Re: Dig if u will my research paper(liveloopinggenre)

[SoundFNR@aol.com]

Kim writes:-

> these are all statements defining the process and techniques employed by 
>  the musician on the creation side. None of them explain for a listener 
what 
>  the result sounds like. That's what you need to do if you are 
>describing a 
>  genre of music, you need to explain the characteristics of the result 
>from 
>  the listener's perspective.

Well try asking a few people to describe some music genres.
It's quite rare that someone will give you an easy to grasp simple
description of say, "what makes House different to Techno".
...most of the time you'll get a vague phrase that sort of 
describes how it might affect them emotionally, or just
a phrase that they heard given as a definition.  

>  
>  So when you try to claim Live Looping as a genre, I'm still lost as to 
what 
>  you are talking about. I really don't see how regular music listeners 
>can 
>  understand it either.

do "regular music listener's" understand any of the other genre terms
though.
new age >>> very simple harmonic sequence and no dynamics, CD lasts 60mins
blues     >>> the same chord sequence all night 
punk     >>> guitarist does all down strokes

or do they just associate the term with an enjoyable(or "cool") experience


>  Certainly you can explain to them about the looping 
>  techniques and devices the musicians are using, and maybe they will 
>find 
>  that a bit interesting in an educational way. But that isn't describing 
the 
>  music, and ultimately people go to listen to music not the musician's 
>  technique.

usually people go to listen to music because lots of other people do the 
same thing, the most common gig review is
"it was a great night, there were lots of people there".

Well I don't even know if anybodies "claiming Live Looping as a genre",
some of us use it as a descriptive term for our music.

At a "Live Looping" gig you will hear sounds that the musician isn't
currently involved in producing, but neverless they appear to be in
control of the sound,  shaping it in some way, and adding
to it  by the use of their instrument.

which is probably as good a definition for a type of
music as "jazz" "classical" "rock", and 
at least gives you some idea of what the experience will
be like, if not the audio part of the experience
 

If you could describe a piece of music accurately, would
there be any point in listening to it?
(isn't that what makes it worth listening, the undescribable?)
 
Well, if I don't give my music a name, I won't 
be able to promote it, so it's

andybutler--livelooper