From: ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Ever heard "Synths are making orchestras useless"?
Keywords: synths orchestra obsolete
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:45:47 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

f1toyl@uta.fi (Topi Ylinen) writes:
>Nowadays, or even a few years back, many computer enthusiastics and experts
>boldly claimed in computer-related magazines (at least in Finland, they did)
>that the modern synthetizator technology is so good in producing music that
>we do not need expensive orchestras anymore.
>
>IS THAT SO?

	I am a synthesizer enthusiast, but I don't think that synthesizers
are anywhere near replacing orchestras.  The two media are quite different.
With sufficient patience, I suppose that synthesizers could be used to 
duplicate the orchestral experience, but why bother?  It takes more time
to fake it than to do it with the real thing.

[stuff deleted]

>Computer music lacks committedness, vividness, immediacy and all the
>"ethereal beauties" we have learnt to respect in classical music. Notes
>are simply certain frequencies.

	Balderdash.  "Computer music" (I'm taking this to mean both music 
performed live by synthesists, and taped compositions) can most certainly
be commited, vivid, and immediate.  Granted, computer music may not be
indistingushable from the music created by an orchestra.  Also granted,
orchestral music can also be full of "ethereal beauty."  That does not
imply that computer music possesses none of these qualities.  Your argu-
ment is not syllogistic at all.

>Thus, the only kind of music which may be threatened by synths, is (IMHO
>deservedly) popular music, which, as is, lacks the above-mentioned qual-
>ities already... (as a rule, at least)

	I've heard plenty of orchestral music which lacks the above-
mentioned qualities.  It's possible to be a tired hack in any genre of
music.

	What constitutes a "threat" to a particular genre of music?  Do 
you mean that a new genre of music takes the sociological position that 
was previously occupied by another type of music?  If so, you may be dis-
appointed to know that synthesizers do indeed constitute a threat to 
"classical" music.  Classical music did not cease to be written in 1899!
Many recent composers are incorportaing synthesizers into their works.
If, by classical music, you mean the type of music that well-dressed
people listen to respectfully in a concert hall, then sorry - the synths
are already here.

	If you instead define a "threat" to a particular genre of music
to mean that the new genre subsumes the old genre completely, then you're
right, synthesizers are no threat to classical music.  However, neither
are they a threat in popular music.  People still listen to pre-synthesizer
popular music as a separate genre.  The sound of the acoustic guitar has
enjoyed somewhat of a revival in the last ten years, despite the prolifera-
tion of synthesizers.

	Make your choice.

>Topi Ylinen (f1toyl@uta.fi)

-- 
== John J. Ladasky II ("ii") ========================= ladasky@netcom.COM ==
"Great composers do not borrow -	     "Talking about music is like
 they steal."  - John Ladasky	      ~ -     dancing about architecture."
(quote stolen from Stravinsky, who    o o     - Elvis Costello?  Laurie
 stole it from a statement made by     >        Anderson?  Frank Zappa?
 Pablo Picasso about painting, who    \_/    -------------------------------
 stole it from...)			     "Property is theft." - Groucho
============================================================================