 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)big ...and 635 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614121 Today 4 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
...yeah, I guess so... I'm just, you know, thrashing round some ideas here. .... WOAHHH!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you might want to drop this feeble idea and come up with something more proposable like un-shittable pants, now theres an idea |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
or a range of un-shittable beds just a thought. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The very act of collecting music naturally brings you closer to this in reality. The more music you own the less time you have available to listen to everything. Music then becomes disposable by default. How many of John Peel's records were played only once? Thusly all music is disposable and any perceived permanence is merely an illusion. i totally disagree. don't know if you're serious, but that's a huge lapse of logic. from my own experience, owning lots of music does not devalue any of it - it simply means i have more to choose from. there have been times when i've bought a cd and played it once and then shelved it for years, later rediscovering it and appreciating it in a whole new way. having an album "collection" is fantastic. i don't always feel like listening to autechre, so i listen to something else. that doesn't mean i no longer value their music. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
He's not saying, i don't believe, dear Ralph, that it devalues musc, simply that, having so much music, does one have the time to listen to it ALL repeatedly, or do some things, as good as they are, go by the wayside, as a temporal neccessity. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i just don't believe it is a universal thing. just like the article - it varies from person to person... i may, hypothetically, listen to every album i own 100 times during my life and value each one more each time - who knows? i may very well have the time to listen and appreciate them many times. and do some go by the wayside? sure, let's say i suddenly realize i hate band x - i can always sell it or give it away... this is a question of taste or preference. people change, and so do their music preferences. this is the transient part of the equation that i see... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
But we're back to talking about "proper" albums. I am actively seeking the musical creation of the equivalent of paper cups, those weird sticks to stir your "coffee" in McDonalds, sanitary towels or christmas crackers. Sure, you can hang onto them... but should you? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
haha... ok... that's an interesting concept! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm still with you, dog_belch. The terms album, EP, etc. are the product of an age limited by 'hard copies'. While I still prefer hard copies, and am perhaps old fashioned in that sense, the Internet distribution craze has thrown all these formats into question. Would scrapping the album format mean a drop in the amount of so-called 'filler?' These questions aside, I like the idea of disposable music alot. Sure, it's a gimmick, but so are Pop Rocks.. and those are great :). Why can't disposable music be something along the lines of a cheaper CD single? Sometimes we just want something new, not necessarily something great or groundbreaking. Some music is valued for its artistic asperations and aesthetic qualities, other music is, regrettably, only valued if it accomplishes some utilitarian purpose, like Muzak. Is one better than the other? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on your evaluative criteria. Why not produce a series of generic, semi-forgettable music for that quick fix when you want some new music to pass the time but aren't in the mood to give it your full attention? It will decrease the number of crappy albums that are automatically placed in the same arena as what we would consider 'quality' music.. thus making it easier for us to wade through the modern maelstrom of musical mediocrity. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Young Uviol there expressing far better than what my swollen tounge and indecisive fingers could ever express, but what he says are EXACTLY my thoughts on the matter. Let's not pretend all "music" is equal, I believe it's far more noble to strive to make something that's enjoyable for two minutes than painstakingly piecing together some grower that you have the audacity to expect people to listen to more than once. Give the listener a break, make some nice music, then get the hell out of there. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Why not produce a series of generic, semi-forgettable music for that quick fix when you want some new music to pass the time but aren't in the mood to give it your full attention? Because when you want to listen to new music, you give it your full attention. When you want music to pass the time, you listen to your old favourites. Why make low-quality music in the hope that people will listen to it just because it's new and they want something to pass the time? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hmm, i dont really think its the great idea that you seem to think it is : P i do see the point, tho. on another note, i remember hearing about these dvds. where you rent/BUY them from video rental places, for a cheap price, and then they stop working after a few days. (which is kinda like renting a video but not having to return it) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
This idea was already implimented in the 80's. Hasn't anyone heard of flexidiscs? Not to mention dubplates, which were probably around even earlier. There are also digital implementations of the general idea out there: DIVX (a failure one-play dvd technology, not the video codec), Flexplay, SpectraDisc, EZ-D. Google those terms, all this stuff already exists or has existed. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
wow, quite an informative first post : ) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm glad we're on the same wavelength, dog_belch :). Good points, moire and pigster, but you're focusing on the technology. What we're talking about seems to be a new concept involving disposable, transient content, not just the inherent disposability of the vehicles of that content (although that may very well prove to be an integral part of it). redrum:Because when you want to listen to new music, you give it your full attention. In some cases, perhaps, but doesn't this depend quite a bit on the listener? People such as ourselves for whom music is an important part of our lives probably give much more attention to any given type of music, new or otherwise, than your garden variety radio-listener. This is not an issue of superiority, but simply a difference in priority. Maybe some people do want new music without necessarily investing any more time than usual in it.. hence the beauty of this system. For example, I may not be paying much attention to the radio as I'm driving down the highway.. I might simply have it on to keep me company. But if they started playing the same song 100 times in a row, I might get angry and irritable; simply craving something new for the very sake of its newness. I need something different to keep my sanity, but I don't necessarily want to expend any more time, energy, or money than I have to in order to achieve this end. The same goes for this system.. the sense that we are not treading the same ground over and over but listening to something fresh, regardless of quality. If we want quality, then we can buy a traditional 'album,' or the like. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
couldnt we just leave it to the listener if they wanna listen to something more than just once? also, i know this is kinda different, but i remember that tom cruise movie dvd, it had different deleted scenes played different times you watched the movie. making it different. and then theres the gescom minidisc. i wonder if changing albums will ever become.. something. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ha! i wasn't being particularly serious. though it's true that if you have 20000 cds you aren't going to have time to listen to them all hundreds of times. anyone who knows me would know that i value music more than most things. disposable music is a really stupid idea. music is for life! not just for christmas. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I guess Uviol and I will have to wait 20 years for the rest of the world to catch up with us. But it will... it will. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and on that day the world will truly be a sorry place. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
nah sorry. 20 years is 2026. quite a bit after 2012. dont go off making plans that far ahead in the future. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
As much as it is a fun idea. I think that the major problem is that we live in an already consumer consumed society. What we really need is things that work. Things that last. I think that such kitsch ideas should be left as blue prints in the planning office. I mean what constitutes disposable music? Dosen't every piece have it's own little bit of validity? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Since this thread has returned to discussing the creation of a new music, designed without quality in mind, instead of merely trying to come up with a new name for mp3 releases and the like, I'm outta here. I fucking hate it. It's a fucking disgusting idea. It's shitting on an already dirtied artform. Fuck this. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think disposable music already exists, it's just misleadingly lumped in with albums and singles. It needn't mean that it's low quality. If i think waaaaaaaay back to a time before video recorders, people would watch a programme once, and yet legend's were created, I don't know, let's say comedies like Fawlty Towers or The Young Ones. They were a national event without being subject to repeat viewings and dissection. I'm just trying to think of a way of saving music, rather then perpetuating the fallacy of "albums" and "eps". |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
isn't this what mp3s are already? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well yes, really. I'm just suggesting we recognise this fact, or is it a tacit understanding that doesn't require mentioning? I just thought I'd mention it, that's all. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i'm listening to jamie lidell's "music will not last" and reading this thread. both are interesting. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
theres far to many big words in this thread. so heres my biggest word.ELEPHANT. thank you. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think it can't ever be said too much, seeing as a lot of people still call things netlabels and then call bunches of mp3s EPs and albums. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
there, there... it's going to be... all right... you'll make it through this one, dear alex... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that would imply separating music into two kinds, "solid" music and "disposable" music/muzak... and then yet another problem: how would be defined which music would be good enough to be burnt into cds and vinyls, and which music would only make it to the disposable muzak kind? for some people, some "solid music" would be "muzak" - that wouldn't be a problem, it already is this way - but for some people, some "muzak" would be "solid music". and that would be a shame. for example what would you say if one of the idm idols of this messageboard, say richard d james, released some rare tracks he finds crappy (but the fans would find lovely), on a disposable disc? (tracks he would have released on a solid disc for the money if disposable discs didn't exist?) wouldn't you be frustrated? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
interesting post indeed : ) welcome moire! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
chewing gum music while you eat it you listen to it, then its gone the music sounds inside your mouth and you hear it from the inside of you head... when the chewing gum flavour is over the music is over |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I know what you mean... hmmmm, I think it would be difficult to put into practice... I think it's more an approach to music making than any... means to... provide alternative ... listening options. I'd like to have a go, and like to hear other people's interpretations of making tracks that were designed to be heard once. Maybe it'd have to be a live band that never played the same song twice. Or at least, not in the same manner. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Chewing gum... a can of drink... a little pep in your step as you unwrap 3 minutes of Snares style rhythms just before you go into an important meeting. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
delightfully warholian |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
imagine you have some kind of chip in your ears that is activated when you eat chewing gum, or drink a coke or eat some chocolate candy... while you eat it you listen to a certain track or ep... when the chewing gun is over the chip stops receiving the signal so you get taste, refreshement and music in one can of coke for example |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeahh.... maybe it's not as groundbreakingly original as I first thought. Oh well, back to the ... laptop. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
haha, that's not what i meant. lots of people used pop art as a starting point since warhol. as far as i know your idea is original |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
