Re: Music !!

From: Kenneth Van Oost (
Date: Tue Jul 10 2001 - 20:54:55 BST

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Music !!"

    Received: by id UAA14668 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 20:17:08 +0100
    Message-ID: <001901c1097a$50eaa6a0$5d06bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <>
    To: <>
    References: <><> <>
    Subject: Re: Music !!
    Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:54:55 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Precedence: bulk

    Hi Chris,
    You wrote,
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Chris Taylor <>
    To: <>
    Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 5:59 PM
    Subject: Re: Music !!

    Is it not just that the complexity (both in parts and over time) of
    classical music requires more 'space' than throwaway stuff. Imagine you
    were somehow trying to represent the music in dance - the classical
    would require more space and dancers (probably) than the pop.

    << I know what you mean here, Chris and I do understand your point
    of view, but than again, the same argument can be applied here.
    Why does classical music need more space than other stuff !?
    I know you don 't imply that the other stuff is not at the quality hights of
    classical music, but making such assumptions could lead to misunder-

    if you are severely reduced in brain function, you have less free space
    in your mind, so classical just passes you by, while you can still
    become engaged with pop. This effect could also be about modelling and
    predictability (much of our motivation for listening to music) - to
    model/predict pop takes much less effort (the possible variants are
    limited). This could also explain why all the stuff I listen to (Floyd,
    Zep etc. - the 'dinosaurs') doesn't appeal as widely (although I'm open
    to other reasons on that one...).

    << Yes, but Floyd and Zep are not so much as throwaway stuff, though !!
    They are quite sophisticated if you are willing to listen to them.
    Stairway to heaven ( Zep) and the CD 's, The Wall and The Dark Side
    Of The Moon, both by Floyd are not that easy to appreciate, in the music
    sense of the word. It demands more of the listener than of one who listens,
    to Boom- Boom music, like Prince Charles put it.
    Although, some of that throwaway stuff got quite a sophisticated beat,...

    And, Chris, the top 3 of the Timeless Top 100 exist out
    1_ Bohemian Rhapsody of Queen
    2_ Stairway to heaven of Led Zeppelin
    3_ Child in Time of Deep Purple

    All 3, in a sense a mixture of classical and pop.
    How would we explain this in regard to what Persaud tells us !?
    The more intellectual stuff needed to appreciate classical music is here
    complete out of the picture, because those records are made for the
    youngsters, not specially for the upperclasses or for the bourgeois,...

    Ps, the info about Qumran and the rest will follow shortly.

    Best regards,


    (I am, because we are)

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 20:25:27 BST