 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Random snippet: I remember when the school orchestra performed Ode To
> Joy. (Don't ask me who wrote that.)
please, man... Whenever you don't know something, do yourself and everyone a
favor and be more curious about it; look it up somewhere.
But I told you you knew Beethoven...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:46:46 +0000, Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> > Random snippet: I remember when the school orchestra performed Ode To
> > Joy. (Don't ask me who wrote that.)
>
> Beethoven used it in the last movement of the 9th Symphony, but it's a
> traditional tune, and I don't know if the authorship is even known. The
> words were written by Friedrich Schiller (a poet) in 1785, but it's been
> used in music since 1786; Beethoven's use (the best known) is just one of
> many uses in music. Even Tchaikovsky used it (which I didn't know).
hmm, you say it's a traditional tune (melody) but I've never heard of that. I
know after Schiller wrote it, many musicians created music for the words, but I
think the melody in the 9th is definitely from Beethoven. I searched wikipedia
and this:
http://europa.eu/abc/symbols/anthem/index_en.htm
the EU anthem is based on the 9th's Ode to Joy.
is it true it's a traditional tune from before the 9th?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Oh, sure, because *one* person who lives in Britain doesn't like
> classical music all that much, the whole country must be like that. ;-)
Yeah nemesis, not all UK is as ignorant as Orchid.
Err... did I type that out loud?
;)
(don't harm me, Andrew)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> My favourite TMBG album has got to be Factory Showroom or Spines. As for
> other guys... if you haven't heard Tangerine Dream, give it a whirl. If
> you enjoy crazy synthesizer music, that is...
I have actually heard some Tangerine Dream, though I don't actually own
any of their music. As I recall I enjoyed it, perhaps I'll take another
look.
> I have run into the name "Mogwai" several times though. I have no idea
> what that sounds like.
It's post rock, so the musical content tends to be built up by slowly
evolving repetitive patterns. Sort of like Radiohead but more so, and
with a bit more emphasis on drums and less on voice. They're good
though, and the repetitive nature makes it good music to work to. If
that's a bit hard to picture, you can listen to some of their tracks here:
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1641
If you do like it, I'd also recommend Sigur Ros.
> Similarly, every time I go into a music shop I
> find myself wanting to by YES albums just to look at the pictures... no
> idea what the music sounds like.
Conveniently, the same site also has some tracks by Yes:
http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=105
I'd say that "Close to the Edge" Is my favorite song listed there, if
you're only going to listen to one.
On a very related note, www.progarchives.com is a great site to find new
progressive rock artists, as it will generally include both reviews and
sample tracks for each band. You could start at this page:
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive-rock.asp
which should list the major bands from each subgenre and then go to the
pages for them to listen to some of their songs. Also, this page is a
very good one to look at if you're interested:
http://www.progarchives.com/top-prog-albums.asp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Random snippet: I remember when the school orchestra performed Ode To
>> Joy. (Don't ask me who wrote that.)
>
> please, man... Whenever you don't know something, do yourself and everyone a
> favor and be more curious about it; look it up somewhere.
Hey, it was probably written on the score. I just don't *remember* any
more. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> (don't harm me, Andrew)
OK, sure. 0:-)
muhuhuuhhuh...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
> There's no much point in watching The Rocky Horror Picture Show if you're
> not in a theater with dozens of guys (and girls) in garter belts and panty
> hoses throwing rice and water and shouting every line before they appear on
> screen. If you ever find yourself in Paris, go to the Studio Galande either
> on Friday or Saturday.
> http://90plan.ovh.net/~rocky/frame.html?id=0}
Er... o_O
*backs away slowly*
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Yes, it's just that few people really do love music for the music itself. Many
> associate certain music to special occasions in their lives and that's why they
> enjoy it foremost. Many just enjoy music as a way to get together with other
> people. Few have pleasure with just paying attention to it and marvel at the
> heartpounding transformations and transfigurations...
I'm one of those few. [Well, for sufficiently good music anyway.]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> I have actually heard some Tangerine Dream, though I don't actually own
> any of their music. As I recall I enjoyed it, perhaps I'll take another
> look.
My personal favourit is the impronouncible "Force Majeure". It's also
the leasst progressive and most "tune-like" album. But then again,
"Canayon Dreams" is rather good too. And don't forget Rubycon (although
it's a very short album). In fact, hell, there are too many great albums
to list...
[Especially amusing is that some of them are live AND I DIDN'T NOTICE!]
>> I have run into the name "Mogwai" several times though. I have no idea
>> what that sounds like.
>
> It's post rock, so the musical content tends to be built up by slowly
> evolving repetitive patterns. Sort of like Radiohead but more so, and
> with a bit more emphasis on drums and less on voice. They're good
> though, and the repetitive nature makes it good music to work to. If
> that's a bit hard to picture, you can listen to some of their tracks here:
>
> http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=1641
Don't know Radiohead. [Obviously I've heard of them, and I've probably
heard their music, but I wouldn't recognise it.]
Hmm... this isn't really my taste.
>> Similarly, every time I go into a music shop I find myself wanting to
>> by YES albums just to look at the pictures... no idea what the music
>> sounds like.
>
> Conveniently, the same site also has some tracks by Yes:
>
> http://www.progarchives.com/artist.asp?id=105
This is a little more like it...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 16:47:22 +0100, Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 23:20:53 +0100, Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> Actually, I was surprised that the Amazon downloadable Complete LOTR
>>>>> soundtracks are in MP3 format. I don't *think* there's any DRM
>>>>> involved (which was really surprising).
>>>> But maybe they can tell who bought the mp3 file by looking at it...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.google.com/search?q=mp3+watermark+amazon
>>> I'm sure they probably can. That's a bit different than DRM, though,
>>> which has the explicit stated goal of preventing people from
>>> "inappropriate use". Watermarking allows them to act reactivley - and
>>> I believe is fairly easy to remove anyways...
>>>
>>> mplayer -ao pcm:file=temp.wav file.mp3 lame -h temp.wav
>>> file-without-watermark.mp3
>> Yes, but then you assume that the watermarking is done on the bit-level.
>>
>> What if they change the music somewhat in a way that will survive format
>> conversion ? (E.g. tiny changes in volume levels within a frequency
>> band, small phase shifts, changes in the dynamic range, added noise or a
>> combination of some of these.)
>>
>> There will only have to be minor changes to the sound, as they will only
>> have to encode something like e.g. 30 bits into more than 100s of sound
>> in 2 channels.
>
> I'd think that the conversion back and forth would modify an attempt like
> this enough. Remember that mp3 encoding is lossy, not lossless.
Yes, I know. And to overcome that, just don't make the changes to the
sound THAT small.
> Of course, though, the best option is to not give the files away.
=)
--
Tor Olav
http://subcube.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
