Ross-c wrote:

>Personally I think that some modern techno music sounds (to my
non-academic
>ears) more like (e.g.) African percussive music than traditional
melody+
>harmony, defined structure western music, based around complex
interacting,
>evolving patters. But, it sounds quite different. .

>(Prepares to be shot down in flames by the 'real' musicians :-))

Well,
first off, I may have a Ph.D. in music composition, and played in many
professional orchestras for years.so I guess I call myself a "real"
musician..
..*but* I would be the first to admit the "real-ness" of the
musicianship of
 (*many* but  not all!) popular musicians. And I think you've hit at the
heart
of the biggest movement in both art and pop music today: the rise of the

'African" rhythmic musical paradigm.(I quote African, because don't
tell the indian Tabla player or the player in the village Gamelan that
their music isn't a heavily/"primarily" rhythmic music. And a lot of
the interest in rhythm in modern "art" music is from these sources,
rather
than African...)
I feel music can be found/"used" in many different social/human
activities,
and I don't feel any one expression of music is ideal for all these, but

I still feel they are all valid to some degree within their environment.

I don't expect Varese to be appropriate or popular in a popular dance
venue, and I don't really want to listen to F.S.O.L. sitting down in
a dark concert hall, but hearing a good live performance of Hyperprism
is, for me, a true peak experience, and a well-done techno CD or wailing

blues album can be just the ticket for a busy dish washing or house
dusting
session. And I don't judge! One cannot live on an exalted peak of
complex
listening (eg: the Eliot Carter Double Concerto live at Ojai festival)
twenty four hours a day, 365 days a year! We all have to wash clothes,
we all have moments where "high" art is too much, in-appropriate, and
just plain silly!

On the other hand, to those who welcome a "serious" composer's open
support
of popular music styles, REMEMBER:
a) the 90% rule holds. only about 10% of any art form/style is good.
b) If all you know is the popular styles, you really are missing some
amazing music. It's not just "bloop-bleep", and not all dissonance is
"ugly" or "wrong". That's *why* musicians like Zappa and Eno have had
their music influenced by "serious" modern music.

To open one's ear's to new styles of music takes effort. Musicians at
my conservatory-style music school had a great deal of trouble opening
up to the ethnomusicology dept. and the wild new ensembles it brought
in.
But after a few years, and a little effort, it (ethnomusicology) has
become
 one of the jewels of the school, and (mostly) visiting shakuhatchi
players
are treated with the same respect shown someone like Emanual Ax
(pianist).

In some ways, on this list, I'm "preaching to the converted"...but a few

notes have clearly shown displeasure at modern music... if it bores you,

then you havn't found/listened to the good stuff. *OR* (more likely),
you bring too much baggage to the listening experience. Open up.

As for "nothing new"... listen to "Cappricio Stravaganza" by ...hm.
forget...
mid-baroque composer. MANY "extended-performing-techniques" in that
work!
(Ca. mid 17th cent.) Does that invalidate Stockhausen's 1950's
experiments?

There's nothing new and everything is constantly new...how 'new' is your
heart?

"...and every moment is a new and shocking valuation
of all we have been..." T.S. Elliot, _Four Quartets_


Pax,
CharlieB