[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music

From: Dmytro O. Redchuk
Subject: Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:14:48 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Thu 17 Mar 2011, 18:08 Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Unfortunately, "lower barrier of entry" almost always means "more crap to
> sift through".
The more crap -- the lower criteria barrier for "what is `crap'?".
The more crap will become "normal" and even "good thing".

And at some point in the future we all will agree that "is it quite good
music; why? not `crap', it's great!".

And we will be unable to distinguish "as great as classical" (in modern sense
of "classical") from "as ugly as <crap>" (i don't know what i mean "crap",
let's say).

Well... This is my english...

Stanisław Lem in his "Summa Technologiae" says (i hope i am not too much
wrong) that the information *is* the information if and only if here is
somebody who can recognize it as such, can accept and understand.

Let's say, i *love* J. S. Bach very much (well, let's say), as much as my
father and grandfather (etc). So, can i really be sure that i understand his
music as good as my grandfather?.. I mean that every Beethoven's symphony
contains "a piece of information" -- can i be sure that i can recognize it as
good as my grandfather? Yes, i know this can not be measured at all.

Anyway. I mean that at some point in the future people will like our classical
music as much as their modern, no problem, they will! -- but "the level of
understanding" will be lower. Because of because of "more crap"; because of
"lower barrier of entry".
Isn't it "rather computer-generated"? Regardless of emotions on the face?..
(My friend sent this link as a "great performance example" or like that.)

Sorry, i may be wrong, easily.

Oh well... 42.

Yes, i know the answer; i don't know what's the question .)

  Dmytro O. Redchuk
  Bug Squad

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]