Talk:New-age music/Archive 1

message: New Age music survived vfd. Per discussion it is now on the cleanup list. See: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/New_Age_music -- Wile E. Heresiarch 21:05, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

message: I see you did some work on New Age Music. This article contains most of the Music sub-section from New_Age, word for word, then a nice little table with other links. Do you think this is right to copy and paste a section from a longstanding article just to make a new one? BF 00:17, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not create New Age music, I merely copyedited (check the history) and haven't looked at the parent New Age article itself.  However, it is a good practice to include a two or so paragraph summary of an article in the parent article with a Main article: link to the daughter article which is a longer extension of that summary, which will often include the initial summary from the parent article, e.g. Simulation and Computer simulation.  In general that's warranted when it is likely that the daughter article will be expanded with additional information beyond what would be wanted in the parent article, which would probably be the case with New Age music. --Lexor|Talk 03:28, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New_Age_Music 

message: Doesn't classifying Tubular Bells as the first New Age album contradict the definition given in the first place that the beginnings of New Age music were closeley related to the mystical matters of the New Age movement? Oldfield originated from the jazz-related and somewhat humoristic Canterbury Scene. 84.174.254.240 10:59, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mike Oldfield 

message: I have drastically changed the article and "wikified" it with guidelines of Wikipedia style. I have also removed personal opinions and irrelevant information that does not belong in this article. There could be alot more change to this article because it seems loosely organized and misleading. I suppose somebody will come later to edit the article information better and cite references. Remember that Wikipedia is not a message board to spout your beliefs. Save that for the article's talk pages or refrain completely. I hope though the article will improve. --Eeee 03:23, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done some stylistic editing re the Froese qote, but more could be done here. Also, when was this said and in what context? Is the comment on it really necessary? Metamagician3000 09:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatted 

message: This article was deperately in need of a lead-in, and I started a somewhat rough one.  I blantantly ripped the statement The borders of this genre are not well defined, and the dividing lines between its sub-genres are often fluid from the Science fiction article.  As usual, edit mercilessly. --192.112.210.155 15:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead-in 

message: * New Age Music is not just a subgenre of Electronic or Ambient music. New Age Music INCLUDES many different styles and influences from Western, Eastern Classical music to Avant-Garde, Jazz, Minimalism, Indigenous, Sacred, Symphonic, Electronic and Solo Acoustic Music. You can't say it is mostly Electronic because a large part of New Age Music includes Solo Piano, Harp, Flutes, Sitar, Drums etc. I would say any instrument and/or almost any musical style you can imagine has been used to create New Age Music. It is not the style or the instrumentation, that makes it New Age! It is a certain feeling and experience that the music evokes in the listener that will give New Age Music it's qualification. That's why it is so confusing to talk about it. What is now called New Age Music is as old as music itself. There was always music to expand consciousness, sacred music, music for healing, relaxation and music for meditation and contemplation. Music created with a certain knowledge of music psychology, or created in an appropriate state of consciousness and with the intend to heal, enchant, spiritualize, or relax and uplift will have a different impact than music created for entertainment or mass-hypnosis. All theses components have to be taken into consideration when talking about New Age Music, labels and artists. I would suggest to make New Age Music a separate article/section. It is definitely not just a sub section of electronic music. There are many artists that also qualify to be included in Electronic Music, and there will be of course a sub genre called "electronic" in New Age Music. Electronic Music and New Age Music can share some of the information in this sub genre. But the same is true for Classical Music, Jazz, World Music, and Pop Instrumental as well as some Pop Vocals. Just to give a few examples, I would consider Donovan's ATLANTIS a New Age Song. Composers such as Ravel and Debussy have certainly written music that could be termed New Age and Paul Horn's "Classic" INSIDE THE TAJ MAHAL or INSIDE THE GREAT PYRAMID could also be listed under Jazz...
We need much more educated comments here. 
Onam 19:16, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NOT JUST A STYLE, OR SUB GENRE! 

message: There are thousands of New Age titles and probably over 100 subgenres. New Age is much bigger than  most people might imagine. Since sales for the New Age genre are only captured statistically in record retail the numbers put out by the RIAA are only roughly accounting for half of the sales. New Age Music has in reality about 10% of the music market!
Onam 19:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NEW AGE MUSIC MARKET SHARE 

message: Definition 3 claims to be "not accurate" while 2 & 1 only "can be questioned" / "is problematic". How so? This could be read to imply that 3 is an "incorrect" definition, which seems like a POV to me. I don't think I can agree with the interpretation "this definition is more vague than the others" either. Can I get some comments on what was meant here?
Also, does anyone think it would it be useful to list the definitions in order of inclusivity / breadth instead, that is 1 > 3 > 2 or 2 < 3 < 1? It would add some NPOV to the order of them. I can imagine people protesting that the order of the list suggests eg. that the first definition(s) would be the most (more) common one(s). Tropylium 09:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy and order of definitions 

message: Before reverting my next contributions to this article, please read 
1) Browsing Music Spaces - Categories And The Musical Mind.
2) A Theory of Musical Genres - Two Applications (1980).
Thank you.Brian Wilson 18:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music Genres related articles 

message: A former version of this article shows some interesting sentences that could be put in this one.Brian Wilson 20:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Instrumental music 

message: Ambient Music  is an instrumental,  not rhythmic and not melodic genre that uses techniques and styles of electronic music, minimalistic acoustic music, and often concrete (sampled) music; it aims to get an "atmospheric environment", a sort of sonic carpet, that can merge with environmental noises or that can be listened as a form of ambience soundtrack. 
Therefore, the so called Ambient Techno and Ambient House have nothing to do with Ambient Music. Actually, those styles are within the field of "Techno" dance music. Nevertheless, many works by KLF, The Orb, Aphex Twin and others are "pure electronic music" with no beats and drums, and many are pure ambient music, but most of their hits are Techno, a sophisticated form of techno, but nothing more. Sorry if that may annoy someone...
Electronica is a non-sense, meaningless word, used only with regard to modern works that mix many different styles. The term "New Age" has a bit more sense, at least New Age artists and works seem to share the same purpose, that is to chill out the listener and help spiritual meditation. For this reason, New Age is hated both by religious fundamentalists (New Age is a plan of the Anti-Christ") and by those musicians and academics that reject such kinda "yoga tool" use of music.Dr. Who 00:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambient and New Age music 

message: # (cur) (last)  16:00, 12 March 2007 JohnCub (Talk | contribs) (←Undid revision 114563690 by 209.204.98.238 (talk) -- Undoing because user')
I meant to say Undoing because user's contributions in the past few minutes have all been vandalisms so I assume this one is as well.  JohnCub 16:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My broken edit summary 

message: Today, this new external link appeared in the article: http://www.newagepiano.net (labelled New Age Pianists).  I followed the link to a website that seemed to me to be purley advertising of non-notable artists with no informative content, so I removed the link by undoing the edit, including an edit sumary stating it was a self-promotional link.
Within moments, User:Gene_Poole reverted my deletion with this edit summary:  (revert - perfectly on-topic informational link). I took no action but noticed other editors re-deleting the link and each time, Gene reverted the deletions.  I was not involved in any of those edits either way (other than my initial deleting of the link that appears to me to be advertising), but since there was so much back and forth, I am posting my notes here about why I removed the link in the first place. 
  
I explored the linked website and found that none of the pianists listed there are notable according to WP:notability. I did not see any New Age pianists listed there who I know to be notable, such as for example, George Winston or Jim Brickman or Suzanne Ciani or David Lanz. How could that website be an informative source of New Age pianists if it omits the most important ones? I did not recognize any of the artist names so I googled several of them.   I found that they were listed only on self-promotion sites such as CD Baby, MP3.com and others like that.  The linked website itself stated on its home page that it was launched only a month ago.   I further explored the website and found that it had only a few sparsely populated database pages and that it did not contain any informative pages about new age pianistsIt did contain advertising links to websites of the listed artists, and a shopping section and downloads section, again with only music by artists not known as historical contributors to this genre. 
Since the link is basically a new website aggregating advertising and not providing any informative content, that link does not belong here, according to Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided.
Gene, after carefully reviewing that website in detail as noted above, I don't understand why you would want it listed in the article. If you still feel that link is valuable for this article, I'd appreciate it if you would explain your reasons here.   Thanks.  Parzival418 08:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously I agree with you. Once again, one person's POV is trying to damage the content of this Encyclopedia. I'll revert it endlessly.Doktor Who 09:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that Parzival418 did a terrific analysis for invalidating that link. This reversion is a small but good place to draw the line on Gene's WP:OWNership of the New Age music articles. A journey of 10,000 miles begins with a single step. Milo 11:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And how long do we have to wait before trying to rework these articles seriously? Please tell me, so that I'll take a Wikibreak n the meanwhile, I'm talking seriously, do  not take it in a wrong way, cheers.Doktor Who 13:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Re:  newagepiano.net.  Back in February, I identified this link as self-published/self-promotional on the Steven Cravis article, at which time I did not remove but I did request more reliable sources (Talk:Steven Cravis#Notes).  At that time, he was about the only artist on the site, and his article clearly states it was begun by him and Wierzbicki.org which identifies itself as a "cross-media network".  It seems now there are more artists that have signed up.  I too do not see this link as relevant to the history of new age music.  Cricket02 13:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link seems to be advertising - shall it be kept or deleted? 

message: ::Music genre (the plural is a redirect) says: "A music genre (or subgenre ) could be defined by the techniques, the styles, the context and the themes (content, spirit)." So  New Thought Music could be a genre of spiritual theme. But this particular case suffers from a lack of commercial consistency based on the very real desire of listeners to hear stylistically, 'more music like that'. I subscribe to a view not explicitly mentioned in the Music genre article, that genres include by necessity, a balanced blend of commercial description and critical analysis. 
::More complexly, I think of a genre as symbolized by a tetrahedron with artist, producer, critic, consumer, at the four vertices (corners), while they interact with each other in a push-pull balance along the vectors at the edges. An analogy, of mechanical tension and compression balance to music business interactions balance, is demonstrated by the Needle Tower tensegrity art shown here. Why I think this, is partly that Stephen Hill, the founder of spacemusic genre in 1973, was an architect influenced by architect Buckminster Fuller (Geodesic domes), who analyzed this 1968 Kenneth Snelson sculpture to coin the tern "tensegrity" (tensional integrity). Whatever, it's a stunning photo. 
::An alternative idea with which to tinker is that New Thought Music might be a meta-genre — a genre of genres. To sell such a concept, I think one would need a presentation form like a VJ video in which the widely differing genres were bound together into a set using spoken words, text, or images of the New Thought Movement. Milo 23:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well said.  I've been thinking for a while that describing music genres needs more dimensions. I like your analogy of the way business balances music influences as similar to the mechanical/gravitational forces acting on structures.  For music to be created and somehow found by the listeners who want that kind of music - processes of creation, portal, filters (critics and social networks), marketplace, consumers - is changing fast in today's world - the structure needs to be flexible and adaptable, sort of spongy, yet still needs to have some way of retaining the ability to categorize music in ways that are useful for consumers to find it and marketers to tell them about it.  Parzival418 00:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very, very interesting.Doktor Who 00:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny you should mention "structure needs to be flexible and adaptable, sort of spongy". Wire and tubes or sticks and string tensegrity spheres will deform and bounce to some degree like a rubber ball. See pic here (slightly flattened under it's own weight). Here's Fuller's description of  bouncing tensegrity spheres including a mahogany (!) one harmlessly dropped by a hurricane. (find down to "mahogany"; next two paragraphs).  Milo 01:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's exactly what I meant!  Cool references!  Parzival418 01:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ...broader and broader...

message: Are there any sources for this? It makes sense in a vague way, but that's WP:OR. 115.64.123.40 (talk) 00:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking post-rock music to this genre 

message: The current layout of pictures creates sandwiching of text, which is discouraged by the MOS. Articles do not usually start with a picture on the top left as this apparently means that readers have difficulty finding the start of the text. I don't particularly want to revert this as I am unfamiliar with priorities here, so I leave it up to a regular editor to sort. See MOS:IMAGELOCATION for the guidelines.--SabreBD (talk) 15:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: According to Allmusic, New-age music is "born from an aesthetic that aims to induce a sense of inner calm, new age music emerged from the meditational and holistic fields. Generally, these are harmonious and nonthreatening albums that are allied with new age philosophies encouraging spiritual transcendence and physical healing. Some of these albums are artistically satisfying as well as therapeutic. Lesser musicians, however, often make ridiculous claims in the liner notes as to their ability to catapult listeners into advanced spiritual states through specially designed sonic vibrations and "immaculately conceived" musical ideas". 
However, I don't understand why and how in both Allmusic and the article are cited considerations by which are listed/higlighted electronic music composers whose music style has nothing to do with New Age spirituality, relaxation, meditation, alternative healing, yoga practice and so on. The "History" section is badly written, and facts about the so-called genre or musical movement are misleading; example, Mike Oldfield's progressive rock album Tubular Bells is cited to be an album of New-age genre - that's complete ignorance of musical styles. As can be seen in both "History" and "Influences and themes", the whole article is more focused about the artists who influenced (dubiously) the New-age musical genre and movement, rather then those artists who really belong to it. The whole article needs to focus on the real New-age musicians, for example like Deva Premal, and not electronic composers like Vangelis, and should note the difference between those real New-age musicians, and the general term "New-age music" which is, as stated under "Definitions", used for "music which cannot be easily classified into other, more common definitions". The whole article lacks references. As both Enya and Kitarō were nominated for Grammy Award for Best New Age Album, it should be seen what kind of definiton is used for the genre by the The Recording Academy.--Crovata (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree that this article could be improved considerably, several of your criticisms are directed at statements that currently appear to be supported by reliable sources (for example, your statement about Mike Oldfield). Liner notes, as you suggest, often cannot be regarded as reliable sources, particularly when they are written by the artist, since they amount to self-published statements. It is important to keep in mind that "what we know to be true" makes little or no difference on Wikipedia, where claims must be supported by reliable sources.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 23:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: However, it is a well known problem when seemingly reliable sources do not have reliable and correct considerations - Tubular Bells is not a New-age album, or simply, the source statement was more about the "terminology"/"philosophy" rather than "music genre" of New-age. It seems that exist conflicting viewpoints what is "New-age music". I am now a bit interested, so will do a research on these issues, and then edit the article with reliable sources. If the information on your user page is correct, you could review the edit, and improve the article with your experience and reliable sources which are not unavaliable for me. --Crovata (talk) 01:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: , I rewrote the article. It needs a review for any information or grammatical errors.--Crovata (talk) 09:26, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent news. I have already found some formatting problems in the references, but I think they have been there for a long time. I will review the text for grammar and syntax. Thanks for your hard work.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not informed about the general music terminology, but after reading the sources I don't understand what is the correct term of the musical-marketing genre/style/category/; New-age, New Age, new-age, new age or some other, and thus decided to use "New-age". Seemingly, the use of this form makes sense as the genuine "New-age" music is related to New Age movement which name is mostly written with upper case first letters, but...--Crovata (talk) 01:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that this is not really "musical" terminology as a marketing term, and there is no single practice in the marketplace. For the purposes of this article, this matter was discussed some time ago (see further up on this Talk page), and it was decided to use all-lowercase. The hyphenated form is used when the two words together describe something else, such as "new-age music" or "new-age artist".
Think Henk N. Werkhoven's The International Guide to New Age Music (1997) could help improve the article, as according to preface "New Age music, though often instrumental, turns out to be a repository for diverse musical styles. It ranges from classical music to rock music, from jazz to meditation music, from Western music to Eastern music. And suddenly New Age vocal music could also be heard... Many record stores decided to call any music that could not be easily labeled New Age... To cope with all this complexity, I have tried in this book to make a first attempt at clarifying this new musical trend by building a dam around all these musical waves. New Age music isn't all that new anymore. The genre has been around for nearly thirty years, counting back to its very first pioneers", and review that the major pop artists like Enya, Enigma, Tangerine Dream or Mike Oldfield were not even mentioned, and the focus was on dedicated new age music artists and labels.--Crovata (talk) 02:03, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

text: Don't know when will have time to edit, but The Dynamics of a Cultural Struggle in Academia: The Case of New Age Music Research (2012) by Omri Ruah-Midbar and Marianna Ruah-Midbar is really good and informative source on the subject.--Crovata (talk) 02:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article really needs a rewrite 

message: WTF !!! NOTHING ABOUT JEAN MICHEL JARRE ????????  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.90.213.255 (talk) 19:03, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a fact (though underdocumented in this article) that one use of "new age" is for spacey, non-dance but also not quite ambient, often instrumental electronic music. This is the same use by which people also often classify artists like Vangelis or Klaus Schulze or as "new age". This use persists since often such music has no better description going for it either. --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 16:51, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Jean Michel Jarre