not small sycophants with mpd
What do the Grammys have to do with anything? I couldn’t find anything in the entire list of nominations that inspired curiosity. Please let me know if you think I’ve overlooked something.
Words for the day: Polyphony and Micropolyphony.
As it applies to medieval music, polyphony is a liturgical chant that includes a combination of different but harmonizing melodies, as opposed to plainsong.
In the previous century, it became the simultaneous sounding of two or more melodies of equal importance; also known in jazz as "collective improvisation;" the simultaneous expression of two or more instruments improvising with equal individual melodic and counter-melodic significance (e.g., polyphony is a key element in Dixieland jazz.)
To me, the etymology of the term micropolyphony could be a bit misleading because it isn’t really about polyphones made smaller. The polyphones are made smaller so that distinct patterns can move past each other and the interference can register as dissonance, much like a moiré happens visually. It destabilizes the “melodies” to create a new compositional form. Here’s the wiki definition of micropolyphony and a few Ligeti videos for your edification. (Actually, the metronome video doesn't really demonstrate micropolyphony- it just looks cool.) My apologies for being pedantic this week.
L'escalier du Diable
Poème Symphonique For 100 Metronomes
Requiem (2001 - A Space Odyssey)
Labels: Ligeti
13 Comments:
On the Grammys: I like that Feist album pretty well, and I can't get that Amy Winehouse song out of my head. Category 13 has some band called LCD Soundsystem but I'm pretty sure you'd hate them. ;) And I won't belabor the point on the Shins or Arcade Fire down in Category 22. That Tom Waits guy down in Category 69 is pretty okay as well. And Flight of the Conchords are quite entertaining to me. (Category 80, comedy album.)
What I'm really curious about are some of the deep categories, like tejano, zydeco/cajun, polka (!) and banda. I wonder if the records nominated are actually good or are as shit as, by and large, the nominees from most of the categories are. Also, it would be great if the nominees for album notes (category 90) were downloadable.
I looked up that Johnny Cash video and the song was good but the video is fucking terrible: http://youtube.com/watch?v=1e0EQlQXoEo
Also, henceforth we will now refer to my preferred Democratic presidential candidate as "Grammy Award Winner Barack Obama".
Yes whoever, please share that bit of Grammy relevance with all of us.
Hey Bluebird - thanks for the learning. It's right up my current alley. Did you happen to read the NY-er article on Nico Muhly last week? It's weird - in the past few weeks I've been exploring almost all of this dudes influences.
Thanks, dd. Still, that whole spectacle of the music industry makes me feel like I live in a parallel universe.
Will look up the Nico Muhly article this evening. :-)
My apologies for being pedantic this week.
More didactic than pedantic, I think. This comment, though, is pedantic.
Did you happen to read the NY-er article on Nico Muhly last week
Why don't I have that issue? Stupid Postal Service.
Don't get me wrong - I think the Grammys are shockingly irrelevant, certainly when compared to the Oscars. The latter does a reasonably okay job of reflecting some idea of taste independent of financial success, while the former rarely does, at least in the high profile categories.
Thanks for the Ligeti as well, btw.
The Oscars blow too.
When three of the best movies of the year - THERE WILL BE BLOOD, NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, and MICHAEL CLAYTON - are nominated for best picture, I have no real reason to complain. JUNO and ATONEMENT are pretty okay too.
No way I love pedantic. :)
I only watched like a total of maybe 15 minutes of the grammys, switching back during the commercials while watching something probably way worse that i have now blocked out from my memory. And I have to say i was pleasantly surprised. Every time i switched back there was someone playing music and it wasn't totally horrible, though i won't say it was what I would vote for if i was voting for grammy winners... I saw the bit of Alicia Keys with the dead Sinatra, which was a little painful, but at least it didn't involve Nickelback or Britney Spears... Then i saw the Kid Rock - Keely Smith duet which at first was a little annoying, but then it turned out to be kind of cute, and again, no Nickelback or Britney. Then the last time I tuned in it was Herbie Hancock and Lang Lang piano dueling to Rhapsody in Blue, this was probably my favorite part of it all, and again no Nickelback or Britney! I'm sure the other parts must have been totally horrible, but it was nice to see that, at least what i saw, was actually music, and not people talking about how big someones tits are, or how many gold chains so and so is wearing, or how many gold records someone has in their anal cavity. Though i'm sure the other whatever hours i didnt watch were probably full of that.
Justin - I have delivery problems with the NYer all the time. Sometimes they come two at once and almost always when I go to their site, they are showing a newer edition than the one in my hand.
I blame their subscription services since I don't generally have a problem with USPS...at least when our regular, Cookie, is on the route. You can always tell when she's not.
i can't find my fucking copy of the new yorker either and i have a deadline tomorrow.... grrrr....
Mine came today. Maybe yours will too.
nah, i'm going to steal a copy from someone else, i'm afraid. i'm guessing mailperson put it in the wrong box and lucky neighbor wanted to read it first, then give it to me, but forgot, or something like that.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home