If he has constructive opinions, that is fine.

His response to my post was not at all constructive and was not based in fact. 
It was just that, his opinion. If he thinks that there is some spiritual or 
paranormal or I don't know what else sort of aspect to making music that is 
some emergent property then by all means he should clarify it. But, that's 
going to require a bit more than a bunch of sentences. What he's claiming is 
pretty much a religion. 

Do you take all op-eds that you see in the newspapers that you read as the 
gospel?

Some people look at change and are excited about the possibility. The other 
half complain about how things just aren't how they used to be. I seriously 
think that if the latter group of people did have a time machine and did have 
the option of going back in time they would probably not want to stay there. 
They always long for the good old days but completely ignore the fact that 
there were more problems back then (and worse problems) than there are today. 
Unless, I guess, you think it was perfectly alright for Mahler to have to go 
through the things he had to go through to conduct in Vienna?

"Things were so simple when I was growing up!"
"But how old were you?"
"I was nine, but still..."

The problem the traditionalists always have is that their definitions lie so 
far into the supernatural and romantic that and attempt to actually make a more 
concrete definition of existence is met with harsh criticism and protest. To 
call a spade a spade, or to see things as they really are is to not make them 
less important. It's far more important to me to see things as they actually 
are and improve upon them than to delude oneself - no matter how comforting.

The actions of the human brain (despite however complex) are still finite and 
measurable. They exist in the real world. They lie within the laws of physics. 
What we do as musicians is finite. It is not other-worldly. Yes, it is complex, 
but not immeasurably so. As such, it is entirely possible for a machine or 
robot to mimic the exact behavior of a human - or to even outdo it. They do not 
have sentience though, and until they do will still require human input. 

-William

 


  Hans Pizka's opinions have been valued by hornists around the world for 

many years. How sad that you take his thoughts to be rude, when indeed they 

are true.

  So William, do you forward to the time when we have robots teaching other 

robots how to play Mahler (who was NOT a robot) ?  Hopefully I won't be 

around !



 


_______________________________________________
post: [email protected]
unsubscribe or set options at 
https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org

Reply via email to