# Music is Stupid



## oogabooha

View attachment Music is Stupid.mp3


hello all, i know i haven't been on this site in a while, i've been incredibly busy with composition and my studies. i am giving a lecture recital soon on intimacy in music (using my compositions as the driving force of the lecture) and the opening piece is a pre-recorded piece for tape that i think some of you may find interesting.

as you can tell from the title, it's called _Music is Stupid_.

here's a short description that I will read during the recital:

_In this piece I wanted to explore the certainty behind people and their life choices. Words are power, and can be used in many ways to blackmail or misrepresent someone, and in a community so tightly knit as music (and a community so culturally "dying out" as classical music), I wanted to see who would subconsciously put themselves on the line.

I tested this in a casual conversation setting. I would approach someone who is an undergraduate at the Eastman School of Music (the school I currently attend) and ask them to let me record their voice saying "music is stupid". 10 people turned me down, saying that they would not feel comfortable saying something so against what they actually believe (one of them even asking "Jake, would you say something you don't believe just because you are told to?"-I replied "no".) However, most of the interviewees ended up letting me record them, but had mixed reactions. Some of them were afraid (but when I told them it didn't matter whether they meant it or not, they became open to it), some took it with a smile (as they were taken aback and thought the prompt was absurd), and some took it very casually, giving away their voice and therefore their identity.

One of the main points about this piece is that these people obviously don't mean that. Of course they don't, they're students at a musical conservatory-they have to believe in music if they want to make a living in the future. By giving me their voice saying such a blasphemous, immature phrase, they very well could have tarnished their future. But many people did not care, as what they were saying was "just words, nothing important". There was one student who tried to thwart my process, and when other students would say that, he would say "oh c'mon, don't give in to this! Words have power whether you mean it or not, you don't know what he's doing with yours". Regardless of his rebellion, I only had to assure the participants that their part would be anonymous and for the greater good of the piece.

Words may not mean something to the people who say them, but society in a general sense assigns meaning to words, so the people who say certain things have no control over how they are interpreted.

This draws a parallel to the Millgram experiment, showing how humans who don't have to take responsibility for their actions are up for doing many things that they don't intend.

Because they weren't responsible for the outcome of their words, aspiring musicians denounced their morals.

The musical aspect of this piece comes interestingly enough from the repetition within the phrase "music is stupid". Halfway through the recording it becomes inaudible, and to my ears becomes different syllables. The change in background, accents, and noise levels are essential to listening to this piece. It creates a surreal effect, and helps the listener appreciate music as something that doesn't revolve around consistent rhythms/pitches. The music comes around from noticing the little things in the piece, like the incredibly vibrant backgrounds that result from the "field recordings". The music also has a certain rhythmical punch that is distorted by each person's individual take on the phrase, resulting from not only conscious thought but also accents. You could say it's a set of 102 variations on a theme._​


----------



## Vesteralen

Could you have accomplished the same thing asking people to say "music is okay" or "music is all right" or "music is neutral" or "music is diverse" or "music is changing"?


----------



## oogabooha

Vesteralen said:


> Could you have accomplished the same thing asking people to say "music is okay" or "music is all right" or "music is neutral" or "music is diverse" or "music is changing"?


Nah, like I mentioned, it is the immaturity of the phrase. Also, the phrase had to have a strong, negative connotation, and the phrases you've suggested are slightly ambiguous--the word "stupid" leaves little room for interpretation.

The piece isn't just conceptual, though. I had a few phrases picked but decided based also on the rhythmic patterns and the way the words relate to each other phonetically.


----------



## Vesteralen

Ah...I see.

So, how do you think it turned out? Were you satisfied with it?

And, what conclusion have you reached, if any, about your vocal participants?


----------



## oogabooha

I mean, I think it turned out very well, for me it's a very enjoyable piece to listen to. I wrote everything I felt about it in the OP, though, and think I state that the purpose was not to reach any conclusions about the participants, but rather paint a "what if" picture of identity theft through music and relating to that confidence and the unstable western art music scene.


----------



## Vesteralen

I guess what is unclear to me is how much trust entered into it. I was assuming at first that these people were strangers to you, but one of them addressed you by name. So what I'm wondering is what percentage of people involved were willing to participate because they trusted you not to misuse their voice and what percentage didn't concern themselves because it was "just words".


----------



## DrKilroy

I liked it.


Best regards, Dr


----------



## oogabooha

Vesteralen said:


> I guess what is unclear to me is how much trust entered into it. I was assuming at first that these people were strangers to you, but one of them addressed you by name. So what I'm wondering is what percentage of people involved were willing to participate because they trusted you not to misuse their voice and what percentage didn't concern themselves because it was "just words".


well, a lot of these people are strangers, really. we go to school together so some of them knew my name, but at the time of recording none of them were familiar with my music or me as a person so i don't think there was trust besides the fact that they assumed that because it was for a piece of a fellow eastman student it was fine. that's a very good point, though, thanks for bringing that up. i will talk about that in the lecture as well



DrKilroy said:


> I liked it.
> 
> Best regards, Dr


thank you very much!


----------



## PetrB

Sigh. I was expecting soooo much more in the way of a piece. Instead there is a series presentation of a bunch of folk saying your text, so it sounded like the assemblage of basic material which, If I had the tools, I would begin putting together in phasing, broken syllables, etc. while with the right electronics and editing software, the potential to isolate just the consonants or vowels, mix the order of any of those above, and make some polyphony of a sort out of it is all "yet to come."

Then, the phrase itself can be taken one way, which you did, but I think the point you wanted to make is failed, in that *"music is stupid," is a wholly valid statement equal to "computers are stupid,*" because on their own, both are innately stupid, being entirely dependent upon the inventor / operator to come up with something worthwhile.

Sorry mate, this seemed like one of the more drearily sophomoric projects (dozens of which went on all about me when I was in school) which seem to abound still in undergraduate level academe. Regardless of the premise, it didn't demonstrate anything to me.

ADD P.s. I'd urge you to keep all those recorded bits, and use them when you get to your required electronic music course... you've got the basics for a helluva piece, the text contradictory to what you can make of it -- then you've got something which will hold people's interest, I think.


----------



## Svelte Silhouette

If you speed it up to 5x after the first couple of "phrasings" it becomes a more agreeable listen imo. Sadly I don't feel this proved anything though but maybe a video would "give more depth" and allow a new project.


----------



## BurningDesire

Oogabooha, you are attending a very fine music academy. You have incredible resources available to you (FAR more than I have available to me at my school). Why don't you take advantage of that? You don't even do anything imaginative with the recorded material, you just play it straight as a series of un-manipulated samples. Where's the composition in that? I think its pretty clear that I'm a very open-minded musician and composer myself, but this piece, as well as another piece of yours (the one with the graphic score) seems to not be concerned with sound as material for art. Its all about concept, and its more other people doing the work for you creating the sounds that constitute the music. I'm fine with concept. Most of my music is about stuff as well, but really, the craft element, the imaginative manipulation and use of sounds is highly important to a successful piece.

I personally think you are wasting the resources you have to not be REALLY using them while you are studying there. A piece like this can literally be achieved anywhere. You could do it all yourself, with different voices and a cheap recorder, and it would have literally no effect on its quality. Again, experimentation is fine, use of any kinds of sound is fine, but REALLY do something with those sounds. Put in some effort beyond the concept phase of creation.

PS: the title is good, and the concept is cool, you've got something great to work from here.


----------



## oogabooha

BurningDesire said:


> Oogabooha, you are attending a very fine music academy. You have incredible resources available to you (FAR more than I have available to me at my school). Why don't you take advantage of that? You don't even do anything imaginative with the recorded material, you just play it straight as a series of un-manipulated samples. Where's the composition in that? I think its pretty clear that I'm a very open-minded musician and composer myself, but this piece, as well as another piece of yours (the one with the graphic score) seems to not be concerned with sound as material for art. Its all about concept, and its more other people doing the work for you creating the sounds that constitute the music. I'm fine with concept. Most of my music is about stuff as well, but really, the craft element, the imaginative manipulation and use of sounds is highly important to a successful piece.
> 
> I personally think you are wasting the resources you have to not be REALLY using them while you are studying there. A piece like this can literally be achieved anywhere. You could do it all yourself, with different voices and a cheap recorder, and it would have literally no effect on its quality. Again, experimentation is fine, use of any kinds of sound is fine, but REALLY do something with those sounds. Put in some effort beyond the concept phase of creation.
> 
> PS: the title is good, and the concept is cool, you've got something great to work from here.


i can assure you that i'm not taking the resources i have available to me at this school for granted, i just want to clear that up. these types of pieces are only a fraction of what i've been composing while here (among concert music i've also been writing these more avant-garde/conceptual works, a musical, and i've been working on an album that a local record label is offering to put out for me). i understand the comments about craft, but please do not tell me where i stand morally, because--believe it or not--my current composition professor really enjoyed this piece (and said it was well constructed). this type of music isn't something that i just threw up, it is done with extensive research into tape music and the avant-garde community of the past 50 years. *i can take heat about the piece itself, but please don't criticize things that are irrelevant to the composition.*

anyway, i understand the comments about craft. i suppose i would say this is a piece that doesn't have much craft on a surface level (although i would disagree and say that the graphic score contained a lot of craft and took so long for me to do correctly).

...but the voices are not put in chronological order. i specifically spent a lot of time finding different ways to present it and *chose the final draft based on rhythmic nuances and certain inflections i wanted*. it is very composed, even if it doesn't feel like it on a surface level. the amount of work i put in clearly isn't seen in the final draft, which is interesting to me.

and it can certainly be done anywhere, because it is supposed to represent just normal, everyday sounds. instead of traditionally presenting the audience with sounds, it points out the sounds in life (which, in my opinion, can be more valuable than being presented with something solid. a piece of music as a guiding point for experiencing life and finding music within that. i'm thinking in particular of max neuhaus' installation piece in times square, but i guess that even has composition involved so it's slightly invalidated).

i just thought i would share it, all i will say is that i think you guys are looking for too much into a piece that purposely is direct.

thank you for your comments though, i'm not oblivious and i obviously knew that the works i've been posting recently would get negative responses (this is a pretty conservative community). those are the only comments i'm interested in anyway, if i want to take my work seriously


----------



## BurningDesire

I'm sorry Oogabooha. I was wrong to call into question your efforts on this piece. Still I believe this piece has the feel of raw materials, and appears unfinished in its current state.


----------



## PetrB

BurningDesire said:


> I'm sorry Oogabooha. I was wrong to call into question your efforts on this piece. Still I believe this piece has the feel of raw materials, and appears unfinished in its current state.


This may seem like hammering you into the ground, but I repeat, after another has said similar, edited or not, what you are calling a piece sounds like a file-list of assembled materials _for a piece not yet done._ Concepts are fine, but still, unless truly meant to be inserted into situations as a planned but apparently spontaneous event, a sort of guerrilla theater, they too need some working to seem more than a list of materials.

Being quite used to conceptual pieces and art since near the inception of 'conceptual' on the scene, I felt there was just not enough in what you've done to make me think of it as a conceptual piece or a more plainly musical piece.

A good rule of thumb to think about is when your explanation (in the OP) is lengthier and weightier than the piece itself -- very much the case with this piece, I think... (and it really took biting my lip to even call it "a piece") -- something is out of balance in where the most effort went.

If the piece does not convey the concept, a then necessarily accompanying explanation explaining the concept ends up being the critical evaluation that the concept, as a piece, has failed to communicate.

The most important thing I would like you to consider: even if the teachers and peers in your immediate surroundings are not demanding of you that which both BurningDesire and I expected, once out of your current school environment, most people will be expecting of you what BD and I have already said we were thinking to find but did not.


----------



## oogabooha

Hmm okay, thanks for these above comments. Like I said, I posted this here knowing I would get a negative response so I can use that to work on it. This piece (and the graphic piece) are both very dear to me, and while I have the more concert-music oriented things that you guys may enjoy, I want to get feedback on these ones because I think that these pieces have been the most effective (explanation or not) when an audience member really identifies with it.

Thanks, though, you all bring up some very strong observations. I will take these into account , didn't mean for it to get heated


----------



## aleazk

I have to agree with BD and PetrB. I think that this is a piece of conceptual art. To make it a piece of music, more imaginative transformations of the material are needed (and yes, even in its current state, there are some musical elements; for example, near the end, a guy says "music...-a pause-is stupid", and this makes a nice contrast in the flow; but it's not enough!).

Also, your introductory text is too verbose and moralistic to my taste, the conclusions are obvious and cliché. You have to make a choice: you want to be a musician, a writer, or a philosopher (when presenting a new piece I mean). If you want to deliver a political discourse, then better to write a book about it (and to read and become expert in philosophy...). When I'm going to listen to a piece, I'm really not interested in the poorly expressed, and short winded, political thoughts of the composer, to be honest.

A better introduction would have been: "I wanted to record the reaction people have when they are saying something that, presumably, don't believe to be truth". Bingo, very good idea. Leave the moral interpretation to the public. Because, really, do not believe you can read people that easily and that your interpretations are that interesting... for power relations, I prefer to read some of Michel Foucault's essays in that case... don't get me wrong, you can be inspired by your political/philosophical ideas, that's good; but I don't need them for hearing the piece, I only need the concept element of the piece, which is the one I mentioned ("I wanted to record the reaction people have when they are saying something that, presumably, don't believe to be truth"); of course, you were inspired by your interpretation, the one you develop in your introduction, but that's superfluous for me. I know you will possibly disagree with this view.

In any case, with the introduction cleaned of that uncalled moral rant, this is still an interesting piece of conceptual art.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that. I feel stupid after listening to that.


----------



## oogabooha

just wanted to say thanks again for your comments. I didn't end up changing the piece, but did rethink the way I present this type of music based on these comments.

i gave a lecture on Saturday night talking about the word intimacy and its relationship to composers and their music (sexually and not sexually--_Music is Stupid_ opened the lecture). It ended up getting a crowd and a very positive response!

I wanted to post about the focal point of the lecture here as well, but based on the past two pieces I've shared (both _Music is Stupid_ and the untitled piece from a while back), I didn't want to offend anyone, so I'll talk about it now:

(EDIT: the below should probably require a *DISCLAIMER* for sexual content, but it isn't irrelevant to classical music)

one of the pieces was called "Trouble in Tahiti" after the Bernstein opera of the same title, and was a piece about how Bernstein (among many others) created a peculiar casual sex scene in art music (or at least art music contained in NYC). It was a piece about the moral conflict that this can cause when you sleep with the people you work with, and involved the performer (in this case me) giving the microphone fellatio. While this was going on, I collaborated with a splendid jazz guitarist who was manning various pedals to bring the noise and feedback to life (the juxtaposition between the sensual event and the noise represent the moral conflict). Some beautiful sounds were created!

if you're interested in hearing my lecture or the music involved, I'd be more than happy to send the video or notes around.


----------



## hreichgott

I guess I've seen/heard too many pieces like this to get excited about another one. (Ditto the stunt with the microphone).


----------



## PetrB

hreichgott said:


> I guess I've seen/heard too many pieces like this to get excited about another one. (Ditto the stunt with the microphone).


*Seconded!*

_Ay chihuahua...
*"Those Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." *_


----------



## oogabooha

PetrB said:


> *Seconded!*
> 
> _Ay chihuahua...
> *"Those Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." *_


I have no problem with you not getting excited, but since you're making a big claim like the quotation you posted, I'd be curious to know which history you're claiming I don't know--especially in regards to _Trouble in Tahiti_


----------



## PetrB

oogabooha said:


> I have no problem with you not getting excited, but since you're making a big claim like the quotation you posted, I'd be curious to know which history you're claiming I don't know--especially in regards to _Trouble in Tahiti_


Let's not get oversensitive, please. I'm familiar with _Trouble in Tahiti,_ but that was no where part of what I was talking about.

I was referring to performance art and conceptual art, both of which I was there for "the first time around," and is somewhere in the arena of your '_Music is Stupid._'

To me, you seem to have some 'moral' interests and concerns which, first, interest me not, second, I think need someone with far more practice and experience in both performance art and conceptual art to pull off successfully. Of course, you are at a beginning, in school, studying, essaying as it were, so it is a bit surprising you do not seem to accept that for those to whom you present these works, they are seen as less than successful. School is where you make a lot which is not wholly successful in order to later.... well, you know.

That quote was meant to send you packing to any and all of the better past works done in those areas -- much of it done well before you were born. As it now stands, I feel like you are somewhat unnecessarily "re-inventing the wheel."

Best regards.


----------



## oogabooha

hmm, duly noted, thanks. didn't mean to appear like i was being oversensitive. all i'm gonna say is that the original piece (_music is stupid_) isn't conceptual art, it's very highly composed and is incredibly specific. in the end i'm composing this music for myself to enjoy and to listen to, the piece also functioned as a social experiment but that was really only for the context of the lecture i gave.

thanks for your comments though, this website's reaction to this work has reminded me of the duality in opinions--i've had professors here tell me how "musical" and "thoroughly composed" this piece was, but here it seems like it rubs off as a lazily put together amateur art experiment. in the end it just matters what i enjoy listening to it for (as these pieces are just to build my self-esteem for enjoying life), i can only throw it out there and hope others feel the same. i understand that there are many people who use speaking samples in more elaborate ways (jacobTV comes to mind), but that stuff doesn't really interest me at all.


----------



## mellame

It's an interesting concept, but it needs.. _more_. I can't place my finger on it, but it just seems like there's something missing.


----------



## Bored

I wonder if there would be a difference in the piece if it was 10 seconds or 3 minutes? Lol.

Anyways, I thought the piece was cool and that it's a very interesting piece. I find it more artistic however, that you decided to call this a musical piece instead of a conceptual art piece (I know i'm weird that way). Overall, good sound and I think the main message that oogabooga wanted to get out was that, put in a position like them, would you be able to say music is stupid? And how deep is your connection with music really?


----------



## dwindladwayne

When does the music start?


----------



## millionrainbows

It doesn't make sense that you think this music is stupid.


----------



## millionrainbows




----------



## janxharris

oogabooha said:


> i've had professors here tell me how "musical" and "thoroughly composed" this piece was


Could you expound on that please?


----------



## MarkMcD

Well just to throw my 2 pence worth in, I think I have to agree with PetrB and 1 or 2 others in thinking that this is an interesting _concept_, but you haven't made _music_ from it. Editing and reorganising your material into a defined rhythmic structure would have given the piece it's _musical_ element, whilst being wholly contra to what the material is saying, which for me would have been a much more inventive piece. At the moment it's neither musical nor radical enough to be a piece of purely conceptual art. I really would take the advice of some of your audience here and work on a redo and repost, see what happens. It has the bones of something with potential, but it's not there yet.


----------

