Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:22, 18 February 2007

Audio Streams

Please post any other Audio Stream links for SpaceMusic specific stations. ]

Not Ambient?

If space music isn't ambient music, why is Brian Eno listed as a key artist? ]

Brian Eno is a crossover artist. Eno first appeared in HOS #004 (public radio network, 1983). Eno is credited with coining the phrase "Ambient music", (Brian Eno:Solo work) with his 1978 album "Ambient #1 / Music for Airports", but he had become well known in the USA long after MFTHOS (Music From The Hearts of Space) debuted on KPFA, Berkeley in 1973. Unknown is whether Eno, an Englishman, ever heard a tape of the original San Francisco Bay Area MFTHOS. ≈ Stephen Hill does use the word ambient twice in his web page's opening descriptive paragraph. HOS show music is also described as contemplative, and therefore by definition is never irritating. Yet among other examples, Ambient music broadly includes irritating industrial machine noises (Metal Machine Music, Lou Reed, 1975, 1998, 2000) that would probably never be heard on HOS (or anywhere else in its entirety). ≈ Furthermore, Space music is not a subgenre of Ambient because, for just one example, traditionally rooted music such as whistle Celtic is regularly played on HOS. Whistle Celtic is also played on public radio's Thistle and Shamrock, a show apparently not claimed to be Ambient. ≈ Space music is therefore a fusion music, where fusion is understood as a blending process, not a genre or style (see Jazz fusion). Milo 04:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC) Re-edited 04:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Brian Ferry and Andy MacKay co-founded Roxy Music; eventually MacKay invited Brian Eno to join them; that happened in early , not late, 1970s. .

I recall pondering whether to include that line... Since you have stated the Roxy facts, I'll cut that reference from my edited answer comment above. My reporting error of late vs. early 1970's aside, who cofounded Roxy is elsewhere (mis)reported as including Eno (see Misplaced Pages Brian Eno:Roxy Music), history page for this date --> Milo 04:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, I invite you to read Kosmische Musik, familiarize yourself with the history of German electronic music and finally realize that Popol Vuh released Affenstunde in 1970; if you listen to it you can agree that it may be regarded as the first cosmic, ambient and spacey album. Brian W 10:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I had added Popul Vuh to the Notable artists list on 2006-05-15. They were on a list of artists who were featured on my favorite HOS shows, artists who's popularity I verified with the HOS playlist server. ≈ I've previously skimmed Kosmische Musik, and I'll put a heavy read of it on my to-do list. Milo 04:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Internal Server Error?

Anyone care to shed some light onto why two of the audio streams have this written beside them? Both webpages seem to work fine, so if there's no real reason for this, it should be removed. DezSP 01:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Do both streams play music for you? Milo 00:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Unpleasant sounds

Zeit, by Tangerine Dream makes use of unpleasent sounds. So do several other releases. Therefore, the unpleasent discordant sounds are as important. ]

The HOS server lists 21 hits for Tangerine Dream, but, it does not hit on Zeit. That absence is a good example of meta composition, in which a composer only selectively defines the genre within limits set by the segue producer.

For radio, unpleasant sounds can't be "as important" (an equality), since half of the showcased pieces would sound unpleasant. Neither Hearts of Space nor Echoes typically sound like that, since they feature an uplifting type of show music for which the public is historically willing to pay money.

HOS often produces one late October show per year that is seasonally and musically "dark", spooky, edgy, intense, or disturbing in ways that evoke the supernatural. These shows are not always dissonant or necessarily unpleasant. Dead Can Dance (38 HOS playlist hits) group-soloed with their own show (#339 Dead Can Dance 12-Nov-1993), but later they and DCD's soloist Lisa Gerrard (68 hits), prominently featured in October (e.g., #471 'Gathering Gloom" 31-Oct-1997, Halloween). Not everyone likes DCD/Gerrard's artistry, but I wouldn't call it unpleasant.

By HOS numbers of 119 playlist hits, Vangelis is a more important example of highly selective meta composition. Vangelis has composed albums or parts of them that are unpleasant, not at all spacey, or (according to a space fan correspondent) just boring. Yet Stephen Hill obviously considers Vangelis to be an important HOS contributor — if his segue pieces are carefully selected. An analogy is adding a small proportion of a bitter cooking spice, which provides contrast to an otherwise cloyingly sweet recipe. Milo 07:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Really Now

"multidimensional gradients"

What's this all about now? Hey hey? Gradients? Let's be honest with ourselves. Now. Yes. Ascensionedits 11:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

From the article: "Space music is subtly distinguished on multidimensional gradients, shading toward adjacent genres of new age, ambient, and electronic."

A spatial color image gradient is easy to visualize: "A transition between one color and another, or one shade of a color and another, or one density of a color and another. The many users of graphics programs like PhotoShop are familiar with color and shade gradients. However, sonic gradients transition with audible time rather than visible distance. Glissando is a gradient of pitch with time.

A dimension can mean any characteristic that has a range of variation between two extremes. "Multidimensional" in this context means that multiple sonic characteristics are each transitioning on a gradient, and sometimes these gradients transition simultaneously with time. For example, the pitch of a note may slide from high to low frequency, while its timbre changes from a flute-like pure tone to a sax-like buzz tone. The gradient of timbre is space music genre's signature synth sound, which a space fan correspondent calls "zwhooshy" (a buzzy whoosh).

The multidimensional gradients mentioned in the sentence specifically refer to a range of compositions that suggest a perceptually gradual transition between genres similar to space music.

I think "]" should be wikified, but how much more of this explanation really needs to be put in the article? Milo 21:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

So there you have it, Ascensionedits. The meaning of "multidimensional gradients". To be honest, I thought the given answer was obvious. In fact, I think you knew it all along, and you're just having us on, to try and trap us in a cunning, erm, trap. My favourite bit was ""Multidimensional" in this context means that multiple sonic characteristics are each transitioning on a gradient, and sometimes these gradients transition simultaneously with time".
I was tied to my seat. If I wasn't, I'd have jumped out the window.
Gardener of Geda 22:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Lisa Gerrad and Mike Oldfield - space music?

Can anyone provide specific album names of the two artists that have the characteristics of space music? - User:Stardancer

Lisa Gerrard? I think they're taking the p1ss on that one. Great Music, but it's about as "spacey" as Britney Spears. And apart from his 1994 album, The Songs of Distant Earth, I wouldn't say Oldfield was "spacey" either.
Gardener of Geda 22:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I suggest that both Lisa and Mike are removed from the list of "notable artists". --Stardancer 09:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Do it, then!
Gardener of Geda 12:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Done.--Stardancer 12:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to put Lisa back in. She's been featured many times (with and without Dead Can Dance) on Hearts of Space . I would suggest The Mirror Pool as typical of Gerrard space music.

As far as Oldfield, he is a key figure in progressive instrumental rock, which Stephen Hill definitely cites as one of the elements contributing to space music (e.g. Pink Floyd and Tangerine Dream). He has only had Oldfield a few times on the show, however, , so I'm not sure about putting him back in.

Except for one thing. Hill defines space music as music which evokes or creates a sense of mental "space" or place -- mental videos, or what we used to call eyelid movies. Much of Oldfield's music, particularly Hergest Ridge, Ommadawn and QE2, powerfully evokes this sense for many listeners. So I'm going to put him back in and cite those albums. --Bluejay Young 17:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I still think that saying Oldfield's music is "spacey" is stretching the concept to a ridiculous length, particularly if you say it's because it "evokes or creates a sense of mental "space" or place". You could justify any album or artist in that case, no matter how inappropriate or daft. Or no matter who plays it on what radio station.

And QE2??!! Nooooooooo!!!! I like it fine, but "space"??!! With covers of Abba and Shadows tunes? Noooooooo!!!!!!

Still; whatever turns you on, I suppose. The article is hilarious with, or without Oldfield's presence. It don't mean a thang.

Gardener of Geda 18:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Help

Can someone patrol this article please? It has been a good article for months, but the user Gene Poole seems to want to destroy its sense and quality as he did with the Ambient music article thanks to his "rave subculture" - influenced point of view. I do not want to start an edit war. Thx.Dr. Who 01:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you're over-reacting. Having read Gene's input to the Ambient article I see no evidence of any "rave subculture" - influenced point of view, or any "destruction" of any kind. There are parts of this article that are clearly ridiculous, and could use some editing. So please don't make subtle threats about possible "edit wars". It's not nice. You obviously don't like Gene - that's your problem. Has it anything to do with the fact that he's David Brent's double?

Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 01:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not know Gene Poole and his face, I do not live in UK, therefore I do not know that Brent you are mentioning. Dr. Who

Never mind. I was just trying to make conversation ..... lighten up the mood a little. I failed. Oh well, then!!! ... Gardener of Geda | Message Me....

What is the overeaction you mention? Dr. Who

The overreaction? Oh. That would be you storming into this talk-page and writing something like "but the user Gene Poole seems to want to destroy its sense and quality as he did with the Ambient music article thanks to his "rave subculture" - influenced point of view. I do not want to start an edit war", just because he dared to say "Space music is a sub-genre of ambient". I would say your reaction was an overreaction, but maybe I'm overreacting, even though I'm not. Meh! ... Gardener of Geda | Message Me....

I should overreact becosue an imaginary person has posted a message right 30 seconds after I wrote at Talk:Ambient music? Dr. Who

No; I don't think you should. That's what I'm saying. (An "imaginary person"?!) ... Gardener of Geda | Message Me....

He hasn't written there for months. Someone (like him, for example) exagerately takes care for the post-Eno/neo rave definition of ambient (Jah Wabble, Bill Laswell, The Orb, and so on). I cant help more, sorry, I'm too busy with real world.Dr. Who 02:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, lucky old "real world" I say! Yes! Cheer up, and happy editing! .... Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 13:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your revert, Dr. Who. Removing the central Hill-Turner metacomposition concept struck me as at least lacking serious knowledge of this subject.

As the cover of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy says, "Don't Panic". :) You aren't alone in patrolling the article, but we need just a little of your help here as you can spare it. Milo 05:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks to you all.Dr. Who 23:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Note : Dr. Who saw fit to slightly change the text of his last-but-one message whilst posting his last one. See here. It's no big deal. Just thought I'd mention it. Cheers!
Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 00:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Apologies if that may seem an inappropriate behaviour, I wished to change the text two days ago, but I was really tired.Dr. Who 00:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

No apologies necessary. I thought I'd mention it just in case someone had read what you'd originally written, then come back later and saw that it was different.

Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 00:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

The article clearly explains why Space music is not Ambient, I am wondering if this editor has ever read it.Dr. Who 13:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Please calm down. The article is NOT being vandalized. Gene Poole is merely stating an opinion - an opinion which may very well be correct. The article, as it currently stands, is hugely point-of-view ("What space music is not" and "What space music is", for instance). It simply cannot exist in that form much longer, and badly needs a rewrite. And be careful - you are well on your way to breaking the 3RR rule if you continue to mindlessly revert Gene's input. Relax. Listen to some ambient/space music. Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 18:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I'm very satisfied with my many edits at Misplaced Pages, and I do not care about articles related to music genres, they are all poorly written and unorganized. You are taking this story too seriously, Dr. Who

Methinks you doth protest too much. Take a deep breath, and relax. Gardener of Geda | Message Me....

I am not going to break any rule, but please try to be objective. Dr. Who

I'm trying. I'm trying really hard. You should try it yourself. Think calm thoughts. Yes. Gardener of Geda | Message Me....

I can't understand why that user is let to come here and claim to be the only real worldwide expert of ambient music. Dr. Who

I don't think that he's claiming that at all. He's merely stating his opinion in an article that is ALL opinion. And so are you. And the reason that he's "let to come here" is because Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia that no-one "owns" and ANYONE can edit. I suggest you try to understand that very quickly. Gardener of Geda | Message Me....

Where are his edits about music? Dr. Who 19:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

None of my business. Everyone has to start somewhere. Be calm. Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 19:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Rewrting this article

I've re-written this article to conform with Wiki NPOV and verifiability policies. This has necessitated the wholesale removal of the "what it is" and "what it isn't" sections, as they were basically one person's highly eccentric and subjective POV, unsupported by any reference sources. I don't believe the deleted content has any intrinsic value that isn't already covered by other more appropriate articles - but if anyone thinks otherwise please feel free to restore anything considered an essential inclusion. --Gene_poole 00:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

It's always a shame to delete so much from an article, particularly when you think that it meant so much to whoever wrote it in the first place ...... but I, for one, agree with the deletions in this case. It most definitely was all very point-of-view; not encyclopaedic at all. Perhaps - I say perhaps - some of it could be carefully reinserted in the future if it could be substantiated with references. All that's left to do now is to go through the Notable artists material, some of which is, quite frankly, daft. Yes. Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 01:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I removed Mike Oldfield from the list as the most gobsmackingly strange inclusion, but there are plenty more to cull, and some to add. --Gene_poole 02:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Kosmische Musik

I should like to know what the relation between space musik and Kosmische Musik is. The list of artists suggests that Kosmische Musik is a subcategory of space music, but is it considered the progenitor of space music, or is it just space music that happens to be German? Is there any difference in sound btw. Kosmische Musik and other space music? O0pyromancer0o 05:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Any answers to those questions would very probably be opinionated, so it's best to make up your own mind, I think. I assume you've read through the Kosmische Musik article? For what it's worth, I'd say that Kosmische came first, and Space developed out of it, by way of other stuff. Many would probably disagree. Or agree, depending on the situation. As for "differences" in sound ...... best not to go there. Personally, I'd define Kosmische as being all-electronic; can feature guitarwork and rhythm; sweeping; lots of drone (my favourite); and is very ...... um ...... spacey. Yes. Space is ...... erm ...... I'll get back to you on that one. Happy listening!

Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 16:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

It looks to me like "kosmische musik" is a subset of "krautrock". The kosmische musik article however is another POV opinion piece that needs to be re-worked or provided with more reliable reference sources. --Gene_poole 23:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. The mysterious Dr. Who seems to think so as well - I've just noticed that he's redirected "kosmische musik" to Krautrock! Woof! Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 00:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the prompt answers, even if they didn't make me much wiser :) I suppose the best way to go about it is for me to listen to some more of this stuff and form an impression of my own. O0pyromancer0o 05:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Erm ...... yes. That would be a fantastic idea. It's always best to form an impression of your own, by listening to stuff. Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 19:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Link to classic 2006 Misplaced Pages:Space music

This classic edition for the public is now history. For future editors' consideration of its notably different content, here is the link to see how it read:
2006-10-23 classic edition of Misplaced Pages:Space music. Milo 08:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The classic edition? I know this is the spacemusic article, but it's not necessary to be a card carrying space cadet to post contributions here, you know. --Gene_poole 22:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Unless that person is myself, any edit should be welcome. It has been edited by a dozen of editors in 3 years, and none complained. Now, after my first attempts at rewriting it according to criteria that have some sense for musicology, and not for business, two editors come here and accuse me of everything, and say that all the other editors are POV. This is simply incredible.--Dr. Who 20:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

You do not "own" this - or any other - article. It is the responsibility of all editors to correct errors or expunge POV opinion pieces unsupported by reliable third party references sources from any articles whose content is muddied by their presence. This was most certainly one such article. It was appallingly written, full of bizarre unverified statements and was totally misleading - until I took the long-overdue step of re-writing it. --Gene_poole 11:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Merged

I merged the two versions, and I reworked the heading so that now it has some sense in musicology. --Dr. Who 21:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Either stop inserting your eccentric personal opinions into this article or else provide third party references to support your position. What part of this very simple concept do you not understand? --Gene_poole 11:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Enciclopedic tone. What part of this very simple concept do you not understand? Dr. Who 22:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not post incoherent nonsense on talk pages. It is disrespectful to other editors. If you do not possess sufficient proficiency in written English to communicate with other editors in a clear, concise, rational manner, you may be better served by contributing to the version of Misplaced Pages in your native language. --Gene_poole 23:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Persistent revision of discredited article

I've just had a look through the article's history, which throws an interesting light on things. The individual who keeps reverting to the "old", POV, pretentiously-written, original-research article (and who keeps deleting the line which equates Space to Ambient) has said, and I quote, "It has been edited by a dozen of editors in 3 years, and none complained". Let's see.

The first, very short entry, in July 1 2005, says "A sub-genre of ambient music with space or astronomy as a theme, originally intended as soundtrack music for planetarium shows."

From September 6 2005, it was changed to "Sometimes associated as a sub-category of Ambient music, space music itself offers interpretations of other popular genres, among them: Electronic, Sacred/Choral, Piano, Trance, Celtic, Native American, World Fusion, and Arctic."

This version lasted until user Milomedes, on May 15 2006, rewrote the article to the infamous version (POV; original research; Space not Ambient) which lasted up to February 1 2007, when it began to be stripped of its unencyclopaedic content.

(As early as June 5 2006, User Brian G. Wilson stated that the 'Milomedes' version was "original research", and slapped a warning on it). Yes.

The upshot is, the article should NOT be restored to any version which contains material from the article mentioned above, unless references to the opinions can be found.

I'm going to try a rewrite in the very near future which will hopefully satisfy everyone. Gardener of Geda | Message Me.... 12:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)