Wow, well said, SyXified. Harsh, but you told it like it is... I didn't want to be a dick or start a flame war, but as long as someone said what I wanted to, I'm happy. 
Rock on.
Rock on.
The longest piece ever (Organ2)
- Thread starter Luis
- Start date
scanner313
The EYE
Music is anything with pitch and rhythm. If those songs had these two elements, then they were music. I wouldn't call it GOOD music, but it is music nonetheless. I wouldn't call most rap GOOD music, but that is still music nonetheless.
Weird Al should write a song about you, as a musical parody of Dream Theater's A Change of Seasons. He can call it A Change of Subjects.
I was talking about the über long tune, not the 4'33" thing. I think that the latter is rediculous, and is not music. The super long song isn't the best idea in my book either, but I would hardly call him pretentious for writing it, and I would definitely call it music. It has pitch and rhythm, and is therefore music.
Why you brought up Warhol is beyond me, since that wasn't part of the discussion, and I was never aware that anybody considered that video as a peice of music. I certainly don't, for reasons I will get to later.
Nobody said that every peice of art is as good as the next one. There is good art, and there is bad art, and there is art that falls everywhere in between. Just because something is not at the same standards of another work of art does not disqualify it as art. You're making the assumption, for some reason, that people in this thread think that all art is equal, and I don't see any posts that say that. I would consider something like this art, but I would not consider it a particularly good work of art. The world is not black and white. Stop looking at it like it is.
I agree with this. Again...Cage's song doesn't classify as GOOD music in my book, but I would hardly disqualify it as music or art. It's rediculous, but it (the long song, not the 4'33" thing) is still music.
Just to clarify how I feel about this...
The long song is a cool concept, but the song itself is probably not all that great. However, it has pitch and rhythm, and is therefore music. Good music? Probably not, but still music. I would not call Cage pretentious for writing it. I might call him insane, but not pretentious. He was just being weird and trying something different. It's not something that I would enjoy at all (especially since it will long outlive me
) but I'm not going to disqualify it as music or art, since I consider it to be music. Good music? No. But it is still music, and not pretentious at all.Now as far as the 4'33" thing...I wouldn't call that music. Someone might argue that the background noise constitutes pitch and rhythm, but since these cannot be notated as a replicable part of the composition, they have nothing to do with the composition itself. The composition is empty space, and does not qualify as music.
soundgarden
I know how to be cool !
Souldn't all good epics be like a story? It should have an intro, climax, resolution, etc. This particular piece is too long for anyone to live through. Even if one person wants to listen to one movement, they can't listen to it 70 years non-stop. If you ask me this is a dumb idea.
SyXified
Member
Liquid Shadow said:
Then how do you decide the difference between art and non-art? If anything you look at, hear, or experience can be considered art, the meaning of the word art disappears and just becomes synonomous with "stuff". The word 'art' exists of itself outside of 'stuff' for a reason. Once you agree to make that distinction, at some point you are making a subjective judgement and drawing a line somewhere. The second one agrees to the concept that some things are art and some things are not, you have to establish standards, and I think one of the easiest standards to draw is that nonsense from the likes of John Cage is NOT art. Otherwise, a lot of things that should not qualify as art would have to because of their similarities to his work. chance operations, dropping items into a piano, and staring at an instrument without playing should not be called art; that's just doing stuff.
Yngvai X
Dark Emperor
MC Pee pants
Wookie Member
syxified, your missing the point of why it is art. The idea behind 4:33 isn't that there are sweeping melodies to listen to or anything like that, it's showing you that there is more to listen to than just the music, that's why he believed that ambient, and or random sounds were also music. It's his interpretation and it is that exact opposite of the other school of though in the twentieth century which was cerealization. They wanted to control every aspect of music, where as Mr. Cage wanted to make it more random. I don't know if I would enjoy it, but sometimes you have to look a little outside the box to understand the music, or art. How about opening your minds guys, no one said you have to like it, but you can at least appreciate or understand what's going on.
SyXified
Member
MC Pee pants said:
I see no reason to have to appreciate things that are stupid. If you have to appreciate everything anyone does you're just giving idiots more credit than they deserve. Calling what Cage does bad art is still giving him too much credit; he's no artist, nor a visionary, he's just a dumber than average guy coming up with things that amount to marketing gimicks. I'd rather have an open mind about things that are worth having an open mind about. I'm not going to sit here and pretend like it's artistic for someone to throw hamburgers at a piano and record it because they feel like it makes a statement about American culture. Everyone has reasons behind what they do, that doesn't mean I should assume that there is any merit behind it.
Also, FYI, I've just written the REAL worlds longest organ piece. It's exactly the same as Cage's, only 3 seconds after his last note, I hit a C#. Henceforth I shall be known as the composer of the longest organ piece! I hope everyone appreciates what I have accomplished here. I'm the Cal Ripken of music. Or more fitting perhaps in this scenario, Raiden. Now if you are going to appreciate Cage's work, but call what I have written here just being trite and sarcastic, you're in a world of hypocracy. He conceptualized somthing, and I outdid him. Woohoo, I win, one to nothing!
soundgarden
I know how to be cool !
MC Pee pants
Wookie Member
First off, as your piece is the same except one note, you are violating copyright laws since his piece isn't in public domain yet. And who says you know what art is? Is it what you like? I wouldn't like to live in that world. We wouldn't get anywhere artistically, because you wouldn't let anyone experiment in other directions. We would all be subject to the same kinds of art we already know, because it is the only good or true art. Your response has made me wonder if you have any schooling in music besides guitar lessons and maybe band or orchestra. Isn't it even remotely plausible that you have more to learn about music and art and to just decide you know everything about art isn't the best strategy (maybe you could look up the definition of art to use in a argument). Maybe you could read one of his books while your in prison for copyright infringement.
The term "art" is subjective. When it first came out, impressionism caused an uproar but now it is admired by people from all over the world, and now a crucifix in a gallon of urine causes a great brouhaha so who knows how people will look at what is now modern art years from now. What doesn't sit right with me is that since the song is so long no one will be around to hear it in its entirety. It just makes no sense.
dargormudshark
Senior Member
hold each note for 100 years:
a-d flat-d natural
repeat 6 times.
now i've beaten cage for longest organ piece. where is my music school, in my honor? how long will it take for them to build my custom made organ?
see, its not so hard to be a genius. what really burns me about this whole thing is that they are actually doing this. its one thing to write it down, as a concept. to spend all kinds of money to make it reality is absurd.
a-d flat-d natural
repeat 6 times.
now i've beaten cage for longest organ piece. where is my music school, in my honor? how long will it take for them to build my custom made organ?
see, its not so hard to be a genius. what really burns me about this whole thing is that they are actually doing this. its one thing to write it down, as a concept. to spend all kinds of money to make it reality is absurd.
SyXified
Member
MC Pee pants said:
You have to try to SELL somthing for it to be copyright infringment. There are lots of songs that are basically the same notes, they are called covers. You don't need permission from an artist to do a cover once the song is published. I'm not interfering with Cage's royalty stream. I still get the title of longest piece tho. Sounds like you really know your stuff there tho. Getting a wee bit intense are we?
I never said I personally knew everything about art or even that I was sitting on the definition. It is, however, the same idea with good and evil. No one knows exactly the definition, but to say that they are completely subjective, just in the eye of the beholder, is a really goofy way of looking at things. Charles Mason thinks he has it down, I'd like to think he doesn't. In music, Cage likes to think he has it down and I REALLY hope he doesn't.
Rifugium
Umphreak 3
This is kind of ridiculous, but still, I hope they're at least recording it for a CD set. I'd like to listen to it when it's done.
Oh.
Oh.
soundgarden
I know how to be cool !
Similar threads
