Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site mhuxr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mfs
From: mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (SIMON)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Pros and Cons of net.music.jazz
Message-ID: <212@mhuxr.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 22-Jan-85 08:22:50 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxr.212
Posted: Tue Jan 22 08:22:50 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 23-Jan-85 06:11:23 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 20

I think it is a good idea to have net.music sub-groups. Music is so wide
and diverse that to compress it all in one group produces a certain
crowding out, so thata few related subjects dominate at the exclusion
of others. So as a demand evolves for them, net.music subgroups can
be a good idea, as is being demonstrated by folk and classical. A
subgroup I see a demand for right now is synth, which would be dedicated
to the instrumentation segment of electronic music, sort of a cross between
music and audio. This would not include electronic music discussion per se,
except for such discussion involving instrumentation, e.g. Tangerine Dream
using this synth vs that synth and how it affects their sound.

This does not, however, include a jazz subgroup, simply becasue there has
not, in the last several months, been the traffic to support a separate
group. Recently there has been a debate on the role of jazz in US society,
a mini discussion of Pat Metheny and a few isolated articles that have
not led to followups. I see no need for a net.music.jazz if it will only
have ten articles in six months. The same can be said about a bluegrass
subgroup.

Marcel Simon					..!mhuxr!mfs