[78-L] Huh?

[Taylor Bowie]

Well,  Steve,  I appreciate your response!  I guess we're having a 
disagreement about semantics more than anything,  when you talk about the 
"reason" people listen to one kind of record or another.

I think the 'reason" people choose to listen to any sort of music is for the 
pleasure of the experience.

Just as you can't tell the nuances of operatic tenors,  there are plenty of 
listeners who can't tell the difference between dance and/or swing bands, 
just to pick one example.    I guess it comes down to a matter of what 
catches one's ear in the first place and catches the listener in such a way 
that s/he wants to pursue the subject.

So if you spend enough time on it,  you (like me) will be able,  in a matter 
of five or ten seconds of playing,  to tell the difference between a George 
Hamilton,  Shep Fields,  Gray Gordon or Blue Barron record.

Not that most people would want to,  I should add.


Taylor



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven C. Barr" <stevenc at interlinks.net>
To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: [78-L] Huh?


> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Taylor Bowie" <bowiebks at isomedia.com>
>> I've learned there is little or no point in engaging   Mr.  Barr in any
>> kind
>> of a discussion...he seems more inclined to make outrageous and
>> unsupported
>> statements and then simply retreat while the rest of us fume and
>> fulminate...until he comes up with his next batch of goodies,  and so the
>> process repeats itself,  again and again.
>> I asked him twice last night for some elaboration on his claims about
>> classical music fans and how they listen and collect in a "different"
>> way...so far,  not a peep...I assume that he did not reply because he
>> realized,  on reflection,  that the statement was complete balderdash.
>>
> You didn't get a reply simply because I didn't receive that post until 
> about
> 1:25 EDST; I was headed for bed in about five minutes...?!
>
> Now, to try and explain insofar as I can...!
>
> For the last hundred-odd years, "pop"music has had a strong rhythmic
> element,
> and was partly, if not mainly, intended to be danced to (if anything, this
> is even
> more true to-day?!). This gives the music an element of "fun;" this was
> probably
> the main thing that attracted its listeners when it was current...?!
> Further, I am a
> serious lover and student of history; this is why I enjoy living in a 
> c.1869
> house.
> Thus, my many 1900-25 pop vocal 78's are interesting a specimens of 
> "musical
> history!" They inform me of what people were listening to when they were
> issued; just as my house informs me of the architecture and living habits 
> of
> people were many years ago!
>
> OTOH, classical music seems (to me, anyway?!) to be an effort on the part 
> of
> its
> composer to "tell a story" in a musical way. As well, most lovers of
> classical
> music seem (at least to me) to listen and "evaluate" the performances
> against
> those of other performers...?! In fact, this is why I neither collect nor
> listen to
> classical vocal 78's; I don't have the knowledge to evaluate the
> performances
> they contain against other examples...?! When I listen to a Caruso 78, I 
> can
> easily tell that he is singing "in tune;" beyond that, I can't tell that 
> his
> singing
> is in any way superior to other tenors I may hear...?!
>
> I suspect (I can only speak for myself...?!) that those who are most 
> serious
> about jazz may also evaluate the performances on the recordings they own?!
>
> In passing, I might also note that my lack of comprehension of more 
> current
> jazz also means that I can't enjoy listening to it!
>
> Steven C. Barr
>
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>