask/raise some good questions
)I think it's self-explanatory really - you're not trying to create art when you argue with your parents, but it could be recorded and used in a piece of music.
All of the things you mention are communication, and music is a type of sonic communication - hence the similarities - although as the poet Craig Raine once said "You can't use music to tell people where their baggage is at an airport".
The intention of communication is everything - working out what the artist intended is part of the fun of listening to music (for me, at least...), and part of why we misunderstand each other so frequently, ie, not many people find enjoyment in working out the "artists'" intentions, rather they would prefer, or find it easier to make their own interpretations.
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 12:46
| It occurs to me that many of the different opinions in this thread arise because different people mean different things when they say "noise." |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 14:18
^ wise words Phillip, but isn't that the essence of Assaf's original question:
...it does appear that this imaginary line varies from person to person as their personal perception of what is or is not music is set by their own personal boundaries. Is it simply that "noise" takes the listener out of their comfort zone?
So another question would be how is this line set from one person to the next. Is it simply a matter of education, learning to explore new boundaries and experimenting with pushing the received limits of what is acceptable? Or is it something hardwired that cannot be altered?
By that I suppose I am asking whether it is possible to educate someone into accepting Merzbow (or Faust or whatever) as music in the same way that "education" can teach students to understand modern-art as Art?
------------- What? |
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: November 13 2007 at 14:32
|
Not if its done from an artistic view point ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 02:33
Oh, undoubtedly, but I'm the wrong person to tell you how to go about it. I'm sure there are people who would be far more qualified to answer this question around somewhere. I will say that I personally have never been able to play a piece of music proficiently without learning to appreciate it, if not like it.
But bad music is still music, even if it doesn't work for you,, because it works for others. I take noise to be something completely different, although I must admit some sympathy for Buddy Rich's postion here. The story goes that near the end of his life he was in a hospital room. A nurse was there attending him and apparently he groaned or something because she asked him if something was wrong.
He replied, "Country music."
|
Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 02:43
|
sounds: 1)unorganised set of sounds 2)organised set of sounds 2.1)for the purpose of communication (excl. communication artist-audience) 2.2)for the artistical purposes 2.2.1)standalone music 2.2.2)non-standalone music examples: 1. traffic jam (non-musical to many), bird song (musical but not music) 2. any set of sounds that humans organise for communication, artistic or otherwise 2.1 speech, yelling, laughter etc. (in communication with other persons) 2.2 organised for the artistic purposes, musical or otherwise 2.2.1 anything that you use to reflect a (piece of) nature (the very definition of art: to be a reflection of a nature) that could stand alone without other media 2.2.2 same as above but incorporated in other art forms (sound effects for a theatre play) This sections may intersect to some extent: you can use music (2.2.1) as speech (2.1) (singing a song to a girl to express love, singing a weeping song to express sorrow for dead grandparent). (Same can be done (also in a limited way) with other art forms; if I am a painter and I paint oil on canvas with explicitly erotic content and I give it as a present to a girl, I'm also trying to tell her something.) Sound effects (2.2.2) are used combined with some other art form (multimedia art project, theatre, dance, movie). They can also be a standalone musical piece without a host (soundtrack), but the listener must mentally host music into the border of a context. You can listen a soundtrack without knowing that is a soundtrack or without knowing the existence of a movie, but however, music must be NESTED in an orchestra or on a recorded CD. Sheet music on a piece of paper is also art; because the written play never played on stage could be readen and experienced artistically. However, if music exist only in one's head, it doesn't exist as art (same for all art forms). Of course, if we accept a point of view that art that was/is/never will be experienced doesn't exist at all. The perfromed concerto in a hall or on a sea shore is not the same thing if composer intended to incorporate the sound of seagulls and waves. If that wasn't composers intention, then those sounds are simply a background noise during the performance, like a cough in audience. So music is all about context: nesting, hosting, packaging, quod errat demonstrandum. ------------- |
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 03:08
|
For me, its really about presentation. If someone goes into the studio and bangs the living hell out of the instruments, kicking the chairs all over the room, and slamming windows/doors, I do consider that noise. But, if its organized in some pattern, no matter how chaotic, than its more than just noise. (Even chance music is still organized in some way, though unpredictable, thus I still consider that music).
However, that doesn't mean it can't be enjoyable. As I'm sure almost everyone in this thread has said, its certainly up to personal taste. I remember last year in my Intro to Music class, my teacher played this piece (which I unfortunately can't recall the name of) which was written without defined meter and very unconventionally. And the music reflected that. It was mostly if not all dissonant, jagged, undefined, and realitively brutal (especially compared to everything else we listened to). Anyway, this one girl started to freak out when it started to play. She was sitting across the room and I could hear her say, 'what the hell is this? Oh God...you can't call this music. Turn it off!' It made me laugh, mostly because I was enjoying it like nothing else. Me personally, I can listen to a straight noise album, however I don't think I would constantly or consistantly.
Aside from that tangent, I think the best use of noise, and probably the most musical would be in combination with something more melodic. I would also think more people would be willing to accept this as music, instead of just straight up, unrestrained noise (which is fun to make nevertheless...
).After reading over my post I realized I never explictly answered the question: No, for me there is no line, even though I would consider some things noise (which I could also define as music. Another little story: Over the summer I got a new roof put on my house. Certainly the noisiest thing I've heard. However, after awhile it kinda took me into a trance...the consistant pounding, the random slams, bangs, bashes, the almost rhythmic pattern of the nail gun being fired...afterwards I kinda whished I taped it). ------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 03:14
|
In all seiousness, I suppose we define music subjectively. I'd like to say there in some definite answer to what music is exactly, but any line drawn by someone else will have a counterexample by another person, and how can one possibly overrule a counterexample based on opinion in fairness. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 03:59
I think that "Sound organised in time" is as objective as you can get - there's no opinion in that sentence, although it is rather open-ended;
Obviously, speech is sound organised in time - and we wouldn't generally consider speech to be music (although it's true that Schoenberg developed a spoken/singing style which he called "Sprechgesang", and even some Operas, such as Mozart's "Die Zauberflote" include speech in places, despite the proliferation of recitative).
The other twist to "Sound organised in time" is that anyone can do it - ie, the listener can choose to "organise" sounds by listening for patterns, or even the absence of patterns, if that is what "does it", that create intellectual or emotional stimulation.
Therefore, anyone can be the artist in this scenario, such that music and noise are effectively what we choose them to be, and thus deeply subjective.
It's precisely this co-existing objective/subjective nature of music/art that I find so fascinating about it.
In terms of a "composition", however, I much prefer to explore the composer's objective intentions than my own subjective reactions to it - that way I get to listen to and enjoy a huge variety of music - and can at least attempt to judge it on its own merits rather than my personal taste.
Once you reach an understanding of what the composer was trying to do, the music can take on an extra level of meaning and enjoyment - and even pieces like "Gesang Der Junglinge", "Revolution #9" or "Moon Child" cease sounding like random noise and more like music with artistic intentions.
...so yes, there is a line between noise and music - it all depends on where you choose to draw it at this current time in your life, depending on how intently you choose to listen to what is being communicated to you.
"No man means all he says, and yet very few say all they mean, for words are slippery and thought is viscous."
Henry Brooks Adams ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 05:19
 ------------- What? |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: November 14 2007 at 15:39
|
My music theory teacher stressed this definition:
"Music is the organization of sounds and silences designed to elicit an emotion."
This is a sufficient condition of music, but not a necessary one, in my mind. Music can be accidental, with no intention to make music at all. For example, one shouldn't think a bird's song is designed to illicit an emotion in humans, but it often does (and we hardly regard the illiciting of emotions in non-humans in considering music anyway. How selfish.
). Also, the term "organization" implies conscious design, which I don't think is necessary for something to be music. So, how about this definition:"Music is the not-necessairly conscious organization of sounds and silences that illicits an emotion in a listener."
Perhaps that is even too narrow. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 01:20
|
Good news, everyone... I found the line: http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/the_jesus_and_mary_chain/psychocandy/">  _____________________________________________________________________ http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/lou_reed/metal_machine_music/">  |
Posted By: Teh_Slippermenz
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 01:53
|
I can give you a simple answer: "Trespass" by Genesis is music. "Eaten Back to Life" by Cannibal Corpse is noise. God-awful noise. |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 02:22
Of course there is -- but it's largely subjective. 
What's music to some is noise to others, and vice-versa.
I think there'd be broad agreement, though, as to any given sonic phenomenon's fitness to even be in consideration for music status (even if pleasure/displeasure responses would vary widely).
I think music has to be deliberate -- an attempt by a thinking, sentient being to create music (thus I wouldn't accept unmanipulated patterns of sounds from nature -- no matter how pleasing -- or industry, as "music").
I suppose it is possible that whales and other advanced animals might have an artistic "esthetic" in their "songs," but as I'm not a whale, it's not music to me.  ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 03:03
I can give you a simple caveat: In your opinion... ------------- 
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: November 15 2007 at 16:40
|
Very cool, thoughtful thread.
Here's my contibution: Merzbow, Cannibal Corpse and Keith Rowe are music. Sean Kingston is noise. |
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: November 16 2007 at 14:37
Sorry for the double post, but
What beautiful music. Thank you for posting this. |
Posted By: Philéas
Date Posted: November 17 2007 at 17:17
| If the artist considers it music, it is music. |