Subject: Re: Loud music From: David John SMith <smithd@xxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 23:27:31 -0400 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>----------MB_8CD2A78B8F8154C_A74_13F6E_web-mmc-d05.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To my knowledge, the Marshal amplifier was the "gauntlet thrown down" to= start the loudness wars. It was developed at the request of Pete Townshend because Pete didn't want to= hear the audience. I=20 assume they were heckling the band.?=20 I believe most of the "effect of loudness" is due to compression in the au= ditory system.=20 Rock is quite likely the most encompassing genre term, much more diverse= than, say, European=20 classical music, and has probably evolved more forms in the past 50 years= as any other culture has in a few hundred - mostly due to commercialization enabling a large number= of practitioners and=20 technology enabling fast exchange of ideas.? But, as is reasonable to expe= ct in any endeavor,=20 - research papers come to mind here - about 80% are just uninspired, there= are very few=20 works of genius... Mostly alienated kids and dropouts listen to rock?? Ha!!!? Have you listen= ed to a college radio station recently? Gone to a college bar?? Walked through a dorm? That said, I agree that there has been a downturn in the quality of rock= - read "commercial" - music though I put it beginning in the mid '70s. A few reasons come to mind: a)= Music is necessarily a frontier. As territory is claimed exploration becomes more difficult.? b) The corpor= ate structure that grew around the music has no need for great music or the accompanying risk and expense= - they just need something to sell.? c) It's easier to "market manage" forms of music which can be pl= ayed by replaceable talent. and most dishearteningly d) Rock and jazz "yer local bands" are not about music, th= ey are about selling booze and drugs. I don't go into any rock music venue without hearing protection. I feel wa= rnings should be required, sound levels recorded, and class action law sui= ts begun.? But then I use hearing protection if I'm going to be in a car= for more than a few minutes.? The levels over longer durations, in some= frequency bands, in "yer average auto" are harmful - but to fix this we= would be messing with the auto industry and they are way more powerful th= an "the guys" running the music business. As things now stand, anyone can ruin your hearing and get away with it.?= Music is a small part of that picture. regards, Dave Smith www.roughlight.com ?=20 -----Original Message----- From: Bruno L. Giordano <bruno.giordano@xxxxxxxx> To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx Sent: Fri, Sep 24, 2010 7:28 pm Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] Loud music Dear Linda,? ? you make interesting points, and I respect your opinion.? ? However, I don't agree with your statement that since the 60's rock has= evolved along a single path towards simplicity. Contemporary "rock" is= the product of a diaspora that has given us a large number of genres, = only part of which are as structurally primitive as you describe.? ? Concerning mainstream music, I doubt that the Beach Boys were way more = sophisticated than, say, Lady Gaga: if listening habits have the strong= psychological impact you describe, today we have as many opportunities= for becoming alienated and intellectually dull as we had 50 years ago = (and fortunately more opportunities for choosing not to).? ? Best,? ? ? Bruno? ? On 24/09/2010 7:02 PM, Linda Seltzer wrote:? > In the early years of rock music, musicians such as Jimi Hendrix and= the? > Jefferson Airplane turned up the volume to arouse political or socia= l? > rebellion against a repressive and superficial culture. The musicol= ogist? > Richard Taruskin said in classroom lectures that after the violence= of? > World War II there was a reaction against the unbridled emotions of? > expressionism. Postwar musical culture emphasized the control of em= otion,? > as emotion was not considered something to be trusted. The evidence= of? > this in classical music was the rise of twelve tone serialism and th= e? > aesthetic of mathematical structures. Even a mystical composer like= ? > Messiaen turned to serialism and other unemotional structures. The? > rebellion against this in classical music was postmodernism, with? > composers such as Glass or Goercki. In popular music, controlled em= otion? > was epitomized by Frank Sinatra and even, in jazz, by Louis Armstron= g.? > The rebellion took the form of the return to emotional expression by= ? > Hendrix, Janis Joplin and others.? >? > However, rock music today has taken a different direction. With the= ? > increasing cutbacks of music education in the schools, music has bec= ome? > more primitive structurally even if this is hidden behind increasing= ly? > expensive and complex technology. There are rock performances invol= ving a? > large degree of spectacle, where the music often consists of the sin= ger? > repeating the same note, occasionally making a departure to sing ano= ther? > note or two. The audience does not notice that there is no melody= present? > because the attention is directed to the spectacle. Similarly, the= rhythm? > is very repetitive and a 1-2 rhythm with the accent on the second be= at is? > considered as novel by the audience.? >? > Aesthetically such music feeds into the increasing forces of conserv= atism? > opposing sensitivity in our society. People are accused of being? > oversensitive if they complain about a slur based on race or gender.= ? > Reality TV shows feature authority figures who are granted the power= to? > insult the contestants, who are supposed to be able to take it and= even? > appreciate it without being hurt. Workers are supposed to be like? > interchangeable parts with no preferences or feelings about their of= fice? > space or their work environments.? >? > Loud, repetitive music stamps out sensitivity or the ability to perc= eive? > and react to subtle differences or variations in the social environm= ent.? > What passes for music actually has the opposite effect of what we no= rmally? > consider to be the purpose of music. Whereas we have traditionally? > thought of music as something that stimulates elevated toughts, puts= us in? > touch with our feelings, and increases our sensitivities, this so-ca= lled? > music has the opposite effect of protecting the listener from such? > feelings, which may impede one's ability to function as an interchan= geable? > part that does not make any demands on the system. Remember that fo= r? > people without college degrees, work often means having to produce? > repetitive tasks in small spaces, with the output monitored by compu= ter.? > Factory workers and mail sorters, for example, have their work monit= ored? > and they can't drift into the normal ebb and flow of slower and fast= er? > outputs in the course of a day. Retail workers are forced to listen= to? > whatever music or muzak the management chooses to broadcast over the= ? > loudspeakers during the entire time they are working, and they never= have? > the right to silence. Silence is the pathway to introspection and? > analysis, which such freedom of thought being a luxury commodity ava= ilable? > to those with access to leisure time and a quiet living environment.= ? >? > For this reason I question whether the current loud rock "music" is? > actually music at all, or, to put it another way: perhaps the variti= es of? > uses of organized sound are so diverse that there is no such thing= as? > music, and several of the different cultural approaches to organized= sound? > and its effect on people are different phenomena. This a question= that? > may be answerable by numerous scientific studies in the future.? >? > What can be said at present is that the current forms of loud rock= music? > result from the decrease in quality of our educational systems and= the? > increase in the percentage of students dropping out of high school,= in? > some areas, 20%. For such individuals music is a means of numbing= their? > emotional responses to the alienation and stress they experience on= the? > outskirts of society and of toughening themselves for a society that= does? > not tolerate their humanity.? >? >? =20 =20 ----------MB_8CD2A78B8F8154C_A74_13F6E_web-mmc-d05.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" <div style=3D"font-family: arial; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"> To my= knowledge, the Marshal amplifier was the "gauntlet thrown down" to start= the loudness wars. It<br> was developed at the request of Pete Townshend because Pete didn't want to= hear the audience. I <br> assume they were heckling the band. <br> <br> I believe most of the "effect of loudness" is due to compression in the au= ditory system. <br> <br> Rock is quite likely the most encompassing genre term, much more diverse= than, say, European <br> classical music, and has probably evolved more forms in the past 50 years= as any other culture has<br> in a few hundred - mostly due to commercialization enabling a large number= of practitioners and <br> technology enabling fast exchange of ideas. But, as is reasonable to= expect in any endeavor, <br> - research papers come to mind here - about 80% are just uninspired, there= are very few <br> works of genius...<br> <br> Mostly alienated kids and dropouts listen to rock? Ha!!! Have= you listened to a college radio<br> station recently? Gone to a college bar? Walked through a dorm?<br> <br> That said, I agree that there has been a downturn in the quality of rock= - read "commercial" - music<br> though I put it beginning in the mid '70s. A few reasons come to mind: a)= Music is necessarily a frontier.<br> As territory is claimed exploration becomes more difficult. b) The= corporate structure that grew around<br> the music has no need for great music or the accompanying risk and expense= - they just need something<br> to sell. c) It's easier to "market manage" forms of music which can= be played by replaceable talent. and most<br> dishearteningly d) Rock and jazz "yer local bands" are not about music, th= ey are about selling booze<br> and drugs.<br> <br> I don't go into any rock music venue without hearing protection. I feel wa= rnings should be required, sound levels recorded, and class action law sui= ts begun. But then I use hearing protection if I'm going to be in a= car for more than a few minutes. The levels over longer durations,= in some frequency bands, in "yer average auto" are harmful - but to fix= this we would be messing with the auto industry and they are way more pow= erful than "the guys" running the music business.<br> <br> As things now stand, anyone can ruin your hearing and get away with it.&nb= sp; Music is a small part of that picture.<br> <br> regards,<br> </div> <div> Dave Smith<br> www.roughlight.com<br> <br> <br> </div> <div> <br> </div> -----Original Message-----<br> From: Bruno L. Giordano <bruno.giordano@xxxxxxxx><br> To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx<br> Sent: Fri, Sep 24, 2010 7:28 pm<br> Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] Loud music<br> <br> =20 <div id=3D"AOLMsgPart_0_b2589eba-69f6-4a16-93d8-6a811b332c60" style=3D"mar= gin: 0px; font-family: Tahoma,Verdana,Arial,Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px;= color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Dear Linda,= <br> <br> you make interesting points, and I respect your opinion. <br> <br> However, I don't agree with your statement that since the 60's rock has= evolved along a single path towards simplicity. Contemporary "rock" is= the product of a diaspora that has given us a large number of genres, = only part of which are as structurally primitive as you describe. <b= r> <br> Concerning mainstream music, I doubt that the Beach Boys were way more = sophisticated than, say, Lady Gaga: if listening habits have the strong= psychological impact you describe, today we have as many opportunities= for becoming alienated and intellectually dull as we had 50 years ago = (and fortunately more opportunities for choosing not to). <br> <br> Best, <br> <br> Bruno <br> <br> On 24/09/2010 7:02 PM, Linda Seltzer wrote: <br> > In the early years of rock music, musicians such as Jimi Hendrix and= the <br> > Jefferson Airplane turned up the volume to arouse political or socia= l <br> > rebellion against a repressive and superficial culture. The musicol= ogist <br> > Richard Taruskin said in classroom lectures that after the violence= of <br> > World War II there was a reaction against the unbridled emotions of&= nbsp;<br> > expressionism. Postwar musical culture emphasized the control of em= otion, <br> > as emotion was not considered something to be trusted. The evidence= of <br> > this in classical music was the rise of twelve tone serialism and th= e <br> > aesthetic of mathematical structures. Even a mystical composer like= <br> > Messiaen turned to serialism and other unemotional structures. The&= nbsp;<br> > rebellion against this in classical music was postmodernism, with&nb= sp;<br> > composers such as Glass or Goercki. In popular music, controlled em= otion <br> > was epitomized by Frank Sinatra and even, in jazz, by Louis Armstron= g. <br> > The rebellion took the form of the return to emotional expression by= <br> > Hendrix, Janis Joplin and others. <br> > <br> > However, rock music today has taken a different direction. With the= <br> > increasing cutbacks of music education in the schools, music has bec= ome <br> > more primitive structurally even if this is hidden behind increasing= ly <br> > expensive and complex technology. There are rock performances invol= ving a <br> > large degree of spectacle, where the music often consists of the sin= ger <br> > repeating the same note, occasionally making a departure to sing ano= ther <br> > note or two. The audience does not notice that there is no melody= present <br> > because the attention is directed to the spectacle. Similarly, the= rhythm <br> > is very repetitive and a 1-2 rhythm with the accent on the second be= at is <br> > considered as novel by the audience. <br> > <br> > Aesthetically such music feeds into the increasing forces of conserv= atism <br> > opposing sensitivity in our society. People are accused of being&nb= sp;<br> > oversensitive if they complain about a slur based on race or gender.= <br> > Reality TV shows feature authority figures who are granted the power= to <br> > insult the contestants, who are supposed to be able to take it and= even <br> > appreciate it without being hurt. Workers are supposed to be like&n= bsp;<br> > interchangeable parts with no preferences or feelings about their of= fice <br> > space or their work environments. <br> > <br> > Loud, repetitive music stamps out sensitivity or the ability to perc= eive <br> > and react to subtle differences or variations in the social environm= ent. <br> > What passes for music actually has the opposite effect of what we no= rmally <br> > consider to be the purpose of music. Whereas we have traditionally&= nbsp;<br> > thought of music as something that stimulates elevated toughts, puts= us in <br> > touch with our feelings, and increases our sensitivities, this so-ca= lled <br> > music has the opposite effect of protecting the listener from such&n= bsp;<br> > feelings, which may impede one's ability to function as an interchan= geable <br> > part that does not make any demands on the system. Remember that fo= r <br> > people without college degrees, work often means having to produce&n= bsp;<br> > repetitive tasks in small spaces, with the output monitored by compu= ter. <br> > Factory workers and mail sorters, for example, have their work monit= ored <br> > and they can't drift into the normal ebb and flow of slower and fast= er <br> > outputs in the course of a day. Retail workers are forced to listen= to <br> > whatever music or muzak the management chooses to broadcast over the= <br> > loudspeakers during the entire time they are working, and they never= have <br> > the right to silence. Silence is the pathway to introspection and&n= bsp;<br> > analysis, which such freedom of thought being a luxury commodity ava= ilable <br> > to those with access to leisure time and a quiet living environment.= <br> > <br> > For this reason I question whether the current loud rock "music" is&= nbsp;<br> > actually music at all, or, to put it another way: perhaps the variti= es of <br> > uses of organized sound are so diverse that there is no such thing= as <br> > music, and several of the different cultural approaches to organized= sound <br> > and its effect on people are different phenomena. This a question= that <br> > may be answerable by numerous scientific studies in the future. = ;<br> > <br> > What can be said at present is that the current forms of loud rock= music <br> > result from the decrease in quality of our educational systems and= the <br> > increase in the percentage of students dropping out of high school,= in <br> > some areas, 20%. For such individuals music is a means of numbing= their <br> > emotional responses to the alienation and stress they experience on= the <br> > outskirts of society and of toughening themselves for a society that= does <br> > not tolerate their humanity. <br> > <br> > <br> </div> =20 ----------MB_8CD2A78B8F8154C_A74_13F6E_web-mmc-d05.sysops.aol.com--