So I got to thinking of this 'timeless music' debate. Here's a theory-
For any piece of music to be considered 'timeless,' it must transcend the
era in which it was composed. So to me, timeless music seems to fall into
two catagories- the totally sugary bubblegum pop music and the over-the-top
avant gaurde experimental pieces.
1. Bubblegum pop- because a well-crafted song will always stand up to
scrutiny. Take for example something like the Go-Go's first album or Simon
and Garfunkel. These are recordings that I think in 100 or 200 years, people
will stiff listen to and think 'wow, what a great song.' The industry is so
backwards today that I can't even think of a quality pop artist today.
2. Experimental- because it is a source of endless fascination. And this is
why centuries from now people will refer to Skinny Puppy's Last Rights or
Oval or Chiastic Slide and still find things that amaze them. It's the same
feeling when we listen to Stockhausen and Arvo Part.
And on an almost related note-
I think the market for new recordings of the 'highly regarded' classical
compositions will dry up only beacuse recording technology has come so far
that there are already definitive recorings of all the major works. Do we
really need another pristine, feels-like-you're-the-conductor recording of
Beethoven's Ninth or complete Brandenburg Concerti? There's already a dozen
and a half out there and sure, the differences in performance (especially in
reference to major vocal and opera works) are worth looking into, but it's
not enough to drive an entire market.
now playing: Autechre in Austin 2001
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org