Re: Loud music (Brian Gygi )


Subject: Re: Loud music
From:    Brian Gygi  <bgygi@xxxxxxxx>
Date:    Sun, 26 Sep 2010 07:36:14 +0000
List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>

----=_vm_0011_W8535611703_12464_1285486574 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The story about Pete Townsend is totally apocryphal. Townsend was an earl= y fan of Marshalls, but so were Clapton and others. Marshall amps were de= veloped as a lower-cost alternative to Fenders, and in fact were based on= the Fender bassman. Also, Townsend was hardly being heckled, as he was o= ne of the most popular musicians in England at the time. Also, the effect at high volumes is not totally due to compression. Amps = sound the best in the range in which the amplifier produces the most odd = order harmonics, and that is an engineering issue. Compression adds some = sustain, but also the nasty even order harmonics. As for the whole discussion about the music industry, it seems to me that= most comments on the auditory list in that regard are about twenty years= out of date. The music industry has fractured and split apart, so that n= o one knows who is in control anymore. There are successful subgenres of = music (e.g. all the manifestations of techno and hip hop) that never see = the conventional light of day but thrive through the Internet and word of= mouth. They are DIY in nature and the supporters are as rabid as those i= n the heyday of rock or jazz. And it is not just about selling drugs and = booze (ever hear of the straight edge movement?) Brian Gygi, Ph.D. Speech and Hearing Research Veterans Affairs Northern California Health Care System 150 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 (925) 372-2000 x5653 -----Original Message----- From: David John SMith [mailto:smithd@xxxxxxxx Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 08:27 PM To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Loud music To my knowledge, the Marshal amplifier was the "gauntlet thrown down" to= start the loudness wars. It was developed at the request of Pete Townshend because Pete didn't want t= o hear the audience. I assume they were heckling the band. I believe most of the "effect of loudness" is due to compression in the a= uditory system. Rock is quite likely the most encompassing genre term, much more diverse = than, say, European classical music, and has probably evolved more forms in the past 50 years= as any other culture has in a few hundred - mostly due to commercialization enabling a large numbe= r of practitioners and technology enabling fast exchange of ideas. But, as is reasonable to expe= ct in any endeavor, - research papers come to mind here - about 80% are just uninspired, ther= e are very few works of genius... Mostly alienated kids and dropouts listen to rock? Ha!!! Have you listene= d to a college radio station recently? Gone to a college bar? Walked through a dorm? That said, I agree that there has been a downturn in the quality of rock = - read "commercial" - music though I put it beginning in the mid '70s. A few reasons come to mind: a)= Music is necessarily a frontier. As territory is claimed exploration becomes more difficult. b) The corpor= ate structure that grew around the music has no need for great music or the accompanying risk and expens= e- they just need something to sell. c) It's easier to "market manage" forms of music which can be pl= ayed by replaceable talent. and most dishearteningly d) Rock and jazz "yer local bands" are not about music, t= hey are about selling booze and drugs. I don't go into any rock music venue without hearing protection. I feel w= arnings should be required, sound levels recorded, and class action law s= uits begun. But then I use hearing protection if I'm going to be in a car= for more than a few minutes. The levels over longer durations, in some f= requency bands, in "yer average auto" are harmful - but to fix this we wo= uld be messing with the auto industry and they are way more powerful than= "the guys" running the music business. As things now stand, anyone can ruin your hearing and get away with it. M= usic is a small part of that picture. regards, Dave Smith www.roughlight.com -----Original Message----- From: Bruno L. Giordano <bruno.giordano@xxxxxxxx> To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx Sent: Fri, Sep 24, 2010 7:28 pm Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] Loud music Dear Linda, you make interesting points, and I respect your opinion. However, I don't agree with your statement that since the 60's rock has = evolved along a single path towards simplicity. Contemporary "rock" is th= e product of a diaspora that has given us a large number of genres, only = part of which are as structurally primitive as you describe. Concerning mainstream music, I doubt that the Beach Boys were way more s= ophisticated than, say, Lady Gaga: if listening habits have the strong ps= ychological impact you describe, today we have as many opportunities for = becoming alienated and intellectually dull as we had 50 years ago (and fo= rtunately more opportunities for choosing not to). Best, Bruno On 24/09/2010 7:02 PM, Linda Seltzer wrote: > In the early years of rock music, musicians such as Jimi Hendrix and t= he > Jefferson Airplane turned up the volume to arouse political or social = > rebellion against a repressive and superficial culture. The musicologi= st > Richard Taruskin said in classroom lectures that after the violence of= > World War II there was a reaction against the unbridled emotions of > expressionism. Postwar musical culture emphasized the control of emoti= on, > as emotion was not considered something to be trusted. The evidence of= > this in classical music was the rise of twelve tone serialism and the = > aesthetic of mathematical structures. Even a mystical composer like > Messiaen turned to serialism and other unemotional structures. The > rebellion against this in classical music was postmodernism, with > composers such as Glass or Goercki. In popular music, controlled emoti= on > was epitomized by Frank Sinatra and even, in jazz, by Louis Armstrong.= > The rebellion took the form of the return to emotional expression by > Hendrix, Janis Joplin and others. > > However, rock music today has taken a different direction. With the > increasing cutbacks of music education in the schools, music has becom= e > more primitive structurally even if this is hidden behind increasingly= > expensive and complex technology. There are rock performances involvin= g a > large degree of spectacle, where the music often consists of the singe= r > repeating the same note, occasionally making a departure to sing anoth= er > note or two. The audience does not notice that there is no melody pres= ent > because the attention is directed to the spectacle. Similarly, the rhy= thm > is very repetitive and a 1-2 rhythm with the accent on the second beat= is > considered as novel by the audience. > > Aesthetically such music feeds into the increasing forces of conservat= ism > opposing sensitivity in our society. People are accused of being > oversensitive if they complain about a slur based on race or gender. > Reality TV shows feature authority figures who are granted the power t= o > insult the contestants, who are supposed to be able to take it and eve= n > appreciate it without being hurt. Workers are supposed to be like > interchangeable parts with no preferences or feelings about their offi= ce > space or their work environments. > > Loud, repetitive music stamps out sensitivity or the ability to percei= ve > and react to subtle differences or variations in the social environmen= t. > What passes for music actually has the opposite effect of what we norm= ally > consider to be the purpose of music. Whereas we have traditionally > thought of music as something that stimulates elevated toughts, puts u= s in > touch with our feelings, and increases our sensitivities, this so-call= ed > music has the opposite effect of protecting the listener from such > feelings, which may impede one's ability to function as an interchange= able > part that does not make any demands on the system. Remember that for > people without college degrees, work often means having to produce > repetitive tasks in small spaces, with the output monitored by compute= r. > Factory workers and mail sorters, for example, have their work monitor= ed > and they can't drift into the normal ebb and flow of slower and faster= > outputs in the course of a day. Retail workers are forced to listen to= > whatever music or muzak the management chooses to broadcast over the > loudspeakers during the entire time they are working, and they never h= ave > the right to silence. Silence is the pathway to introspection and > analysis, which such freedom of thought being a luxury commodity avail= able > to those with access to leisure time and a quiet living environment. > > For this reason I question whether the current loud rock "music" is > actually music at all, or, to put it another way: perhaps the varities= of > uses of organized sound are so diverse that there is no such thing as = > music, and several of the different cultural approaches to organized s= ound > and its effect on people are different phenomena. This a question that= > may be answerable by numerous scientific studies in the future. > > What can be said at present is that the current forms of loud rock mus= ic > result from the decrease in quality of our educational systems and the= > increase in the percentage of students dropping out of high school, in= > some areas, 20%. For such individuals music is a means of numbing thei= r > emotional responses to the alienation and stress they experience on th= e > outskirts of society and of toughening themselves for a society that d= oes > not tolerate their humanity. > > ----=_vm_0011_W8535611703_12464_1285486574 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><div><font face=3D"Verdana" size=3D"2"><br></font></div><div><font = face=3D"Verdana" size=3D"2">The story about Pete Townsend is totally apoc= ryphal. &nbsp;Townsend was an early fan of Marshalls, but so were Clapton= and others. &nbsp;Marshall amps were developed as a lower-cost alternati= ve to Fenders, and in fact were based on the Fender bassman. &nbsp;Also, = Townsend was hardly being heckled, as he was one of the most popular musi= cians in England at the time.</font></div><div><font face=3D"Verdana" siz= e=3D"2"><br></font></div><div><font face=3D"Verdana" size=3D"2">Also, the= effect at high volumes is not totally due to compression. &nbsp;Amps sou= nd the best in the range in which the amplifier produces the most odd ord= er harmonics, and that is an engineering issue. &nbsp;Compression adds so= me sustain, but also the nasty even order harmonics.</font></div><div><fo= nt face=3D"Verdana" size=3D"2"><br></font></div><div><font face=3D"Verdan= a" size=3D"2">As for the whole discussion about the music industry, it se= ems to me that most comments on the auditory list in that regard are abou= t twenty years out of date. &nbsp;The music industry has fractured and sp= lit apart, so that no one knows who is in control anymore. &nbsp;There ar= e successful subgenres of music (e.g. all the manifestations of techno an= d hip hop) that never see the conventional light of day but thrive throug= h the Internet and word of mouth. &nbsp;They are DIY in nature and the su= pporters are as rabid as those in the heyday of rock or jazz. &nbsp;And i= t is not just about selling drugs and booze (ever hear of the straight ed= ge movement?)</font></div><div><font face=3D"Verdana" size=3D"2">&nbsp;</= font></div>Brian Gygi, Ph.D.<br>Speech and Hearing Research<br>Veterans A= ffairs Northern California Health Care System<br>150 Muir Road<br>Martine= z, CA 94553<br>(925) 372-2000 x5653<div><font face=3D"Verdana" color=3D"#= 0000ff" size=3D"2"></font>&nbsp;</div><blockquote style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: = 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"= ><font face=3D"Tahoma" size=3D"2">-----Original Message-----<br><b>From:<= /b> David John SMith [mailto:smithd@xxxxxxxx<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, Sep= tember 24, 2010 08:27 PM<br><b>To:</b> AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx<br><b>Sub= ject:</b> Re: Loud music<br><br></font><div style=3D"font-family: arial; = color: black; font-size: 10pt;"> To my knowledge, the Marshal amplifier w= as the "gauntlet thrown down" to start the loudness wars. It<br>was devel= oped at the request of Pete Townshend because Pete didn't want to hear th= e audience. I <br>assume they were heckling the band.&nbsp; <br><br>I bel= ieve most of the "effect of loudness" is due to compression in the audito= ry system. <br><br>Rock is quite likely the most encompassing genre term,= much more diverse than, say, European <br>classical music, and has proba= bly evolved more forms in the past 50 years as any other culture has<br>i= n a few hundred - mostly due to commercialization enabling a large number= of practitioners and <br>technology enabling fast exchange of ideas.&nbs= p; But, as is reasonable to expect in any endeavor, <br>- research papers= come to mind here - about 80% are just uninspired, there are very few <b= r>works of genius...<br><br>Mostly alienated kids and dropouts listen to = rock?&nbsp; Ha!!!&nbsp; Have you listened to a college radio<br>station r= ecently? Gone to a college bar?&nbsp; Walked through a dorm?<br><br>That = said, I agree that there has been a downturn in the quality of rock - rea= d "commercial" - music<br>though I put it beginning in the mid '70s. A fe= w reasons come to mind: a) Music is necessarily a frontier.<br>As territo= ry is claimed exploration becomes more difficult.&nbsp; b) The corporate = structure that grew around<br>the music has no need for great music or th= e accompanying risk and expense- they just need something<br>to sell.&nbs= p; c) It's easier to "market manage" forms of music which can be played b= y replaceable talent. and most<br>dishearteningly d) Rock and jazz "yer l= ocal bands" are not about music, they are about selling booze<br>and drug= s.<br><br>I don't go into any rock music venue without hearing protection= . I feel warnings should be required, sound levels recorded, and class ac= tion law suits begun.&nbsp; But then I use hearing protection if I'm goin= g to be in a car for more than a few minutes.&nbsp; The levels over longe= r durations, in some frequency bands, in "yer average auto" are harmful -= but to fix this we would be messing with the auto industry and they are = way more powerful than "the guys" running the music business.<br><br>As t= hings now stand, anyone can ruin your hearing and get away with it.&nbsp;= Music is a small part of that picture.<br><br>regards,<br></div><div> Da= ve Smith<br>www.roughlight.com<br><br><br></div><div>&nbsp; <br></div>---= --Original Message-----<br>From: Bruno L. Giordano &lt;bruno.giordano@xxxxxxxx= IC.MCGILL.CA&gt;<br>To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx<br>Sent: Fri, Sep 24, 20= 10 7:28 pm<br>Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] Loud music<br><br> <div id=3D"AOLMs= gPart_0_b2589eba-69f6-4a16-93d8-6a811b332c60" style=3D"margin: 0px; font-= family: Tahoma,Verdana,Arial,Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px; color: rgb(0, 0= , 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Dear Linda,&nbsp;<br>&nbsp= ;<br> you make interesting points, and I respect your opinion.&nbsp;<br>&= nbsp;<br> However, I don't agree with your statement that since the 60's = rock has evolved along a single path towards simplicity. Contemporary "r= ock" is the product of a diaspora that has given us a large number of ge= nres, only part of which are as structurally primitive as you describe.&= nbsp;<br>&nbsp;<br> Concerning mainstream music, I doubt that the Beach B= oys were way more sophisticated than, say, Lady Gaga: if listening habit= s have the strong psychological impact you describe, today we have as ma= ny opportunities for becoming alienated and intellectually dull as we ha= d 50 years ago (and fortunately more opportunities for choosing not to).= &nbsp;<br>&nbsp;<br> Best,&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;<br> &nbsp; Bruno&nbsp;<br>&nb= sp;<br> On 24/09/2010 7:02 PM, Linda Seltzer wrote:&nbsp;<br> &gt; In th= e early years of rock music, musicians such as Jimi Hendrix and the&nbsp;= <br> &gt; Jefferson Airplane turned up the volume to arouse political or = social&nbsp;<br> &gt; rebellion against a repressive and superficial cult= ure. The musicologist&nbsp;<br> &gt; Richard Taruskin said in classroom = lectures that after the violence of&nbsp;<br> &gt; World War II there was= a reaction against the unbridled emotions of&nbsp;<br> &gt; expressionis= m. Postwar musical culture emphasized the control of emotion,&nbsp;<br> = &gt; as emotion was not considered something to be trusted. The evidence= of&nbsp;<br> &gt; this in classical music was the rise of twelve tone se= rialism and the&nbsp;<br> &gt; aesthetic of mathematical structures. Eve= n a mystical composer like&nbsp;<br> &gt; Messiaen turned to serialism an= d other unemotional structures. The&nbsp;<br> &gt; rebellion against thi= s in classical music was postmodernism, with&nbsp;<br> &gt; composers suc= h as Glass or Goercki. In popular music, controlled emotion&nbsp;<br> &g= t; was epitomized by Frank Sinatra and even, in jazz, by Louis Armstrong.= &nbsp;<br> &gt; The rebellion took the form of the return to emotional ex= pression by&nbsp;<br> &gt; Hendrix, Janis Joplin and others.&nbsp;<br> &g= t;&nbsp;<br> &gt; However, rock music today has taken a different directi= on. With the&nbsp;<br> &gt; increasing cutbacks of music education in th= e schools, music has become&nbsp;<br> &gt; more primitive structurally ev= en if this is hidden behind increasingly&nbsp;<br> &gt; expensive and com= plex technology. There are rock performances involving a&nbsp;<br> &gt; = large degree of spectacle, where the music often consists of the singer&n= bsp;<br> &gt; repeating the same note, occasionally making a departure to= sing another&nbsp;<br> &gt; note or two. The audience does not notice t= hat there is no melody present&nbsp;<br> &gt; because the attention is di= rected to the spectacle. Similarly, the rhythm&nbsp;<br> &gt; is very re= petitive and a 1-2 rhythm with the accent on the second beat is&nbsp;<br>= &gt; considered as novel by the audience.&nbsp;<br> &gt;&nbsp;<br> &gt; = Aesthetically such music feeds into the increasing forces of conservatism= &nbsp;<br> &gt; opposing sensitivity in our society. People are accused = of being&nbsp;<br> &gt; oversensitive if they complain about a slur based= on race or gender.&nbsp;<br> &gt; Reality TV shows feature authority fig= ures who are granted the power to&nbsp;<br> &gt; insult the contestants, = who are supposed to be able to take it and even&nbsp;<br> &gt; appreciate= it without being hurt. Workers are supposed to be like&nbsp;<br> &gt; i= nterchangeable parts with no preferences or feelings about their office&n= bsp;<br> &gt; space or their work environments.&nbsp;<br> &gt;&nbsp;<br> = &gt; Loud, repetitive music stamps out sensitivity or the ability to perc= eive&nbsp;<br> &gt; and react to subtle differences or variations in the = social environment.&nbsp;<br> &gt; What passes for music actually has the= opposite effect of what we normally&nbsp;<br> &gt; consider to be the pu= rpose of music. Whereas we have traditionally&nbsp;<br> &gt; thought of = music as something that stimulates elevated toughts, puts us in&nbsp;<br>= &gt; touch with our feelings, and increases our sensitivities, this so-c= alled&nbsp;<br> &gt; music has the opposite effect of protecting the list= ener from such&nbsp;<br> &gt; feelings, which may impede one's ability to= function as an interchangeable&nbsp;<br> &gt; part that does not make an= y demands on the system. Remember that for&nbsp;<br> &gt; people without= college degrees, work often means having to produce&nbsp;<br> &gt; repet= itive tasks in small spaces, with the output monitored by computer.&nbsp;= <br> &gt; Factory workers and mail sorters, for example, have their work = monitored&nbsp;<br> &gt; and they can't drift into the normal ebb and flo= w of slower and faster&nbsp;<br> &gt; outputs in the course of a day. Ret= ail workers are forced to listen to&nbsp;<br> &gt; whatever music or muza= k the management chooses to broadcast over the&nbsp;<br> &gt; loudspeaker= s during the entire time they are working, and they never have&nbsp;<br> = &gt; the right to silence. Silence is the pathway to introspection and&n= bsp;<br> &gt; analysis, which such freedom of thought being a luxury comm= odity available&nbsp;<br> &gt; to those with access to leisure time and a= quiet living environment.&nbsp;<br> &gt;&nbsp;<br> &gt; For this reason = I question whether the current loud rock "music" is&nbsp;<br> &gt; actual= ly music at all, or, to put it another way: perhaps the varities of&nbsp;= <br> &gt; uses of organized sound are so diverse that there is no such th= ing as&nbsp;<br> &gt; music, and several of the different cultural approa= ches to organized sound&nbsp;<br> &gt; and its effect on people are diffe= rent phenomena. This a question that&nbsp;<br> &gt; may be answerable by= numerous scientific studies in the future.&nbsp;<br> &gt;&nbsp;<br> &gt;= What can be said at present is that the current forms of loud rock music= &nbsp;<br> &gt; result from the decrease in quality of our educational sy= stems and the&nbsp;<br> &gt; increase in the percentage of students dropp= ing out of high school, in&nbsp;<br> &gt; some areas, 20%. For such indi= viduals music is a means of numbing their&nbsp;<br> &gt; emotional respon= ses to the alienation and stress they experience on the&nbsp;<br> &gt; ou= tskirts of society and of toughening themselves for a society that does&n= bsp;<br> &gt; not tolerate their humanity.&nbsp;<br> &gt;&nbsp;<br> &gt;&= nbsp;<br> </div> </blockquote></html> ----=_vm_0011_W8535611703_12464_1285486574--


This message came from the mail archive
/home/empire6/dpwe/public_html/postings/2010/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University