I read Guy Gavriel Kay's viking fantasy, something about Light of the Sun... title made no sense relative to the book that I could see. I've read half of another titled Prospero's Children. And part of that Gene Wolfe ancient Greece book.
None of these people know how to properly tell a story. OTOH Robin Hobb is king. I shall attempt to start putting together a story/ies keeping Hobb's expert writing in mind.
I've spent the last 4 days laid up with I guess back spasms. Not too painful but I can't stand up straight and can hardly walk (not too painful unless I try to stand up straight). The worst part is just watching the time pass by, praying I'll have healed enough to go work for 14 hours (on my feet probably a good 5) on Monday night. I already called off for Friday night. If I call off Monday night that will be two call offs. We get 5 for an entire year. At which point we receive a written infraction (whatever that means). Fired at 11.
Which is absurd. It's a hospital by the way. This means people routinely come to work sick and spread their diseases to their patients. It should be against the law to have such a policy about sick days at a hospital. It is a threat to the public's health.
It's not as big a deal for me as I usually go years at a time without catching colds or flus. But the back thing worries me. It seems to be an increasingly chronic problem. Will have to start taking additional steps to try to fix this problem. But it seems to follow no rhyme or reason...
I don't think sitting in a chair is really a good idea so for now I lay in bed praying I'll heal enough to handle work Monday night. It's not looking like I'll quite be better enough that I should attempt such a thing. I suppose I could get out my old laptop and try to outline some kind of template while I lay in bed...
At some point I need to actually truly begin the writing. I hold back almost as if I think my real life hasn't yet started.
--
I think Michael Harrison's justly toned piano is beautiful by the way. There is perhaps something positive to be said for the extra dissonance along with the extra consonance.
Despite going off into dissonance there still seems to be something limited about the songs he's written with it though. (Also the pounding repetitive dissonant tone clouds of song 4 and 10 are kind of awful.) If one stayed in consonance, just intonation IS limited. With Harrison, I think he's still staying enough within it (it still sounds like music) that it is limited. I want though to experiment with the same tuning next and see if it is indeed limited. Probably so.
Limited or not, when working instead with VST technology it might make more sense to add many additional tones to the standard 12 to potentially remove dissonance from the just intonation (so you had a choice). So for example, having a second D note that was tuned to be consonant (1.5/1) with the originally justly tuned A note, etc. Although this concept taken all the way could mean a huge scale. One could instead limit this scale somewhat, maybe just tripling it for example to add more possibility, if indeed the justly toned 12 is as limited (although beautiful) as it appears in Harrison's work.
This does appear to come back somewhat to the justonic concept. Although is a combination of the two and was thinking might be easier or lazier to not actually bother with justonic and instead just make a separate scala file that added additional... secondary D, E notes, etc.
But there are all kinds of additional issues. Does one retune the additional notes based on the triad or the fifth, etc? There is no answer really. Would depend on each individual song. Would be very complicated.
About the justonic: I don't even think the justonic really makes all that much sense either. You play for example a C/E/G chord, then a D/F/A followed by a E/G/B chord in succession. In just intonation the first is perfect consonance, the following two are dissonant. But using the justonic, say where it used the lowest note as the root, all would be consonant, but the last G would be a different G than the first.
What this is to say, is that the step up by the middle note would be different than the step up by the bottom note... I think this in and of itself is similar to the issue of dissonance. I need to hear extended music written with justonic. I think it would have a vertigo-like effect.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
While 3/2 is assoclated with power, 5/4 is more expressive of sentiment and emotion. To my ear, these qualities of the primes show up to some extent in combined intervals; for example, the included interval 5/3 (a "major sixth") seems to convey some "fiveness" and some "threeness." This would imply that the character of any just interval includes expression of the prime factors that make it up. Of course, all this is highly subjective.
In early times the interval 5/4 was considered discordant; its acceptance as consonant came centuries after 3/2 gained popularity. Then it became firmly established as an essential component of traditional triadic harmony.
http://www.redshift.com/~dcanright/harmser/
Power versus a more nuanced expression of differing feelings. Sort of like forcing people in line versus actually using reason and communicating their differences. Originally the 5/4 sounded discordant but as the ears spent time hearing it became 'musical'. With time a much larger and discordant scale could become acceptable. Would such routinely listened to by an entire society influence the actions in the same direction?
justonic and long explanation of just intonation
http://www.justonic.com/demos.html
Do I really care? Not sure.
These commas exist only outside the confines of the twelve notes tones of equal temperament. In fact, tempered tunings were developed over the past four hundred years precisely to avoid the commas that are heard whenever music with moderately complex harmonies is played in just intonation. I have discovered that incorporating the commas into the harmonic fabric of my music frees it from the need for tempered tunings and opens up a new approach to tonality.-Michael Harrison (as opposed to justonic)
Throughout the history of Western classical music there has been a gradual evolution from the use of relatively wide and consonant intervals to increasingly narrow and more dissonant sounding intervals. For example, organum, early two-part music that developed from the 9th to 12th centuries, used the consonant open sounding intervals of perfect fourths, fifths and octaves. In the 15th and 16th centuries, the relatively dissonant intervals of seconds, thirds, and sevenths were interwoven into the polyphonic fabric of the music, which was still organized contrapuntally as opposed to tonally. At the beginning of the 18th century, music began to be formally organized around tonal centers. As major, minor, and other key relationships developed, it became essential to create a tuning system that permitted moving easily between different key centers. In the 19th century, the evolution of even more complex chromaticism resulted in stretching tonal harmony to its limits. In the 20th century, Schoenberg’s concept of “emancipation of dissonance” led to the free use of any interval combination in equal temperament. I propose that this evolution is still in progress, and that its next stage is the “emancipation of the comma.”etc...
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Two things:
A problem with modern society is that to an extent, you feel like you're in a constant battle with the other people around you. Your boss isn't on your side. Everyday you go to work there is the potential of life altering conflict which is ultimately not really in your control. Your company could simply decide to downsize. Through some misunderstanding some idiot with power over you could suddenly decide to destroy. At any time you can be ruined. And you try and try to worry about such things. All, usually, while being stuck in a situation where you can't actually do anything.
And at the same time you then go home in your metal box to your stone or wood box and are otherwise highly isolated.
In comparison, go back to a 'simpler' lifestyle. A farming community. Each ...group/family is relatively self sufficient, which is to say, they go out and plant the seeds, etc and survive off that basis. It really isn't that difficult. There isn't the (at least I surmise) potential of life altering conflict with people who essentially have total power over you on a daily basis.
I read once that actually they had to work so much harder on farms and we're living in luxury today in comparison. This isn't really true. Scott Nearing went off into the wilderness and carved out a good life (he wrote a book called Living the Good Life) for 50 plus years; living to be 100. He said they worked for four hours a day. And this work again, was not the stressful stuff it is in our modern society.
Humans aren't meant to have so much stress on a daily basis. Perhaps occasionally. From evolution there had to be occasional conflicts, fights, tribal wars. But what we have today instead ruins health. Causes unhappiness. Causes mental illnesses. Despite attempts by the sick psychiatry system to make mental illness sound like it's genetic in origin, we know for example that the rate for schizophrenia is much higher in big cities. Why this is I can't say for sure. Perhaps people have hypothesized it's from excessive pollutants? I think though it could just be people put in more stressful situations, more often having to deal with other people, whom they don't consider on the same 'side' and thus instead have to deal with as potential threats. Endless potential threats, more stress, slowly wearing them down.
There would still be conflict in a society where people were more self sufficient. There would still be stress. But it seems it wouldn't need to be such a consistent daily thing.
There is then furthermore the potential isolating factors of all the technology we use. Sitting alone in the dark in front of the TV with what little free time we have (and we have too little free time, we're hardly only working 4 hours a day like Nearing). And the fact we live in one place and then spend half our waking time at some other place far away where we're usually around no one who lives where we actually live.
And so on. All of which isn't to say going back to an agrarian lifestyle would mean instant utopia. I'm sure it's very possible for that to be miserable. But I think we could recognize that from such a lifestyle which is more suitable for the psychology of man and try to incorporate it into how we're living.
-
So many books have characters who are in effect caricatures. I think, in a way, this is not a bad thing perhaps. It is maybe kind of like more generalized efforts to take complex human interactions and simplify them into something that is more easily understandable (while not totally losing all truth in the simplification process). And such books with antagonists that stray in the direction of being two dimensional. And in general characters that just aren't as complex as real life people, isn't necessarily a bad thing. It maybe can serve the same purpose in a way.
A problem with modern society is that to an extent, you feel like you're in a constant battle with the other people around you. Your boss isn't on your side. Everyday you go to work there is the potential of life altering conflict which is ultimately not really in your control. Your company could simply decide to downsize. Through some misunderstanding some idiot with power over you could suddenly decide to destroy. At any time you can be ruined. And you try and try to worry about such things. All, usually, while being stuck in a situation where you can't actually do anything.
And at the same time you then go home in your metal box to your stone or wood box and are otherwise highly isolated.
In comparison, go back to a 'simpler' lifestyle. A farming community. Each ...group/family is relatively self sufficient, which is to say, they go out and plant the seeds, etc and survive off that basis. It really isn't that difficult. There isn't the (at least I surmise) potential of life altering conflict with people who essentially have total power over you on a daily basis.
I read once that actually they had to work so much harder on farms and we're living in luxury today in comparison. This isn't really true. Scott Nearing went off into the wilderness and carved out a good life (he wrote a book called Living the Good Life) for 50 plus years; living to be 100. He said they worked for four hours a day. And this work again, was not the stressful stuff it is in our modern society.
Humans aren't meant to have so much stress on a daily basis. Perhaps occasionally. From evolution there had to be occasional conflicts, fights, tribal wars. But what we have today instead ruins health. Causes unhappiness. Causes mental illnesses. Despite attempts by the sick psychiatry system to make mental illness sound like it's genetic in origin, we know for example that the rate for schizophrenia is much higher in big cities. Why this is I can't say for sure. Perhaps people have hypothesized it's from excessive pollutants? I think though it could just be people put in more stressful situations, more often having to deal with other people, whom they don't consider on the same 'side' and thus instead have to deal with as potential threats. Endless potential threats, more stress, slowly wearing them down.
There would still be conflict in a society where people were more self sufficient. There would still be stress. But it seems it wouldn't need to be such a consistent daily thing.
There is then furthermore the potential isolating factors of all the technology we use. Sitting alone in the dark in front of the TV with what little free time we have (and we have too little free time, we're hardly only working 4 hours a day like Nearing). And the fact we live in one place and then spend half our waking time at some other place far away where we're usually around no one who lives where we actually live.
And so on. All of which isn't to say going back to an agrarian lifestyle would mean instant utopia. I'm sure it's very possible for that to be miserable. But I think we could recognize that from such a lifestyle which is more suitable for the psychology of man and try to incorporate it into how we're living.
-
So many books have characters who are in effect caricatures. I think, in a way, this is not a bad thing perhaps. It is maybe kind of like more generalized efforts to take complex human interactions and simplify them into something that is more easily understandable (while not totally losing all truth in the simplification process). And such books with antagonists that stray in the direction of being two dimensional. And in general characters that just aren't as complex as real life people, isn't necessarily a bad thing. It maybe can serve the same purpose in a way.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Me and my wife just had a laughing contest. Each person stares at the other until one person genuinely laughs. Good fun.
-
Thought of a music video where the visual image would be that of one insect eating another alive (or should it be multiple examples?). What would the music sound like that went with it?
Real live monsters doing the most unspeakable acts to each other... It's like they're some kind of humorous psudeo subtle reminder by the way. What if instead they looked just like human beings (but still seemed relatively mindless) and there were chainsaw wielding species that went around killing and eating damsel in distress species?
There's something Phillip K. Dick about them but worse. He was mostly just losing reality. What if reality was not only being lost, but was being replaced by some other reality? What if you had suspicions the more realistic way of seeing the world was actually quite horrible and you had these tiny little monsters around you, which you're supposed to just ignore, which are constantly eating each other alive. In literaure, such things can almost serve as foreshadowing, or symbolism for the 'reality' of the situation in the story.
You can imagine a world where these bugs were the size of humans. Imagine say a battlefield of ants. Attacking a dying boring bee. It's not dead yet but they're already eating it alive. To be down in such a world is a nightmare world. No matter you're an entomologist and 'love' insects. They're eating each other alive constantly. They have extremely short life spans. They're often such mindless and yet highly specialized killing machines.
That they're so tiny is humorous. They're all around us. We're supposed to just ignore them and focus on Jesus or whatever as we sludge through our days. But there they are, sometimes there's minature flying monsters on my computer screen at this time of day. They're in effect saying, "Hey, guess what? Guess what the truth is of this world?" But we just ignore this other reality which is right on top of our own reality.
But at the same time they seem a beautiful miracle. That life can be so diverse. The boring bees on my porch would always get right up in my face. I like bees. How can such things exist? Have life?
-
What about a fictitious story that began in 1933 Germany, but then consisted of a way that the Jews managed to get the Nazi's past all that ugliness and they all learned to love one another instead? What in the world would it have taken to make that happen instead?
-
I have bicuspid aortic valve. I've known this for almost 30 years. I finally bothered to research it on the internet this week. I won't go into the complicated reasons I never did before. Apparently the last few doctors I've seen the last 5 or 6 years didn't have a clue. Apparently I really shouldn't be doing any heavy weight lifting or sprinting/jumping as both raise my blood pressure too much. Such is what I was originally told as a child. Was told I shouldn't even run. And that I would have to have open heart surgery before the age of 15.
But I had no pain, or symptoms at all when I ran and played. Just sharp pains when I was sitting around doing nothing. And I was so full of energy to run around and play. It was too much to do to such a kid. My parents even agreed. So we ignored the doctors advice. And I did everything. Including boxing (beat two state champions), powerlifting (even got third place in a big tournament once in the 242 class), general very heavy weight lifting (have done a chinup with an extra 140 pounds attached to me at 220 pounds bodyweight), basketball (could do a 360 two hand slam), run very long distances (although like a snail on that one), etc.
Through all such things never had any chest pain, thus figured the doctors were FOS. ...but here and there always had very sharp pains right over top my heart, thus I still worried I might keel over at any moment...
I finally quit worrying about it a few years ago on one doctor's advice, who said they now know such exercise makes no difference. And the pain I described couldn't possibly be the result of anything wrong with my heart. Probably some unimportant lung issue... A great weight off my shoulders...
Then even those sharp pains I'd had all my life went away.
But now, a new feeling has come. A strange fluttering feeling in my chest. Which caused me to finally use the damm internet and research my condition.
Now I see she didn't know what she was talking about. (Or perhaps figured lying would be better for me?)
I apparently really shouldn't be doing any heavy weight lifting. Or sprinting.
It appears I really have to be a wimp from now on. I have to live as if I'm broken.
And still chances are good I'll have to have my chest cracked open within the next 20 years.
-
Treated like hell at work this morning. It's actually hard enough I think to work one's ass off for 12 hours without then getting quizzed on every little irrelevant detail of each patient and then treated like shit if you can't remember each 100 of those new facts you could be attempting to memorize about each new set of patients.
No, I don't remember off the top of my head (of course it is all written down) the exact diameter of each patient's pupils when each patient doesn't even have anything wrong with their eyes, etc. My one boss tells me to just treat each report like a quiz. She's kind of a dumbass. The unfortunate thing about work is that both my bosses are... straying in that direction. Somehow, so far, they like me. But they ruin people's morale by telling them such things, to treat every single day at work as if there will be a big quiz at the end, that each day, after 12 hours, at which point you're exhausted, now take a test on every little thing you just did. I hope you were concentrating on every little endless unimportant detail. I hope you memorized it all. Now after you've reported it. Dump it. And memorize another endless string of useless info the next day. Repeat for 20 years until you suddenly get fired 6 months before retirement (which I've heard of happening quite often.)
The way I was treated today... it seemed like a setup. Don't want to go into the ugly details. Anyway afterwards I could look down at my chest and through my clothes I could count my heartbeats by sight. Treated in such a manner after working my ass off. 52 hours in the last 4 days. Such is life. Hopefully I'll be able to run myself through the ground trying to help, help, help people for a few decades before someone destroys me or my heart gives out.
-
81 and 82 rock.
------------
http://bipolarblast.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/what-happens/#more-7422
-
Thought of a music video where the visual image would be that of one insect eating another alive (or should it be multiple examples?). What would the music sound like that went with it?
Real live monsters doing the most unspeakable acts to each other... It's like they're some kind of humorous psudeo subtle reminder by the way. What if instead they looked just like human beings (but still seemed relatively mindless) and there were chainsaw wielding species that went around killing and eating damsel in distress species?
There's something Phillip K. Dick about them but worse. He was mostly just losing reality. What if reality was not only being lost, but was being replaced by some other reality? What if you had suspicions the more realistic way of seeing the world was actually quite horrible and you had these tiny little monsters around you, which you're supposed to just ignore, which are constantly eating each other alive. In literaure, such things can almost serve as foreshadowing, or symbolism for the 'reality' of the situation in the story.
You can imagine a world where these bugs were the size of humans. Imagine say a battlefield of ants. Attacking a dying boring bee. It's not dead yet but they're already eating it alive. To be down in such a world is a nightmare world. No matter you're an entomologist and 'love' insects. They're eating each other alive constantly. They have extremely short life spans. They're often such mindless and yet highly specialized killing machines.
That they're so tiny is humorous. They're all around us. We're supposed to just ignore them and focus on Jesus or whatever as we sludge through our days. But there they are, sometimes there's minature flying monsters on my computer screen at this time of day. They're in effect saying, "Hey, guess what? Guess what the truth is of this world?" But we just ignore this other reality which is right on top of our own reality.
But at the same time they seem a beautiful miracle. That life can be so diverse. The boring bees on my porch would always get right up in my face. I like bees. How can such things exist? Have life?
-
What about a fictitious story that began in 1933 Germany, but then consisted of a way that the Jews managed to get the Nazi's past all that ugliness and they all learned to love one another instead? What in the world would it have taken to make that happen instead?
-
I have bicuspid aortic valve. I've known this for almost 30 years. I finally bothered to research it on the internet this week. I won't go into the complicated reasons I never did before. Apparently the last few doctors I've seen the last 5 or 6 years didn't have a clue. Apparently I really shouldn't be doing any heavy weight lifting or sprinting/jumping as both raise my blood pressure too much. Such is what I was originally told as a child. Was told I shouldn't even run. And that I would have to have open heart surgery before the age of 15.
But I had no pain, or symptoms at all when I ran and played. Just sharp pains when I was sitting around doing nothing. And I was so full of energy to run around and play. It was too much to do to such a kid. My parents even agreed. So we ignored the doctors advice. And I did everything. Including boxing (beat two state champions), powerlifting (even got third place in a big tournament once in the 242 class), general very heavy weight lifting (have done a chinup with an extra 140 pounds attached to me at 220 pounds bodyweight), basketball (could do a 360 two hand slam), run very long distances (although like a snail on that one), etc.
Through all such things never had any chest pain, thus figured the doctors were FOS. ...but here and there always had very sharp pains right over top my heart, thus I still worried I might keel over at any moment...
I finally quit worrying about it a few years ago on one doctor's advice, who said they now know such exercise makes no difference. And the pain I described couldn't possibly be the result of anything wrong with my heart. Probably some unimportant lung issue... A great weight off my shoulders...
Then even those sharp pains I'd had all my life went away.
But now, a new feeling has come. A strange fluttering feeling in my chest. Which caused me to finally use the damm internet and research my condition.
Now I see she didn't know what she was talking about. (Or perhaps figured lying would be better for me?)
I apparently really shouldn't be doing any heavy weight lifting. Or sprinting.
It appears I really have to be a wimp from now on. I have to live as if I'm broken.
And still chances are good I'll have to have my chest cracked open within the next 20 years.
-
Treated like hell at work this morning. It's actually hard enough I think to work one's ass off for 12 hours without then getting quizzed on every little irrelevant detail of each patient and then treated like shit if you can't remember each 100 of those new facts you could be attempting to memorize about each new set of patients.
No, I don't remember off the top of my head (of course it is all written down) the exact diameter of each patient's pupils when each patient doesn't even have anything wrong with their eyes, etc. My one boss tells me to just treat each report like a quiz. She's kind of a dumbass. The unfortunate thing about work is that both my bosses are... straying in that direction. Somehow, so far, they like me. But they ruin people's morale by telling them such things, to treat every single day at work as if there will be a big quiz at the end, that each day, after 12 hours, at which point you're exhausted, now take a test on every little thing you just did. I hope you were concentrating on every little endless unimportant detail. I hope you memorized it all. Now after you've reported it. Dump it. And memorize another endless string of useless info the next day. Repeat for 20 years until you suddenly get fired 6 months before retirement (which I've heard of happening quite often.)
The way I was treated today... it seemed like a setup. Don't want to go into the ugly details. Anyway afterwards I could look down at my chest and through my clothes I could count my heartbeats by sight. Treated in such a manner after working my ass off. 52 hours in the last 4 days. Such is life. Hopefully I'll be able to run myself through the ground trying to help, help, help people for a few decades before someone destroys me or my heart gives out.
-
81 and 82 rock.
------------
http://bipolarblast.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/what-happens/#more-7422
Saturday, October 3, 2009
19 tone equal temperatment.
Today I like it. Although not impressed with the sound of Homegrown Piano. Still not entirely sure how much is the natural sound and how much is the single note pitch shifting scala file. Something which I could probably figure out in about how much time it's taking me to type this entry. But may not figure out for months.
Next something not equal perhaps. Something with a pure seventh (7/4) maybe.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
I think that people put on ..demeanors or personalities/moods for given social situations. A large part of the decision of what to put on, what to 'wear', is based on tradition. Simply mimicing what they saw those before them do. Eventually it becomes 'natural'.
If instead you're reiventing everything, questioning everything, you may reject certain demeanors or simply hold back from putting them on simply because you haven't yet decided that they're really the best thing to do.
Then you're left with what? Unsureness. Appearing nervous. Ill at ease. Or just appearing flat. You don't know how you should act. So you hold back and appear shy. Or unemotional. Or unfriendly.
This ties into being a 'late bloomer', instead of just copying others and getting as far as you'll ever get by the age of 20, you think things through, invent your own way, or eventually decide the tradition was actually the best way, and thus you don't 'mature' till much later. And though perhaps with insufficient exposure to certain situations you just never do 'mature'.
In my life I've done both by the way. I've followed tradition very closely at times. And when I did it seems a lot of people were impressed. Some few women wanted me, my mom was very happy with me... but I was kind of disgusted. Because I knew it was an act. An act I was capable of falling into. And making 'natural' but still part of a tradition that I hadn't actually decided was truly the right way forward. So, thus, I was just really mindlessly going along like a puppet, in my mind. And a part of me was disgusted with myself. Even though I wasn't seemingly causing any harm and in fact apparently making a lot of people happy/impressing people, etc.
I'm talking of stuff from just how you greet a new person and carry on a conversation up to how you act at a wedding. How you dance, how you take part in the festivities there and at a dance and anywhere.
Instead of being disgusted with myself I then mostly preferred to appear as if I were sulking. Which is to say holding back, appearing glum/'flat'. Just observing. Not taking part in anything that I hadn't decided was truly the best way forward.
And then, when I'm not taking part in the games that others have decided to play, they get annoyed. Of course people generally are mindlessly playing along/following tradition and of course those who are turning left when everyone else turns right, or just aren't walking at all are going to piss some people off.
But here, just noting part of what nervousness can be in social situations. Along with focusing too much on yourself instead of having interest in others. Of course too much interest in the other ruins the balance and you've 'won' and then they're probably going to be nervous and so on.
---
I borrowed an electric guitar from my one brother-in-law and yesterday a friend from nepal came over to play it. He has a couple such guitars in Nepal but didn't bring them with him. It's just like a somewhat cheap child's electric guitar. But with lots of overdrive distortion and/or some flanger, it sounds OK.
Attempting to play music with this guy a few times now hasn't really worked. He mainly just played bits of other people's songs. Which he does well, and was nice to listen to. There's something about having it right in front of you, controlling the distortion, etc yourself which is nice. But in trying to just play a few chords along with a drumbeat he starts he and there falling out of time.
So for me the interesting thing is to write music. I've zero interest in just playing other people's music. I want to improv and/or at least write original stuff. That isn't working out with him.
I couldn't quite see a way forward at the time and eventually just read a book while he messed around. In the past I managed to play a melodica while he played an acoustic. And it was music, but relatively crude. When it comes to being 'original' he's reduced to just repetitively playing a few chords as opposed to finding some random string of notes and then working with that string... But then perhaps two people improv'ing together means one has to keep it simple and repetitive.
So, just not sure how to work that.
Instead would make more sense for me to make tracks that have space left open for guitars and/or vocals. If I really want to collaborate with people. Which I think I do. So, I shall throw together such things. I think I could very easily throw together ten such tracks in a single day, just as a palette maybe for someone else to throw ideas at, and then back and forth.
...to be honest though, what I really want to do is just improv with someone. This fellow can definitely play a guitar but just isn't to that point yet.
I guess it just depends on what you do. If you just practice other people's music then you never get any good at improv'ing? I very early on would spend hours trying to improv on the piano, driving my family crazy as I hit endless wrong notes and slowly got better at identifying the right possibilities... You want to reach the point where you play a note and then in your head you hear what you want to come next and the instrument is just an extension of you, like your voice, and so you simply play what you wanted to come next. When nothing's coming next in your mind, then you can just wander around a bit while (usually) staying in key....
If instead you're reiventing everything, questioning everything, you may reject certain demeanors or simply hold back from putting them on simply because you haven't yet decided that they're really the best thing to do.
Then you're left with what? Unsureness. Appearing nervous. Ill at ease. Or just appearing flat. You don't know how you should act. So you hold back and appear shy. Or unemotional. Or unfriendly.
This ties into being a 'late bloomer', instead of just copying others and getting as far as you'll ever get by the age of 20, you think things through, invent your own way, or eventually decide the tradition was actually the best way, and thus you don't 'mature' till much later. And though perhaps with insufficient exposure to certain situations you just never do 'mature'.
In my life I've done both by the way. I've followed tradition very closely at times. And when I did it seems a lot of people were impressed. Some few women wanted me, my mom was very happy with me... but I was kind of disgusted. Because I knew it was an act. An act I was capable of falling into. And making 'natural' but still part of a tradition that I hadn't actually decided was truly the right way forward. So, thus, I was just really mindlessly going along like a puppet, in my mind. And a part of me was disgusted with myself. Even though I wasn't seemingly causing any harm and in fact apparently making a lot of people happy/impressing people, etc.
I'm talking of stuff from just how you greet a new person and carry on a conversation up to how you act at a wedding. How you dance, how you take part in the festivities there and at a dance and anywhere.
Instead of being disgusted with myself I then mostly preferred to appear as if I were sulking. Which is to say holding back, appearing glum/'flat'. Just observing. Not taking part in anything that I hadn't decided was truly the best way forward.
And then, when I'm not taking part in the games that others have decided to play, they get annoyed. Of course people generally are mindlessly playing along/following tradition and of course those who are turning left when everyone else turns right, or just aren't walking at all are going to piss some people off.
But here, just noting part of what nervousness can be in social situations. Along with focusing too much on yourself instead of having interest in others. Of course too much interest in the other ruins the balance and you've 'won' and then they're probably going to be nervous and so on.
---
I borrowed an electric guitar from my one brother-in-law and yesterday a friend from nepal came over to play it. He has a couple such guitars in Nepal but didn't bring them with him. It's just like a somewhat cheap child's electric guitar. But with lots of overdrive distortion and/or some flanger, it sounds OK.
Attempting to play music with this guy a few times now hasn't really worked. He mainly just played bits of other people's songs. Which he does well, and was nice to listen to. There's something about having it right in front of you, controlling the distortion, etc yourself which is nice. But in trying to just play a few chords along with a drumbeat he starts he and there falling out of time.
So for me the interesting thing is to write music. I've zero interest in just playing other people's music. I want to improv and/or at least write original stuff. That isn't working out with him.
I couldn't quite see a way forward at the time and eventually just read a book while he messed around. In the past I managed to play a melodica while he played an acoustic. And it was music, but relatively crude. When it comes to being 'original' he's reduced to just repetitively playing a few chords as opposed to finding some random string of notes and then working with that string... But then perhaps two people improv'ing together means one has to keep it simple and repetitive.
So, just not sure how to work that.
Instead would make more sense for me to make tracks that have space left open for guitars and/or vocals. If I really want to collaborate with people. Which I think I do. So, I shall throw together such things. I think I could very easily throw together ten such tracks in a single day, just as a palette maybe for someone else to throw ideas at, and then back and forth.
...to be honest though, what I really want to do is just improv with someone. This fellow can definitely play a guitar but just isn't to that point yet.
I guess it just depends on what you do. If you just practice other people's music then you never get any good at improv'ing? I very early on would spend hours trying to improv on the piano, driving my family crazy as I hit endless wrong notes and slowly got better at identifying the right possibilities... You want to reach the point where you play a note and then in your head you hear what you want to come next and the instrument is just an extension of you, like your voice, and so you simply play what you wanted to come next. When nothing's coming next in your mind, then you can just wander around a bit while (usually) staying in key....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
