The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But
- Thread starter lkwdblds
- Start date
- Status
RogerB
Crusader
Re: The Ethics Officer Learns Something
Lakey, the above can benefit from clearer articulation and more exact use of words.
Hubbard's pronunciations on the subject of communication and the issues of "cause and effect" are a complete screw up.
It is the limitation to the use of "cause and/or effect" that screws it all up . . . but that's Hubbard
At the top of the scales of our existence and abilities/powers is the state wherein we have unfettered volition and also potential. These are quite natural attributes of our Being and presence.
When one exercises one's volition, one can elect to be a receiver or a causer (to emanate) . . . but this is a causative action, this exercise of volition.
The notion that one is "effect" . . . . this is a misused and oft not correctly understood word in $cn . . . because one is at the receiving end of a communication is the screw-up entered into the equation by Hubbard.
Clearly, if one elects by free choice use of volition one is operating at cause . . . it simply happens that one can choose either to receive of to emanate.
These nuances were fully written up and diagrammed by me and adopted by Alan as part of Knowledgism. My write-up and diagram becoming part of one of his books.
Understanding these nuances enables one to operate at an omni-sovereign position and with an omni-causing perspective.
One of these days I must post on ESMB the traffic between Alan and me concerning this tech.
Rog
Lakey, the above can benefit from clearer articulation and more exact use of words.
Hubbard's pronunciations on the subject of communication and the issues of "cause and effect" are a complete screw up.
It is the limitation to the use of "cause and/or effect" that screws it all up . . . but that's Hubbard
At the top of the scales of our existence and abilities/powers is the state wherein we have unfettered volition and also potential. These are quite natural attributes of our Being and presence.
When one exercises one's volition, one can elect to be a receiver or a causer (to emanate) . . . but this is a causative action, this exercise of volition.
The notion that one is "effect" . . . . this is a misused and oft not correctly understood word in $cn . . . because one is at the receiving end of a communication is the screw-up entered into the equation by Hubbard.
Clearly, if one elects by free choice use of volition one is operating at cause
. . . it simply happens that one can choose either to receive of to emanate.These nuances were fully written up and diagrammed by me and adopted by Alan as part of Knowledgism. My write-up and diagram becoming part of one of his books.
Understanding these nuances enables one to operate at an omni-sovereign position and with an omni-causing perspective.
One of these days I must post on ESMB the traffic between Alan and me concerning this tech.
Rog
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The Ethics Officer Learns Something
Thanks for putting this into words which we can all understand Roger! In so many words, my client was stating something akin to what you say above and that caused me to feel more expansive when a false stable datum was knocked out. The concept that a being had to beat effect during various portions of a communications cycle did not stand up to close scrutiny.
Once one has one of these new awarenesses, it is both helpful and reassuring to get a nice technical explanation as you are capable of providing. You and Allen are both heroes in this regard.
Lakey
Lakey, the above can benefit from clearer articulation and more exact use of words.
Hubbard's pronunciations on the subject of communication and the issues of "cause and effect" are a complete screw up.
It is the limitation to the use of "cause and/or effect" that screws it all up . . . but that's Hubbard
At the top of the scales of our existence and abilities/powers is the state wherein we have unfettered volition and also potential. These are quite natural attributes of our Being and presence.
When one exercises one's volition, one can elect to be a receiver or a causer (to emanate) . . . but this is a causative action, this exercise of volition.
The notion that one is "effect" . . . . this is a misused and oft not correctly understood word in $cn . . . because one is at the receiving end of a communication is the screw-up entered into the equation by Hubbard.
Clearly, if one elects by free choice use of volition one is operating at cause
These nuances were fully written up and diagrammed by me and adopted by Alan as part of Knowledgism. My write-up and diagram becoming part of one of his books.
Understanding these nuances enables one to operate at an omni-sovereign position and with an omni-causing perspective.
One of these days I must post on ESMB the traffic between Alan and me concerning this tech.
Rog
Thanks for putting this into words which we can all understand Roger! In so many words, my client was stating something akin to what you say above and that caused me to feel more expansive when a false stable datum was knocked out. The concept that a being had to beat effect during various portions of a communications cycle did not stand up to close scrutiny.
Once one has one of these new awarenesses, it is both helpful and reassuring to get a nice technical explanation as you are capable of providing. You and Allen are both heroes in this regard.
Lakey
purple haze
Patron with Honors
Re: The Ethics Officer Learns Something
yes, Roger, I for one, would be very interested in reading that traffic.
Post soon whilst ESMB is still here, please.
aloha, purple haze
Lakey, the above can benefit from clearer articulation and more exact use of words.
Hubbard's pronunciations on the subject of communication and the issues of "cause and effect" are a complete screw up.
It is the limitation to the use of "cause and/or effect" that screws it all up . . . but that's Hubbard
At the top of the scales of our existence and abilities/powers is the state wherein we have unfettered volition and also potential. These are quite natural attributes of our Being and presence.
When one exercises one's volition, one can elect to be a receiver or a causer (to emanate) . . . but this is a causative action, this exercise of volition.
The notion that one is "effect" . . . . this is a misused and oft not correctly understood word in $cn . . . because one is at the receiving end of a communication is the screw-up entered into the equation by Hubbard.
Clearly, if one elects by free choice use of volition one is operating at cause
These nuances were fully written up and diagrammed by me and adopted by Alan as part of Knowledgism. My write-up and diagram becoming part of one of his books.
Understanding these nuances enables one to operate at an omni-sovereign position and with an omni-causing perspective.
One of these days I must post on ESMB the traffic between Alan and me concerning this tech.
Rog
yes, Roger, I for one, would be very interested in reading that traffic.
Post soon whilst ESMB is still here, please.
aloha, purple haze
purple haze
Patron with Honors
Re: Sex is the answer
Mr Sexy,
You are definitely not innocent...that category was tongue in cheek and don't go getting any ideas, now...
I'm still surfing and looking forward to our tryst in Hawaii. We'll have to meet in Waikiki where the surf is gentle and I promise to be your gentle surf teacher.:shark::shark::shark:
I'm heading to the big Apple before that. Maybe you'll be in the area in May? Should be a lovely time of year.
I'm looking forward to celebrating my birthday there in the Village, as I did 42 years ago and 5 years ago.
Who wants to party? Meet me in NYC on May 23rd.
:dancer::dancer::dancer::dancer::dancer:
aloha and namaste
purple haze
aka
candy swanson
Well Ms sexy,
Sadly I missed out on surfing my brains out with you. I'd have LOVED that!
A serious lack in my education.
However did many comparable things.
Guess I fall into the innocent and well meaning category.
Mr Sexy,
You are definitely not innocent...that category was tongue in cheek and don't go getting any ideas, now...
I'm still surfing and looking forward to our tryst in Hawaii. We'll have to meet in Waikiki where the surf is gentle and I promise to be your gentle surf teacher.:shark::shark::shark:
I'm heading to the big Apple before that. Maybe you'll be in the area in May? Should be a lovely time of year.
I'm looking forward to celebrating my birthday there in the Village, as I did 42 years ago and 5 years ago.
Who wants to party? Meet me in NYC on May 23rd.
:dancer::dancer::dancer::dancer::dancer:aloha and namaste
purple haze
aka
candy swanson
Commander Birdsong
Crusader
Re: The World's best Mozart pianist?
hmmm...
perhaps one is not listening to bach
or...
perhaps one is
hmmm...
perhaps one is not listening to bach
or...
perhaps one is
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Yes, well part of what I picked up on Vinaire's thread was that if one desired to be more "Godlike" he or she could take on more viewpoints. That was not germane to the point I was making so I didn't mention it.
Taking on many different viewpoints, at least from my present point of view, seems to be a sort of skill which requires a bit of effort for most people.
You look on a message board such as this and many posters are rigidly fixed into insisting that their present viewpoint is the only valid viewpoint. Rather than deciding to see things from other people's point of view, and grant those the right to exist, they instead focus on negating the beingness of the other person.
To me, this is all too common on ESMB and also in most areas of life and I find this trait disgusting. In Hubbard's parlance it usually falls under the category of being a service facsimile.
It seems that early in a being's history, the ability to take on many viewpoints is an innate capability of every being but as the being accumulates negative experiences through living in this universe, that ability appears to be abated. Of course the being still has the ability but usually does not realize that he/she does.
I throw it open to the savants of this thread to explain this phenomena, tell us how Alan dealt with it and give us some background tech in this topic of a being assuming multiple viewpoints.
Lakey
Yes, well part of what I picked up on Vinaire's thread was that if one desired to be more "Godlike" he or she could take on more viewpoints. That was not germane to the point I was making so I didn't mention it.
Taking on many different viewpoints, at least from my present point of view, seems to be a sort of skill which requires a bit of effort for most people.
You look on a message board such as this and many posters are rigidly fixed into insisting that their present viewpoint is the only valid viewpoint. Rather than deciding to see things from other people's point of view, and grant those the right to exist, they instead focus on negating the beingness of the other person.
To me, this is all too common on ESMB and also in most areas of life and I find this trait disgusting. In Hubbard's parlance it usually falls under the category of being a service facsimile.
It seems that early in a being's history, the ability to take on many viewpoints is an innate capability of every being but as the being accumulates negative experiences through living in this universe, that ability appears to be abated. Of course the being still has the ability but usually does not realize that he/she does.
I throw it open to the savants of this thread to explain this phenomena, tell us how Alan dealt with it and give us some background tech in this topic of a being assuming multiple viewpoints.
Lakey
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The World's best Mozart pianist?
I see MAB's point. Perhaps in a strict and orthodox sense, there is merit to what he is saying. Most of the rest of us seem to not agree with MAB on this point.
Great pieces of music or just good music can usually be enjoyed when not played on the exact instruments for which it was written. A lot of orchestral parts are re-orchestrated for just the piano or just piano and strings. Most musicians don't have access to a full orchestra and maybe an aria can be sung with just a piano accompaniment rather than an orchestral accompaniment. Certainly playing an aria with piano accompaniment is better than not playing it at all.
MAB does make a special point. When Bach wrote his keyboard concertos or solo keyboard works, the piano really did not exist for all practical purposes. The primitive piano of the 1720's certainly was not technically sophisticated enough to play Bach. When Bach is played on a modern piano we get something quite different from what Bach intended.
Nevertheless, trying to see things from Bach's point of view, I believe that he would like what he hears if he could hear a modern performance. Even so, the odds are likely that he would prefer that it be performed on a period instrument.
Lakey
I see MAB's point. Perhaps in a strict and orthodox sense, there is merit to what he is saying. Most of the rest of us seem to not agree with MAB on this point.
Great pieces of music or just good music can usually be enjoyed when not played on the exact instruments for which it was written. A lot of orchestral parts are re-orchestrated for just the piano or just piano and strings. Most musicians don't have access to a full orchestra and maybe an aria can be sung with just a piano accompaniment rather than an orchestral accompaniment. Certainly playing an aria with piano accompaniment is better than not playing it at all.
MAB does make a special point. When Bach wrote his keyboard concertos or solo keyboard works, the piano really did not exist for all practical purposes. The primitive piano of the 1720's certainly was not technically sophisticated enough to play Bach. When Bach is played on a modern piano we get something quite different from what Bach intended.
Nevertheless, trying to see things from Bach's point of view, I believe that he would like what he hears if he could hear a modern performance. Even so, the odds are likely that he would prefer that it be performed on a period instrument.
Lakey
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Shakespeare took old stories and histories from all over the place and re-scored them for the theatre. Should we reject all of these in favour of only reading/hearing the original stories? Obviously not. Well the same applies to music. All of the names attached - e.g Bach, Mozart, Symphony number xxx etc etc - these are all tags used for filing and retrieving music when it is stored in some physical form. But music, anyone's music, only exists when it is being played, and it exists completely independantly of it's creator.
Shakespeare took old stories and histories from all over the place and re-scored them for the theatre. Should we reject all of these in favour of only reading/hearing the original stories? Obviously not. Well the same applies to music. All of the names attached - e.g Bach, Mozart, Symphony number xxx etc etc - these are all tags used for filing and retrieving music when it is stored in some physical form. But music, anyone's music, only exists when it is being played, and it exists completely independantly of it's creator.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
I think you make some good points but IMO may have over generalized a bit. I don't fully agree that music exists only when it is being played unless that includes it being played in a person's mind as well as in the physical universe.
Also, there are those who study musical scores and get pleasure and understanding from reading a non played score.
As far as it existing independently of it's creator, I agree only in part. I believe if one knows the history of how the music came into being, the composer's life story and struggles, the state of music in the time and place where it was introduced, etc. one can get more enjoyment out of the music. BTW, this is at least as true for popular music as for classical.
Also, your comment about existing independently of its creator is not always the case in modern times what with copyright laws, etc. If someone owns the legal rights to the music, they can control its being played and being marketed. If such an owner wanted to they could keep a musical score from being played.
Things of this nature have happened in film making. The owners of film rights for a specific movie can and have banned showing of that film for decades.
Lakey
I think you make some good points but IMO may have over generalized a bit. I don't fully agree that music exists only when it is being played unless that includes it being played in a person's mind as well as in the physical universe.
Also, there are those who study musical scores and get pleasure and understanding from reading a non played score.
As far as it existing independently of it's creator, I agree only in part. I believe if one knows the history of how the music came into being, the composer's life story and struggles, the state of music in the time and place where it was introduced, etc. one can get more enjoyment out of the music. BTW, this is at least as true for popular music as for classical.
Also, your comment about existing independently of its creator is not always the case in modern times what with copyright laws, etc. If someone owns the legal rights to the music, they can control its being played and being marketed. If such an owner wanted to they could keep a musical score from being played.
Things of this nature have happened in film making. The owners of film rights for a specific movie can and have banned showing of that film for decades.
Lakey
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
How many times has one to be a live - but small - performance where ,say , an extremely talented player will do B.B. King almost better than B.B. King ? I Have. The music is, of course, copyrighted but the performer will do it for himself or a few freiends............surely many music lovers have seen that.
Also, some people hearing a classical piece for the first time may have NO CLUE who wrote it, have no idea it was Mozart or Beethoven ( not everyone grows up with classical music! ). Does that music not exist independant of the composer for that particular listener ?
And, OMG, do I have to know it was the London Philharmonic that played it ?
Does that music not exist for me entirely separtae from not knowing which orcherstra gave that performance ? ( Nevermind who the guest conductor was! )
What if I don't know who was first violin ? Again, does that mean that music does not still exist for me ?
Music exists at the time one hears a performance of it without knowing who wrote the piece, who played the piece or the names of the principal players or conductor.
Well, unless one considers when I turn on my radio and there is a piece being played that I do not know who wrote it, who did the lyrics, who played it ( hell, maybe even what studio it was recorded in! ) that it does not exist until I know all that.
No one this thread is widely read. It is ribald humor !
And, I sort of find it more than funny for someone to think for a long dead composer personal preferences would be for an instrument of this choice rather than that choice!
Most great creators would tend to want the best possible presentation of their work but surely each would be allowed their own preference in that. Sheesh.
Would Shakespeare reject modern stage lightings and PA systems as not being "period "? Wonder what he'd think of flying sets, eh ?
How many times has one to be a live - but small - performance where ,say , an extremely talented player will do B.B. King almost better than B.B. King ? I Have. The music is, of course, copyrighted but the performer will do it for himself or a few freiends............surely many music lovers have seen that.
Also, some people hearing a classical piece for the first time may have NO CLUE who wrote it, have no idea it was Mozart or Beethoven ( not everyone grows up with classical music! ). Does that music not exist independant of the composer for that particular listener ?
And, OMG, do I have to know it was the London Philharmonic that played it ?
Does that music not exist for me entirely separtae from not knowing which orcherstra gave that performance ? ( Nevermind who the guest conductor was! )
What if I don't know who was first violin ? Again, does that mean that music does not still exist for me ?
Music exists at the time one hears a performance of it without knowing who wrote the piece, who played the piece or the names of the principal players or conductor.
Well, unless one considers when I turn on my radio and there is a piece being played that I do not know who wrote it, who did the lyrics, who played it ( hell, maybe even what studio it was recorded in! ) that it does not exist until I know all that.
No one this thread is widely read. It is ribald humor !
And, I sort of find it more than funny for someone to think for a long dead composer personal preferences would be for an instrument of this choice rather than that choice!
Most great creators would tend to want the best possible presentation of their work but surely each would be allowed their own preference in that. Sheesh.
Would Shakespeare reject modern stage lightings and PA systems as not being "period "? Wonder what he'd think of flying sets, eh ?
lkwdblds
Crusader
A Time Machine to Late 18th Century Music?
This performance is about the closest possible that one can come to watching and hearing a late 18th century piano and orchestra performance live:
Robert Levin is playing the 1785-1790 type of 5 octave piano and all of the orchestral pieces are also from that period as well. Check out the French Horns! There are no valves and the players have to create notes through usage of their lips plus moving their hands around inside the bell of the horn.
That piano is surprisingly good! It appears to be a very advanced action for it's time period. It is very different from a modern piano. It lacks in some areas but it seems to make up for is deficiencies in other areas. The sound it makes is a bit similar to that of a harp.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HRDYVB9Hhg&feature=g-vrec&context=G22bbf5bRVAAAAAAAABA
Lakey
This performance is about the closest possible that one can come to watching and hearing a late 18th century piano and orchestra performance live:
Robert Levin is playing the 1785-1790 type of 5 octave piano and all of the orchestral pieces are also from that period as well. Check out the French Horns! There are no valves and the players have to create notes through usage of their lips plus moving their hands around inside the bell of the horn.
That piano is surprisingly good! It appears to be a very advanced action for it's time period. It is very different from a modern piano. It lacks in some areas but it seems to make up for is deficiencies in other areas. The sound it makes is a bit similar to that of a harp.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HRDYVB9Hhg&feature=g-vrec&context=G22bbf5bRVAAAAAAAABA
Lakey
FoTi
Crusader
Terril park
Sponsor
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
With you Bro!
I see you also have evil transcriptionists and editors.
I expect the spell check process handles that. Sadly I'm at a lower level.
But then, ...... I think this bach Busoni transcription is Bach's greatest testament.
Currently, and under the influence of the georgeous Helene I even find it greater than the "Art of Fugue".
This is really HARD. For hundreds of years it was considered merely an intellectual effort. An exersise not really music to be listened to.
Ho!
Just searched U-tube and have found my favorite version where Lional Rogg completes the final 4 part fugue!
Years ago asked the record company if they would release it on CD and they said there were problems including London underground trains being too noisy.
Gird your loins. You need to enjoy!
And Emma but not for you I would never have found this earlier dream
of mine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEMNU1Wv42w
With you Bro!
I see you also have evil transcriptionists and editors.
I expect the spell check process handles that. Sadly I'm at a lower level.
But then, ...... I think this bach Busoni transcription is Bach's greatest testament.
Currently, and under the influence of the georgeous Helene I even find it greater than the "Art of Fugue".
This is really HARD. For hundreds of years it was considered merely an intellectual effort. An exersise not really music to be listened to.
Ho!
Just searched U-tube and have found my favorite version where Lional Rogg completes the final 4 part fugue!
Years ago asked the record company if they would release it on CD and they said there were problems including London underground trains being too noisy.
Gird your loins. You need to enjoy!
And Emma but not for you I would never have found this earlier dream
of mine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEMNU1Wv42w
Terril park
Sponsor
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
Never heard of the Keller Quartet. But there's some on U-tube.
Very interesting!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SM2N1oEgac
I very much like Herman Scherchen with orchestra.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVGiOPnvqfM
Never heard of the Keller Quartet. But there's some on U-tube.
Very interesting!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SM2N1oEgac
I very much like Herman Scherchen with orchestra.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVGiOPnvqfM
Terril park
Sponsor
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
When it comes to Bach and new music one of the greatest Is
Herman Schershen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMYiiANad_c
When it comes to Bach and new music one of the greatest Is
Herman Schershen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMYiiANad_c
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
duplicate
duplicate
Last edited:
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973
That sounded 'tinny' tony ear and I found myself waxing sentimental in the end. It kind of brought to mind the sublime joy I luxuriated in towards the end of this film. Director Peter Weir used the music of Boccherini in his epic film about 1805 fictional hero Captain Aubry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p94DFyBBwc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5pnr53S_qc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
I know the one is really simplistic compared to the skills of the other but I just love this.
That sounded 'tinny' tony ear and I found myself waxing sentimental in the end. It kind of brought to mind the sublime joy I luxuriated in towards the end of this film. Director Peter Weir used the music of Boccherini in his epic film about 1805 fictional hero Captain Aubry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p94DFyBBwc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5pnr53S_qc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
I know the one is really simplistic compared to the skills of the other but I just love this.
Last edited:
- Status