January 9, 2007

On the top-selling music of 2006: "Personally, I can’t handle The Fray, John Mayer, Jack Johnson, that Daniel Powter song, James Blunt, any Coldplay since “Parachutes”, etc, etc … It’s all part of some introspective sad sensitive-guy thing that I just can’t buy into. It’s Generation X in reverse."


January 8, 2007

"Popular performers or groups are pleasing not because of any particular virtuosity, but because they create an overall timbre that remains consistent from song to song." The neuroscience of music.



January 8, 2007

"I confess I've been increasingly dissatisifed with the direction of modern pop, which has more and more privileged screechy and/or whiny vocalists who are utterly unable to play any instrument themselves, and thus, usually, unable to actually write music or songs themselves." Over at Collision Detection, Clive Thompson points to a recent article by Chuck Klosterman about how YouTube is reviving musical virtuosity. Klosterman:

One of those depressing paradoxes about rock 'n' roll: Very often, profoundly exceptional guitar playing is boring to listen to... It's difficult for nonmusicians to appreciate world-class guitar playing through solely sonic means, mostly because a) the difference between great guitar playing and serviceable guitar playing is often subtle, and b) every modern listener assumes production tricks can manufacture greatness. (As a result, radio audiences are automatically skeptical of what they hear.) Guitar brilliance usually comes across as ponderous. But that changes dramatically when one adds the element of video; somehow, watching changes the experience of hearing. There are certain things that sound good only when (and if) you can see them. And YouTube lets you see them.

Two comments on the side:

One, for great example of YouTube sanctifying musical skill, check out the video of Stanley Jordan playing "Autumn Leaves" that I linked to earlier. Seeing is believing there.

And two, I'm really curious why Esquire didn't put the links directly in the body of Klosterman's essay--we're talking about the internet, here. Is there a reason to list a plain-text web address buried in a footnote?



January 8, 2007

"Popular performers or groups are pleasing not because of any particular virtuosity, but because they create an overall timbre that remains consistent from song to song." The neuroscience of music.






January 5, 2007

An interview with Steven Johnson.

I came out of college in the late '80s amid the science wars. Literary theorists were deconstructing the scientists, and scientists were making fun of the literary theorists. There was no realm where you'd come into a classroom and say, "This complexity theory might be useful in thinking about the kind of urban system Dickens is describing." If you talked about science, it was entirely to show how it was Eurocentric or something.

I always felt like that was a total waste of time. There were obviously insights that both domains could productively share. A lot of what I've been trying to do since then is figure out what those connections could be, and figure out a way to work them into the books.

[via... Steven Johnson]