# Music that makes you wonder "am I being trolled?"



## Curiosity (Jul 10, 2011)

Ablinger - For Electronic Guitar and Tape






John Zorn - Litany IV






Diamanda Galas - The Litanies of Satan






John Cage - Cartridge music






:lol:


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Yes, I get your point, you hate anything that's "experimental." Fine by me, no problem. I really have no "agenda" here, or at least not a "hidden agenda." So basically I'm tired of these kinds of threads which just leads to slanging matches, various sprurious ideologies, dogmas, generalisation, all that cr*p. Don't get me started on that, please, I could go on for ages. Anyway...

I don't know the others well, but I've heard some great music by John Cage over the years, got some of his stuff on disc. I just got a disc with pianist Francesco Tristano playing both his own pieces alongside those of Cage and J.S. Bach. One of the pieces on it that I like by Cage is his _In a Landscape_, composed in 1948. Kind of soothing, picturesque, impressionistic, surreal, new age. It's on youtube, people who are interested in "the other side" of Cage should check this out. Like many of the great composers, he was a man of many talents and aspects. I'd say he's one of the most significant composers of his time, and quite a number of reputable scholars, musicians, composers as well as listeners (who've heard a fairly wide range of his music) agree about this...


----------



## Curiosity (Jul 10, 2011)

Sid James said:


> Yes, I get your point, you hate anything that's "experimental." Fine by me, no problem. I really have no "agenda" here, or at least not a "hidden agenda." So basically I'm tired of these kinds of threads which just leads to slanging matches, various sprurious ideologies, dogmas, generalisation, all that cr*p. Don't get me started on that, please, I could go on for ages. Anyway...


Not at all. I adore many experimental pieces. Don't make the mistake of believing that I haven't listened to this kind of music in (some) depth. I heard Penderecki's Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima, Polymorphia and The Dream of Jacob long before I ever heard Beethoven's 3rd symphony. I listened to Galas' Litanies of Satan and Plague Mass before I'd ever laid my ears upon Mozart's Jupiter symphony. For crying out loud I was acquainted (via my father) with the work of Xenakis, Cage and Stockhausen LONG before I ever became fascinated with more traditional forms of classical music!

This thread is not just for music of the atonal plink-plonk variety, all genres are welcome. That said, contrary to the opinions of some, even in highly experimental avant-garde music it's possible to seperate the excellent from the patently ridiculous and laughable. Have you never had the feeling that someone is pulling your leg while listening to a composition?

This is "serious music". Allegedly.





Besides, I don't outright dislike any of the artists mentioned in the OP - I'm a huge fan of Galas' overall, for example. Her "music" is grating to the ear but as a type of twisted performance artist, she's magnificent.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Well, I wasn't meaning to pick a bone with you, but I'm kind of tired of these kinds of threads. It ends up being quite negative with "the usual suspects" getting on board to offer their "two cent's worth." Of course, can try to stay away from this in future, as I've been avoiding other threads like this. I've made a number of threads opening up the discussion for people to question their thinking. I've tried to steer a "middle" "baseline" course there. Open up, not "restrict" discussion.

Anyway, of course the latest musics differ in quality & level or artistry & all that. But so do things of earlier times. I found myself buying a disc of a fairly obscure composer - who died decades ago - touted as "great" by someone here, turns out this guy was basically rehash (at least the works on that disc). Totally outdated. I'd personally have something challenge me, push me out of my comfort zone, even make me cringe, than just offer me boring rehash. I can go to the original to get "the original," I don't need rehash.

& some people value a lot of things other people don't. It applies to all types/eras of classical. You sometimes get people on these forums rubbishing things like Mozart's _Eine Kleine Nachtmusik_, Ravel's _Bolero_, Beethoven's _Fur Elise_, whatever, the list goes on. Doesn't have much to do with quality, just preference, opinion, over-exposure, etc. If it's too popular, that's a problem, if it's too "fringe" then that's a problem. You can't win as an artist, can you? You can't satisfy everyone. Which brings up that artists are free to do what they want. Anyway, I'm probably wasting my time. Feel free to whack anything you want & use catch-all cliches - eg. "atonal plink-plonk" - as much as you want. If that "rocks your boat," then great...


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

No music, but this thread makes me feel like I'm being trolled for sure.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

This:


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

@Aramis: My wife and I both thought that piece was hilarious. I assume it was not meant to make people laugh, but I'm still laughing just thinking about it. I'm not even sure I could ever explain why I think it's so funny.

On a more serious note, is it OK to say that a piece of art failed? Attempts to produce interesting outcomes fail all the time. Most people would say communism was a governmental system that failed. In science most theories are failures (many by great scientists). In many areas when people try to push the state-of-the-art, they often fail. I see no reason to think that is not true in art/music. Since art appears subjective, it's hard (for many) to make definitive statements about the value of work, and I suppose ultimately the best judgement is the test of time. I'll just say I don't understand the works in the OP.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

mmsbls said:


> @Aramis: My wife and I both thought that piece was hilarious. I assume it was not meant to make people laugh, but I'm still laughing just thinking about it. I'm not even sure I could ever explain why I think it's so funny.
> 
> On a more serious note, is it OK to say that a piece of art failed? *Attempts to produce interesting outcomes fail all the time.* Most people would say communism was a governmental system that failed. In science most theories are failures (many by great scientists). In many areas when people try to push the state-of-the-art, they often fail. I see no reason to think that is not true in art/music. Since art appears subjective, it's hard (for many) to make definitive statements about the value of work, and I suppose ultimately the best judgement is the test of time. I'll just say I don't understand the works in the OP.


The reason that the bolded statement is not true about music is that it has different goals than the other things you mentioned. Communisms goal was to create a system that best served the people, it didn't do that, so it failed. Scientists theories are created to explain truths in the world, if they don't explain truth then they fail. People selling state of the art equipment or whatever lines you were thinking of, their goal is to sell something, if they don't then they fail.

The reason that no piece of music can ever be a failure, is because music's goal is to provide interest and enjoyment. Since every piece, I believe, can provide interest and enjoyment to at least someone, then no piece of music can ever be a failure. A piece of music might fail you, if you don't find enjoyment in it. But no piece of music, by the logic I stated above, can be a totally objective and universal failure.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

violadude said:


> But no piece of music, by the logic I stated above, can be a totally objective and universal failure.


You mean I am a successful musician and never even knew it?

I found the Diamanda Galas piece above fairly interesting if a bit disturbing, by the way.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Weston said:


> You mean I am a successful musician and never even knew it?
> 
> I found the Diamanda Galas piece above fairly interesting if a bit disturbing, by the way.


I said no piece of music can be a complete failure, I didn't say no performance of a piece can be a complete failure. haha


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

Music that makes you think that you're being "trolled" = music that challenges you = interesting music. Not necessarily good music, but interesting to hear, perhaps once, perhaps many times. I have a lot of music like that and I always try to challenge myself.

That said, the problem with this for me is extramusical... it's the composer's attitude. If the composer says "I'm a crazy fringe musician, I challenge your perceptions, I might be a genius in disguise but maybe not, anyway check this stuff out!", then it's all fine. The problem is when the composer starts to insinuate that others are doing it wrong, or that their music is outdated, or that all music should be like his, or pseudo-egalitarian crap about the equality of all sounds, ergo, his music is as good as Beethoven's, or something like that. But I've always been very interested about experimental music per se. It just has to come with a right attitude.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Takes these pieces, for example. Anyone who thinks these are music ought to go see a doctor to get their heads and ears examined.






*Health warning: do not turn this up loud, otherwise hearing damage could occur.*


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Takes these pieces, for example. Anyone who thinks these are music ought to go see a doctor to get their heads and ears examined.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So you think I should get my brain examined then?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

This is the definition of music according to dictionary.com:

mu·sic   [myoo-zik] Show IPA
noun
1.
an art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color.
2.
the tones or sounds employed, occurring in single line (melody) or multiple lines (harmony), and sounded or to be sounded by one or more voices or instruments, or both.
3.
musical work or compositions for singing or playing.
4.
the written or printed score of a musical composition.
5.
such scores collectively.

Every single piece of music HC posted and implied was not music, fits at least one or more of these definitions.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

I like these threads, someone always posts a bunch of youtube links to "terrible"/"non-musical" pieces and I always find a new artist whose body of work is worth exploring. Keep 'em coming!


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Xaltotun said:


> Music that makes you think that you're being "trolled" = music that challenges you = interesting music.


Is there, therefore, any music that is _not_ interesting?

I can tell that the answers to that question will be useless.


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

Interestingly, what struck me most about the Zorn and Galás piecxes is how UNoriginal they were. Luciano Berio wrote the vocal masterpiece in this vein 50 years ago:


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

As I have only ever used the pc for work prior to this, I wouldn't know what a troll is unless I was being chased by one of these








and while I would be trying to block this troll from scoring a goal on me, I'd be hearing this:



*actually, einsturzende neubauten is and has always been one of my favs


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

Just about everything by Philip Glass makes me think of the 'emperor's new clothes'. I suppose I'd call that trolling!


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

******* said:


> Wah.
> 
> I don't like to be challenged.
> 
> ...


Welcome to the forum, *******. I can tell we're going to get along. 

Edit: Actually, after reading some of your other posts, I think you might want to add some things a bit more constructive...


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

******* said:


> Wah.
> 
> I don't like to be challenged.
> 
> ...


I can only assume (and hope upon hope) that this post was a joke.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

That gimmick is going places.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

regressivetransphobe said:


> That gimmick is going places.


We'll see...I don't think the managers of this forum will put up with it forever though.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

mmsbls said:


> @Aramis: My wife and I both thought that piece was hilarious. I assume it was not meant to make people laugh, but I'm still laughing just thinking about it. I'm not even sure I could ever explain why I think it's so funny.


The first time I saw that video I seriously thought it was creepy (probably the guy's plastic smile and bad lip-sync).
The second time I already thought it was hilarious and now I absolutely love it. :lol:

What's funny is that as soon as I saw this thread's title, that song came to my mind and I was going to post it, but then I saw that Aramis did it already.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> *Health warning: do not turn this up loud, otherwise hearing damage could occur.*


Ugh that actually hurt my ears... and I didn't have the volume that loud.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

******* said:


> Wah.
> 
> Bad music hurt baby's ears.
> 
> Wah.


What is wrong with you? Is it my fault that my ears started hurting probably from the high frequency? I wasn't joking or saying the music was bad. Did you see anything in my comment saying that the music was bad? I honestly think you're trolling and posting the same thing to everyone in this thread anyway...


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)




----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

kv466 said:


>


I still love that she tried to blame her "band", somehow. The entertainment industry really has faith in the stupidity of its viewers.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Jan said:


> Ugh that actually hurt my ears... and I didn't have the volume that loud.


I could not listen to it either due to the high frequency. There are several works I've heard that have a similar effect on me. I can only assume many (most?) people are not as sensitive to those frequencies; otherwise, no composer would use them.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Not really! Physical danger has a long, storied relationship with music. It kinda hurts my eardrums too.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

violadude said:


> The reason that no piece of music can ever be a failure, is because music's goal is to provide interest and enjoyment. Since every piece, I believe, can provide interest and enjoyment to at least someone, then no piece of music can ever be a failure. A piece of music might fail you, if you don't find enjoyment in it. But no piece of music, by the logic I stated above, can be a totally objective and universal failure.


I understand your view and know that others here feel the same way. Obviously I would never want composers to feel they should only write music that makes a strong impression on a large number of people. Too many would not write.

For me I would view art on a larger scale. If a work or a movement does not attract sufficient interest (i.e. stand the test of time), in that larger sense it has failed. This is clearly a different definition and one that may not be useful in all cases (e.g. a young composer trying to make her way on the world). What's truly interesting is how hard it is to determine in the present what art will "stand the test of time".


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

regressivetransphobe said:


> Not really! Physical danger has a long, storied relationship with music. It kinda hurts my eardrums too.


But if there's physical danger no one would really want to hear it... right? So why would they use that in music? There's no way I can endure those frequencies :lol: it took me a while for my eardrums to stop hurting.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Same reason some people smoke, maybe.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

But how can this be addictive/enjoyable?  Well...maybe there's someone out there.


----------



## Machiavel (Apr 12, 2010)

Some can be enjoyable some can make you want to become a killer just for a brief moment. That thing Aramis played was awful. Scratching finger nails on a chalk board is bettter than this. I think however that the winner is The Lituanies of satan. I cannot believe someone is making money with that.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

I just tried listening to The Lituanies of satan. I don't know if it was the supposed to make me laugh :lol:. I feel sorry for the person that had to perform that... it sounds exhausting.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Jan said:


> But how can this be addictive/enjoyable?  Well...maybe there's someone out there.


 were you listening with headphones?


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

No, why ?


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

I don't really think he's being unfair or prejudiced by saying his body didn't take the sounds well


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

This thread is getting confusing with all the crying babies. I'm out.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Jan said:


> No, why ?


Just wondering in case close proximity to your ears might have caused the pain.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Jan said:


> I just tried listening to The Lituanies of satan. I don't know if it was the supposed to make me laugh :lol:. I feel sorry for the person that had to perform that... it sounds exhausting.


Hey! I quite liked that piece. It was cool.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

Oh I thought maybe it had a different effect with headphones on... but no I wasn't wearing them. Maybe I'm just sensitive to the high frequences.


----------



## Yoshi (Jul 15, 2009)

violadude said:


> Hey! I quite liked that piece. It was cool.


It was different from anything I ever heard that's for sure.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Jan said:


> It was different from anything I ever heard that's for sure.


yes...different indeed! I liked the John Zorn piece more though.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

******* said:


> Wah.
> 
> I don't like to be challenged.
> 
> ...


Wah.

I gave specific examples of pieces of challenging music. Folks, like you, come back with generalisation about all pieces of music (or even quoting definitions from dictionaries like we don't know what words mean), _but nothing ever specific about those clips posted_. I wonder why. Please fill me in: why do those three clips impress you, about from being "interesting, challenging", "is defined as music" etc.

Wah.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Wah.
> 
> I gave specific examples of pieces of challenging music. Folks, like you, come back with generalisation about all pieces of music (or even quoting definitions from dictionaries like we don't know what words mean), but nothing ever specific about those clips posted.
> 
> Wah.


Apparently you didn't know what it meant...because you said they weren't prices of music, which they all were by definition.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

violadude said:


> yes...different indeed! I liked the John Zorn piece more though.


Why? Give us detail reasons. I can give you detail reasons why I enjoy Beethoven's symphonies. Can you give me detail reasons why you enjoyed the Zorn piece?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Why? Give us detail reasons. I can give you detail reasons why I enjoy Beethoven's symphonies. Can you give me detail reasons why you enjoyed the Zorn piece?


I thought it sounded very primal. It sounded like something you might hear from somebody expressing their frustrations as if they weren't held back by society's expectations of how they should act. Those were just my impressions anyway.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

violadude said:


> I thought it sounded very primal. It sounded like something you might hear from somebody expressing their frustrations as if they weren't held back by society's expectations of how they should act. Those were just my impressions anyway.


Hey HC! Does my explanation of why I like this piece live up your expectations?


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

spoilers:











no


----------



## Pieck (Jan 12, 2011)

It warms my heart to see people defending any piece of music. I can be sure that someone will think that my music is good. Or maybe not? I dont know, maybe only experimental music will always get that privilege.


----------



## Pieck (Jan 12, 2011)

Delicious Manager said:


> Just about everything by Philip Glass makes me think of the 'emperor's new clothes'. I suppose I'd call that trolling!


I used to think like you, and even got some harsh comments from the fellow TC members. I changed my mind when I heard some of his piano music (Metamorphosis and the opening of Glassworks), and then the 2nd VC. I just stopped expecting to hear a usual development.
Still think that some of his music is crappy.

P.S
There seems to be a lot of quotes of ******* who seemingly did not write a single comment in this thread 
Edit: and now his name is censored. That's kind of cool.
Could someone explain to me what happened?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Pieck said:


> I used to think like you, and even got some harsh comments from the fellow TC members. I changed my mind when I heard some of his piano music (Metamorphosis and the opening of Glassworks), and then the 2nd VC. I just stopped expecting to hear a usual development.
> Still think that some of his music is crappy.
> 
> P.S
> ...


His name was c r y b a b y and he was just typing purposefully instigating comments to everyone. Although, I thought most of them were kind of funny.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Haha, they censored his name? Who is he, Lord Voldemort, he whose name must not be spoken? Come on now.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

Pieck said:


> . . . There seems to be a lot of quotes of ******* who seemingly did not write a single comment in this thread  . . . and now his name is censored. That's kind of cool.
> Could someone explain to me what happened?


The posts were removed by the staff ... for what we feel were obvious reasons. Hence the "*******'s".

We now return you to the topic of this thread .


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Now this one ought to fit right in here. I came across it on the literature forum I frequent:

The Shaggs were a rock band formed by a group of girls who were locked in a basement and forced to produce a rock album because their father was under the delusion that God had ordained they would be a huge success. Unfortunately, none of the girls ever had any formal musical training. The end result is something like a car crash you can't look away from. Frank Zappa rated them as the third greatest band in history. That would put them well above Black Sabbath...


----------

