Darcy James Argue wrote:
[snip]
No, it absolutely does. Let me try one last time:
Dog bites man.
Man bites dog.
What's the difference? Same three words. Different meaning. What
accounts for the difference?
Grammar. Grammar controls meaning.
Actually, meaning controls grammar.
We have the
You seem to me to be arguing that acoustics are part of the musical
content of a work of music, where I'm saying that it is only the
mechanism by which the content is conveyed.
Can to define this elusive content without reference to physics?
___
In all of these words about words, it may be that the hangup is the word
'significant'. Perhaps all he is saying is that grammar is not the meaning
and the words themselves are not the meaning. If I am on the right track
then he would also say that sound (and hence any aspect of physics) is not
On Feb 9, 2005, at 2:53 PM, John Howell wrote:
Bernouli's law, ...Same law that holds up both fixed-wing and
rotary-wing aircraft.
Actually, that can't be the case, though everybody thinks it is. If
Bernoulli's law were responsible for lift in aircraft, airplanes
wouldn't be able to fly
On Feb 9, 2005, at 4:20 PM, Mark D Lew wrote:
I assume that by age of 150 you mean 150 years after birth*. When I
wrote the first post I thought I had examples, but now that I do the
math, I find the ones I had in mind went out of fashion around age
75-100 and thus don't meet your test. I'...
Since he dangle his grammatical temporal dongle, I wonder if he'd
clarify
if he meant the fame from the late 18th century on, or the composer
from
the late 18th century on.
Dennis
Fame--or rather, reputation, wh. is what I was really talking about.
Andrew Stiller
Kallisti Music Press
Regarding physics and music, can I walk out on the ice and suggest that a
distinction needs to be made between physics as a discipline of study, on
the one hand, and the term being used to refer to the actual forces, etc.,
that function in the universe? After parsing through these interesting
At 11:06 AM -0500 2/10/05, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Feb 9, 2005, at 2:53 PM, John Howell wrote:
Bernouli's law, ...Same law that holds up both fixed-wing and
rotary-wing aircraft.
Actually, that can't be the case, though everybody thinks it is. If
Bernoulli's law were responsible for lift in
David W. Fenton wrote:
No one is a bigger fan of Mozart than I am. But I have always felt
that the Magic Flute is incoherent *as an opera* (or Singspiel,
technically speaking, I guess). If it did not have some of the most
glorious music ever written, it would be a failure. But so far as I
can
On 10 Feb 2005 at 0:36, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 10 Feb 2005, at 12:26 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 10 Feb 2005 at 0:09, Darcy James Argue wrote:
No, it absolutely does. Let me try one last time:
Dog bites man.
Man bites dog.
What's the difference? Same three words.
Darcy James Argue / 05.2.10 / 00:09 AM wrote:
No, it absolutely does. Let me try one last time:
Dog bites man.
Man bites dog.
What's the difference? Same three words. Different meaning. What
accounts for the difference?
Grammar. Grammar controls meaning.
Or may be the grammar style is
On 10 Feb 2005, at 12:26 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 10 Feb 2005 at 0:09, Darcy James Argue wrote:
No, it absolutely does. Let me try one last time:
Dog bites man.
Man bites dog.
What's the difference? Same three words. Different meaning. What
accounts for the difference?
The fact that
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:40, dhbailey wrote:
A friend of mine who is a professional violinist and violin teacher
has explained to me the importance of physical memory for the solo
violinist in regard to intonation as opposed to having a good ear.
The point is that hitting
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 7:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
I just pointed
out that if the music is incomprehensible without reference to
outside information that is not musical in nature, then it's not very
good music.
Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree there. I
Mark D Lew wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
. . . Is it important to know
that _The Magic Flute_ is full of Masonic symbolism? . . .
Perhaps, because otherwise, it's fairly incoherent. I would say that
proves that it's not a very good opera.
The fact that Flute has
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Feb 2005 at 17:56, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
. . . Is it important to know
that _The Magic Flute_ is full of Masonic symbolism? . . .
Perhaps, because otherwise, it's fairly incoherent. I would say that
proves that it's not a
Darcy James Argue wrote:
[snip]
Both a human and a pool-playing robot (like, say, Deep Green --
http://www.ece.queensu.ca/hpages/faculty/greenspan/) have to solve
exactly the same problem, which happens to be a problem of applied physics.
So one solves it with neurons and one solves it with
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Can someone communicate effectively without having consciously learned
the rules of grammar specifically (as opposed to picking up general
concepts of communication)? Certainly, children
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Hey, I'm not ignoring it! I was just trying to resist the urge to make my
no-doubt-anticipated musico-politically incorrect two-finger mouth salute
over Mozart's incessantly repetitive noodling.
I feel for you, too, Dennis.
On 09 Feb 2005, at 7:07 AM, dhbailey wrote:
Richard Yates wrote:
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Oooh, good one!
Can someone communicate effectively without having consciously learned
the rules of grammar specifically (as
At 10:33 AM -0500 2/9/05, dhbailey wrote:
Could you please explain what aspects of physics are in my conscious
thought while I'm playing the trumpet?
Physics is the science which defines and describes in precise detail
the actions and interactions. I don't concede that we're discussing
Andrew suggested that history's verdict on Janacek is long since
in. I think it's way too soon to say that. I can think of a dozen
opera composers who were considered great 75 years after their death
but were discarded by history 50 years later. (Plus a few more who
were great for a
On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, at 03:02 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
I cannot think of a single composer, in any genre, who having been
considered great at the age of 150, came to be considered
insignificant, or even minor, at any later time.
Composers, living or dead, do tend to go out of
On Feb 9, 2005, at 12:02 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
First of all, Janacek is not an opera composer--he wrote important
music in a wide variety of genres, and even were all his operas to be
forgotten the remaining body of work would be more than sufficient to
maintain his standing as a major
On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
For composers of age of 150, the limiting date is 1855. So your
description actually focuses on a few decades of composition, and on
those composers' current reputation. It neither proves nor
demonstrates anything.
How do you figure only a few
On Feb 9, 2005, at 3:16 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
Since he dangle his grammatical temporal dongle, I wonder if he'd
clarify
if he meant the fame from the late 18th century on, or the composer
from
the late 18th century on.
Ah, now I see the confusion. I assumed he meant fame from the late
Could you please explain what aspects of physics are in my conscious
thought while I'm playing the trumpet?
You are calculating the air pressures necessary using Bernoulli's Principle
and the modulus of elasticity of skin as it relates to the natural
vibrational frequency of the air column from
Bernouli's law, actually, making the lips buzz like any other double
(or single) reeds. Same law that holds up both fixed-wing and
rotary-wing aircraft. John
I cannot believe that someone else also mentioned Bernoulli! By the way, I
heard somewhere recently that the relative force of
On 9 Feb 2005 at 0:27, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 08 Feb 2005, at 7:30 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Feb 2005 at 1:31, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Please explain how you would build a pool-playing robot without
including some sort of physics module in the AI.
A human pool player
On 8 Feb 2005 at 22:07, Richard Yates wrote:
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Oooh, good one!
No, it's the same question as before, and the answer is that it is
significant to *enabling* it, but does not necessarily
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of any
particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a rather
nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in mind. Can you write some examples of
utterances in which you
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:33, dhbailey wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 7:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
I just pointed
out that if the music is incomprehensible without reference to
outside information that is not musical in nature, then it's not
very good music.
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:40, dhbailey wrote:
Darcy James Argue wrote:
[snip]
Both a human and a pool-playing robot (like, say, Deep Green --
http://www.ece.queensu.ca/hpages/faculty/greenspan/) have to solve
exactly the same problem, which happens to be a problem of applied
physics.
On 9 Feb 2005 at 5:19, Richard Yates wrote:
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Can someone communicate effectively without having consciously
learned the rules of grammar specifically (as opposed to picking up
On 9 Feb 2005 at 6:48, Richard Yates wrote:
I don't think anybody has said physics has no significance, just
that it is not part of people's conscious thought processes while
making music or playing pool.
My part of this thread has been to respond to the post that said:
Physics is
On 9 Feb 2005 at 19:28, Richard Yates wrote:
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of any
particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a
rather nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in mind. Can
On 9 Feb 2005 at 19:37, Richard Yates wrote:
It seems to me that you are willfully re-reading everything I've
written -- I'm talking about *musical* significance, and always have
been, and quite clearly.
There are those asterisks again! . . .
Asterisks are not equal to quotation marks.
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of any
particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a
rather nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in mind. Can you write some
examples of utterances in
On 10 Feb 2005 at 0:09, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 10 Feb 2005, at 12:04 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 9 Feb 2005 at 23:58, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 09 Feb 2005, at 10:36 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Physics has no necessary *musical* significance, just has grammar
has no
On 9 Feb 2005 at 21:11, Richard Yates wrote:
That doesn't mean grammar has any significance to the meaning of
any particular utterance (though it certainly *could*).
If you really believe this then I can only assume that you have a
rather nonstandard definition of 'grammar' in
At 2:31 PM -0500 2/7/05, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Monday, February 7, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Phil Daley wrote:
The first question: Was this (Cage's) music as successful
(moving, exciting, attractive) as other musics?
I don't see how anyone can argue a yes answer to this question.
The
And to get the point of the music, do you need to know this about the
origins of the idea?
If not, then it's not very important musically, in my opinion.
If so, then it's probably not very good music to begin with.
--
David W. Fenton
Depends what you consider important to know about different
At 4:22 PM -0500 2/7/05, David W. Fenton wrote:
The carpenter's tools are not the point of his work.
Unless, of course, you play that famous pre-Theramin instrument, the saw.
John
--
John Susie Howell
Virginia Tech Department of Music
Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240
Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax
On Tuesday, February 8, 2005, at 01:06 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
And BTW, it's not up to you to decide whether J's music is very good
or not. On that point, the verdict of history is in, long since.
Umm, what IS history's verdict on Janacek's music? I really like it,
but I'm not sure that
On Tuesday, February 8, 2005, at 02:24 PM, Stu McIntire wrote:
What modern composer IS known outside of academic circles?
Steve Reich, John Adams, and, in particular, Phillip Glass.
Thank you, at least two of those will do nicely for illustrative
purposes. Reich and Glass (and perhaps Adams,
[answering Andrew Stiller]
And BTW, it's not up to you to decide whether J's music is very good
or not. On that point, the verdict of history is in, long since.
Umm, what IS history's verdict on Janacek's music? I really like it,
but I'm not sure that counts for much. 8-)
I'm not
On 8 Feb 2005 at 1:31, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 07 Feb 2005, at 8:40 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
You don't think basketball commentators (and coaches, and players)
talk about angle, rebounds, arcs, etc?
That's not physics, except using a rather debased definition of it
that
On Feb 8, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
. . . Is it important to know
that _The Magic Flute_ is full of Masonic symbolism? . . .
Perhaps, because otherwise, it's fairly incoherent. I would say that
proves that it's not a very good opera.
The fact that Flute has remained popular for
As a
trained (but not completed) musicologist, I would suggest two names
that will be of great interest to scholars in 200 years because their
music has touched so many people: Paul McCartney (along with
whatsizname), whose throwaway songs still won't go away 40 years
later, and John
On 8 Feb 2005 at 17:56, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Feb 8, 2005, at 4:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
. . . Is it important to know
that _The Magic Flute_ is full of Masonic symbolism? . . .
Perhaps, because otherwise, it's fairly incoherent. I would say that
proves that it's not a very good
On Feb 8, 2005, at 3:52 PM, dhbailey wrote:
I don't think it has anything to do with faith -- history will be the
final arbiter, regardless of how great we currently may think any
composer (currently living or long dead) might be.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. When I said the permanence of history's
At 9:05 PM -0500 2/8/05, David W. Fenton wrote:
No one is a bigger fan of Mozart than I am. But I have always felt
that the Magic Flute is incoherent *as an opera* (or Singspiel,
technically speaking, I guess). If it did not have some of the most
glorious music ever written, it would be a failure.
Human beings do not think of equations and physics when they move --
they just move. Physics is involved, but not at any conscious level,
and not at any significant level.
On the contrary, the preparation for the precise movements in performing
music involves detailed conscious thought about
On 8 Feb 2005 at 21:31, John Howell wrote:
At 9:05 PM -0500 2/8/05, David W. Fenton wrote:
No one is a bigger fan of Mozart than I am. But I have always felt
that the Magic Flute is incoherent *as an opera* (or Singspiel,
technically speaking, I guess). If it did not have some of the most
On 8 Feb 2005 at 18:18, Richard Yates wrote:
Human beings do not think of equations and physics when they move --
they just move. Physics is involved, but not at any conscious level,
and not at any significant level.
On the contrary, the preparation for the precise movements in
Human beings do not think of equations and physics when they move --
they just move. Physics is involved, but not at any conscious level,
and not at any significant level.
On the contrary, the preparation for the precise movements in
performing music involves detailed conscious
On 08 Feb 2005, at 7:30 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Feb 2005 at 1:31, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Please explain how you would build a pool-playing robot without
including some sort of physics module in the AI.
A human pool player is not a pool-playing robot.
And that's the whole point.
Both a
Do you consciously think about grammar when you speak?
Is grammar significant to communication?
- Darcy
Oooh, good one!
Richard
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
But of course this very thing produced Cage himself. Cage didn't posit
an alternate but an inverse. His way was never free but rather, full
enslavement. Without the legacy of culture we would be as every other
living thing -- in perpetual present. His early stuff was great!
Less
ere is nothing important in music that comes from science.
--
David W. Fenton
You've really got to stop blurting out things like that w.o thinking.
Valved brasses? Boehm-system woodwinds? Electric and electronic
instruments? MIDI? Nylon strings? Computer composition? Computer
sound synthesis?
At 12:34 PM 2/7/05 -0500, Phil Daley wrote:
The first question: Was this (Cage's) music as successful (moving,
exciting, attractive) as other musics?
I don't see how anyone can argue a yes answer to this question. The
scientific proof would be that pretty much no one has ever heard of him
At 2/7/2005 01:31 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
I'll argue yes, and easily. I'm not an academic, and never have been. But I
If by 'other musics' you mean the bulk of music people listen to and buy,
then Mozart can't hold a candle in this argument either. But there are many
measures of success
Phil Daley / 05.2.7 / 00:34 PM wrote:
The first question: Was this (Cage's) music as successful (moving,
exciting, attractive) as other musics?
Woa. Never expected this to come.
I was very, very lucky to play his music under his direction one year
before he past away. His percussion pieces
On Monday, February 7, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Phil Daley wrote:
The first question: Was this (Cage's) music as successful (moving,
exciting, attractive) as other musics?
I don't see how anyone can argue a yes answer to this question. The
scientific proof would be that pretty much no one has
On 7 Feb 2005 at 11:32, Andrew Stiller wrote:
ere is nothing important in music that comes from science.
--
David W. Fenton
You've really got to stop blurting out things like that w.o thinking.
Valved brasses? Boehm-system woodwinds? Electric and electronic
instruments? MIDI? Nylon
On 7 Feb 2005 at 11:34, Andrew Stiller wrote:
You prove *your* assertion that, in
effect, consonance can exist in music in which dissonance is
never resolved.
Dumbarton Oaks Concerto. Last chord. QED
A schoolmarmish definition of unresolved you have here, as lots of
dissonances *before*
On 7 Feb 2005 at 12:06, Andrew Stiller wrote:
whether other critters can be said to
make music depends a lot on how music is defined.
Ah, finally a statement that shows that you *do* actually understand
the topic of discussion.
Speech uses sound to convey meaning (the prose of sound).
Phil Daley:
I don't see how anyone can argue a yes answer to this question. The
scientific proof would be that pretty much no one has ever heard
of [Cage] (outside of academic music people).
Now, *that's* not true. There's a major Hollywood actor who's taken
Cage's name as his own, and I
David--
You went to Oberlin? I went to school right down the road in Ashland. When
were you there?
On 2/7/05 3:31 PM, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] saith:
When he visited Oberlin while I was a student, his visit was actually
sponsored by the dance department.
Beyond that, there is the less measurable by very important influence
of acoustic and music-psychological theories upon compositional
styles, going back at least to Berlioz.
I would be interested to see specific examples in pieces of music
where these things produced events in the musical
On 07 Feb 2005, at 4:17 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 6 Feb 2005 at 23:39, Darcy James Argue wrote:
That's like saying There is nothing important in basketball that
comes from physics.
On the one hand, Lebron Lames doesn't actually need to know the first
thing about Isaac Newton or his theories in
Sorry All--
Didn't mean for this to go to the list...
On 2/7/05 3:56 PM, Allen Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] saith:
David--
You went to Oberlin? I went to school right down the road in Ashland. When
were you there?
On 2/7/05 3:31 PM, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] saith:
When he
On 7 Feb 2005 at 17:08, Andrew Stiller wrote:
Beyond that, there is the less measurable by very important
influence
of acoustic and music-psychological theories upon compositional
styles, going back at least to Berlioz.
I would be interested to see specific examples in pieces of
On 07 Feb 2005, at 8:40 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
You don't think basketball commentators (and coaches, and players)
talk about angle, rebounds, arcs, etc?
That's not physics, except using a rather debased definition of it
that includes just about anything involving motion.
David, that's just
On Feb 5, 2005, at 8:34 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Hi Chuck,
Well, clearly, we cannot perceive frequencies beyond those that our
hardware is capable of conveying to our brains. Other animals with
different hardware perceive a different range of frequencies. Some
animals (e.g., bats) even
And when you eliminate the concept of dissonance in the musical text
(i.e., the dissonances are never resolved),
--
David W. Fenton
I'm sorry, but this literally makes no sense as formulated, and there
have clearly been several logical steps omitted.
Let's do it this way: I deny what you say.
Jerry:
Birds don't make music -- they use sound for function.
Music has no function?
Bird song is not produced for joy but for vigilance.
You are making the common error of confusing the function of a
behavior with the subjective experience of the one behaving. If you
accept that birdsong is a
Maybe an interesting hypothetical question: does our hardware
(inner ear bones etc.) react to outside stimuli that bear some
relationship to the physical laws that govern the resonant behavior
of the bones themselves? Just an idle thought. I'm in no position
to explore this.
Chuck
The
Why was musical education considered (apparently) so important for
the girls and young women who studied with Vivaldi at the Ospedali?
One presumes that since orphans don't have dowries, they were being
prepared for employment. Was music a positive factor in that?
Never have seen anything
Of course, Andrew. I do know that. I must not have couched my hypothetical question in the best way.
What I meant to consider may be better expressed this way: since the human hardware is subject to the same principles of physics that govern the resonant behavior of those materials that produce
On 6 Feb 2005 at 13:17, Don B. Robertson wrote:
Owain Sutton wrote:
This is a good explanation of the situation - unfortunately it's
beyond the distance that even musicians are prepared to go to question
whether their understanding of music is inate or acquired. I do find
is scary, that
On 6 Feb 2005 at 15:26, Andrew Stiller wrote:
And when you eliminate the concept of dissonance in the musical text
(i.e., the dissonances are never resolved), --
David W. Fenton
I'm sorry, but this literally makes no sense as formulated, and there
have clearly been several logical steps
David W. Fenton wrote:
To those who assert that music is a purely cultural phenomenon, I
would point out that this idea has been put to the test, quite
rigorously, by John Cage, who insisted that any sounds or combination
of sounds could be construed as music if one merely had the will to do
so,
Owain Sutton wrote:
There have been some pretty intense commentaries about this
tension-release technique being sexually analogous and
gender-specific, and that in recent years, women composers have
emancipated their writing from the build-to-climax model implicit in
harmonic and architectural
On 5 Feb 2005 at 9:56, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 4, 2005, at 7:06 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 4 Feb 2005 at 8:23, Christopher Smith wrote:
Right. No dissonance, no consonance. It's not about that any more.
You have correctly understood, grasshopper!
Well, then, you
On 5 Feb 2005 at 10:33, John Howell wrote:
Since male musicians were trained in the church's choir schools--no
girls need apply--the girls who did get a musical education usually
got it in the home, from parents who were musicians.
Females were also trained in music in convents, but were
David W. Fenton wrote:
And when you eliminate the concept of dissonance in the musical text
(i.e., the dissonances are never resolved), then you no longer have a
distinction between the two types of intervals beyond the culturally
defined meanings the listeners bring to the table.
This is a
On Feb 5, 2005, at 7:02 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 5 Feb 2005 at 9:56, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 4, 2005, at 7:06 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 4 Feb 2005 at 8:23, Christopher Smith wrote:
Right. No dissonance, no consonance. It's not about that any more.
You have correctly understood,
At 7:13 PM -0500 2/5/05, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 5 Feb 2005 at 10:33, John Howell wrote:
Since male musicians were trained in the church's choir schools--no
girls need apply--the girls who did get a musical education usually
got it in the home, from parents who were musicians.
Females were
On 5 Feb 2005 at 19:48, John Howell wrote:
At 7:13 PM -0500 2/5/05, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 5 Feb 2005 at 10:33, John Howell wrote:
Since male musicians were trained in the church's choir
schools--no girls need apply--the girls who did get a musical
education usually got it in the
On Feb 5, 2005, at 7:20 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
And when you eliminate the concept of dissonance in the musical text
(i.e., the dissonances are never resolved), then you no longer have a
distinction between the two types of intervals beyond the culturally
defined
That's a straw man, Owain. Of course English isn't natural (read:
innate), but the common fundamental grammar (Chomsky's universal
grammar) that makes human language possible in the first place is
clearly innate, and, like the man says, universal.
No one is arguing that the Western system of
On 5 Feb 2005 at 19:54, Darcy James Argue wrote:
No one is arguing that the Western system of functional harmony is
natural or innate. . . .
Perhaps no one in this particular discussion has explicitly argued
that, but there are lots of people who *do* believe exactly that, and
that body of
On Feb 3, 2005, at 9:57 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 21:51, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 3, 2005, at 8:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 12:07, Andrew Stiller wrote:
In any event, emancipation of the dissonance certainly does not
imply elimination of the consonant. I
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 3, 2005, at 9:57 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 21:51, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 3, 2005, at 8:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 12:07, Andrew Stiller wrote:
In any event, emancipation of the dissonance certainly does not
imply
At 08:41 AM 2/4/05 -0500, dhbailey wrote:
they look for that good old mix of dissonance and consonance
where the composer builds the tension masterfully and controls the
release, so that the audience feels good at the end.
Let's mix it up some more! :)
There have been some pretty intense
On Feb 4, 2005, at 8:41 AM, dhbailey wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 3, 2005, at 9:57 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 21:51, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 3, 2005, at 8:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 12:07, Andrew Stiller wrote:
In any event, emancipation of
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
At 08:41 AM 2/4/05 -0500, dhbailey wrote:
they look for that good old mix of dissonance and consonance
where the composer builds the tension masterfully and controls the
release, so that the audience feels good at the end.
Let's mix it up some more! :)
There have
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 4, 2005, at 8:41 AM, dhbailey wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 3, 2005, at 9:57 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 21:51, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Feb 3, 2005, at 8:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 3 Feb 2005 at 12:07, Andrew Stiller wrote:
In any
At 09:23 AM 2/4/05 -0500, dhbailey wrote:
You mean to tell me that men are the only participants in a sexual
encounter who enjoy it? Come on, now, Dennis. That's not been my
experience! Why does the sexual analogy of the tension-release have to
be from a male point of view? I know of
1 - 100 of 231 matches
Mail list logo
