Look, dance music does not depict disgust and yet foster feels it when he listens this kind of music. On the same thread of logic, a horror movie even if depicts disgusting things, people that watch horror movies LIKE them. Point being, people are into the genre becuase they like the genre. Same for drama people like to read tragedies, they don't read them because they don't like them - tragedy infuses a string of emotions throughout the story, not all negative. Yes, the final is always unjust but so is life.

Back on movie topic, people don't watch horror and them comment "[A] oh my god, horror movies suck to bad, they are so simplistic, they don't even have a proper love story in them OR {B} Horror movies should be about more passion and love and less about horror".

Now, in all his years on this board, Foster is doing two things: [A] either listening (waay too much) music he doesn't like then bashing the sh!it out of it OR {B} asking for any random mix of noises that by definition is not music, to be called music.

We all have genres that we hate one way or another but I have yet to find someone that just opens new topics to remind us for the thousandth time that dance music sucks.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Feb 8, 2018

@huschiwuschi think twice before you dislike jay-z & dub phizix & someone that is just sharing his thoughts
good luck

 

Last edited by a moderator: Feb 9, 2018

Dance music doesn't depict anything. Dance music is for dancing. Again, doesn't mean you can't read stuff into it (use like a tailor's dummy, to hang your ideas/feels on). You can also laugh at it, or get mad & channel that anger into creating a response, which, via teh majik of Hegelian Dialectic, will birth moar, betterer muziks. He doesn't like things you like, it causes him to act (create), new things happen (e.g. you make a post) Thesis => antithesis => synthesis => goto10; lark's on the wing, snail's on the thorn etc. Nothing to get angry about, that's just how life works. Art in/as reaction to art

Help me out here.
TL;DR: I like that he posts. I don't always agree with him/understand what he's saying, but I like reading it. I'm glad that he's here.

 

well, we start off with an experience we have thoughts , we then have to have some way to tell the difference between what is real or what is misunderstanding, because we know that there is such a thing as these polar opposites.
yes it is very complicated , but we have no choice but to attempt it. what ever degree we get it wrong we see the consequences in our lives.
the only creator i am aware of it the creator of thoughts, you and me
what i create in my thoughts is fiction unless i can show otherwise.
there is no value in what mmj2017 thinks or says unless it is demonstrable.
this is how i deal with each moment and second of existing and being alive.

over the course of the year i have been speaking with you, i noticed that you do not hold this idea that foster911 thoughts and what he says is only as accurate as what foster911 can demonstrate.
instead its seems you hold a different type of concept, that whatever thought pops in your head is automatically true no matter how it stacks against reality.

we are born into a reality that exists a specific way we are a prisoner of, for instance i cannot fly like superman from the power of my feet, why not? i can "think" in my thoughts about it?

i can imagine millions or more of things that are impossible or just plain "wrong"
why is there a such thing as "wrong" at all?
why are people able to have incorrect thoughts to begin with?
you ever wonder why there is such a thing as "wrong" or fiction or fake phony>?
what does it mean to you that there IS such a thing as "incorrect"
why isn't it the case that everything is reality? why isn't it the case that every human thought is 100 percent accurate?
i have my take on that answer, but i am wondering about your take on that answer.
imagine for a quick moment a world identical is this one, except one small difference that there was no such thing as being "wrong" , incorrect, there was no fiction no fake no phony.
what does it mean to you that is imaginable yet not our world?
for instance i cannot take 50 empty pepsi cans and build a super computer.
i cannot build a woodstove out of ice cubes that lasts 50 years.
I cannot eat aluminum foil for breakfast everyday and be healthy.
i cannot jump in front of traffic everyday and be healthy.
i can imagine all these things yet they are NOT the world we live in ,
have i yet demonstrated that there is a such thing as reality and fantasy to you yet?
that there IS a such thing as reality and that 100 percent of everything is NOT classified under "reality"
some things are imagination and fantasy and fiction, and fake,phony, wrong and incorrect?
there is no such thing as a man with 5,623,362 arms AND legs, that sentence which is a thought is fiction fake and phony and incorrect. there IS a such thing as a man with 2 arms and 2 legs but not with 5,623,362 arms AND 5,623,362 legs.
this means there is such a thing as reality(as things really are) and not reality ( not as things actually are for real)

 

Last edited: Feb 8, 2018

Let's focus on the art:

Art has nothing to do with realism. It is not about creating a replica of what's out there in the world. I can take a realistic photograph of my cat and no one would give me a penny for it. In fact, art is not about realism at all - it's about the exact opposite. It involves deliberate hyperbole, exaggeration, even distortion, in order to create pleasing effects in the brain.

In the fantasy world (eg. art), there's no rule. The artist's job is to make that world first and take the audiences' hands and take them with himself/herself into it. How to make that world, is another case.

You're making or publicizing music based on the rigid rules and verify them at the end that are in conformity with them or not. Even your possibilities and replacements must correspond less or more with those rules (theoretically or stylistically). This is just one reason I don't like some music or genres. They don't create that world for me.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Feb 8, 2018

okay, if you want to change the subject fine.


foster911"You're making or publicizing music based on the rigid rules and verify them at the end that are in conformity with them or not. Even your possibilities and replacements must correspond less or more with those rules (theoretically or stylistically). This is just one reason I don't like some music or genres. They don't create that world for me.[/QUOTE]"


i dont know what you mean by this, I have never seen music that worked that way before, I have never seen a person or known about one out there in the world that thought about , and made music that way. i can't even find any music genres that could be made that way.

when you say " This is just one reason I don't like some music or genres. They don't create that world for me."

which genres work that way?

can you give an example of a person any time in history that,

"making or publicizing music based on the rigid rules and verify them at the end that are in conformity with them or not. Even your possibilities and replacements must correspond less or more with those rules (theoretically or stylistically)"

i can't find any examples of a single person thank you sir.

this is what i was talking before about.

foster911 has a thought

"
foster911"You're making or publicizing music based on the rigid rules and verify them at the end that are in conformity with them or not. Even your possibilities and replacements must correspond less or more with those rules (theoretically or stylistically). This is just one reason I don't like some music or genres. They don't create that world for me.[/QUOTE]"

when that thought came to you, what about it comes across to you as talking about the real world we both are in?

based on the content of it, i cannot look at our world and find music or people that work that way can you?
that leaves me saying the sentence you spoken that you imaged is fictional not about reality, (only because i cannot verify its content to be talking about the real world)
i show you what i mean

when i read your sentence to see if it fiction or reality this is process i follow myself.

"
foster911"You're making or publicizing music based on the rigid rules and verify them at the end that are in conformity with them or not. Even your possibilities and replacements must correspond less or more with those rules (theoretically or stylistically). This is just one reason I don't like some music or genres. They don't create that world for me.[/QUOTE]"



i get to "rigid rules" i cannot figure out where that exists in music for a person to think of that way or use anything based on that?

can you give one single example of "rigid rule" in ALL of music?

next,

"verify them at the end that are in conformity with them or not."

verify what using what? you never said.

"Even your possibilities and replacements must correspond less or more with those rules (theoretically or stylistically)."

can you give an example that it HAS to be this way ( after you show the rigid rules i have never seen before)

"This is just one reason I don't like some music or genres. They don't create that world for me."

i don't know what the reason is! you talking if some genres have rigid rules and all your "possibilities" have to go back to them and all of this is the reason you dont like certain genres. i dont now how any of that could be talking about reality, i dont have any examples i can find where anything works like that or a single genre where music worked like that, thank you fine sir.

the only "rigid rules" i now of is kind of like how a person cannot run into traffic right when a tractor trailer is coming, that have to follow that "rigid rule" to survive. that the only type of "rigid rules" you have to follow that i know of, but i would phrase it differently as " dealing with things the way they actually work" our bodes cannot stand the impact of a tractor trailer thats the way our bodies work EVEN IF you imagine in your thoughts that you are hard as diamond.
similarly in music IF you want to impact the listener a certain way , then YOU have to do things the way our ears ACTUALLY work. this is the only version of "rigid rules" i know about, is that what you meant?
like it is a rigid rules that we dont use assortment of dog whistles in our songs saying its "high definition, extended range " reason is because our ears dont work well in those super high frequencies. is that a "rigid rule" to you? to never use symphony of dog whistles even though it is "high definition extended range"?

 

Last edited: Feb 8, 2018

and I am just sharing my thoughts that i dislike this music. Dont take it personal ;) peace

 

haha lovely stuff my friend, I actually used to be an avid Satriani fan and I think your post is the first I've listened to him in about 6 years I do love it when someone can make a guitar wail, thanks for that

 

Some kind of question. Generes are there to easily find your corner in the record store. Not that there are big record stores in reality anymore, like in the old days of vinyl or compact discs. They are now virtual. But the system stays. I might go 'Electronica' and then...maybe I find something. Genres are selling points.
Music made by others was always and will be a space, opened around me, where I fit in. The musik I like has room for me. If the music does not have that room, I don't like it. It's that simple. Emotion is second, I would rather call it mood. That mood should cover my personal spectrum of moods. Since I rarely am in an agressive mood, agressive genres are not for me. Since I am easily bored with recurring sound and harmony, genres in general with a specific direction and sound, like rock, hip-hop, grunge, rave, rap, even jazz....you name it, are not for me. There is an additional factor, singing. I don't like genres with much singing. That is, because I have the feeling that the singing represses me from the music. Yet I know the most important sentence "Singing makes the people hear to" (C) by Talking Heads. Making music without real voices may be a fruitless venture. But that's another topic.

 

@foster911 Oh foster, sometimes it seems you're competing with yourself to beat your own world record of wrongness on all levels.

• Socialist Realism is art
• Peredvizhniki is art
  
• Naturalism is art
• Social Realism is art
• Theatre Psychological Realism is art
• Chanson Réaliste is art.

But in a way I have to admit you're in tune (for once) with the times. This post-truth time. This trumpster lees of time.
Congrats for that.

 

I would add that like all ultra abstract concepts, like "love", "mind", "good" and so on, any attempt to define those will consistently lead to tell more about you than about the subject you're trying to define.
Which, in a way, is also art.

 

Another Boredoms fan

That's why Atonal Spoken Word Jazz -- with distinctly unreal voices -- is the future!

 

@MMJ2017

By the rigid rules I mean you can never create sth like this (made it some time ago). You can analyze it as always you do but those rules don't let you go beyond that and discover all the uncharted territories inside the human's mind:

Rules (being applied to anything) are similar to the Uncle Sam's compulsory Tax system. It's for torturing the princess Columbia.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Feb 9, 2018

hi my friend with respect please read :
i understand that you are just sharing your thoughts but that is what i was doing too

Jay-z's 99 problems track is produced by Rick Rubin,so do your research a bit,you might learn a thing or 2 by him
Dub Phizix is a great producer imho & brought something very special in the Drum & Bass scene,do you even listen to this kind of music ?

 

If you're content with them, go on like old fogey mossbacks but sorry they don't work for me. I like new expanses and new expanses need new attitudes.

 

it is not my music,it is music that exists argue with that & you're arguing with REALITY HERSELF

Also i'm not taking anything personal,i just have my dog really sick these days & don't have time for bs

Peace also to you my friend

 

oh boy.....


FOSTER911"By the rigid rules I mean you can never create sth like this (made it some time ago)."

eh? I can never appreggiate the dominant to tonic chord in a basic KEY with a saw wave synth, because of ....why exactly? ( 2 chords repeating? i cant do that in 45 seconds?

FOSTER911"You can analyze it as always you do but those rules don't let you to go beyond that and discover all the uncharted territories inside the human's mind:"

so heres the thing if you are saying knowledge of how music works is really (slave to rules to follow) and you are choosing ignorance instead ( not knowing how music actually works in real life) how do you know what is
FOSTER911"discover all the uncharted territories inside the human's mind:""

how you know what is uncharted or charted if you are choosing ignorance over knowledge>?

to YOU its ALL uncharted right? that is what ignorance IS.

not sure what that combination of words means but here is a factual statement that is demonstrable.

A human being can either have knowledge about how music works, or be ignorant of how music works. ( anywhere in between)

are you saying that a human being being ignorant of how musics works will lead to better results than the same person (all other equal) having knowledge of how music works?

i have never come across a situation where ignorance is better that having knowledge.( music included)

when you talk about following rigid rules and this and that,
the only meaning i can take is you just mean " a person that has knowledge of how music works"


when you say

"By the rigid rules I mean you can never create sth like this (made it some time ago). You can analyze it as always you do but those rules don't let you to go beyond that and discover all the uncharted territories inside the human's mind:"

it is your own ignorance of how music works that you are inventing a fiction story about our world we live in,
this alternate dimension in your imagination , a person having knowledge about how music works equals "following rigid rules and cannot arpreggiate a g mak key dominat tp tonic with a square wave and low pass filter going through a tape machine with wow and flutter.

it is your own ignorance that has led to you inventing this.
having knowledge about music or anything else does not mean you cannot do something anymore that you could have before when you were ignorance,
you have it exactly backwards.
in THIS reality (world we live in)
knowledge leads to being able to do anything possible, ignorance leads to not knowing how to and not being able to do anything.
knowledge about how music works is advancing yourself, we all start out ignorant of music.
we slowly build knowledge to get better. wow

lets go back to that "song", you posted,.


By the rigid rules I mean you can never create sth like this (made it some time ago). You can analyze it as always you do but those rules don't let you to go beyond that and discover all the uncharted territories inside the human's mind:

you are just breaking up 2 chords to the notes after each other and then repeating that over and over through a square wave and then soft clipping with tape then some flanger phaser fx thrown on real quick with a lfo going slowing assigned to a low pass filter at 30 bpm


why would i not be able to do that in 30 seconds IF i had knowledge about how music works?
not only can i make it and fast, i can make hundreds of variations and never get writers block.

how would knowledge of how music works give WORSE results over ignorance of how music works?

so you also think that a regular person performs brain surgery or car mechanics BETTER being ignorant , than if they spent 15 years learning how those fields work?
i cant understand that.

 

Last edited: Feb 9, 2018

Genres define the forms of music not its content but unfortunately when you dig deep in the genres, you're getting drowned and usually the content is its first victim. Just a small subset of artists are able to survive the toughnesses that the forms impose on them.

 

I know what I'm doing. It was just for the demonstration purpose. Analyzing is enough. I need to hear music from you. I sometimes think I'm talking with Mr. music calculator.