# Music: Time to bring it under control?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Where I live, even hairdressers and pedicurists must be licensed. How much more so people whose art has a pronounced effect of public morality! And I'm not just thinking rap here. Consider George Bernard Shaw's statement:

"My masters were the masters of a universal language: they were, to go from summit to summit, Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner. Had the Germans understood any of these men, they would have hanged them."

Plato said it, Confucius said it, the church Fathers said it. It's time we removed music from the laissez-faire marketplace and put it firmly within the purview of law. What do you think?


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

I don't get the "they would have hanged them" thought
what he mean?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Where I live, even hairdressers and pedicurists must be licensed. How much more so people whose art has a pronounced effect of public morality! And I'm not just thinking rap here. Consider George Bernard Shaw's statement:
> 
> "My masters were the masters of a universal language: they were, to go from summit to summit, Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner. Had the Germans understood any of these men, they would have hanged them."
> 
> Plato said it, Confucius said it, the church Fathers said it. It's time we removed music from the laissez-faire marketplace and put it firmly within the purview of law. What do you think?


I think your normally wry and provocative sense of humor has failed you here


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Oh god, no. 

There's is special the naïveté in thinking the licensers would somehow make the proper decisions, not to mention arguments to liberty. 

Besides, which great composer convinced Shaw to support Stalin?


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Plato said it, Confucius said it, the church Fathers said it. It's time we removed music from the laissez-faire marketplace and put it firmly within the purview of law. What do you think?


What kind of laws do you have in mind?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

brianvds said:


> What kind of laws do you have in mind?


I make no specific proposals except that allowable music be defined by law and be subject to the normal political processes. It will be interesting to see the planks in various party platforms...

What will the tea partiers allow? The Hollywood liberals?

A: And which are the harmonies expressive of sorrow? You are musical and can tell me.

B: The harmonies which you mean are the mixed or tenor Lydian, and the full-toned or bass Lydian, and such-like.

A: These then, I said, must be banished; even to women who have a character to maintain they are of no use, and much less to men.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Ken, you should start watching soap-operas or something. Maybe it will help alleviate this need of yours for constant drama. :trp:


----------



## mtmailey (Oct 21, 2011)

MUSIC has gone down hill in years past like hip hop /rap which used to be meaningful but now about murder/violence mayhem & other silly junk.Other music forms about hate & other negative stuff should be banned though.I have heard about music they influence drug use & so forth.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

It's about time we bring this here music under control; the stricter the better.
Hope Congress is listening!


----------



## Guest (Mar 29, 2014)

KenOC said:


> It's time we removed music from the laissez-faire marketplace and put it firmly within the purview of law. What do you think?


I wouldn't want to place anything anywhere near a 'purview' at all.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Ken better hope that Obama shares his affinity for Beethoven 

Who knows, if we get an extremist Lutheran for our next president he could ban all music past Bach. Lutherans love their Bach. :lol:


----------



## User in F minor (Feb 5, 2014)

Something like this was going to happen in Serbia a couple of years ago but I don't know what came of it. An approval by a national board of culture would be required for all musical artists who wanted to perform abroad, in order to prevent unprofessional and unserby artists from getting visibility.


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

When I read the OP my first thought went to this guy



Andrei Zhdanov (1896-1948 luckily)

but possibly I misundestood Ken's English...


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

mtmailey said:


> MUSIC has gone down hill in years past like hip hop /rap which used to be meaningful but now about murder/violence mayhem & other silly junk.Other music forms about hate & other negative stuff should be banned though.I have heard about music they influence drug use & so forth.


This reminds me of that discussion between Frank Zappa and John Lofton





I don't know if your serious, if you're joking I'm sorry but if you're serious that is called fascism


----------



## Guest (Mar 29, 2014)

I vote for a 100% rate of taxation for all music artists without a degree in music (thus being kind to our classical musician fellows) 

Hell, make it 100% + community service if they don't write their own songs (sup biebs)



Note: There are hardly any worthwhile non-classical musicians today that make nearly enough money with their music to quit their day jobs, so this is perfect to weed out the bad eggs


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

arcaneholocaust said:


> I vote for a 100% rate of taxation for all music artists without a degree in music (thus being kind to our classical musician fellows)
> 
> Hell, make it 100% + community service if they don't write their own songs (sup biebs)


Yes, strange how you need a degree in biology to work in the field, but not so with music...

It would certainly help weed out the dead weight...


----------



## Piwikiwi (Apr 1, 2011)

violadude said:


> Yes, strange how you need a degree in biology to work in the field, but not so with music...
> 
> It would certainly help weed out the dead weight...


Except that having a degree in music doesn't mean that much. You can take private lessons and reach the same level. In composing and performing


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Piwikiwi said:


> Except that having a degree in music doesn't mean that much. You can take private lessons and reach the same level. In composing and performing


True, but then I sometimes wonder if it's the same for other professions too.

I'm just askin' for consistency here! :lol:


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

violadude said:


> True, but then I sometimes wonder if it's the same for other professions too.
> 
> I'm just askin' for consistency here! :lol:


Yea, I don't know who's offering private lessons for Petroleum Engineering, shah.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Vesuvius said:


> Yea, I don't know who's offering private lessons for Petroleum Engineering, shah.


Ya, I don't know. Libraries?

Ok, ok, but if a music degree doesn't mean much what am I doing getting a Bachlors degree in music??

My whole life is a lie!


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

violadude said:


> Ya, I don't know. Libraries?
> 
> Ok, ok, but if a music degree doesn't mean much what am I doing getting a Bachlors degree in music??
> 
> My whole life is a lie!


It's for the love of music, man. Don't forget that. Cut a lawn or two if you really need some money.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

violadude said:


> Yes, strange how you need a degree in biology to work in the field, but not so with music...
> 
> It would certainly help weed out the dead weight...


Yes, but you'd also lose the few great artists over the years who haven't gone through a traditional education: Gershwin, Takemitsu, Schoenberg...not to mention all of the early jazz artists.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

KenOC said:


> Where I live, even hairdressers and pedicurists must be licensed. How much more so people whose art has a pronounced effect of public morality! And I'm not just thinking rap here. Consider George Bernard Shaw's statement:
> 
> "My masters were the masters of a universal language: they were, to go from summit to summit, Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner. Had the Germans understood any of these men, they would have hanged them."
> 
> Plato said it, Confucius said it, the church Fathers said it. It's time we removed music from the laissez-faire marketplace and put it firmly within the purview of law. What do you think?


--
That's a good point, because if eugenics laws were in effect by the technocratic "experts," then Beethoven could have been avoided since his father was an incurable alcoholic; and Leonardo as well, since he was the illegitimate son of an illiterate peasant girl.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

They all already have artistic license. That's license enough.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> Yes, but you'd also lose the few great artists over the years who haven't gone through a traditional education: Gershwin, Takemitsu, Schoenberg...not to mention all of the early jazz artists.


True... That would suck to lose those composers. But on the other hand, they still studied music hardcore! My complaint is that so many kids these days think all there is to music is being attractive and learning how to strum chords on a guitar. But there's so much more to learn than that! They need to go to school or read up on their craft!!

Most of what I have said in this conversation is sort of tongue in cheek. Except this one...this one is very much believed by me.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

violadude said:


> Ya, I don't know. Libraries?
> 
> Ok, ok, but if a music degree doesn't mean much what am I doing getting a Bachlors degree in music??
> 
> My whole life is a lie!


Because it is where the bulk of the teachers are now. Bach, Mozart and Beethoven, and quite a few others, had no conservatory or college degrees in music, the setting up of those institutions coming later.

Other than that, an American undergraduate degree in music is, well count up how many units of the total to graduate with that fine arts degree are actually in music and you'll know


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

PetrB said:


> Because it is where the bulk of the teachers are now. Bach, Mozart and Beethoven, and quite a few others, had no conservatory or college degrees in music, the setting up of those institutions coming later.
> 
> Other than that, an American undergraduate degree in music is, well count up how many units of the total to graduate with that fine arts degree are actually in music and you'll know


Well, there's stuff to be learned! And I'm lazy about going to the library so I need this degree I guess.

Like I said, most people don't actually know how much there actually is to learn about music. It's nearly as rigorous a study as most other things.

I guess the difference is that if you become a doctor there's not as much wiggle room for creativity or you risk killing people.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

violadude said:


> ....most people don't actually know how much there actually is to learn about music. It's nearly as rigorous a study as most other things.


_Nearly? Hah._

Study your instrument from the age of four or six, year in, year out, maybe one month off a year, capping that off in your teens and twenties with the bachelor's / master's combo.

Doctors of medicine do not start studying their craft so intensely at the age of four or six. Just sayin'

Yeah, I know what you mean. Some people think they can become a painter without learning to draw, for example


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

User in F minor said:


> Something like this was going to happen in Serbia a couple of years ago but I don't know what came of it. An approval by a national board of culture would be required for all musical artists who wanted to perform abroad, in order to prevent unprofessional and unserby artists from getting visibility.


There was a similar system in France. To be credited as a composer on a published score, you had to sit and pass an exam set by some accreditation body. I suppose its the same as we have today in some areas, two I can think of are accounting and nursing. They've got their own accreditation bodies that work with the government to maintain standards (including ethics and so on).

But I came across this with regards to France in a book about Edith Piaf, she sat the exam but didn't pass it. Although a large amount of the songs she sang where actually hers, she wasn't credited due to flunking the test, but her collaborators such as Margeurite Monnot where okay with giving her a slice of the royalties. It was a symbiotic relationship. Her male collaborators tended to be her lovers, and one of them became her husband (or one of her husbands to be more accurate). She is credited though for her most famous song, La vie en rose.

I don't know if the same system exists in France today, since Piaf died in the 1960's. There where many composers in that kind of popular realm then - who are more or less considered classical now - who didn't know music technically speaking but still composed with the aid of others. Eg. Irving Berlin and Noel Coward. The latter knew classical well, he started using the techniques of Debussy and Ravel, considered daring for the time. Coward proudly stated that he sat all of two lessons with a music teacher who didn't like him breaking the rules by using such unconventional techniques. "What's good enough for Ravel and Debussy is good enough for me" he said in his signature witty way.



violadude said:


> Ken better hope that Obama shares his affinity for Beethoven
> 
> Who knows, if we get an extremist Lutheran for our next president he could ban all music past Bach. Lutherans love their Bach. :lol:


Well they where probably more adventurous than the Catholics. You know the anecdote about poor Palestrina who was castigated by the Pope? His gripe was that words have to be crystal clear, can't have all that fancy musical stuff getting in the way. I wonder what that Pope would say about Bob Dylan performing for John Paull II. But that's jumping ahead in time a bit!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

violadude said:


> Yes, strange how you need a degree in biology to work in the field, but not so with music...
> 
> It would certainly help weed out the dead weight...


A degree in anything first and only shows that you tend to finish things you start -- at least when there is pressure and a requirement -- and not much else.


----------



## Katie (Dec 13, 2013)

Finally, a voice for strong central censure of the arts. And make no mistake, the appointed judiciary is but a well-heeled arm of the supreme executive power, so the honorable gentleman's argument is, at root, the espousal of government control of our nation's musical production. And I agree.

However, Ken, in our moral crusade to staunch the degradation of the very medium we love and cherish, we must be able to cite a credible historical paradigm to substantiate our position - and I think I've found one! Reviewing Shirer's "Rise and Fall...", I note that Hitler effectively consolidated all artistic output under Reich purview to ensure consistency with the standards of the New Order. 

Additionally, I am certain that any bureaucratic, logistical, or punitive issues still left unresolved after close examination of the Fuhrer's blueprint could be effectively remediated through study of the iron-clad model subsequently implemented by Stalin, under whose firm - but loving - grip Russia's artistic community positively blossomed. 

With this strong philosophical underpinning I see nothing to impede your vision! Also, I stand willing and able to help as required...just sign me, Katie Goebbels!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I detect sarcasm here and sarcasm there, but perhaps as an insincere person I'm projecting.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Katie said:


> Finally, a voice for strong central censure of the arts. And make no mistake, the appointed judiciary is but a well-heeled arm of the supreme executive power, so the honorable gentleman's argument is, at root, the espousal of government control of our nation's musical production. And I agree.
> 
> However, Ken, in our moral crusade to staunch the degradation of the very medium we love and cherish, we must be able to cite a credible historical paradigm to substantiate our position - and I think I've found one! Reviewing Shirer's "Rise and Fall...", I note that Hitler effectively consolidated all artistic output under Reich purview to ensure consistency with the standards of the New Order.
> 
> ...


After first read, I don't know what you're saying. Anti-gov or something... But I dig your style. :tiphat:


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I would love to see music banned in public places where your don't have a lot of choice to not visit unless you want to remove yourself from society. I am sick of the crap music that we are subject to in grocery stores, drug stores, and just about any store. 

And then if someone can invent a device that will fry all electronics in any car that has the stereo so loud that the car's body panels are rattling, I'll buy one.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Katie said:


> However, Ken, in our moral crusade to staunch the degradation of the very medium we love and cherish, we must be able to cite a credible historical paradigm to substantiate our position...


This is, of course, not about the degradation of music but music's role in the degradation of society. Music itself is of little interest except to self-absorbed aesthetes -- "an effete corps of impudent snobs", as a famous man once said. We may be able to spot one or two of them around here...


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Florestan said:


> I would love to see music banned in public places where your don't have a lot of choice to not visit unless you want to remove yourself from society. I am sick of the crap music that we are subject to in grocery stores, drug stores, and just about any store...


Well I've actually heard Satie's Gymnopedie (the famous one of the three, whichever that is) in a supermarket. He'd probably take it as a compliment. Then there's Piazzolla's Libertango, I've heard it in cafes.

But yeah a lot of the music is background music, generic stuff. I don't mind one way or the other really. Its not as if I'm going there for a musical experience, I just want to buy my groceries!

Classical has also been used to move people on and stop them loitering at train stations, and what Katie said brings up a thing related to this, spectres of one regime that did the same but with horrific consequences. But I won't linger on that. Godwin's rule, all that stuff.

But ultimately both are about control, one way or another. Doesn't matter if its Satie or Bing Crosby singing White Christmas at the appropriate time of the year. Just consume your groceries - or Christmas pressies - in an orderly fashion. Don't stand out too much or we'll get security onto you!



KenOC said:


> This is, of course, not about the degradation of music but music's role in the degradation of society. Music itself is of little interest except to self-absorbed aesthetes -- "an effete corps of impudent snobs", as a famous man once said. We may be able to spot one or two of them around here...


Substitute snobbism for vanity and then you got all of the population covered. Who is without vanity? I think nobody. If you deny you have even a smidgin of vanity, maybe its a kind of vanity itself?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Florestan said:


> I would love to see music banned in public places where your don't have a lot of choice to not visit unless you want to remove yourself from society. I am sick of the crap music that we are subject to in grocery stores, drug stores, and just about any store.
> 
> And then if someone can invent a device that will fry all electronics in any car that has the stereo so loud that the car's body panels are rattling, I'll buy one.


YEA! That small device which fits easily on your key-chain, is harmless to all organic life -- yet with the easy push of a button and a discrete little pointing at the object(s) you want stilled (which can be done with the device still in your pocket with no harm to your clothing) _then, for example the music oozing from the speakers where you are shopping / waiting in line suddenly and inexplicably goes mute forever_

_Sigh_


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

How about this:
Ban all recording of music and archive all existing recordings.
Access to the archive may be granted on application to the authorities showing legitimate reason such as historical research.
New music is allowed but only in live performance in either the public arena or at home. Amplification may be permitted to allow for the use of electronic instruments but P.A.s can only go to volume 5 so as to ensure no large gatherings and only intimate venues.
There are no restrictions on the kind of music made but all performers must dress in plain boiler suits to ensure that audiences are not attracted by anything other than the music. 
This master plan will ensure that there are lots of jobs for musicians of all types.
Oh, and every performer must give 20% of their income to ME!


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Petwhac said:


> but P.A.s can only go to volume 5


Nigel Tufnel will lead the resistance! :lol:


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

Nereffid said:


> Nigel Tufnel will lead the resistance! :lol:


But he'll be able to concentrate on his wonderful Mach style music such as 'Lick My Love Pump'.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I'd say let the musical process go naturally the way it does. Leave it alone. Let the artist be free to create without any boundaries. They're just lyrics anyways.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

All things considered, this has already happened in our world's history. The first laws about music that ever came into being was the ones that countries used to unify what pitch A in the treble staff was. France did it in 1859 with A=435, and in England A=439 in 1896. Imagine if you were to fight this in your country! Perhaps a fine? Furthermore Laws dictating music went on in the USSR, even in Nazi Germany to a degree, all that "social realism" stuff.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

violadude said:


> Ya, I don't know. Libraries?
> 
> Ok, ok, but if a music degree doesn't mean much what am I doing getting a Bachlors degree in music??
> 
> My whole life is a lie!


Study brain surgery at home! Call Southern University for free details. You get to keep your car!


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

KenOC said:


> It's time we removed music from the laissez-faire marketplace and put it firmly within the purview of law. What do you think?


The Feds used music, blasting it loudly all night over large PA speakers, when they were trying to penetrate the Branch Davidian compound.

This is full use of music by law; as a weapon. But music has always been used to promote ideologies. The Church used it for centuries. The Nazis used it as a soundtrack.

So, are you saying that the present-day power structure, based on law and the state, should now control music to keep the masses in line, and propagandized?

The corporate world of advertising already uses music, including classical music, to sell products and build brands.

Since we live in a pseudo-fascist state now, it's already happened.

It's irrelevant for the government or law to have control of music. The real power is corporate, so as long as they use it, that's all that really matters.

Presidents, and laws, and governments, will come and go; the almighty dollar will abide!


----------



## Guest (Apr 5, 2014)

As I understand things, there is software now (Autotune?) that can take the "singing" of a person who sings poorly and adjust it to the proper keys to make their voices sound better.

Why not do the same thing for classical music performances and scores? Just run it through the software to make it sound better!?

It would be easy to legislate such requirements - the pharmaceutical, food, and other industries have long had to meet similar quality standards.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

BPS said:


> As I understand things, there is software now that can take the "singing" of a person who sings poorly and adjust it to the proper keys to make their voices sound better.
> 
> Why not do the same thing for classical music performances and scores? Just run it through the software to make it sound better!?
> 
> It would be easy to legislate such requirements - the pharmaceutical, food, and other industries have long had to meet such quality standards.


That type of disingenuous dryness normally isn't desired by those who actually appreciate art.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Vesuvius said:


> disingenuous dryness


Are you referring to Autotune or to BPS's wit?


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

BPS said:


> As I understand things, there is software now (Autotune?) that can take the "singing" of a person who sings poorly and adjust it to the proper keys to make their voices sound better.


It makes them on-pitch. It certainly doesn't make them sound "better", though. Autotune and similar always stick out like a sore thumb and make pop/rock vocals sound even more horribly artificial than they used to.


----------



## EDaddy (Nov 16, 2013)

Don't even get me started on my extreme abhorrence of auto tuned vocals. I completely agree with you, Mahlerian! As someone who owned a professional production facility for twenty years and sat on both sides of the console as both a producer, engineer as well as a recording musician, I have had to deal with the whole "to auto tune or not to auto tune" dance one thousand too many times. It seems like at least 90% of today's popular music is auto corrected, much of it hyper-tuned and it will literally make me change a radio station on the spot. It can single-handedly ruin an otherwise good song and/or performance for me. Did Ray Charles, Paul McCartney (insert any great singer of the day) need auto-tuning? NO. You know why? Because they could sing. Period. 

If a cellist, violinist or opera singer doesn't need to be auto tuned, neither do you! And if you do, do everyone a favor and find a new career because you CAN'T SING.

Okay, I'm done.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

BPS said:


> As I understand things, there is software now (Autotune?) that can take the "singing" of a person who sings poorly and adjust it to the proper keys to make their voices sound better.
> 
> Why not do the same thing for classical music performances and scores? Just run it through the software to make it sound better!?
> 
> It would be easy to legislate such requirements - the pharmaceutical, food, and other industries have long had to meet similar quality standards.


That is horrible. Bad music cannot be made better by electronically manipulating it. Also, if I want a perfect performance, I'll get computer generated music. I prefer reality. In non-classical music I prefer musicians who don't mess with things a lot in the studio. I actually like realism so much that I just bought live performances of Handel's Israel in Egypt and Messiah and like the fact that there are incidences of people coughing in the recording. I ripped the sound from my DVD of the 1978 Bernstein-conducted Fidelio because it sounds more alive than the CD recording they made a few weeks after the live opera was recorded. Somehow when they took it into the studio, they were too reserved and less emotion shows through in the singing; less background sounds too.

So the best legislation would be for people to keep their music to themselves, that is, don't make other's involuntarily listen to it whether it is your car stereo, or a store PA system.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> It makes them on-pitch. It certainly doesn't make them sound "better", though. Autotune and similar always stick out like a sore thumb and make pop/rock vocals sound even more horribly artificial than they used to.


Let's see if Autotune can fix this:
You Tube of a terrible singer


----------



## EDaddy (Nov 16, 2013)

Just turn on any current pop or new R&B radio station and listen. You can actually hear the auto tune computer forcing the notes of the vocal performances into "the grid" of the exact mathematical tonal centers of each note. It's awful, unnatural and literally makes me wanna slap my mama!

(Sorry mom)


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Handy for your favorite Florence Foster Jenkins CDs perhaps? Found this for you iPhone owners: 'T-Pain became so associated with Auto-Tune that he has an iPhone App named after him that simulates the effect, called "I Am T-Pain".'


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Nereffid said:


> Are you referring to Autotune or to BPS's wit?


Oh, please, we all know which. The implicit is fine, an ad hom is not  The prize goes to the author of the catchphrase, "disingenuous dryness." Imo, what that catchphrase was addressing, though, was devoid of a whit of wit.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

KenOC said:


> Handy for your favorite Florence Foster Jenkins CDs perhaps? Found this for you iPhone owners: 'T-Pain became so associated with Auto-Tune that he has an iPhone App named after him that simulates the effect, called "I Am T-Pain".'


FFJ is a legend, you just don't even think about that! :lol:...and even Dame Joan made mistakes, didn't she... but I wouldn't know the difference ...


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

KenOC said:


> Where I live, even hairdressers and pedicurists must be licensed. How much more so people whose art has a pronounced effect of public morality! And I'm not just thinking rap here. Consider George Bernard Shaw's statement:
> 
> "My masters were the masters of a universal language: they were, to go from summit to summit, Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner. Had the Germans understood any of these men, they would have hanged them."
> 
> Plato said it, Confucius said it, the church Fathers said it. It's time we removed music from the laissez-faire marketplace and put it firmly within the purview of law. What do you think?


I think the quote refers to Nazi Germany - the composers spoke a universal language which could be understood by all humans. This would imply a human equality which the Nazis would have rejected. Is that the point?

Anyway, KenOC's right, music needs a dictator. Who's up for voting? Whoever wins, they need to give the population strict doses of classical - plus, the only condition to be able to stop listening for the day should be 'the utter improvement of the specimen' . Ok, that sounded pretty bad, but hey, we're talking dictatorship.


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

EDaddy said:


> Just turn on any current pop or new R&B radio station and listen. You can actually hear the auto tune computer forcing the notes of the vocal performances into "the grid" of the exact mathematical tonal centers of each note. It's awful, unnatural and literally makes me wanna slap my mama!
> 
> (Sorry mom)


Actually, the use of auto tune is largely a question of fashion and style. It is possible to use such programmes to adjust the tuning without it being obvious and it happens on many recordings unnoticed by even the singer. 
In pop/dance/rnb music, it is part of 'the sound' and the flattening out of pitch modulation and drift is akin to the 80's fondness for big electronic snare drums soaked in reverb.
A lot of pop music is very formulaic, even more so today than in the past. The indie/ rock/ A.O.R scene uses autotune but not so anyone would notice. Same as the use of a bit of rhythmic quantisation. 
Hell, I even noticed it on a Stevie Wonder track (for effect) and he can certainly sing.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

"Son, if you wanna make it in the music business, I have two bits of advice: Get yourself a good auto-tune software program, and a good plastic surgeon."

I want a hi-fi set up which is as many channels as there are instruments; if the orchestra is 120 members, then I will have 120 separate channels. Then, each channel will have its own speaker, and they will all be set-up like the orchestra is laid out.

Then, if I want to run a certain instrument through auto-tune, I can.


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> "Son, if you wanna make it in the music business, I have two bits of advice: Get yourself a good auto-tune software program, and a good plastic surgeon."
> 
> I want a hi-fi set up which is as many channels as there are instruments; if the orchestra is 120 members, then I will have 120 separate channels. Then, each channel will have its own speaker, and they will all be set-up like the orchestra is laid out.
> 
> Then, if I want to run a certain instrument through auto-tune, I can.


Better to get the mix engineer to do it before it's mastered! Save you a lot of money and think of all those cables...urgh!


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Petwhac said:


> Better to get the mix engineer to do it before it's mastered! Save you a lot of money and think of all those cables...urgh!


But it would be fun to do it.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

KenOC said:


> I make no specific proposals except that allowable music be defined by law and be subject to the normal political processes.
> 
> A: And which are the harmonies expressive of sorrow? You are musical and can tell me.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry, but I just can't keep my love for music Platonic.


----------

