---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
That's what Cartier-Bresson said of his work during numerous interviews. Ofcourse his work is artistic, he simply had other and higher ideas about what art is, ideas he tried to fulfill late in life, nothing of which came close to much of what he produced with a camera. The work of Edward Steichen is wonderful and is reaching astronomical prices these days. "Calling Curtis an amateur musician is just like calling yourself a non-professional photographer." If he makes a living from it he obviously is a professional, is's his claim that he creates art that piss me off. In my ears it's mostly noise and believe me, I like much music that by many is considered "noise" or weird Collection of sounds. Again, and for the last time; Claiming to be an artist just because others are willing to pay for it is just foolish and comes from an ego out of control. M: No Nabbie, I don't say I am an artist because I make my total living from it, that is what makes me a professional musician. The word artist is my job description in the agencies who get me business as an artist on their roster of artists who offer serves in the arts to people who want to hire artists to perform art in artistic venues. The ego out of control is the person who believes that his subjective opinion about what art he prefers should be the deciding factor in using a word that relates to the product created by people in the arts. You are imposing subjective snob standards because no one told you that you are not in charge of what is and is not, art. Consider this your notice. Karlheinz Stockhausen - Mittwochs-Gruß http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnC-RKm12ZI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnC-RKm12ZI Karlheinz Stockhausen - Mittwochs-Gruß http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnC-RKm12ZI Mittwoch aus Licht - Mittwochs-Gruß The greeting of the opera WEDNESDAY from LIGHT. The Wednesday Greeting consists of the electronic music from the fourth s... View on www.youtube.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnC-RKm12ZI Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote : Interesting that Cartier-Bresson spent a lot of time drawing and painting, especially after he retired from photography, so calling himself not an artist is rather peculiar. There are lots of photographers that think photography can be an art. I have always thought of it this way. Take this atmospheric photograph of the Flatiron Building in New York City made in 1904 by Edward Steichen. Just like music, painting, sculpture, photographic images can have compositional and tonal integrity. Calling Curtis an amateur musician is just like calling yourself a non-professional photographer. In photography as well as music there are amateurs who are more capable artistically than professionals, but they do not make their living that way. A professional has to produce consistent results day in and day out, they have to be reliable. Bad musicians sing and often play out of tune, so it is less likely they could survive professionally. Photography is so common place, and cameras ubiquitous today, that it is probably difficult for photographers with the run-of-the-mill stuff that just about any idiot can produce photographically today. Most people can tell the difference between a good musician and a bad one, but most of them cannot tell a good photograph from a bad one, in part because photography is a very mechanical profession compared to playing an instrument, which requires some considerable skill to be even barely competent. I think your criticisms of Curtis's ability is far off the mark. Perhaps you are discombobulated by his intellect, which is certainly more powerful than yours or mine. This can be very annoying if you have a strong emotional attachment to TM. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote : --In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : You are right, different instruments obviously need different approaches to training. My suggestion was a hint only, to sit down and listen to one note at the time which should be done regardless of instrument and would benefit any amateur who often tries to accomplish too much too soon. M: This is called every day of my life Nabbie. Check out Well Worn Blues and Love in Vain even in preview on CDBABY on my Well Worn Blues CD and you will see an example of what you are talking about. The start of Well Worn Blues is being played on a single string diddley bow on a board I made to preserve the tradition of single string instruments from the history of blues. Wont cost you a penny! ♫ Well Worn Blues - Curtis Blues. Listen @cdbaby http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/curtisblues2 http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/curtisblues2 ♫ Well Worn Blues - Curtis Blues. Listen @cdbaby http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/curtisblues2 Click to listen at CDBaby View on www.cdbaby.com http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/curtisblues2 Preview by Yahoo Regarding your last question. I'm certainly producing "soulless pictures for money". There is no artistic merit in this whatsoever, though I do try to make every picture "sing", if not able to do that to some extent I would have no clients. Art in photography ? There are many but I like to mention Cartier-Bresson for many reasons, one being that he strongly denied that he was an artist :-) ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote : Okay Nabbie, I listened to the Robert Johnson recording and to some of Curtis's recordings on YouTube. This is regarding you one note theory of music here. Granted some instruments tone productions can be a thing that must be practised, sounding a note on a violin is rather complex. But many instruments such as the piano, just about anyone can strike a note and it sounds the same. It is the relationships between the notes that make music not just one note. Beauty in a single note is in the eye of a beholder. Take the saxophone. This was originally intended to be a classical instrument, but for the most part it ended up in jazz, brass bands, on the popular side of the tracks. Classical saxophone playing is generally very smooth and mellow. While jazz players are often rather raspy in tone. You have to consider the style of music being played. If you consider 'beauty of tone' as a criterion, most jazz saxophonists sound like crap next to a good classical player. But the classical player probably could never replicate the style of the jazz players. YouTube is not the best way to hear music. It is compressed and often recopied and recompressed many times. Consumer video recorders have microphones that have distorted frequency response, often boosting the highs, and they are recorded at the camera location, not with optimum placement. The Robert Johnson recording is a solo, and 1936 recording technology loses both deep bass and much of the high frequencies (and an abrasive was added to the shellac of 78rpm records to keep the needle from wearing them down too quickly). His sound on the reproduction on YouTube is dead because it has been processed to remove the noise of that technology. So when you compare the musical sound of different musicians, you have to account for how the recording technology, and the recording engineer affect the final sound. Studio recordings tend to be different than live recordings. The atmosphere is more relaxed in a studio recording, and the need to project to an audience is absent so the sound might be more intimate. A completely acoustic performance without amplification requires projecting to the audience, and such a performance might sound a bit more intense than one in a more intimate setting. Comparing solo guitar and voice with what Curtis does with additional instruments is not a telling comparison. The ability to play slowly is nice, but a pro has to be able to handle rapid passages with ease, and without making serious errors. Now I can play slowly, because I am not that skilled, and have no other choice, lacking technical fluency. Five-year-old children can play the piano far better than I ever will. I am pretty good with single notes too. I can play them loud, soft, and in between. There are kinds of music I like, music I like less, and music I do not like, but I do not consider those performing music I do not like as crude etc., because I have not really investigated their artistry and style; some of these musicians seem to be fantastic in their technical ability. I mostly listen to Western European music, Bach, Handel, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven and so forth, so I have a musical bias, I almost never listen to pop, jazz, musicals, rock, or blues. Learning something about the style of a particular kind of musics helps to appreciate more, even if in the end, you do not like it. For example, I do not like rap, but it takes a tremendous amount of rhythmic and verbal and literary skill to produce it. I read somewhere on FFL you were a photographer. Are you an artist or a hack (just taking soulless pictures for money)? I do not believe you have ever given us a sample of your work. I am sure there are critics in the audience who would be glad to evaluate your artistic ability. What do you consider to be art in the field of photography? If we are discussing art versus non art, there must be some general criterion or criteria by which to evaluate it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : "If Curtis were as bad as you say, what do you think he should do to improve?" Good question. First of all I'd recommend practise, practise, practise. He could start by hitting one note at a time, just one note and listening to it, how it sounds, vibrates and how the sound slowly disappears. Just that, very simply and innoscently create one sound, and then listen to it, how pleasing is that sound, does it sound better doing it in another way ? And again, and again, and again. By doing this one acquires an understanding of the basics and a love for the note itself. Without this basics one is lost and will never achieve anything. One should understand that the ability to play fast on any instrument is not the same as playing music. To be able to play slowly is the hallmark of a professional. Many amateurs, like Curtis, make this mistake; they skip the basics and try to convey too much. I recommend you to listen to the video I posted by Robert Johnson. Where is the showmanship in this ? There isn't any because his heart is in it. When you listen to this, perhaps you better understand my disgust when fellows like Curtis comes along claiming to play the blues. Robert Johnson - Kind Hearted Woman Blues (1936) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82yNxiF-T4A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82yNxiF-T4A Robert Johnson - Kind Hearted Woman Blues (1936) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82yNxiF-T4A This Song contains the only guitar solo Robert Johnson ever recorded. I very good example for his amazing talent. He plays rhythm and lead guitar on one inst... View on www.youtube.com https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82yNxiF-T4A Preview by Yahoo
