Live data from Hacker News

When Beethoven Met Goethe

theamericanscholar.org

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#31
post #6

Beethoven would be making techno Why? Given that making techno, or modern pop music in general, is basically trivial. Just spin up Ableton, press a few buttons ... boom, 10 minutes later you've got a competitive techno-track that doesn't sound all that different (apart from mastering maybe) from what's being played in the clubs. There is no art left in pop-music -- trivial and generic. A genius would be horrified by…

I've heard the criticism that modern electronic music is repetitive from so many music snobs, but I still don't understand what it is they have against repetition. Why is repetition so bad? Also, why is lack of repetition considered to be superior?

Further, have these critics never heard of trance (as in the state of consciousness, not the music genre)? Or of altered states of consciousness brought on by drugs, (repetitive) music, and other means, to which the repetition in music can be so sympathetic? There is also the simple visceral response that people have to music -- a response that defies analysis, is not intellectual.

Many people clearly enjoy being in the space that relatively simple, repetitive music brings them to, and I'm still puzzled why that's seen as being so wrong.

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#32
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Influential though he may be, Stockhausen still comes across as a self-aggrandizing asshole: > I think it would be very helpful if he listens to my work Song Of The Youth, which is electronic music, and a young boy’s voice singing with himself. Because he would then immediately stop with all these post-African repetitions, and he would look for changing tempi and changing rhythms, and he would not allow to repeat any…

And course the reply: I found Aphex Twin's reply disappointing. Like a petulant child he essentially negated Stockhausen's points, without engaging with them. It seems to me that Stockhausen was trying to be helpful -- after all he had been a music teacher for nearly 1/2 century with academic offspring like Kraftwerk and Can. Aphex Twin seemingly was unable/unwilling to see that there are other approaches to music th…

What would be much more interesting is if instead of bickering, Stockhausen and Aphex Twin collaborated to create a new work together, like Beethoven and Goethe might have. What a wasted opportunity.

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#33
post #2

The population then was about 1 billion. With 7.6 billion people, greater access to education, and more travel, how many meetings of comparable people happen today?

Maybe it is just interests of people shifted from classic music and philosophy to other topics.

But I found contemporary piano music good in my taste: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7maJOI3QMu0

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#34
post #6

Beethoven would be making techno Why? Given that making techno, or modern pop music in general, is basically trivial. Just spin up Ableton, press a few buttons ... boom, 10 minutes later you've got a competitive techno-track that doesn't sound all that different (apart from mastering maybe) from what's being played in the clubs. There is no art left in pop-music -- trivial and generic. A genius would be horrified by…

I've heard the criticism that modern electronic music is repetitive from so many music snobs, but I still don't understand what it is they have against repetition. Why is repetition so bad? Also, why is lack of repetition considered to be superior? Further, have these critics never heard of trance (as in the state of consciousness, not the music genre)? Or of altered states of consciousness brought on by drugs, (repe…

   what it is they have against 
   repetition
    
They find it boring.

Would you come to HN every day if the linked articles never changed?

I'm quite enamoured with Schmidthuber's theory of creativity [1, 2] Schmidhuber develops a theory of artificial curiosity and creativity for an autonomous agent. The agent is equipped with an adaptive predictor trying to predict future events from the history of previous events and actions. A reward-maximising, reinforcement learning, adaptive controller is steering the controller and gets curiosity reward for executing action sequences that improve the predictor. (I term this "Pattern Recognition as Pleasure".) This discourages the agent from executing actions leading to boring outcomes that are either predictable or totally unpredictable. Instead the controller is motivated to learn actions that help the predictor to learn new, previously unknown regularities in its environment, thus improving its model of the world, which in turn can greatly help to solve externally given tasks. Schmidhuber claims that his corresponding formal theory of creativity explains essential aspects of art, science, music, and humor.

If we were to take Schmidhuber's approach seriously, then that that which we enjoy as great art (as creative) would be that which is on the edge of the observer's ability to compress/understand. Note that this is highly observer dependent! What I have been comprehending for a long time and dismiss as boring, might be extremly interesting for somebody else, and vice versa.

In my own life this was born out: I used to enjoy pop-music so much and didn't worry about repetition -- in fact I didn't notice it. I loved pop-music so much that I learned how to make it. This lead to my disenchantment with pop-music: when I was finally able to produce decent pop-music (I was able to compress it into a few rules), I lost interest, and sought novelty elsewhere.

   never heard of trance
I've certainly read Gilbert Rouget's Music and trance [3]. The upshot of this book is that trance is not really tied to any musical quality, but a social effect where we copy other's behaviours.

[1] J. Schmidhuber, Formal Theory of Creativity, Fun, and Intrinsic Motivation. http://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/creativity.html

[2] J. Schmidhuber, Simple Algorithmic Principles of Discovery, Subjective Beauty, Selective Attention, Curiosity & Creativity. https://arxiv.org/abs/0709.0674

[3] https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Music_and_Trance.html...

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#35

If anyone is curious about Beethoven's life, I can recommend and excellent and relatively recently published biography: 'Beethoven: Anguish and Triumph', by Jan Swafford. We see figures like Beethoven and Goethe as geniuses themselves, but the 18th century conception of 'genius' was not of a person, but of a sort of holy spirit that blessed an individual with great abilities, while remaining separate from that person…

Another Beethoven biography for the beginner that I can recommend is 'Beethoven: The Music and the Life' by Lewis Lockwood. This one does a good treatment on his life while also weaving in relevant analysis of his music for the layperson with some musical background. It's a great introduction to both aspects of his life for the non-serious musician and will give you a much greater appreciation for his work.

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#36

If anyone is curious about Beethoven's life, I can recommend and excellent and relatively recently published biography: 'Beethoven: Anguish and Triumph', by Jan Swafford. We see figures like Beethoven and Goethe as geniuses themselves, but the 18th century conception of 'genius' was not of a person, but of a sort of holy spirit that blessed an individual with great abilities, while remaining separate from that person…

Note also that "genius" and "genie" are etymologically related, both descending from Latin "genius". [1]

[1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/genius#Latin

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#37
post #6

Beethoven would be making techno Why? Given that making techno, or modern pop music in general, is basically trivial. Just spin up Ableton, press a few buttons ... boom, 10 minutes later you've got a competitive techno-track that doesn't sound all that different (apart from mastering maybe) from what's being played in the clubs. There is no art left in pop-music -- trivial and generic. A genius would be horrified by…

Aphex Twin.

A few years ago, as a classical music fan, I set out on a mission to find some electronic music that I actually enjoyed listening to. Gradually, I learned that aside from the three usual pillars of composition — melody, harmony, and rhythm — there is a fourth that is underserved by practically every other genre of music: timbre. Electronic musicians are masters of sound sculpting as a musical atom. They can create new worlds from scratch.

Aphex Twin didn't really catch my ear, but Tipper sure did. Listening to his albums, I found myself completely enveloped in his immaculately sculpted aural biomes. When I closed my eyes, I could almost see the grumbling synth rivers, the shimmering vibrato branches, the chirping electric crickets. It was sublime in the classic sense of the word.

I would be disappointed if someone listened to Peripherals[1] or Gulch[2] and still came away thinking that electronic music was repetitive and boring!

(I bring this up because I think Aphex Twin is in a similar orbit of masterful sound design, though his style is too dissonant for my ear.)

[1]: https://soundcloud.com/tippermusic/2-peripherals

[2]: https://soundcloud.com/tippermusic/gulch-teaser

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#38
post #6

Beethoven would be making techno Why? Given that making techno, or modern pop music in general, is basically trivial. Just spin up Ableton, press a few buttons ... boom, 10 minutes later you've got a competitive techno-track that doesn't sound all that different (apart from mastering maybe) from what's being played in the clubs. There is no art left in pop-music -- trivial and generic. A genius would be horrified by…

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14978745 and marked it off-topic.

(It has some excellent comments but the curmudgeonly 'art these days' thing still counts as a generic tangent so it's a borderline call.)

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#39
post #4

This was arguably the golden age of German culture. Even if Kant just passed away, you had philosophers such as Hegel in Berlin, Fichte, Schelling living at the same time and the younger Schopenhauer actually meeting with Goethe, although that did not turn out well. At that time, Romanticism was taking off in Germany, after the Weimarer Klassik around Goethe, Schiller and people such as Herder and Wieland was coming…

Wasn't Austrian culture (it mentioned that Beethoven lived in Vienna) distinguishable from 'German' culture? I think I read about that in Nassim Taleb's Antifragile when talking about Gödel having to leave during the Nazi occupation and the negative affect Viennese culture incurred from being absorbed into Germany.

Re: When Beethoven Met Goethe

#40
post #4

This was arguably the golden age of German culture. Even if Kant just passed away, you had philosophers such as Hegel in Berlin, Fichte, Schelling living at the same time and the younger Schopenhauer actually meeting with Goethe, although that did not turn out well. At that time, Romanticism was taking off in Germany, after the Weimarer Klassik around Goethe, Schiller and people such as Herder and Wieland was coming…

Did these guys have any actual impact on society? Besides Hegel's mysticism that later served as a foundation for Marx (and we all know that didn't turn out well), what exactly did we gain from the philosophy of that era?

It appears to me that the "greatness" of these men is an unquestionable truth in our society, while scientists of the same era with more evident influence go largely unnoticed.

Post reply on HN