[drone/ambient] Pilgrim (mp3)

Louigi Verona · March 04, 2008, 09:32:08

http://lv.velvic.com/pilgrim.mp3

Made without a sequencer (soon I'll get used to that and go like - a sequencer... what's that?) in my beloved GoldWave. Still, one of my best drone tunes.

Sam_Zen · March 04, 2008, 23:32:35

Surely one of your best, Luigi. Beauty and delicacy.

Saga Musix · March 05, 2008, 15:14:25

very relaxing stuff. reminds me of xerxes

mrvegas · March 06, 2008, 19:44:37

Very atmospheric -- who's Xerxes? (I know, a Persian King, but I assume you're not referring to him.)

Saga Musix · March 06, 2008, 21:41:11

http://www.xerxes-music.com/
The master of ambient chillout music!

Harbinger · March 07, 2008, 19:22:36

Definitely needed better aural stimulation, especially in lead-in. The audial palette is very bland, but even i paint canvases washed in pastels (and nothing else) for atmospheric effect. During the entire song, the listener expects at any moment melody, beat, chord progression, bass movement, ANYTHING to lead the listener to make sense of his aural environment, but it never really happens. If the composer was going for minimalism, and even nihilism, he has achieved it, for even nothingness is an environment. Strictly on its MUSICAL merits, the composition is below average. If we're grading for ambience, i'll give it a B-...

Sam_Zen · March 08, 2008, 00:22:45

2 Harbinger
Sorry to disagree here. I may not be an average listener, but I didn't expect any beat, chord progression, etc.
I don't judge things like this on musical merits, because it just isn't music.
It's more the description of a mood, and it's not minimal or nothing, because I specially enjoyed the use of 'tiny' sounds coming up once in a while.

Harbinger · March 08, 2008, 02:37:49

No, you're not the average listener, and, yes, my critique is more scholarly than aesthetic (because one should not critique on aesthetics). I simply wish to prepare listeners for the experience of this music, from my POV of course.

In my defense, i did in fact know that our artist-colleague classified this piece as 'ambient', but the particular chord that fades in leads the natural "unpolished" ear to think that it will be aurally resolved (which it never does). Now in all of my critiques (and i'm not a "real" critic), i hafta leave open the notion that the composer intentionally made it like it is, rather than failed to overcome his subjectivity to create what he was inspired. I don't consider myself "allowed" to judge him in his experience or intentions; i only want to give my perspective on what i heard...

We actually disagree less than you think, Zen, but you may have disagreed with the way i came off, no?

Sam_Zen · March 08, 2008, 04:37:27

The way you came off is perfectly allright, no problems with that.
And we're both doing the own POV in the first place, so no disagreement about that. So I share your way of critical view.
So no need for a defense, because I was not busy with an attack.

You mention 'intensions' by the author.
This is a very important aspect to me. Sometimes when I criticize a track about 'boring' or 'lack of form', I'll ask first,
if this aspect was intended or not. If so, it's ok by me, and I accept the form.

So one can make critique on aesthetics afaic, as far as the intention was to make some nice thing, while it appears to be ugly.

Louigi Verona · March 10, 2008, 20:31:53

Quote from: "Harbinger"Definitely needed better aural stimulation, especially in lead-in. The audial palette is very bland, but even i paint canvases washed in pastels (and nothing else) for atmospheric effect. During the entire song, the listener expects at any moment melody, beat, chord progression, bass movement, ANYTHING to lead the listener to make sense of his aural environment, but it never really happens. If the composer was going for minimalism, and even nihilism, he has achieved it, for even nothingness is an environment. Strictly on its MUSICAL merits, the composition is below average. If we're grading for ambience, i'll give it a B-...

Yes, this trick of sustaining the listeners attention, going into something bigger but not delivering it and gently leading the tune to the end is a trick which I was mastering for over a year of constant experiments and try outs.

It is a trick widely known in electronic music, especially ambient and drone genres.

As for the definition of ambient, it is very strict, given by it's creator, Brian Eno:

Ambient music must be able to accommodate many levels of listening attention without enforcing one in particular; it must be as ignorable as it is interesting.

So while it is questionable whether this particular track is good or bad, only a listener inexperienced in listening to such music may await chord progression or bass or whatever else you awaited. It is an absolutely natural reaction and comes from the fact that the development in ambient has different logic and rules. If you got interested, try artists like Steve Roach (not Reich) and Saafi Brothers. Try Brian Eno's Music for Airports.

Louigi Verona · March 10, 2008, 20:33:09

Quote from: "Sam_Zen"Surely one of your best, Luigi. Beauty and delicacy.

Thx, I am very happy you liked it! Everyone thx for the comments!

Sam_Zen · March 11, 2008, 01:56:56

It's not only an aspect of ambient having different logic and rules. This is valid for the whole electronic range.
An acoustical instrument is build to provide nice musical tones. Electronic sounds can be quite unpleasant.
To restrict their output according to the musical rules and the recognition of expected patterns by the human brain,
would actually cut off the potential of electronic expression, at least, by some 60 %.
If a composer knows, that after 16 bars, the listener would be pleased with a change, then it should be a conscious choice,
to satisfy this or not. I don't talk about out of sloppyness of lazyness, it must be a deliberate thing.

Harbinger · March 12, 2008, 15:17:41

Quote from: "Louigi Verona"Yes, this trick of sustaining the listeners attention, going into something bigger but not delivering it and gently leading the tune to the end is a trick which I was mastering for over a year of constant experiments and try outs.

It is a trick widely known in electronic music, especially ambient and drone genres.

As for the definition of ambient, it is very strict, given by it's creator, Brian Eno:

Ambient music must be able to accommodate many levels of listening attention without enforcing one in particular; it must be as ignorable as it is interesting.

I have found this as well to be true. My favorite 'ambient' music composer is Jonn Serrie (altho i can't stomach his 'New Age jazz'!), but his is actually closer to what they used to call "space music", of which Steve Roach has composed many in this genre. They opened my eyes to music without form but lots of depiction. I guess the reason my ear was not ready for your ambient drone was that i came in with preconceived notions internally. If you meant it to sound like that, and my reaction was as one reacting to static, then you succeeded. And as long as the artist is presenting what he is imagining, then that's all that needs to be said. He has achieved.

Quote from: "Louigi Verona"So while it is questionable whether this particular track is good or bad, only a listener inexperienced in listening to such music may await chord progression or bass or whatever else you awaited. It is an absolutely natural reaction and comes from the fact that the development in ambient has different logic and rules. If you got interested, try artists like Steve Roach (not Reich) and Saafi Brothers. Try Brian Eno's Music for Airports.

While i'm far from inexperienced in ambient, it was actually the unexpected formlessness that caused my somewhat "negative" reaction, and for this i stand down. But i will take your advice and listen to Eno's music, as i have heard his name penetrate many musical discussions...