Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site eosp1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!eosp1!robison
From: robison@eosp1.UUCP (Tobias D. Robison)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: People who talk about outgrowing rock and roll should grow up
Message-ID: <780@eosp1.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Apr-84 17:16:42 EST
Article-I.D.: eosp1.780
Posted: Fri Apr  6 17:16:42 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Apr-84 01:13:29 EST
References: <1621@stolaf.UUCP>
Organization: Exxon Office Systems, Princeton, NJ
Lines: 24

Arguing about whether Rock or Classical music is "more creative" can
be really stupid.  Each artform has dimensions in which there is
great emphasis on creativity, and dimensions in which no one cares
for variation or precision.  We listeners develop sensitivities
appropriate to the style.  It's completely unfair to criticize one
style of music for failing to conform to the sensitivities of another.
If I were to do this unfair thing, my favorite example is:

	- Rock piano players are incredibly hamhanded in their sense
	of touch.  There is more creativity in the variation a
	classical pianist can give to the sound of the piano than there
	is in all the improvisation of rock music.  Jazz pianists have
	this sensitivity too!  Why not rock pianists?

By the way, Rock is also remarkably simpleminded in its choice of rhythms.
I am waiting patiently for rock composers to start using rock rhythms
that have been explored a great deal in 20th century classical music.
Where is Bulgarian rock?? Give me some of that driving 7/8, and 13/8
meter (See Bartok)!  It's not much different from many common rock rhythms, just
fresh and exciting.
					- Toby Robison (not Robinson!)
					allegra!eosp1!robison
					decvax!ittvax!eosp1!robison
					princeton!eosp1!robison