I can imagine any number of "tinkleplunk-ish" (nice word) panderings applied to many kinds of music, many of which I might well abhor. Still, if any of my music is around in hundreds of years, I hope that some thoughtful person of good judgment will think to apply 21st or 22nd Century techniques as he/she might imagine I'd like them applied, to make my music more "receivable" by contemporary ears, rather than trying to recreate a long gone atmosphere of a bygone era that is no longer applicable. I understand, this is a risky wish, but I prefer it (in my fantasy) to a "purist" approach that would be more likely to keep the deeper meaning of the music from reaching the ears of future listeners. There's a lot to consider here. What I would not want, and do not want, is the use of a "more modern" electric bass, or probably even an amplified acoustic bass, and a rock drummer's esthetic, applied to my music, no matter how many more listeners it might get me, because that would surely ruin my intentions (and my idea of balances). On the other hand, changes in instrumental timbre might not mess things up all that much, and I've re-orchestrated some of my own work (as Stravinsky did - not that I compare my work to his) to no big detrimental effect. I always think it's possible to ruin Bach's music, but the architecture is so strong that really destroying its deep meaning takes a determined musical demolition force. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com |
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
