[HN Gopher] John Cage Organ Project in Halberstadt
___________________________________________________________________
John Cage Organ Project in Halberstadt
Author : geox
Score : 113 points
Date : 2022-04-23 12:08 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (universes.art)
(TXT) w3m dump (universes.art)
| awiesenhofer wrote:
| Reminds me of the Culture series book "Look to Windward" - in
| which a composer creates an almost everlasting symphony whos
| finale coincides with the arrival of the light of an ancient
| supernova on his planet (IIRC)
| PoachedSausage wrote:
| Only 639 years?
|
| It would take approximately 1.3m years to ring every permutation
| of the 16 bells in the tower of the church of St Martin in the
| Bull Ring, Birmingham, UK.[0] I'm not sure the bells, tower or
| ringers would last that long though, get there early to avoid
| disappointment.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Martin_in_the_Bull_Ring
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out.
| swayvil wrote:
| I assume that this project has funding. I'd like to see the
| details of that.
| iansowinski wrote:
| Reminds me this instalation in Hamburg Kunsthale, where artist
| constructed conditions for creation of a stalactite. It will be
| ready in about 500 years: https://www.hamburger-
| kunsthalle.de/sammlung-online/bogomir-...
| drunkonvinyl wrote:
| Saying "Encore!" in 2640...
| saalweachter wrote:
| Damn, I missed the start of this performance. Does anyone know
| when the next is scheduled to start?
| adam0c wrote:
| why... lol
| labrador wrote:
| I've don't know why people are so fascinated with John Cage's
| conceptual music like 4'33'' which is 4 minutes and 33 seconds of
| silence. It doesn't do anything for me and seems like b.s.
| b3morales wrote:
| It's not what you think. The concept isn't "oh ha ha, here's
| 'music' that has no sound, smoke that!". It's that while you're
| sitting there with the performer doing nothing, there's _still
| sound going on around you_. Creaking chairs, water in pipes,
| bus going by outside the venue... If someone makes a recording
| that is literally a string of 0 bits, they 're doing something
| different than Cage's piece. (EDIT: Although while listening to
| that recording you the listener can experience the sound of the
| space _you_ are in. So perhaps it would be the same thing, in a
| way.)
|
| Cage was interested in how -- or whether -- accidental and
| incidental noise could be incorporated or experienced as music.
| 4'33" is just the most notorious (and probably starkest)
| expression of that idea.
| labrador wrote:
| I get that but do people really need to pretend it is art to
| sit silently in a room full of people in a concert hall and
| notice the ambient sounds long with their thoughts and
| feelings. People who sit in meditation with others do this
| all the time. I suppose the concept is foreign to most
| Westerners so they need an artist to come alone and give it
| the stamp of approval.
|
| "Let's have a moment of silence for those we have lost"
|
| People understand the above and do it without complaint
|
| "Let's sit quietly in meditation and notice our environment,
| thoughts and feelings. You may find it helpful to focus on
| your breath"
|
| Most people grudgingly do this but find it boring and
| unnecessary
|
| John Cage: "Listen to my piece 4' 33" which the musicians on
| stage won't play"
|
| People: "Oh my God, John Cage is brilliant. What an amazing
| artist! I can't wait to tell my friends that I 'heard' this"
| b3morales wrote:
| I would say that what Cage added was indeed the statement
| (or maybe question) that those noises are music. And
| listening to music is a different thing than meditation.
| That said, one can definitely disagree with his perspective
| on it.
| labrador wrote:
| Ambient sounds do not fit the definition of music
| according to Oxford:
|
| vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) combined in such a
| way as to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression
| of emotion
|
| That said, I get that it's interesting for sparking
| conversations and thought about music
|
| https://nmbx.newmusicusa.org/from-no-such-thing-as-
| silence-j...
|
| like Duchamp's urinal
|
| https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/duchamp-
| fountain-t07573
|
| Needless to say, I don't ever put 4' 33" on play and I
| don't have a replica of the urinal hanging on my wall
| robonerd wrote:
| I agree, it's pretentious nonsense that only exists so people
| can pretend to like it and scoff at the unsophisticated proles
| who call the spade a spade.
| ARandomerDude wrote:
| Sorry, but anyone who thinks this will see completion is
| delusional. It'll be amazing if our distant posterity will
| recognize a map of today's Europe, much less be interested in
| this song's performance.
|
| We live closer to Christopher Columbus than the end of this song.
| Think about how much the world has changed in that time.
| kobalsky wrote:
| when columbus set a foot in america there were 1000 year old
| pubs in europe that are still open today.
|
| sometimes it's hard to understand how mind boggingly old europe
| is, being from the younger continent.
| Honga wrote:
| Medieval Christianity revived and resumed ancient Greek culture
| and philosophy. That's a larger gap than we're talking about
| here. There's precedent if you look hard enough.
| replygirl wrote:
| i also have a nervous breakdown when i see evidence of the HRE
| goldphotograph1 wrote:
| nabla9 wrote:
| This is so called conceptualism, or conceptual art. art for which
| the idea behind the work is more important than the finished art
| object.
| genghisjahn wrote:
| Dude. Turn it up! This is my favorite part.
| homonculus1 wrote:
| This is anti-human and antichristian. Take a beautiful church and
| fill it up for the rest of people's lifetimes with monotonous
| droning. That sanctuary should be glorifying God, not some
| pretentious gimmick.
|
| This isn't music, this is a mockery of music. It's the auditory
| equivalent of brutalism and everybody should see through it and
| despise it.
| je_suis_music wrote:
| soneca wrote:
| The phrasing confused me. It is being performed for almost 21
| years (since 2001) and it will be continuously performed for the
| next 618 years (hopefully).
|
| Initially I thought it was being performed since year 1383 (639
| years ago).
| cool_dude85 wrote:
| Anyone else recently heard about this on the Uhh Yeah Dude
| podcast?
| GrumpyNl wrote:
| The organ used looks pretty new, how did they do that without
| interrupting the continuous playing?
| Bud wrote:
| It probably looks new mostly because the pipes are so shiny.
| This is because, in order to change any note, a new pipe is
| actually installed in one of the slots.
| gunfighthacksaw wrote:
| My cool hipster roommate told me about this 10 years ago when I
| first moved out for school, and I'm now the age she was back then
| (and the piece is 10 years older)
| gotaquestion wrote:
| Once again, for those looking down on artists with their keen
| Vulcan engineer logic brains:
|
| modern art = i could do that + yeah but you didn't
| tomc1985 wrote:
| modern art = i could do that + yeah but you didn't + you didn't
| have the artist's cachet + you didn't have the connections to
| exhibit your work + you don't have the body of experience that
| lead you to this particular output + nobody is going to care
| about your low-effort piece but somehow this artist got them
| too
| zamadatix wrote:
| I think this still completely misses what's interesting about
| this: the number of interesting performance attempts, not the
| piece itself which is neither first/last of the concept or the
| focus of the post.
| coastflow wrote:
| This video presents a version where the piece is sped up to 36
| seconds in length: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5-Yo328Rp4
| zamadatix wrote:
| Unfortunately the choice of using a sawtooth wave for playback
| of an organ piece makes it nearly just as unintelligible as the
| 639 year performance.
| je_suis_music wrote:
| CompleteWalker wrote:
| I wish Cage had kept the acronym ASAP
| JasonFruit wrote:
| Does anyone love this as music, rather than as an idea? Of
| composers, there are two schools: those who try to express
| something interesting musically, and those who produce
| interesting concepts. Some of Cage's work, especially, takes the
| second approach to extremes, where it cannot even be
| _experienced_ as music. I don 't think any of that sort of music
| will survive long, because the concept is no longer clever after
| it loses its novelty.
| caymanjim wrote:
| swayvil wrote:
| Artists are generally in the first camp. Nonartists in second.
|
| Go to a gallery full of abstract expressionism. Hear people
| asking, "what does it mean?"
| tomcam wrote:
| The first 15 years weren't so catchy, but the chorus starting
| in easily 2016 is catchy as hell
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| It's pretty silly IMO. Extreme Concept(tm) isn't difficult to
| do, and it's even less difficult to imagine.
|
| It's trivial to make extremely long time-based pieces on the
| web. You load the page, it works out the time/date, and it
| plays whatever the algorithm says is right for the time date.
| With the right algo you can make pieces that last for millions
| of years.
|
| And so on.
|
| There is a sense in which it's an interesting idea, but it's
| also a cultural dead end. You can only make it bigger and more
| extreme, and that's more about spectacle than music.
| enduser384729 wrote:
| This is a bad take, but unsurprising when most Western
| culture still lauds virtuosity playing and "skill" over most
| other things. If it's a cultural dead end it's because of the
| culture not the idea.
|
| That aside, John Cage was having these ideas when they
| weren't as obvious as they are today and we have the benefit
| of hindsight. Dismissing that is also a pretty ignorant
| mistake.
| dahart wrote:
| Would you mind elaborating on what you mean? Why is that a
| bad take? What is culturally relevant about this? I'm not
| saying it isn't, but I don't know what it is, and tearing
| down others doesn't help me.
|
| John Cage didn't intend this piece to last 639 years,
| right? What ideas of his are you referring to? This long
| running organ piece was conceived by someone in Germany and
| is intended to highlight the history of Halberstadt, right?
|
| The question @TheOtherHobbes is raising seems relevant: how
| does this performance contribute to musical culture, or
| even to Cage's work? It can't be enjoyed as music, it's
| more of a logistical piece intended to create a mythology.
| In that sense, this performance is, in a way, very much
| lauding a sort of skill over most other things about the
| music - the skill of pure perseverance. Like other
| conceptual art, it's the story of this work that is
| interesting, but not really the work itself. You seem to
| suggest otherwise, would you mind coloring that in for me,
| so I can appreciate it more?
| rnd0 wrote:
| >This is a bad take, but unsurprising when most Western
| culture still lauds virtuosity playing and "skill" over
| most other things
|
| Why is that a bad thing?
| enduser384729 wrote:
| If you think music and art are entirely about skill
| that's fine, but I personally am not interested in
| hearing anything further about your opinions in that
| case.
| rnd0 wrote:
| > but I personally am not interested in hearing anything
| further about your opinions in that case.
|
| Fuck me, you say? No, fuck YOU.
|
| Feel free to mute me (edit: assuming HN has that feature)
| if you're unwilling to engage in an exchange of opinions
| and perspectives like a reasonable adult.
| PolygonSheep wrote:
| > most Western culture still lauds virtuosity playing and
| "skill" over most other things.
|
| We must be in different Western cultures because I
| definitely _don 't_ see a lot of skill and virtuosity in
| most popular music.
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _We must be in different Western cultures because I
| definitely don 't see a lot of skill and virtuosity in
| most popular music._
|
| I think it depends on the lens you use. If you're looking
| through a "Tom Scholz" lens, that kind of skill and
| instrumental virtuosity may not exist today (although
| artists like St. Vincent are an argument that they do).
| But tech has completely changed music making, production,
| and distribution since that time, so today's Toms are
| people like Finneas O'Connell, and making music today is
| more akin to software design and engineering.
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| >> Western culture still lauds virtuosity playing and
| "skill" over most other things
|
| It was my understanding that everyone had heard.
| Bud wrote:
| No, it's not trivial to make extremely long time-based pieces
| on the web.
|
| Because you have to keep the computer running continuously.
| That turns out to be extremely difficult.
|
| So there is no spectacle, here.
|
| Part of the magic of Cage's piece, in this incarnation, is
| that someone actually built the special organ, in a suitable
| space that might plausibly remain undisturbed for several
| centuries. It requires some maintenance and some care and
| feeding, of course, but not much. So one doesn't have to
| suspend disbelief too much, here--this performance may
| actually occur as planned. It's been going for over 20 years
| so far, after all.
| [deleted]
| NoOneNew wrote:
| Agreed, extreme concepts are not hard. But I think the
| fascinating part is the salesmanship involved. Something I've
| noticed, really high concept artists are fantastic
| salesmen... and really shitty artists (80% of the time). They
| can convince people that a duct taped banana on the wall or
| just splatter paint can emotionally transcend you. Dont get
| me wrong, I like some abstract art when there is an aesthetic
| quality to it. But the worship status given to something like
| this, one incredibly slow note every however months... come
| on. You could do the same with Vanilla Ice's Teenage Mutant
| Ninja Turtles 2 song from the 90s. Doesnt mean anything...
| other than that song still slaps :)
|
| I'll take listening to an amateur messing with guitar chords
| while drunk in a shitty bar over something like this. Because
| I can actually experience the shitty bar music. You literally
| cannot experience this "art project".
| somewhereoutth wrote:
| The artist as _messenger_ - through inspiration or
| otherwise to bring us a new way of looking at things; the
| artist as _theoretician_ - to build on work that has gone
| on before and progressively expand our horizons; the artist
| as _performer_ - acting out a role in society.
|
| I'd suggest all three are present in artists across the
| ages, but in recent times the last seems to have become
| more prominent.
| Honga wrote:
| The work doesn't necessarily argue against you. It may have
| been the intention, or it may be the effect of the work that
| ideas like yours come into existence. One idea of conceptual
| art is that the work plays out in your mind, and the physical
| creation is secondary, utilitarian even.
|
| The authenticity of the piece and it's validity is reinforced
| by our conversation and replay.
|
| On this measure the timeline is arbitrary, and trumping it is
| a second work all together, creating a new conversation.
| blenderdt wrote:
| What good does this work of Cage bring the world?
|
| Most people think it is uninteresting and a total waste of
| time.
|
| I can also understand the aggression a lot of Cage's work
| got in the past. It's very destructive for people to listen
| a long time to a man who is only speaking letters. Almost
| like torture.
|
| Is a waste of time art?
| vlunkr wrote:
| IMO the point is to question the limits of what can be
| considered music. There's precedent (way too much in
| fact) in visual arts. Is a signed toilet art? Mona Lisa
| with a mustache? Banana taped to a wall?
|
| None of these things are meant to be enjoyed in the
| traditional sense. But they might make you think, or make
| you angry.
|
| So what good do these things bring the world? I don't
| know, probably none.
| Honga wrote:
| It's not the job of the work to bring good to the world,
| nor to interest people in the slightest, as can be said
| for yourself, or myself. Though you're right that the
| success of the work is probably intrinsically tied to
| it's interest.
|
| Art, and media in general are productions of culture
| which celebrate our humanity. That is, they rejoice in
| all of our abilities to perceive, conceive and enact upon
| the world. Wasting people's time in this light makes
| people aware of their time, and allows for further
| interrogations of our humanities to arise. Just as we're
| doing now.
|
| It's good to remember that art only gains it's status
| through a production being named art by an exhibitor. IMO
| there's no special purpose to the term. Consuming art is
| just another form of recreation, and people are right to
| hate it for any reason, just that tyranny of what is
| useful is usually not in the human spirits best interest.
| [deleted]
| rerx wrote:
| This is all concept, of course. But walking around the
| dishevelled old church, listening to the constant humm in the
| background is an experience that grows from knowing that this
| tone will last for years until it will change as prescribed. A
| tone change is a small event that draws some attention from
| wider circles. There are people who have cared for the project
| for more than 20 years and it's not only folks who initiated
| it. It will be fascinating to see how long there will be
| interest and resources to keep it up.
| klelatti wrote:
| I think that there are several issues with this perspective.
|
| Firstly, it presupposes that the music and the 'concept' are
| distinct. I love say Mahler 2 and the Rite of Spring but I love
| those pieces as a collection of notes and a concept together
| and trying to separate the 'concept' from the notes is
| impossible - when I listen to them the concept is an essential
| part of the experience.
|
| In this case I can imagine listening to the notes in the
| knowledge of the wider context and being profoundly moved by
| the experience. I don't see this as any different to music that
| is highly repetitive (and so not 'interesting' musically), for
| example, but still elicits an emotional response from many
| listeners.
|
| Finally, if the classification is of composers into two camps,
| with Cage being in the wrong camp, then I'm afraid that the
| idea that Cage's music won't survive long isn't backed up by
| the evidence as most of it is still doing really well many
| years after it was composed.
| chki wrote:
| Maybe that's part of his art? To show where music and
| experiencing something as music "ends" and where art "begins".
| Exploring the boundaries of what constitutes music or art is
| interesting to me.
|
| > I don't think any of that sort of music will survive long,
| because the concept is no longer clever after it loses its
| novelty.
|
| At some point it stops being a novelty and becomes a historical
| event, where a piece of music has already been playing for 400
| years. Wouldn't it be interesting to visit a place where you
| know that people hundreds of years ago have listened not only
| to the same piece of music but to the same performance as you
| are experiencing right now. That listenership spans centuries?
| JasonFruit wrote:
| I believe we're agreeing, except in our value judgments. You
| say:
|
| > Exploring the boundaries of what constitutes music or art
| is interesting to me.
|
| Interesting, yes, as a concept, and perhaps even as a
| cultural event, but we certainly agree that it's a different
| kind of experience than a musical performance.
|
| > Wouldn't it be interesting to visit a place where you know
| that people hundreds of years ago have listened not only to
| the same piece of music but to the same performance as you
| are experiencing right now. That listenership spans
| centuries?
|
| I honestly have no interest in visiting such a place to hear
| a note, or even the change from one note to another. And
| recognize that what interests you in such a visit is not
| musical interest, but conceptual interest.
| UncleMeat wrote:
| Is it wrong to explore the boundaries of the art form for
| reasons other than enjoyment? Formal experimentation is
| powerful and gives ideas to later composers. By constraining
| oneself to the goal of enjoyable performance, one can't be as
| free to experiment formally.
| ogogmad wrote:
| plausible but [citation needed]
| swayvil wrote:
| Well you're trading music for a story about music.
|
| It's a matter of taste, of course.
| JasonFruit wrote:
| Wrong? I don't see it as a moral issue. I see it as an
| abandonment of music, but not a moral wrong.
|
| I think there's a value distinction to be drawn between
| boundary explorations that expand the art form and those that
| simply depart from any definition of it separate from the
| other arts. That leaves a broad scope for innovation: the
| composers of the _ars subtilior_ , Carlo Gesualdo, Hector
| Berlioz, Debussy and Satie, Harry Partch, Antheil and Edgard
| Varese, and the progression of serialism from Schoenberg
| through Webern to Boulez -- all of them explored and expanded
| the boundaries of music, but you can still experience their
| works as music, even if some have argued that it's bad music.
| It all can be, and has been, accepted as music.
|
| But some of Cage's works (of those which he presented as
| musical) depart from musical material _and_ musical
| experience to play with the nonmusical culture that surrounds
| music and musicians, or, abandoning that, the idea of
| performance itself. Obviously 4 '33", with its formalities of
| opening and closing a piano, is an example of the former, but
| his lesser-known 0'00" runs simply, "In a situation provided
| with maximum amplification, perform a disciplined action." In
| that case, the performer is as justified in a disciplined
| soiling of their pants as any musical act. I refuse to
| countenance such wanking. (Cage was by no means alone in
| this, but he's probably the most famous.)
|
| I'm glad to see that even academic composers seem to have
| retreated from this dissolution.
| klelatti wrote:
| 4'33" isn't about about non musical culture although some
| have mistakenly construed it as such. Cage made it
| absolutely clear what it was about in his comments about
| the piece.
| JasonFruit wrote:
| I could have worded that better: to make its point about
| sounds and, if you please, music, it depends on
| nonmusical cultural expectations that surround musical
| performance. Its adherence to the outward trappings of
| musical performance in the 20th century prompt the
| audience to perceive what occurs during it as part of a
| "performance". Apart from that, there's nothing more
| musical about it than sitting alone in a meadow -- which
| I think was essentially Cage's point.
|
| That I find myself using the word "point" so often here
| emphasizes, to me, that Cage was engaging in philosophy
| rather than musical composition.
| klelatti wrote:
| Your last sentence is very interesting and probably
| captures our different perspectives. I see Cage's work as
| pointing towards an experience that I might enjoy and be
| enriched by in practice (not always but then I don't
| always enjoy performances of my favourite works) and the
| concept is part but only a part of that.
|
| Messiaen found sitting in a meadow quite a musical
| experience!
| fipar wrote:
| I enjoy reading Cage a lot more than listening to his music
| (for that matter, he was fine with not being called a
| musician if people deemed his work not worthy of that, I
| can't recall exactly but I believe sound architect is the
| alternative job description he proposed).
|
| I don't relate to most of his music but I do think he was
| on an honest quest for something. In fact, I think it could
| even be fair to say he was a philosopher using sound as his
| medium, instead of a musician.
| JasonFruit wrote:
| I agree with everything you wrote there.
| jeegsy wrote:
| Its an excellent point. You really cant get a sense of the
| whole thing since its mostly one tone stretched out most of the
| time. Hopefully it survives the stated 639 years
| Bud wrote:
| You could listen to one of the versions out there that only
| lasts an hour. That would give you a good sense of the full
| piece.
|
| Then you could go listen to a snippet of it, in this
| extremely slow version, and get a sense of that.
|
| Then combine the two.
| kderbyma wrote:
| it would be nice to live through a crescendo
| je_suis_music wrote:
| mhb wrote:
| Perfect soundtrack for the pitch drop experiment:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitch_drop_experiment
| MikeDelta wrote:
| Indeed!
|
| I remember a few years ago when the drop was supposed to fall.
| It was so exciting watching the drop almost fall, but after a
| few weeks of no visible movement it got dull.
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _639-year-long John Cage organ performance has a long-awaited
| chord change today_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24384140 - Sept 2020 (1
| comment)
| jdrc wrote:
| "A pretentious piece of avant garde struggles to remain relevant"
| da-bacon wrote:
| Music for the thousanders from Anathem.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Interesting. Besides the fact that they would sing to
| themselves but yes, when you live on a different time-scale you
| probably would have entirely different musical art. Though I
| personally do not think this is interesting and I suspect a
| thousander wouldn't either, they seemed rather more complex
| creatures.
| elihu wrote:
| Kind of a weird corner case for copyright law; a piece whose
| copyright expires part way through the performance. Presumably it
| expires (in the U.S.) 70 years after John Cage's death (1992 + 70
| = 2062), but if it had instead been produced by a corporation and
| the score wasn't published ahead of the performance, each portion
| of the performance would presumably expire 95 years after that
| portion first played. However, there's apparently also a rule
| that corporate copyrights also expire 120 years after creation
| regardless of when they were published.
| b3morales wrote:
| It's not really relevant. There isn't a copyright in the
| performance itself, and if they had permission to start the
| performance, then the expiry of the copyright certainly doesn't
| _prevent_ them from finishing.
| jancsika wrote:
| If you can't even finish the piece before its copyright
| expires, then the duration for copyright protection is _way too
| short_!
|
| Is there a list of edge cases like these collected somewhere?
| E.g., this piece for music performance duration, avocados for a
| high-fat content fruit, qmail's small issue list, etc. I'd like
| to use it as a reference to sharpen my shitposting.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| If nothing else this piece is optimistic.
| replygirl wrote:
| seems pretty cynical to me
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| By optimistic, I meant the idea that humans would be around
| for 600 years.
| zb wrote:
| Any thread about this is incomplete without mentioning the
| article about a note change in this performance by John Darnielle
| (of the band the Mountain Goats, who is also a novelist):
| https://harpers.org/archive/2016/01/there-are-other-forces-a...
| dang wrote:
| Incredible that Cage managed to provoke riots in his audiences
| in 1974 and 1976.
|
| Impressionists and modernists famously did so in earlier
| generations but the mid-70s is astonishingly late for an art
| riot. Among Buddhists in Boulder, no less!
| saalweachter wrote:
| Hmm, so imagine setting up dozens of organs, hundreds, maybe a
| few thousand in a large circle.
|
| You set them to playing ASLSP in, well, a round, each set to take
| some long period of time to finish.
|
| If you stand still, you'll hear it at it's ponderous pace, but if
| you walk, run ahead of the music, it will go faster and faster;
| if you reverse directions, it will slow down, stop, or even
| reverse.
| musingsole wrote:
| Do you have a Kickstarter?
| atoav wrote:
| Organs are kinda expensive instruments, but if they just have
| to play a few notes...
| [deleted]
| anonymoushn wrote:
| The page on the linked official web site has already link rotted
| within a few months!
| jmclnx wrote:
| EDIT: hprotagonist beat me to this :) Took a while for me to find
| the link. Ignore me
|
| Interesting, will need to check it out.
|
| Also there is https://longplayer.org/
|
| which is on the same idea as this piece
| cm2187 wrote:
| "Art"
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| And I thought 20 minute prog rock songs were awesome.
| [deleted]
| je_suis_music wrote:
| amelius wrote:
| If you play long enough, will you not at some point infringe
| someone's copyright?
|
| Or will the lawsuit take 639 years too?
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| I'm pretty sure it would be considered fair use, even if it was
| quite heavily influenced (and in some parts, taken) from a
| work. It isn't like anyone is going to listen to the two pieces
| and get them confused nor is any copyright holder going to lose
| money because someone plays their song so slowly that most
| folks just hear a single tone, even if they stay for days.
| wintermutestwin wrote:
| This version of Pyramid Song by Radiohead is slowed down 800% and
| IMO it is amazing and beautiful.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiKWfcy-Z70
|
| But then again, the source is an incredibly beautiful song which
| has an interesting time signature and chord progression:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdZSOoOF5Ms
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKMAV8pvlOA
| antiterra wrote:
| Nearly anything sounds beautiful when it's spectrally smoothed
| and lengthened 50x by Paulstretch, including the most
| irritating pop song you can name off the top of your head.
|
| http://hypermammut.sourceforge.net/paulstretch/
| wintermutestwin wrote:
| Good point. I wonder how much of the beauty is due to the
| interesting SW approach vs. the speed. Here is an interesting
| discussion with the creator:
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20120217161857/http://www.micros.
| ..
| corporealfunk wrote:
| I haven't played with Paulstretch, but it looks similar to
| what Tom Erbe's "Soundhack" program did (windowed FFT with
| overlap add resynthesis). Soundhack was originally written in
| the late 90's and was used by the sound designers of The
| Matrix.. anyhow. Soundhack is now defunct, but Tom released
| the source and I ported the time stretching bit of the
| software to Go if anyone's interested:
| https://github.com/corporealfunk/gopvoc
| [deleted]
| pwython wrote:
| This is great, I have to check out more slowed down songs. The
| only other one I've heard is the Jurassic Park theme (-1,000%)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX40crWTTYs
| hprotagonist wrote:
| https://longplayer.org/about/overview/
|
| longer duration, faster tempo
| js8 wrote:
| They could also play a superpermutation:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tpNuulTeSQ
| 2143 wrote:
| Let me add that this is scheduled to be completed on 31
| December 2999, which is nearly 1000 years from now.
|
| It began on 1 January 2000.
| dahart wrote:
| This piece and the Cage piece both began in 2000, and both
| descriptions imply the turn of the millennium are an
| important marker. So probably not many > 100 year pieces have
| started since then, but maybe we'll get a new set in the year
| 3000. Makes me curious if there are a bunch of unknown 100
| year performances conceived around the turns of centuries.
|
| Anyway, I like the Long Player's description of survival at
| the end; even if the music seems silly, these are interesting
| questions - "How does one keep a piece of music playing
| across generations? How does one prepare for its
| technological adaptability, knowing how few technologies have
| remained viable over the last millenium? How does one
| legislate for its upkeep? And how can one communicate that
| responsibility to those who might be looking after it some
| 950 years after its original custodians have perished?"
| 2143 wrote:
| I had read the portion you quoted and found it interesting
| as well.
|
| I've always been fascinated by long running processes. I'm
| sure you might have heard about the Clock of the Long Now
| [1] (Wikipedia article [2] seems more useful than the
| official website), which is meant to work for 10000 years.
| It's under construction, but their strategies to handle
| adversities over a 10000 year period worth looking into.
|
| Related to that, I've read about an attempt by a software
| engineer presumably named Brandur who, inspired by the
| aforementioned clock, has attempted to build a software
| that would send out tweets for the next 10000 years [3].
| While I personally feel it probably wouldn't succeed
| because there's too many things that can go wrong, it was
| nice to read the considerations that went into the program.
| Perhaps more than tweeting for the next 10000 years itself,
| Brandur was really trying to point out that it's difficult
| to build long lasting software products.
|
| Writing software that endures for a long time without too
| much additional maintenance is something I'd like to do.
|
| Another long running -- though in comparison to the above
| much smaller -- group of equipments are the space probes
| Voyager 1 (launched in 1977), Voyager 2 (1977) and New
| Horizons (2006). Unless I'm mistaken they all continue to
| function in limited ways and continue to send back data to
| the earth. Isn't it mind-blowing that something that left
| Earth about 45 years ago still works?! (Or maybe it's not
| mind blowing because I guess space doesn't have as much
| distrubances as the Earth).
|
| I also like long running processes in nature. Comets are
| one of them. Isn't it just so cool that some of them
| actually (very likely) come from Oort cloud and their
| orbits can take hundreds or even thousands of years?
|
| Halley's Comet -- which has an orbital period of 76 years,
| and whose appearances have been recorded by various people
| in various places over the past couple of thousand years --
| will show up again in 2061, nearly 40 years from now. I
| sincerely hope I can see it then. Infact I have a calendar
| reminder set up for it in 2061 July. Just in case I forget.
| (The calendar program I currently use might die first. Or I
| could be dead).
|
| [1] https://longnow.org/clock/
|
| [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_of_the_Long_Now
|
| [3] https://brandur.org/10000-years
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| Depending on the criteria, it may not be the longest piece ever.
|
| _* On July 10, 2014, the band [Bull of Heaven] released 305:
| Hostages are Human Beings. On July 12, 2014, 303: n(k), 304:
| 0(2^18x5^18) and 306: It is Not a Lack of Love were released. On
| the very next day, they released several other tracks of various
| lengths. By the time, 310: OSPx0(2^18x5^18)p*k*k*k is their
| longest release, and lasts for 3.343 quindecillion years.*_
|
| ref:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bull_of_Heaven_%28band%29#2014...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-04-23 23:01 UTC)