OT Propelled inline skating

On 5/5/2011 6:12 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
On May 5, 1:18 pm, wrote:
kolldata wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Here's my own band-- one small example of music that is very much
alive and kicking today, no taxidermy required: http://blip.tv/file/4910969
As you might notice, it doesn't even fit into a recording device. For
the full effect, it must be taken straight and undiluted directly from
the source.

No Sousa ?

What you talkin' about? We got three nice ladies playing
Sousaphones!

But no, we don't play any J.P. Sousa. No Gilbert& Sullivan,
either.

If Sheldon were still alive, he'd slap you around for that one.

We marched behind the Woodland String Band last year --
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozjdr4c3hAI That's from the Mummers
parade in Philly and a lot more complicated than their honking in the
Grand Floral Parade in PDX, but it is really cool to hear a totally
sax driven band with zero brass. Really good musicians, too -- these
neighborhood string bands compete with each other like the English
company brass bands. -- Jay Beattie.

How does one play a cello or double bass in a marching band? Do they
borrow Chalo's platform trike?

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On May 5, 4:23*pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 5/5/2011 6:12 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:





On May 5, 1:18 pm, *wrote:
kolldata wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Here's my own band-- one small example of music that is very much
alive and kicking today, no taxidermy required: *http://blip.tv/file/4910969
As you might notice, it doesn't even fit into a recording device. *For
the full effect, it must be taken straight and undiluted directly from
the source.

No Sousa ?

What you talkin' about? *We got three nice ladies playing
Sousaphones!

But no, we don't play any J.P. Sousa. *No Gilbert& *Sullivan,
either.

If Sheldon were still alive, he'd slap you around for that one.

We marched behind the Woodland String Band last year --
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozjdr4c3hAI*That's from the Mummers
parade in Philly and a lot more complicated than their honking in the
Grand Floral Parade in PDX, but it is really cool to hear a totally
sax driven band with zero brass. Really good musicians, too -- these
neighborhood string bands compete with each other like the English
company brass bands. -- Jay Beattie.

How does one play a cello or double bass in a marching band? *Do they
borrow Chalo's platform trike?

Note the strap -- this was in our parade. I was off by a year! It was
2009.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/richtpt/3612482519/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pdbg/3601823314/

Pizzicato and not arco. (Arco is a gas! -- as my bass player friend
used to say)

marching accordion http://www.flickr.com/photos/richtpt/3613296108/
Don't leave home without it. This was a trimmed down version of the
Woodland String Band -- presumably the guys willing to pay the fare to
PDX. There were a few more of us.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/plainka...oralparade2009
(we go out of the frame)

On May 5, 6:37*pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:

Hildegard of Bingen?

More to my taste. But I'm used to being in the minority.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Tºm Shermªn wrote:

Hildegard of Bingen?

More to my taste. *But I'm used to being in the minority.

Man, talk about dead music. That stuff was for celibate stiffs even
in the12th century.

I bet there was some lively and interesting music in the 1100s, but it
must have died with its practitioners. And I reckon it would sound
spectacularly dorky to our ears.

Chalo

On May 4, 5:01*pm, Chalo wrote:
Most human ears have moved on. *At
least they grooved on it.

Music has moved at least as far beyond J.S. Bach as J.S. Bach had
moved beyond monophonic Dark Ages tunes. *It's very hard to make a
case for pre-blue, pre-swing, pre-syncopation, pre-groove sounds now
that we have been programmed with the good stuff. *Listening to what
passed for dance music in Western culture before the 20th century,
it's baffling that anyone could dance to it. *But music is a living
thing, and after it has died, even the most skillful taxidermist can't
give back what once was there.

Nonsense. Any notion that fashion equates with progress is easily
disproven by bubble gum music, disco and rap. Standards have fallen a
great deal.

There's no accounting for taste, of course; and there's a variety of
legitimate aesthetics. But in music and dancing (and poetry, and
sculpture, and painting) my standard is, if you can't tell when the
artist makes a mistake, it's not art. Or at least, not serious art.
Grunge bands banging out dissonant chords too loud to hear? Not
music, not art. Jackson Pollock? Give me a break.

Admittedly, I tend to like complexity, and the oldies. That is,
_real_ oldies - back through traditional fiddle tunes, to baroque,
renaissance, and medieval music. There is such a thing as "the test
of time," and Procul Harum is unlikely to pass.

And regarding "it's baffling that anyone could dance to it," I admit
these folks are baffling. But great!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2trSUR2few

- Frank Krygowski

On May 5, 7:56 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On May 4, 5:01 pm, Chalo wrote:

Most human ears have moved on. At
least they grooved on it.

Music has moved at least as far beyond J.S. Bach as J.S. Bach had
moved beyond monophonic Dark Ages tunes. It's very hard to make a
case for pre-blue, pre-swing, pre-syncopation, pre-groove sounds now
that we have been programmed with the good stuff. Listening to what
passed for dance music in Western culture before the 20th century,
it's baffling that anyone could dance to it. But music is a living
thing, and after it has died, even the most skillful taxidermist can't
give back what once was there.

Nonsense. Any notion that fashion equates with progress is easily
disproven by bubble gum music, disco and rap. Standards have fallen a
great deal.

There's no accounting for taste, of course; and there's a variety of
legitimate aesthetics. But in music and dancing (and poetry, and
sculpture, and painting) my standard is, if you can't tell when the
artist makes a mistake, it's not art. Or at least, not serious art.
Grunge bands banging out dissonant chords too loud to hear? Not
music, not art. Jackson Pollock? Give me a break.

Admittedly, I tend to like complexity, and the oldies. That is,
_real_ oldies - back through traditional fiddle tunes, to baroque,
renaissance, and medieval music. There is such a thing as "the test
of time," and Procul Harum is unlikely to pass.

And regarding "it's baffling that anyone could dance to it," I admit
these folks are baffling. But great!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2trSUR2few


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...8d60456b19722a

On May 5, 8:03 pm, Dan O wrote:
On May 5, 7:56 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:



On May 4, 5:01 pm, Chalo wrote:

Most human ears have moved on. At
least they grooved on it.

Music has moved at least as far beyond J.S. Bach as J.S. Bach had
moved beyond monophonic Dark Ages tunes. It's very hard to make a
case for pre-blue, pre-swing, pre-syncopation, pre-groove sounds now
that we have been programmed with the good stuff. Listening to what
passed for dance music in Western culture before the 20th century,
it's baffling that anyone could dance to it. But music is a living
thing, and after it has died, even the most skillful taxidermist can't
give back what once was there.

Nonsense. Any notion that fashion equates with progress is easily
disproven by bubble gum music, disco and rap. Standards have fallen a
great deal.

There's no accounting for taste, of course; and there's a variety of
legitimate aesthetics. But in music and dancing (and poetry, and
sculpture, and painting) my standard is, if you can't tell when the
artist makes a mistake, it's not art. Or at least, not serious art.
Grunge bands banging out dissonant chords too loud to hear? Not
music, not art. Jackson Pollock? Give me a break.

Admittedly, I tend to like complexity, and the oldies. That is,
_real_ oldies - back through traditional fiddle tunes, to baroque,
renaissance, and medieval music. There is such a thing as "the test
of time," and Procul Harum is unlikely to pass.

And regarding "it's baffling that anyone could dance to it," I admit
these folks are baffling. But great!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2trSUR2few

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...8d60456b19722a

"Fuddy-duddy" - in case you missed the reference :-)

On 5/5/2011 9:56 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On May 4, 5:01 pm, wrote:
Most human ears have moved on. At
least they grooved on it.

Music has moved at least as far beyond J.S. Bach as J.S. Bach had
moved beyond monophonic Dark Ages tunes. It's very hard to make a
case for pre-blue, pre-swing, pre-syncopation, pre-groove sounds now
that we have been programmed with the good stuff. Listening to what
passed for dance music in Western culture before the 20th century,
it's baffling that anyone could dance to it. But music is a living
thing, and after it has died, even the most skillful taxidermist can't
give back what once was there.

"Everyone loves J.S. Bach except cretins and those with undeveloped or
improperly developed minds." - Tom Sherman

Nonsense. Any notion that fashion equates with progress is easily
disproven by bubble gum music, disco and rap. Standards have fallen a
great deal.

Disco had its upside, for one shining night in Chicago:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disco_Demolition_Night.

There's no accounting for taste, of course; and there's a variety of
legitimate aesthetics.

"Everyone loves J.S. Bach except cretins and those with undeveloped or
improperly developed minds." - Tom Sherman

But in music and dancing (and poetry, and
sculpture, and painting) my standard is, if you can't tell when the
artist makes a mistake, it's not art. Or at least, not serious art.
Grunge bands banging out dissonant chords too loud to hear? Not
music, not art. Jackson Pollock? Give me a break.[...]

butbutbut, it *sells*!

I used to make stuff in elementary school art class not to different
from Pollock's paintings. And I have *no* talent for painting.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On May 4, 5:01 pm, Chalo wrote:
Most human ears have moved on. At
least they grooved on it.

Music has moved at least as far beyond J.S. Bach as J.S. Bach had
moved beyond monophonic Dark Ages tunes. It's very hard to make a
case for pre-blue, pre-swing, pre-syncopation, pre-groove sounds now
that we have been programmed with the good stuff. Listening to what
passed for dance music in Western culture before the 20th century,
it's baffling that anyone could dance to it. But music is a living
thing, and after it has died, even the most skillful taxidermist can't
give back what once was there.

Nonsense. Any notion that fashion equates with progress is easily
disproven by bubble gum music, disco and rap. Standards have fallen a
great deal.

There's no accounting for taste, of course; and there's a variety of
legitimate aesthetics. But in music and dancing (and poetry, and
sculpture, and painting) my standard is, if you can't tell when the
artist makes a mistake, it's not art. Or at least, not serious art.
Grunge bands banging out dissonant chords too loud to hear? Not
music, not art. Jackson Pollock? Give me a break.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Side_of_the_Moon

Don't think I'll grow tired of listening to it.

Interestingly, after introducing it to some younger folks, they seem to
get hooked too. Less so on J. S. Bach I suspect.

It would be interesting to experiment on people who'd never heard music,
apart from their own drums and percussion perhaps, to see what they
would want to listen too. A clean slate is difficult to find.

JS.

Dan O wrote:
On May 5, 8:03 pm, Dan O wrote:
On May 5, 7:56 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:



On May 4, 5:01 pm, Chalo wrote:
Most human ears have moved on. At
least they grooved on it.
Music has moved at least as far beyond J.S. Bach as J.S. Bach had
moved beyond monophonic Dark Ages tunes. It's very hard to make a
case for pre-blue, pre-swing, pre-syncopation, pre-groove sounds now
that we have been programmed with the good stuff. Listening to what
passed for dance music in Western culture before the 20th century,
it's baffling that anyone could dance to it. But music is a living
thing, and after it has died, even the most skillful taxidermist can't
give back what once was there.
Nonsense. Any notion that fashion equates with progress is easily
disproven by bubble gum music, disco and rap. Standards have fallen a
great deal.
There's no accounting for taste, of course; and there's a variety of
legitimate aesthetics. But in music and dancing (and poetry, and
sculpture, and painting) my standard is, if you can't tell when the
artist makes a mistake, it's not art. Or at least, not serious art.
Grunge bands banging out dissonant chords too loud to hear? Not
music, not art. Jackson Pollock? Give me a break.
Admittedly, I tend to like complexity, and the oldies. That is,
_real_ oldies - back through traditional fiddle tunes, to baroque,
renaissance, and medieval music. There is such a thing as "the test
of time," and Procul Harum is unlikely to pass.
And regarding "it's baffling that anyone could dance to it," I admit
these folks are baffling. But great!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2trSUR2few
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...8d60456b19722a

"Fuddy-duddy" - in case you missed the reference :-)


Not ScooBeeDooBee Bros?

JS.