the topic of topics: MIDI vs AUDIO ("what is music"?)

[H20nly]

Except for the agreement about the correctness of the statement that audio is not music, we could have anything in common, dont know.

it's clear that the "audio is not music" statement is not something we are going to change our minds about.

just like how Propellerheads aren't gonna change their mind about VST no matter how many posts 9V makes.

now if only he could swallow these realities.

[9V]

You completely misunderstand Noam Chomsky then. He's not saying each language follows the same rules, as you are stating music must. Instead, he's saying that some form of grammar exists without being taught.
i studied psychology at university, actually. I know noam chomsky for his studies in psycholinguistic. Then i like him for his political ideas, of cours, being myself a libertarian.
Especially when played in real time, music is sound.
when played in real time music is music, because the musician (performer) plays it. For the listener it remains sound, both in real time and heard on cd, at home. I take the "musician" point of view. You take the listener perspective. This is the difference.

[crofter]

This has got to be a wind up, he's found a meaningless mantra which he repeats ad nauseum, he got banned from one forum so he's come here,time to stop feeding the troll.

[docprosper]

9V,
a) What's your point?
b) What does this nonsense have to do with of any importance other than as some way for you to justify your distaste for PH/rewire, your past banning(s), etc.?
c) Are you getting anything out of this (it appears that no one else here is, at least not in any positive way)?
d) As a music hobbiest, I find your "only a real musician could understand" rantings to be particularly offensive. Do you really think a formal musical education is necessary to assess your logic or lack thereof?
e) You seem to be a very bitter, egotistical person. Not really a question, but hey, I was making a list.
f) What do you think about Behringer desks?
g) Do you make music?
-Hamish

[rote fahne]

you take things personal. This is the wrong way to discuss. Maybe i am hitting a nerve here, i don't know... because many home music makers consider themselves "musician"? And they feel insulted? This is my impression. Music industry of course pretends to "forget" this ABC of music... because of loops, samples, etc. i guess.

Not at all, I just find your arrogance disturbing. I am not even a home music maker, in case you try to categorise me in order to invalidate me.

I dont make music at all. But I do know a little about it.

I think the frustrated musician is you here, there is not even a link to your music, and you are member here since 2004.

Maybe a little too shitty to have people listen to your music?

[9V]

"arrogance" is something emotive, a projection of your feelings. It is your mind, assuming i have a "personality" etc. You don't even know me, how can you judge people in such a superficial way?... And, by the way, the "hit the nerve" was not referred to you

[drewbixcube]

You completely misunderstand Noam Chomsky then. He's not saying each language follows the same rules, as you are stating music must. Instead, he's saying that some form of grammar exists without being taught.

i studied psychology at university, actually. I know noam chomsky for his studies in psycholinguistic. Then i like him for his political ideas, of cours, being myself a libertarian.

So leave the psycholinguistics to Noam Chomsky then. His studies weren't about music, so they aren't pertinent to this discussion. Just because music can be considered a language, philosophically speaking, doesn't mean it is the same as spoken language. We aren't all born with an understanding of the C scale, yet we can all enjoy music arguably before even being born. How do we enjoy this music? Through changes in air pressure. Not 1's and 0's in a sequencer.

[drewbixcube]

Especially when played in real time, music is sound.
when played in real time music is music, because the musician (performer) plays it. For the listener it remains sound, both in real time and heard on cd, at home. I take the "musician" point of view. You take the listener perspective. This is the difference.

This is why you are coming off as arrogant. You are implying that you are the only real musician here because you are the only one with your view. The musician and listener relationship has nothing to do with your original argument anyway. What the musician is playing, what the listener is hearing, what comes out of the radio over the airwaves is the music itself, realized through changes in air pressure, or "sound".

[9V]

drewbixcube: WATCH this, it is very interesting and maybe you understand better the matter!
http://www.celemony.com/cms/index.php?i ... view_peter

[stringtapper]

drewbixcube: WATCH this, it is very interesting and maybe you understand better the matter!
http://www.celemony.com/cms/index.php?i ... view_peter

That's all well and good, but Neubäcker's view is only one of countless views on the topic of what music is.

I suggest you read Bruno Nettl's entry on "Music" in the New Grove Dictionary of Music if you can get access to it. There you will see that not only is Neubäcker's definition not the only one, but that even one of the giants of the field of musicology (Nettl) finds it necessary to refrain from presenting one all-encompassing definition of music. From the conclusion of the entry:

In developing a definition and conceptualization of music, it is difficult to choose among the approaches mentioned. The purpose of this article is, indeed, to show that, in its conception of music, the world is a pastiche of diversity, and thus the author is obliged to avoid commitment to a single position.

Again, as you will see if you read the entry this is a long debated question and for you or anyone else to say "I have the answer" is simply naïve and reveals an ignorance of centuries musical scholarship.

[3rdFloorSound]

This is tangential, but I though it really shouldn't be ignored.

of cours, being myself a libertarian.

Noam Chomsky is not just a libertarian. He claims he is a "libertarian-socialist" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Choms ... ical_views
It makes me a little sad to see just how wide the umbrella of libertarianism has expanded now, when originally it could be boiled down to "maximum possible individual rights and freedoms without affecting the rights and freedoms of others."
As an example of how badly this has been perverted, there are now neo-nazi groups claiming they are libertarians.

[trevox]

One of my friends writes electronic music without using MIDI - he uses Sound Forge rather than a DAW.

Chopin wrote music without using MIDI... 90% of musicians don't use MIDI. They use instruments and/or a pen. But: if what you wrote/composed can be translated into score or MIDI instructions, then it is music. Otherwise it is just sound. It can even be "musical" sound (like the singing of the birds, a storm, the tolls of a bell etc.) but being a musical sound does not mean it is "music". MUSIC must be written, read, edited, changeable, playable, replayable. Is the music of your friend respecting these rules? Then it is music. Otherwise NO, it isn't. Human music has rules. Complex rules are difficult to play (but not impossible: see the virtuosos playing chopin or stockhausen etc.). Simple rules can be played even by a child. This is music.

We listen to music with our ears.

Wrong. We listen to sounds with our ears. Our brain can recognize whether it is music or not, because music has rules. When these rules are too complex, only expert musicians can understand it is music. Naive listeners will say: "it is my cat jumping on the piano" or "it is something nice. Beautiful sounds! Is it music?". It is like a language: if i speak english words your ears hear sounds and your brain calls these words "english" (because of the rules of grammar). If i write: "dfjkaslòifjoif4i 4iofklafòldkj", your brain understands it is not a language, even if the elements are the same (letters). Why? Because there is no rule. Maybe you could interpret this "chaos" like "what a strange tongue" or "is it a secret CODE?" etc. Why i can translate my italian thoughts into english? Because of the universal rules of grammar. This is the difference between AUDIO and MUSIC: music is the code. Audio is just sound. So, when you listen to an audio track, your brain understands IT WAS MUSIC. It is human deceiving, normal. Like if i watch someone reflected in a mirror. But that reflex is not him. It is identical, of course. But techincally it is something different.

MIDI is revolutionary, because it is the only STANDARD, UNIVERSAL MUSICAL way to make different electronic instruments to communicate each other. Something new in music history. It is like a score sheet in the past: I can give it to an indian, an arab, a chinese... everyone... and they can read, play, edit it: it remains music. Because music is a universal language, it is not like human tongue or other forms of expression. That is why it is the most universal form of art. If you break this "code", you break music. AUDIO is not music. It is sound. MIDI is music. If you play with audio you can call yourself "a sound performer", not a musician. The music (to remain music) must be universal: that is to say "universal code". Which are the musical "universal codes" of audio?! They don't exist. Audio is editable with acoustic parameters, not with musical parameters.

You are an idiot - full stop. I made a perfectly good case for stating that music does not have to be written down somewhere or stored in a midi file and you still insist on making a claim that this is not the case. So if my friend realises music in his head and does not write it in score, MIDI format or whatever other means YOU find acceptable, it is never music? Apart from what is stored in his head? Your logic is so flawed, it is unbelievable.

You can believe whatever you like - just go away and leave us poor laymen to struggle on with our meaningless ventures into creating sound that 99.99999% of the world do consider to be music. You must be really proud to be in such a minority which I am sure gives you the superiority complex you appear to crave.

Is all of this a facade to hide inadequacies in your life? Is there something you would like to tell us? We won't laugh...

[crofter]

I think he's a bed wetter

[andydes]

9v, I think everyone gets what your definition of music is. I'd like to know your take on language? Word meanings evolve over time, and the only useful definition is what that word means to other people. Having a different definition of music to every single other person you're talking to doesn't change the nature of what it is, it just makes it harder for you to communicate ideas. And telling everyone else they're wrong is just pointless.

Consider the 'link your music' section of the forum. Everyone knows what that means. Ableton could have called it the 'link the audio representation of sounds which may or may not have once been music, depending on how you created it' section, but everyone except you would wonder what the hell they're talking about.

[drewbixcube]

drewbixcube: WATCH this, it is very interesting and maybe you understand better the matter!
http://www.celemony.com/cms/index.php?i ... view_peter

I've stated music is a relationship of numbers realized through sound. So, what's your point? He's not supporting your argument in the slightest. In fact, he downright disproves it. MIDI is a relationship of numbers, yes. However, it is not related to music in the same way. Don't you think it's ironic to argue audio is not music by posting an interview with a software developer who's entire platform is based on the manipulation of audio to create music?