Actually I would vote for a combo. Musicians and acousticians have no clue about how the brain works and vice versa.
-A on 8/1/05 7:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 8/1/2005 7:27:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> Without knowing more details, I also instinctively question what seem to be >> totally arbitrary criteria for transforming brain waves into "music." > > That was precisely my concern, John. That the frequency mix in the brain > waves themselves falls within an extended definition of music that goes back > at > least to Charles Ives is beyond dispute. > > But these people are heavily into the transcription business, almost > certainly to provide a familiar cultural context for their test subjects. In > any case, > we're not talking about the original sounds anymore. My question is: do you > want to trust neuropsychiatrists to do this kind of thing, or would you rather > hand the task over to composers and acousticians at a place like CCRMA? I > assume that members on this board would vote for the latter. > > --David Lawrence > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
