THis is a thread where you try and remember the soulless pap from the eighties

why is that pathetic? i'd say its healthy and nautral, even instinctive. the main reasons i loved the hip hop and dance, however unmusical (in geir's or the supposed official terminology) it was, is because it was new and exciting, politically charged, sonically innovative regardless of lack of melody/trad/conventional traits in music. maybe it isnt REAL music...so what? its still art, and great art at that. but i'll call it music because its closely related.

Non-melodic music will never replace melodic music.

they will co-exist just fine...if the former is outstripping the latter commercially then thats too bad but it makes sense

Oasis anyone?

It wasn't until the 70s that jazz started to be (at least partly) dominated by Europeans rather than (or at least in addition to) African Americans.

As for my attitude towards jazz: I dislike the improvisation and lack of emphasis on melodies, while I like the harmonic sophistication.

Eric Idle to thread, then!

even mere handclapping, finger-snapping, toe-tapping, or head-nodding could be deadly to the harmonic and melodic components. ideally, all rhythm, and hence all notion of reference points regarding constructs of time, should be obliterated from music. the best music is silence, since the vibration of the air that is involved in any aural phenomenon inherently partakes of the non-european disease of rhythm.

i was going to post a question to ile along the lines of "who is at the vanguard of comedy these days?...who is coming up with the most indisputably hilarious shit? absolutely essential yuks?" but i guess i've found my comedic saviour in geir's unrelentingly gut-busting deadpan shtick. he does it so well; never dropping character for a second, never skipping a beat...oops, didn't mean to upset him with that blatant reference to rhythm...

i wonder if he has initiated a campaign to rid the norwegian white supremacist black metal bands of any rhythm that exists in that sadly corrupted european artform. we all know that any overprominent rhythmic elements in the neo-nazi black metal stuff are the result of a sinister infiltration by non-europeans, or people trying to piss off their white supremacist parents, or some such conspiracy. heil hongro, etc.

Why does it matter where the tradition comes from anyway?

The point is that melody has proved superior to all other musical forms. And as such, it should be used universially. Never mind about ethic origin, because that isn't important. Music in itself is the only important thing here.

i've been forced to revise my take on the geir-as-comic-genius theory, after further viewing of these beyond-inanities that he keeps spitting out like clockwork. (oops, there i go again with the rhythm thing)

he is definitely a comic genius, but "he" is also in reality a computer program, as propounded above. the program is not fiendish, though, but is part of extremely successful AI research attempting to simulate absurd comedic personas. it's not unlike those computers that blow away the russian chess grandmasters. the geir program demonstrates a more consistent and speedier absurdist wit than any human would be capable of doing. the 'absolutist piffle' is not an earnest attempt to put forth a coherent argument but rather is meant to tickle the funny bone in a most sublime fashion.

This is really funny. I read quite a few websites and newsgroups which are full of extreme right-wingers - keeping an eye on the enemy, all that sort of thing. I can *easily* imagine these (mostly British) far-right apologists writing *exactly* those words as an explanation of why the Beatles are acceptable to them but hip-hop is not.

I wonder if Geir votes for the Norwegian far-right party (is it called the Popular Party? Populist Party? Peoples' Party? whatever ...)

I hate the three contemporary bands you mention (although I love the Beatles, precisely because they have more than one influence, more than one song, more than one emotional mood etc, whereas the other three are one-trick ponies). But I don't feel the need to rant against them on here. Suckers who relate to the plodding emotional nothingness of "Clocks", "In My Place", "Sing", "Stop Crying Your Heart Out" and the like can appreciate it if they like - I genuinely couldn't give a shit if they do. So why do you feel the need to rant against the music that *you* dislike?

Obviously, a lot of people think differently than you.

Pythagoras (dunno if that is the correct English spelling) was definitely among those who worked with this. He may not have been the first one, but he was the one that was closest to the harmony system still used in the West today.
― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Monday, 21 April 2003 21:23 (eighteen years ago)

Actually Pythagoras' tuning system is closer to Arab/african arab and asian tunings. You see dear old chap, the problem is Europe itself in a way killed melody by inventing equal temperality. An absolute development of harmony means absolute melody as pure unmodulated expression is radically underdeveloped (this is why The Beatles had to crib tips from Indian classical.) Terry Riley only half understood this, tablas are also melodic instruments. cordal counterpoint is the original sin, which was absolutely not invented by 'them Africans.' Bach's music only makes sense on harpsichord and nothing else! everyone who adapted his music for piano is to blame here. You killed melody Geir, you really did, chief.