|
I thoght it was common knowledge I'm bi, not homosexual. Well, I'm not conscerned with image anymore heh, so trivialities like 'elite taste' have become unimportant, I just listen and (most of the time) expect to find enjoyment in doing so. Music is not a competition nor a race, keep that in mind.
My problem with Part is that one cannot sustain the same pillars for so long before they start to fall. That is; his planet spins around objects that are musically samey, if you arent taken away by the 'angelical beauty' of Pärt his music starts to rot, pretty fast. This happens with post-rock albums too, releases of undescribable magnificense bore me to death after my second or third listen-- I just know whats going to happen, and I hate unjustified redundancy.
gian for prez. this is a great post my lil nig
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
on a side note it'ws pretty awesome when fratres came in There Will Be Blood. Good Morning GN is one of the most beautiful albums I've ever listened to, actually, and I recently acquired my physical copy from Erst-- Fascinating imagery. Luciers record is a revolution, Schaeffer would've been proud I swear, resonant frequencies of natural evolution through intricate processing.
Idk man I also put some dinisaur jr and kent and j mascis or Slagsmalsklubben on my cd/vinyl player from time to time, haahagsf huhu.
| | |
You're dickered bi
| | |
Why can't you like more things to a greater extent like me
| | |
title track is still one of my top 10 favourite songs ever
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
to quote this dude on lastfm: Felixle --> GianXgx ;Me `"I hate music" "Karlheinz Stockhausen 159 plays" SURPRISNLGGY ACCURATE´#SWAG
Lol.
I like to discuss things, after all, this is a music discussion/journalism network, no?
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
whatever
| | |
divergent opinions are always welcomed... unless they're wrong.
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
so you believe in 'objective facts', hahaaahaahahahahahehhehuh
| | |
sigh
it was a joke
| | |
so you believe in 'objective facts'
Doesn't the word 'fact' imply it being objective?
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
not nescesarily in this context
| | |
Gia: i'll try not to be sarcastic at all so as not to confuse you, but if you're interested in discussing the music without getting caught up on ratings, let's do it.
My problem with Part is that one cannot sustain the same pillars for so long before they start to fall. That is; his planet spins around objects that are musically samey, if you arent taken away by the 'angelical beauty' of Pärt his music starts to rot, pretty fast. This happens with post-rock albums too, releases of undescribable magnificense bore me to death after my second or third listen-- I just know whats going to happen, and I hate unjustified redundancy.
my problem with this is that it's kind of pretentious and meaningless. 'one cannot sustain the same pillars for so long before they start to fall'. seriously? anyway, moving along. i definitely understand why someone wouldn't like this based on repetition. the latter half of tabula rasa (song) is a great example of that. to a casual music listener, it's probably boring as fuck, but in the context of the album, i think it's a devastating finale. that's the thing i love about part though: his ability to elicit such strong emotions from the listener without having to do much at all. minimalism at its best, i say. but i digress, it actually isn't that repetitive - the music shifts, but it's subtle. it's something you'd have to hear a few times and really focus on. much like what basinski does with his music, i think the repetition works in that it really helps me settle into a specific mood and stay there.
also, your point about music boring you after 2 or 3 listens doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. you know what's going to happen on your third time listening? well, um, yeah. that doesn't mean it's not worth hearing. i could apply that to any music, unless you're listening to some really indescribable ever-shifting piece of music.
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
stott is better than james blake ;]
| | |
well, that was a total waste of time
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
I'm studying and not in the mood to write two paragraphs explaining you why I don't loooove Tabula Rasa as much as you do,
that doesn't means I wont.
| | |
well then, write one paragraph instead ;D
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
It's not repetition what bothers me, it is unjustified redundancy. What do I mean by that? Pärt's music, though beautiful and immerseful, can be very predictable from the instant his compositions start developing, 'moving'. This I do not attribute to minimalism's compositional limitations but to Pärt's particular brand of it (as some of Riley's and Reich's work will make you realize); he deals with very interesting and fascinating motifs that can definitely touch your soul, I agree, but whenever that angelical idiosyncrasy disappears all you're left with are works that recycle an evolutive process--- Or, touring different facets of one distinct basis. I never said I 'hate' part, don't get me wrong, but Tabula Rasa's feature on so many movies and the amount of times I've listened to it have surely diminished its impact.
His music (while not 'ever-changing) can evoke diverse and ambiguous feelings (melancholy, joy, horror). That's something I really like. Anyways, I'm not in love with Pärt's minimalism, but you seem to think it is because of the repetition -- fundaments of minimalist Pärt-- But no
;I've heard Young's The well-tuned Piano and a lot of drone music, completely different spectrums.
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
both, but unfortunately i can't enjoy one without the other *~*
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
It's not the fact that he uses repetition, but how he uses it which prevents me from enjoying this as much as other minimalist works. I don't find his style all that engrossing, and the materials that he assembles just are not interesting enough for me to really dive in. His "purity" I see as materials drained of colour, and a musical architecture devoid of interest. I don't think he gains much through repetition, unlike Basinski, as you mentioned, who exploits textural change through repetition really well.
Part is by no means bad, and this is definitely a nice pleasant listen, but it is not at all a spiritual experience or some transcendent embodiment of the sublime. Perhaps this is because I listen to sounds and not feelings.
| | | |
|
|
