komponisto comments on Helpless Individuals - Less Wrong

42 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 30 March 2009 11:10AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (235)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Kevin 03 December 2010 09:58:22AM 2 points [-]

Link me to some obscure Beethoven-like academics? I'll give it a try.

http://eceserv0.ece.wisc.edu/~sethares/ttss.html is some random fun obscure academic music I came across on Hacker News the other day.

Comment author: komponisto 03 December 2010 07:08:10PM *  7 points [-]

Link me to some obscure Beethoven-like academics? I'll give it a try.

An ad-hoc (more-or-less-)top-of-my-head sampler, if you're really curious (sorted alphabetically by composer and chronologically by work):

Babbitt: 1948, 1954, 1964, 1984 1992, 2003

Carter: 1955, 1980, 1971, rehearsal of a 1995 work

Crumb: 1970

Dillon: 1992

Ferneyhough: 1980, 1997, 2006, 2007

First: 1999

Murail: 1983

Ran: 1991

Westergaard: 1958, 2006

Wuorinen: 1971 1984, 1998

Folks like these are the intellectual (if not "cultural") heirs of the "standard canon". Some of them are as good as the three B's (most of them are at least at the level of say, Schumann or Mendelssohn), and all of them are currently living academics (or former academics).

(Then, in addition, there are the European non-academics like Boulez, etc.)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 07 December 2010 09:01:14PM 1 point [-]

For what it's worth, I tried listening to Ferneyhough 2007, and the first few minutes were fascinating. It was as though the music was playing something in the back of my mind. And then I ran out of attention.

Is the sort of music you listed especially dependent on good reproduction, or is youtube enough for a fair sampling?

Comment author: komponisto 07 December 2010 10:14:08PM *  0 points [-]

Is the sort of music you listed especially dependent on good reproduction, or is youtube enough for a fair sampling?

It's especially dependent on good performance, but I don't think recording quality is necessarily much more important than for works of earlier periods, at least above a certain minimum threshold. Certainly not for the works I listed, which I think are fairly represented by the linked recordings. (Excepting perhaps Carter's Variations for Orchestra, for which the audio is too soft.)

Comment author: Manfred 04 December 2010 06:15:11AM *  1 point [-]

Thank you for the list, it was interesting to listen to.

Not gonna lie, though, I got to Wuorinen's piano concerto and thought (roughly) "thank god! Something I can tap my foot to!"

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 07 December 2010 09:19:24PM 1 point [-]

I'm not sure how you could tap your foot to the Wuorinen concerto, but I listened to it and his Lepton, and enjoyed the energy level and variety of texture. I wonder if some of that could be brought into more accessible music.

Comment author: Manfred 08 December 2010 07:03:43PM 0 points [-]

It is possible that it was due to an ephemeral state brought on by listening to an hour of the other stuff. But:

I could tap my foot because the first beat of many measures was emphasized, and notes tended to have only a few lengths, which were integer multiples or divisions of one typical length, which in turn was an integer division of a measure. And I did tap my foot because the piano is more forgiving to "let's mess with octaves" moments, and the piece involved things like harmony and phrasing. There may even have been a cadence in there somewhere.