Todd, I think that in this context whereas one person was listening to the music being played, the other was being played by the music/chant and as such found it more interesting because the person was sensing the vibes in his own body responding to the chant. I once did an experiment at a dinner/dance gig where my band was playing after dinner. During dinner I had some beats programmed and let them play in the background. These had NO variation. I used them just to provide time – it was more like a digital metronome with a simple bass line thrown in. I let it play while everyone ate. It was VERY much background music. Finally, someone came up after about 10 minutes and asked if I could change it as it was monotonous. I personally was kind of digging it and no one else seemed bothered at all and in fact the atmosphere was jovial and talkative. So I got up and switched it to another beat – a cousin of the first J
There is something good about repetition, but there’s a contextual element that adds to the mix.
Thanks for sharing, Todd!!
From: Todd Elliott [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
I am reminded of John Cage:
"At the New School once I was
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:08 PM, <email@example.com> wrote:
Great article, thanks for sharing!
I do wonder what the critical mass of non-adjusted perfect repetition is. In other words, if one takes a digital loop (As opposed to people playing), starts it and lets it play without changing anything whatsoever, at what point do people get tired with monotony?
From: Jenko Nashorn [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
I stumbled upon this article, and had to think of looping: "Repetition defines music." http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2014/repetition-defines-music/