[NewMusic] (no subject)

[Matt Davignon]

Sarah went:
>You mean "poopy sounds in microphone" + excessive volume is not
>automatically awesome?

Yes. Yes I do. Even with a Line 6.

Beforeward, Weasel Walter was like:
>
> we both agree on this, because i don't believe that every sound a
> musician makes is profound art either. i'm not arguing that. what i'm
> saying is that you seem to be intimating that so-called "experimental
> music" has a inherently worse shit-to-gold ratio that other idioms and i
> don't agree with that at all.
>

Shit to gold ratio - I like that term. I think the s->g ratio is about
the same in experimental music as it is in other genres. The issue is
that in other genres it's easier to separate the shit from the gold.
It's much more confusing in exp. music. Shit doesn't get called out as
much as it should. The good stuff isn't necessarily the stuff that
gets more attention. There's a sizeable subset of musicians and
audience with an "all shit is gold" perspective.
Those are reasons why it's harder to come in with new ears.

During this discussion, I've been reminded of Marla Olmstead, the 4
year old who was featured on 60 minutes because she was considered by
the arts world to be a prodigy. Why? Her 4 year-old messing around
produces results that are similar to those of the world's leading
abstract artists.

Matt