[Dixielandjazz] Space as feeling in music

[Rick Knittel]

Gary;

I would propose that rests and silence can be very effective parts of a
musical piece but are not themselves music. Music is the melody, harmony
and rhythmic patterns that surround the rests and silence. When you and
Marc drop out, you two are not playing the music of the rhythm and
chords, Jules is. Your and Marc's absence is an important part of that
portion of the arrangement but, to me, not as important as when you and
Marc rejoin the band in performing the music. It's just my humble
opinion.

Rick Knittel
JAZZBONE 


On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 23:25:00 +0200 Gary Kiser <gary at kiser.org> writes:
> Strikes me odd that only a week ago, many were complaining of musos 
> that 
> played too many notes.
> 
> I do disagree, to an extent, that silence is the absence of noise.  
> 
> Perhaps, in some contexts, however, in music we call silence rests.  
> 
> There is a formal group of symbols representing rests of different 
> lengths.  Composers use rests to 'turn on' and to 'turn off' 
> instruments 
> thus varying the color of a piece of music.
> 
> With Sac à Pulses, Marc (drums) and I (tuba) will drop out a chorus 
> 
> leaving Jules (alto guitar) by himself on the rhythmic chores.  To 
> say 
> that our 'not producing noise' is 'not musical' is total hogwash.  
> In 
> truth, the entire texture of the ensemble changes radically.  Our 
> 'rests' are a valid and effective musical effect or they wouldn't be 
> 
> arranged into our tunes.
> 
> In solos too, rests are valid musical entities.  Even top bop 
> players 
> will leave pauses in their note flurries not just to take a breath, 
> but 
> to express something.  Where the rest is places and its duration is 
> as 
> emotional as when and for how long he/she plays a high G...or, for 
> me, a 
> double low D.
> 
> I too am a fan of John Cage reserving that I don't care for 
> everything 
> he has done.  His 4:33 by itself out of the context of a two hour 
> concert may seem thin.  Yet, I'm sure to see it live within a 
> concert 
> full of mind wrenching harmonies and avant garde musical expression 
> 
> would be an entirely different animal.  No, I won't go buy the CD to 
> 
> listen to that track.  But, seeing 4:33 on the program of a concert 
> of 
> his work would not keep me from going to the concert.
> 
> Again, as with the 'note count' thread, we are talking differences 
> of 
> tastes and sensibilities.
> 
> Humbly, Gary
> 
> Gary Kiser
> www.sacapulses.com
> www.mojobrassband.com
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Gunter wrote:
> 
> > Hi listmates,
> >
> > Charles Suhor writes (regarding "silence" and "music"):
> >
> >> In a sense, everything we hear is perceived against a backdrop of 
> 
> >> silence.
> >
> >
> > This is way of saying "silence is something" as opposed to 
> "silence is 
> > nothing."
> >
> > I could restate the issue by saying ". . . everything we hear is 
> the 
> > absence of silence."
> >
> > There is nothing mystical about silence - it's just the absence of 
> noise.
> >
> > Music, in any sense of the word, must have that element of noise. 
> 
> > Without it there is no music. Such idiocies as 4'33" do not strike 
> me 
> > as profound as much as they strike me as absurd and hence, at 
> best, 
> > funny!
> >
> > I used to think that 4'33" was deep and that Cage was promoting 
> deep 
> > cerebral convulsions in the listeners grey matter.  Today I find 
> the 
> > notion puerile and without merit.
> >
> > Charles goes on to say:
> >
> >> In the Buddhist tradition, attention to this spacious source is 
> >> blissful, and sense impressions of all kinds move through it like 
> 
> >> clouds drifting in a clear sky. John Cage was saying something 
> like 
> >> this, I believe, when he said we can experience everything as 
> music . 
> >> . .
> >
> >
> > When you say that "everything is music" then you are truly saying 
> 
> > "nothing is music."
> >
> > Music is "special" and if you try to aver that everything is 
> "special" 
> > then "special" has no meaning.
> >
> > There is the story about the Buddhist monk who, when he became 
> > "enlightened," found that all his perceptions of the world were 
> false. 
> > When he realized the true nature of the universe birds sang 
> special 
> > songs for him and all the woodland animals came to him and ate 
> from 
> > his hand.
> >
> > But finally one day he became "fully enlightened" and he 
> discovered 
> > that trees were just trees and the birds no longer sang for him 
> and 
> > the woodland animals simply ignored him.
> >
> > Cage was trying to make music something that it isn't and, in the 
> 
> > process, produced nothing. 4'33" is the ultimate expression of 
> this 
> > folly.
> >
> > Other than that, Cage was a genius.
> >
> > Respectfully submitted,
> >
> > Bill "Running for cover" Gunter
> > jazzboard at hotmail.com
> >
> >
> > Musicologist Bennett Reimer says,
> >
> >> "when we approach the transcendent quality of experience, the 
> breadth 
> >> we feel is more like silence than sound (even when musical), more 
> 
> >> like quietude than action." In the Buddhist tradition, attention 
> to 
> >> this spacious source is blissful, and sense impressions of all 
> kinds 
> >> move through it like clouds drifting in a clear sky. John Cage 
> was 
> >> saying something like this, I believe, when he said we can 
> experience 
> >> everything as music, letting all sound play itself to our ears 
> and 
> >> into our open consciousness. I don't see this as high-blown puff 
> 
> >> talk--I think it describes the way most of us feel in moments of 
> deep 
> >> appreciation of anything, and it's accessible on an everyday 
> basis 
> >> through cultivation of awareness.
> >>
> >> Charlie Suhor
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dixielandjazz mailing list
> Dixielandjazz at ml.islandnet.com
> http://ml.islandnet.com/mailman/listinfo/dixielandjazz