I'm always amazed how little leeway some people allow themselves or
others in music as opposed to other forms of art.  I've found that my
music was often more welcome by visual artists and (modern) dancers than
by those involved in music.  For those who would like to expand their
horizon a little bit, I can recommend "Silence" by John Cage.  Listening
to non-western music (other than what is presented to us under the
terrible heading "World Music") may help too.  I found the Folkway
record series very helpful at the time.

The ear is more conservative than the eye, someone has remarked once;
there is somehow a need to preserve the tradition, whether in rituals or
in the concert hall of our time.  There is reluctance for change,
because it will anger the gods or the audience.

A composer of electro-acoustic or electronic music has the whole
universe before him or her.  Other than a "traditional" composer, he/she
does not have to worry about performers, if they can be found at all. 
For me this is one of the attractive aspects of creating music with
electronic means.  I also like the combination with other art forms,
such as film or dance.  In one project I composed music to accompany an
exhibition of paintings of a friend of mine.  There are so many
interesting possibilities that, frankly, a pro or contra techno
discussion is kind of immaterial, but it may of course evoke some
interesting thoughts.  

I will admit here and now that I entered the Cherry Coke competition
last year, in which you were asked to create a techno composition using
a special (timed) version of Rebirth.  I heard very late about it, but
sent my contribution anyway (about 30 minutes before the deadline) and,
I'm happy to report, I was selected as one of the 24 second prize
winners.  For those interested, I'm listed as number 25 under Cherry
Coke Contest Winners on URL:

	http://www.propellerheads.se/songs/rb1015songs/pack4.htm

In other words, it doesn't hurt to try something different now and
then.  You will be called eclectic and frowned upon in some academic
circles, but who cares?

Job van Zuijlen    

Michael Gogins wrote:
> 
> It is a historical fact that most genres of music in all cultures have an
> identifiable, fairly regular meter, sometimes changing over time. It is
> equally a historical fact that most genres of music in all cultures have
> "scales" of repeated pitch-classes, usually no more than about 12. Surely
> this means something. These facts are a very, very narrow selection from the
> possibilities.