5 ms·
I'm surprised there isn't a claim from John Cage's estate.
by MikeBVaughn 9y ago
I'm surprised there isn't a claim from John Cage's estate.
- erric 9y agoThat would be silence, or, the absence of music; not white noise. Seriously this is insane that there is a claim against this.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- MikeBVaughn 9y agoIt really depends on where you perform the piece.
- stcredzero 9y agoIf you amplify almost any recording enough, you can get some form of noise. Any white noise of a sufficient duration is effectively a recording of that one John Cage piece.
- brooklyn_ashey 9y agono, it isn't, because that piece is unconscious- it is meant to be what happens without any intention. A crank up to noise is a definite intention of the performer. In 4'33", the performer does nothing but open the score and the keyboard, mark movements, and bow at the end.
- stcredzero 9y agoIf you go through enough generations of analog copies of a recording of that performance, you get 4'33" of noise.
- brooklyn_ashey 9y agono, it would not be silence. I don't mean to be all snooty here-- but since we are talking about it-- it would be whatever sounds occur during that time. He was inspired by those Rauschenberg paintings ( that appear to be blank canvasses, and are but are functioning as shadow catchers- real-time spontaneous art framers, if you will)- same with 4'33". It's about whatever happens in that space in that particular moment. It is a kind of unconscious spontaneous group improv, sort of. Interestingly, improvised solos over tunes aren't copyrightable- bandleaders ripped them off players all the time.
- erric 9y agoI don’t think it’s snooty, but I did clarify as to the absence of (traditional) music. I’ve preformed pieces like this several times, but not Cage specifically. I agree all performances of these types of compositions will be unique, which is something I admire about all performed pieces. Our canvas is not only one of tones but also time and space.
- brooklyn_ashey 9y agoI hear what you are saying. But isn't it interesting... If I play a solo over "Ask Me Now", the Monk estate doesn't own it, but I don't think I "own" it either. But if I did it on a recording made by Monk, with his group, I think then he owns it, depending on the recording contract I sign (which is usually like a gig - I get paid for the recording once, like a gig, but I don't own it) But if I play in his band one night at a club and he hears my solo and digs some section of it and makes a tune out of that, note for note-- I can make no claim against him, because it was an improvised solo. But what I'm wondering, and it is really strange, is it different in John Cage's work because he's claiming to own the idea of framing what sounds randomly occur in that space in his composition as music? (I mean, if he made a recording of the concert)If this is true, then there's an interesting article to be written about you-know-what as it relates to classical and jazz and what each represents and the kinds of entitlements offered by our culture as a result of these pervasive race issues. Thank you! I'd never thought of this idea before as it relates to John Cage and jazz improv and ownership. It is certainly something to think about. Cheers!
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]